Oh, no!!! - finale in new Jansons/RCOA M5

[barry guerrero]

As to be expected, Mariss Janson's secures outstanding playing from the Concertgebouw Orchestra in his new Mahler 5 recording. The sound strikes me as a tad brighter than I what normally remember coming from this RCO Live series. But none the less, it's still good. And while Jansons is often times quite strict in obeying what's written in the score of any particular work, he has a number of small ideas that work quite well here. Or, to be more precise, a different way of interpreting what instructions there are. HOWEVER, he does a major thingy that I absolutely hate, and is dead wrong, wrong, WRONG (at least in terms of what MY scores say to do). What does he do?   .    .    In the finale, he does that same awful slow down, at the same exact spot, that James De Priest put into his LSO M5 for Naxos. While approaching the reprise of the big brass chorale tune from the second movement, Jansons - just like De Priest - slows down many measures BEFORE Mahler asks for any kind of ritardando.

First, you hear the ascending fanfare figures in the horns, accompanied by a unison, descending major scale in the trombones. Then the trumpets come in with one of the second subject tunes - played forte - accompanied by a timpani roll for a bar to two. All of this leads up to a forte stroke in the bass drum, which launches fast, chugging, sixteenth note figures in the upper strings. Then comes the big chorale tune. Welllll    .     .     .     Jansons slows down where the trumpets come in with that secondary theme (first introduced by clarinets, much earlier in the movement). This saps a lot of the energy out  before reaching the reprise of the chorale tune. As he did in Pittsburgh, Jansons greatly stretches out the main chorale theme in the trumpets; almost to an absurd length.  But the effect gets entirely undermined by having slowed down everything already, and much too soon.

By the way, the bass drum stroke that I mentioned - the one that launches the chugging sixteenth note figures in the upper strings - it gets replaced by a cymbal crash. Where did that come from?

Here's an idea: just do what the score says to do. Funny how the composer usually got it right the first time.

[Cristian]

I don't know De Priest's M5. I know another slowdown, in the Gatti M5, but I don't think it's in the same part as in the Jansons & De Priest.

What Gatti does is a major slowdown in the link between the "solemn" and the "fun" part of the ending. The slowdown is only in the link (horns, then strings) and then the "fun" part gets more and more speed. That's at 14:15 in my winamp :-)

I don’t know if that’s in the score or not, but I LOVE that detail.

Regards,
Cris.

[barry guerrero]

What I'm talking about is specifially at rehearsal figure 32. There is no indication to alter the tempo there at all. In fact, Mahler doesn't ask for any kind of ritard. for about another dozen measures or so. What is the point of stretching out the big peroration of the main brass chorale tune, if the music has already been robbed of its energy many bars before? I don't get it - bad decision, I feel. It's certainly not a decision sanctioned by anything in the score.

[sperlsco]

I finally received the SACD of this one and listened over the weekend.  For the most part, I agree with your final statement -- it generally works best when you play as the composer wrote it.  While I certainly don't think that Jansons way with the ending is in any way an improvement over Mahler's ideas, I don't really mind his early ritardando.  I'll admit, though, that your post primed me for this moment and I forced myself to listen with an open-mind.  OTOH, I don't really like the one instance here that he replaces the bass drum with a cymbal crash. 

Now, I don't think that this one is near as good as Chailly with the RCOA.  Overall, though, I find this to be the only satisfying M5 SACD in my collection.  I have a few qualms.  While I quite like Jansons' flexible conducting, some of his ritardandos throughout are too noticeble (i.e. slightly unnatural sounding).  Similarly, there are a couple of spots where he speeds up and briefly muddles a section.  Overall, though I like his way with the tempi (and I much prefer his faster Adagietto).  The RCOA plays splendidly (bravo to the winds, brass, and bass drum), although I would like more ringing cymbals in the second movement. 

[John Kim]

Here is a rave review from Audio Audition:

MAHLER: Symphony No. 5 in C sharp minor (1901-1902) – Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra/Mariss Jansons – RCO Live multichannel SACD RCO-08007, 71:49; Performance ***** Sound: ***** [Distr. by Harmonia mundi]:

Recorded live at the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, Holland on October 18/21, 2007, and January 16/17, 2008, with Neumann and Schoeps microphones at a 88.2 kHz rate utilizing Polyhymnia International's technology. Once more Mariss Jansons and his RCO take on the task of recording one more disc on their highly regarded Mahler series within the beautiful acoustics of the Concertgebouw.

Almost from the beginning it becomes obvious that this disc was to become a sonic example of what can be done and should be done when recording a very large symphony orchestra, and second, an example of a clinical reading from the Evgeny Mavrinsky conducting school of hard knocks. Essentially that school calls for clinically exact passionless rehearsals with the passion thing only to explode extemporaneously during concerts and recordings. It should be noted that Jansons was for a long time an assistant to Mavrinsky. Right from the start it is obvious that Jansons' penchant for extensive orchestral rehearsals (in general) will allow him and the RCO to deliver, or shall we say allow for technical exactness when performing Mahler. His readings of Mahler always go first to the meaning and then to the emotional significance of the music in order to project the best attitude or effect. His rendition on this disc of Mahler's 5th is no exception.

Jansons seems to have a very special approach to Mahler as well as love for all his works which is manifested in intelligent, loving and respectful renditions and the Fifth is one of those where Jansons musical sensibility and taste is plainly manifested. Mahler symphonies, all of them, seem to have particular rhythmic/metric intricacies that cause most orchestra conductors to err on harmonic understanding and intonation. Bruno Walter (who was an assistant to Mahler before he died) many times remarked that Mahler complained “...nobody really understands the Fifth...” This is a work that defies easy solutions and usually suffers from overstated dramatizations, but with Jansons everything seems, and does in fact, come out in the end like a work where one has to guess or somehow discover Mahler's message and only he has the key to that elusive cipher. Jansons does not ignore and neither suppresses for a moment all those characteristic dissonances and harmonic/ chromatic tensions that Mahler is so fond of. In most cases Mahler's rich chromatic writing is suppressed in favor of the simpler and harmonic elements much to the detriment of that elusive “message”, but Jansons does not take that road.

If we take into account the harmonic structuring of the first movement (the Funeral March) we can see that Mahler is no longer preoccupied with the vertical development of the music. Instead, he goes into the rather new for him field of horizontal development with melodic lines that are continuously transformed much like in J.S. Bach's music. There is a “nature” oriented polyphony in these new sounds and I feel that Jansons really “gets it”; consequently it is very easy to listen to this disc and savor Mahler's brilliancy and exactness. Jansons realization of the Fifth’s horizontal elements have a very appealing sound duration and shows his understanding of Mahler's music creation process through anticipation, repetition and changes in tempo. Mahler's vertical elements have more to do with the actual sounds (color and timbre for example) which are created by the conflation of two or more tones. A good example of this effect is Jansons development of the fourth movement, the Adagietto: Sehr langsam, which in fact does not “sing”, but seems more like a declamation of love, love for others - Mahler walked here to the edge of what was then musically acceptable, foreshadowing 20th Century modern music.

All in all, Jansons' is a very thoughtful rendition of a much transited symphony but with the addition of this intimate understanding which is seconded by this great orchestra, and the superb five channels high-res sound the recording engineers gave him make this SACD a must. I am particularly fond of Sinopoli's, Norrington's and specially Kubelik's recordings of this symphony but for different reasons, however they are hampered by poor sound. Jansons' -although also different than all of the above - has something very important going for him: high-res sound, and in Mahler great sound is more than important, it’s essential. Highly recommended recording!
 
-- John Nemaric


I very much like Jansons' RCO recordings of M6th and Shosy 7th and hope that someday they will record a M7th and a M9th.

Meanwhile, I am sold on this new M5th 

John,

[barry guerrero]

I disagree. On second hearing, I really felt that Jansons had screwed this one up. The middle movement scherzo is quite ordinary, bordering on being flat as a pancake. The horn solos, for some reason, sound better on the Chailly recording. As it is, they're nothing special here. Even worse, at the start of the second movement, Jansons starts our very quickly, which is fine. But then he slows down quite markedly at rehearsal figure 2, which is at bar 30. There is no indication to slow down there at all, and I think it sounds awful. It robs all energy and forward momentum.

Compare this to the beginning of the second movement with Zinman. Yes, Zinman starts out slower than normal, but neither does he slow down even the slightest at bar 30.

Of course, the greatest offense to my ears comes at the end of the symphony. Jansons slows down at rehearsal figure 32, where these is no indication to do so. Then he adds a tacky cymbal crash at figure 33, covering over the forte bass drum stroke below (timpani play fortissimo, but then have an immediate decrescendo). Rehearsal number 33 is where the upper strings play 16th notes, and Mahler writes "sehr draengend". At least Jansons suddenly speeds up again, but it's not as fast as it could be. When we finally reach the Pesante marking - the return of the big chorale tune from the second movement - Mahler also writes "etwas gehaltend". Etwas means somewhat; so Mahler is saying "somewhat held-back" (tempo wise). He doesn't ask for further ritarding of the tempo for another 11 bars. Then he finally writes "molto ritardando" just one measure before the start of the coda (rehearsal figure 34).

If all this sounds academic, here's the point: Mahler indicates that there's no need to do a massive ritard anywhere until just before the coda. There's also a second point: read what Mahler actually composed.

Barry

[Psanquin]

D.H. has reviewed it:

http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12343

[barry guerrero]

I guess Janson's ritard. that's placed BEFORE your supposed to ritard. didn't bother Dave much. It sure bugged me. I don't like this M5 nearly as much as the Chailly, and certainly not nearly as much as the Markus Stenz one. That 's just me.

Barry

[Leo K]

I'm with John, this sounds like an M5 I'd want to hear...I have to admit I've never even liked the M5 finale as much as the other movements, so I'm not really as bothered by the ritard at the end, as I'm still not as familiar with this movement, or at least it has been hard to keep my full attention on the M5 finale for as long as I've listened.  I think the only recording to have kept my attention through the finale has been a Tennsedt live performance from Osaka, Japan.

--Todd

[James Meckley]

I agree with Barry here – an early ritard at figure 32 completely undercuts what should be the real point of emphasis 21 bars later, marked Pesante. This is the climax not only of the movement, but of the entire work – it's where the entire symphonic journey has been leading. Proper emphasis is made by a big increase in volume (it should be the loudest spot in the entire performance) and by a dramatic slowing of the tempo. If you've already hit the brakes 21 bars earlier, you no longer have that tool available, and volume alone isn't enough. It's a shame to embark on a 70-minute symphonic journey only to end up feeling you've not quite reached your destination.

No one whose recording I've heard handles this section of M5 better than Markus Stenz with his Australian orchestra; he leaves absolutely no doubt that the Pesante seven bars after figure 33 is indeed the "big moment!" I wish his recording were more widely known.

I feel the same way about M3; if the great climax five bars after figure 30 in the Finale isn't handled effectively, the performance has failed, no matter how beautiful the preceding movements might have been. (Bernstein really gets top marks here.)

James