gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: john haueisen on May 12, 2008, 01:49:37 AM
-
I know we've probably had polls (if not, we should) on this topic, but I'm sure a lot of us newbies would really enjoy what "the old graybeards" find to be their most essential Mahler works or performances. Don't be shy. We all know how hard it would be to limit ourselves to a single CD, but just for the sake of learning what others like, step up and shout out your favorite Mahler performance.
-
Right at this moment, I'd pick
Yoel Levi/Atlanta Symphony Orchestra/Telarc Mahler Sixth
Recently I request to Telarc that they should reissue the recording with the first movt. exposition repeat (they originally recorded it with the repeat) reinserted and possibly in the hybrid SACD format. My fingers are crossed.
John,
-
I'm a newbie by board standards albeit one that comes with a graying beard so maybe I'll qualify nonetheless:
If there is only one Mahler recording to take along, it'll be Abbado & BPO's M9 included in that Netherlands Radio "Mahler Feest" box set. Such a complete and absolute perfection is not heard elsewhere in the Mahlerography (unless perhaps in the same team's take for DG, which is similarly silencing).
In that same set there is also a really special performance of some of the Wunderhorn Lieder by, again, Abbado & BPO and Ann Sofie von Otter. I've listened through it attentively only twice, both times falling off my chair, and to be reliable the response should be replicated at least thrice. Yet I'm not even much of a fan of ASvO.
But indeed it can't be just one. The second one will be Klemperer's "Das Lied" (EMI, with Wunderlich and Ludwig) and the third one Abbado & BPO's M5 (DG) even if I need to swallow those discs to smuggle them in.
PT
-
Can I take a box? If so, I'd just take the Bertini box on EMI, and leave it at that. If a second disc were allowed, it would be the Delos one of Mahler 10 in the Carpenter version (Litton/Dallas S.O.).
Barry
-
If a second disc were allowed, it would be the Delos one of Mahler 10 in the Carpenter version (Litton/Dallas S.O.).
Barry
Yes!! This one I forgot about - quite possibly the BEST recording of M10th regardless of the edition, as I have repeatedly asserted. Can't live without it ;D
John,
-
If there is only one Mahler recording to take along, it'll be Abbado & BPO's M9 included in that Netherlands Radio "Mahler Feest" box set. Such a complete and absolute perfection is not heard elsewhere in the Mahlerography (unless perhaps in the same team's take for DG, which is similarly silencing).
PT
I second your choice. Yes, I agree this Abbado/BPO M9th is very, very special. I think it's even better than his later commercial recording on DG which is still fine but suffers from the mediocre sound quality (shame on you DG). Gee, I guess I'd need all THREE then - Levi M6th, Abbado M9th, Litton M10th :)
John,
-
I've purchased and listened to an awful lot of Mahler in the past few years. One recording that I always come back to is the 2nd Symphony by Bernstein on Columbia (now Sony).
I can't get enough of it.
-
I've purchased and listened to an awful lot of Mahler in the past few years. One recording that I always come back to is the 2nd Symphony by Bernstein on Columbia (now Sony).
I can't get enough of it.
Oh yes, Lenny's first Resurrection is a hell of ride :o
John,
-
And the SACD sounds SO much better.
-
Can anybody recommend another good M6 in addition to Levi's Telarc Sixth?
Other than the Levi, I'd pick,
Tennstedt/LPO/EMI (live, maybe OOP) - the most expansive but searingly intense and sometimes crazed M6th
Bernstein/NYPO/Sony - the sound is becoming out of date but no other conductor has captured the nightmarish mood and underlying tension as brilliantly as Lenny
Eschenbach/PO - an exemplary modern version in great modern sound
John,
-
Well, I'd need a turntable because it's Mehta's LAPO Mahler 5th. Maybe I like it so much because I got it for something like a quarter, but it blows away most on CD (including it's CD remastering.)
-
Can anybody recommend another good M6 in addition to Levi's Telarc Sixth?
Mariss Jansons's RCO recording is also pretty good both musically and engineering wise. The playing of RCO is so aptly transparent and natural that it almost sounds eerie, sometimes :o
John,
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this matter, but is it really possible for an LP on a turntable to sound better than a CD?
Did the CD remastering lose something, or the LP somehow capture something else?
Depends on who you talk to. I believe alot of LPs sound better than the CD. Especially newly remastered ones by companies like Analogue Productions, Classic Records, Speakers Corner, etc. For me alot of it has to do with the "naturalness" of the sound (probably not a real word, but hey...). It gets you closer to actually being present at the recording session IMO. SACD does a better job than regular CD in that regard, but it still doesn't compare to a great sounding LP. This is especially true in classical and jazz where acoustic instruments are featured.
One example: I have a single-sided 45RPM LP of Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven". Everybody has heard the song a thousand times, yet when I play it for people their jaws drop. It's as if you are listening to the tune for the first time.
Some people will tell you LPs rock, and others think digital is the way to go. The only way to find out for yourself is buy the necessary equipment, or find a vinyl freak who will share the joys of analogue with you. But be forewarned: good sounding vinyl is often quite expensive. It's not unusual to pay 2 or 3 times as much (or more) for the LP over the CD.
-
John,
Get the Jansons/RCO M6th by all means. It may not shake you on your first hearing but don't give up, as Mahler's music often comes into life in different moods and directions. You'll admire and love the playing of the Royal Concertgebouw Orch.; it's pretty much their show despite Janson's decent conducting.
If you love the Jansons then I'd recommend Ichiyoshi Inoue/New Japan Phil./Exton recording. It may be currently OOP but with a little luck you might be able to get one copy somewhere. IMO, this one the most prefect musical structure of this great piece. With Scherzo coming in II, each movt. is beautifully proportioned in terms of small sections that connect each other to make the whole, and the entire symphony as a whole holds as logically and aesthetically well as I can imagine. Except for the Levi, I know of no other version that gives me such a sense of uniformity and logicality. Be warned, however, there is a minor mistake in timpani in IV. in the development section. I won't go into the detail because I don't want to spoil your listening experience.
John,
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this matter, but is it really possible for an LP on a turntable to sound better than a CD?
Did the CD remastering lose something, or the LP somehow capture something else?
Depends on who you talk to. I believe alot of LPs sound better than the CD. Especially newly remastered ones by companies like Analogue Productions, Classic Records, Speakers Corner, etc. For me alot of it has to do with the "naturalness" of the sound (probably not a real word, but hey...). It gets you closer to actually being present at the recording session IMO. SACD does a better job than regular CD in that regard, but it still doesn't compare to a great sounding LP. This is especially true in classical and jazz where acoustic instruments are featured.
One example: I have a single-sided 45RPM LP of Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven". Everybody has heard the song a thousand times, yet when I play it for people their jaws drop. It's as if you are listening to the tune for the first time.
Some people will tell you LPs rock, and others think digital is the way to go. The only way to find out for yourself is buy the necessary equipment, or find a vinyl freak who will share the joys of analogue with you. But be forewarned: good sounding vinyl is often quite expensive. It's not unusual to pay 2 or 3 times as much (or more) for the LP over the CD.
Nicely put. One caveat. If you have access to some good book fairs/thrift stores/record stores you may pay significantly less for some great Mahler on LP than on CD. I picked up the aforementioned Mehta M5 for a quarter, and as far as I know, the discmate, the Adagio to M10, has never been released on CD.
When done right, LP's bring a more tactile sound to music. It's funny Jeff should mention jazz. I like using the LP version of Brubeck's Take Five as a test record for friends. Most agree that the striking of the cymbals and drums sound more genuine than the CD. You can hear the brushes as they brush across the surface of the drum. The CD is nice, but not as musical.
I won't evangelize too badly on the merits on vinyl, but if anything, it's a nice way to pick up stuff that languishes out of the catalogs even today.
Regards,
Steven
-
Like Barry, I would just take the Bertini EMI box...it really is a miracle set.
If I could only take one disk...it would be the Olson/Colorado Mahlerfest M9 from 2006 (I think thats the correct year).
--Todd
-
Like Barry, I would just take the Bertini EMI box...it really is a miracle set.
If I could only take one disk...it would be the Olson/Colorado Mahlerfest M9 from 2006 (I think thats the correct year).
--Todd
Excellent choice.
Question for Leo:
Do you know if EMI had gone through a digital remastering before they issued this box set? I once read somewhere that they did a remastering for the set but can't confirm it.
Thanks.
John,
-
John,
They've definitely been remastered. They sound more alike now, and the improvements - where they exist - aren't huge by any means.
-
Thanks, Barry.
For me even a small improvement in sound matters a lot. Although I already own Bertini's M3, M6, M9+10 and heard M7, M8, DLVDE, I shall give the set a try :)
John,
-
Thanks, Barry.
For me even a small improvement in sound matters a lot. Although I already own Bertini's M3, M6, M9+10 and heard M7, M8, DLVDE, I shall give the set a try :)
John,
John, the M2 alone is worth the price of admission, as is the M4 and M5...the M5 is my top M5 right now.
--Todd
-
Todd,
Thanks for the recommendation. I am also looking forward to an improvement in the M9th which I wanted to like as much as it deserves but can't because of issues with the sound quality.
John,
-
I know we've probably had polls (if not, we should) on this topic, but I'm sure a lot of us newbies would really enjoy what "the old graybeards" find to be their most essential Mahler works or performances.
M3 CzechPO/Kobayashi on an Exton SACD set.
-
I know we've probably had polls (if not, we should) on this topic, but I'm sure a lot of us newbies would really enjoy what "the old graybeards" find to be their most essential Mahler works or performances.
M3 CzechPO/Kobayashi on an Exton SACD set.
Very good choice...one of the most powerful M3's out there.
--Todd
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this matter, but is it really possible for an LP on a turntable to sound better than a CD?
Did the CD remastering lose something, or the LP somehow capture something else?
some of us really dig analog sound.
dj
-
Allow me to reprint this comparison review between two excellant M6's:
(http://www.jpc.de/image/cover/front/0/9688528.jpg)
(http://www.resmusica.com/images/ondine_mahler_eschenbach.jpg)
The Martin Sieghart account is an epic M6, and doesn't indulge in emphasizing the 'tragic' aspect. It's a direct reading with solid structure, but the 'color' or sound picture is interesting. It's rather a rough, course sound. The tubas are easy to hear and the other instruments don't blend too well, which is a good thing. It's not a wild or even motivating M6th...and I feel removed from the action somewhat. The image that comes to mind is the painting of a battle on an old, dusty and cracked Grecian Urn. I also imagine an archeological dig on the site of a lost city.
The sense of "lost to the ages" very much describes the drawn out spaces in much of the performance...the tempos take their time and etc. It many ways it is as bleak as Horenstein's Bournemouth account. I keep wanting to go back to it.
The Sieghart M6 only gets better with every listen. I finally got to listen to the SACD layer for the whole performance and noticed an obvious improvement in the sound, which is still very fine on the CD layer, but a little dry. Indeed, the SACD layer sounds so good (especially in the dynamic contrast and clarity of detail in the lower brass and percussion) the interpretation fares much better, and can be better appreciated along with the details heard in the orchestration.
I listened to the Sieghart back to back with the Eschenbach Philly M6 (see photo above) a couple times to compare, as both are my current top commercial recordings of the M6. In both, the lower brass and percussion are captured magnificently, thereby improving my appreciation of the dark timbre mixtures Mahler wrote into the score. I listened to both disks on the two channel stereo SACD layer through my Grato SR80 headphones and was in Mahler M6 heaven for hours.
The Siegart M6 is an incredible experience on SACD. This recording was taken from performances given on the 21-23 of December, 2003 at the Concertgebouw De Vereeniging in Nijmegen (the oldest city in the Netherlands). The natural detail, atmosphere and clarity are such a joy…it must be a good hall. I found myself holding my breath often, taken in by the waves of orchestration. Like the Eschenbach account, the tempos are heavy and movement thoughout the score is rugged, and seem to carry the weight of the world. Unlike Eschenbach, there are no obvious “dramatic” indulgences such as overemphasizing passages for effect, ala Bernstein or MTT. The Sieghart earns its power through the constant hypnotic building by playing the score straightforward…the one indulgence are the expansive tempos, yet the discourse is appealing and the awesome lower brass and percussion (not to mention the wonderful string playing), the performance never drags. The higher timbre of the flutes and other woodwinds are captured well on the wonderful high-ends of the sound picture (and doesn't tax the ear).
When I want a more exaggerated reading I will turn to the Eschenbach without hesitation. I didn’t much care for Eschenbach’s account on the first few listens, but the memory of the unique phrasing and tempo relationships stayed on my mind and grew on me, and on first hearing the SACD layer I got hooked. As fine as it is, the SACD layer of the Eschenbach is not as great as the Sieghart, but the interpretation is first rate, full of great ideas in shaping and dynamics. A favorite moment (in the Eschenbach) is the transition chorale between the march and Alma’s theme in the exposition of the first movement…it really works to slow this passage down and make much of the rather objective reflection here in the midst of the ongoing march. The tempo relationships in the Sieghart are more subtle. A highlight of Sieghart’s first movement is the execution of the Alma theme in both the exposition and the recapitulation…the tempo isn’t rushed but carefully sculpted, and the strings and horns are clearly heard within all the richness the score has to offer. The Arnhem strings easily hold their own when compared to the Philly strings, or any orchestra for that matter…they really rise to the occasion. The horns and trumpets exhibit resonating warmth and bite, whatever is needed they are there, ready to deliver...especially hear the fine blasts that punctuate the rhythm during the development of the 1st movement. The pluck of bass string and growling low brass that sets off the finale is menacing and rises like the lip of a dog bearing his teeth...Bravo!
The only drawback to the Sieghart is the availabilty...it can only be ordered from Japan (http://www.hmv.co.jp/index.asp)...but it is sooooo worth it. The Eschenbach is much easier to find, so go for this if you don't wish to order from Japan.
--Todd
-
The Sieghart seems to be available in Europe as well:
http://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/2425
Splitting the work down the middle between discs, especially when putting the Scherzo second, makes this set less attractive to me though.
-
"Do you have any recommendations as to your favorite M3s?"
I know you weren't asking me, but he's just a few of the ones that I really like:
Chailly/Concertgebouw (Decca sacd/cd hybrid); Haitink/Concertgebouw 1966 (Philips Originals; includes Haitink's decent "Das Klagende Lied"); Boulez/VPO (DG sacd/cd hybrid); Rattle/Birmingham (I think that this may be the very best item from Rattle's spotty cycle); Bernstein I (you can get this on a "much improved" SACD from Japan); Zinman/Tonhalle Zurich (RCA); Abbado/BPO (a good performance, but has a very limited dynamic range); Kobayashi/Czech Phil. (a rather expensive Japanese import); Ozawa/BSO (Philips - hugely underrated, but hard to find now): Levine/Chicago (RCA: available from Japan now, along with Levine's really good M4)
I'm not a huge fan of Bernstein's DG remake - it's simply too long for me. I prefer his earlier one. I also think that the Horenstein M3 sounds far better from the Brilliant Classics box (has that disappeared?) than the Unicorn-Kanchana pressing.
If you can find the 3 cd set of Neumann/Czech Phil. (M3 & M8); well, that's pretty darn good too.
-
When I asked for recommendations of good recordings of M6, John Kim responded with Mariss Janson's RC0 recording of M6.
I just got my copy today, and I'd like to second very heartily John's recommendation.
The performance is so crisp and precise that I heard things in M6 that I had not heard before.
This was a live performance in 2005. The 2 disc set also includes the world premiere recording of Hans Werner Henze's Sebastian im Traum (2003-04).
If John Kim had not recommended this Janson, I might have continued to overlook it.
If you have a favorite recording of M6, please post it.
John H
John,
I am glad you like the Jansons RCO M6th. I didn't warm up to it much when I heard it the first time (which was rather casual) but over the next several months as I paid close attention I became aware of the merit of the recording. It's not my top recommendation and that palm goes to the Levi, the live Tennstedt, and the old Bernstein, but overall it really ranks high up there. Another one to consider seriously but not available commercially is Haitink's live concert with LSO from 2004. As Todd and I have raved numerous times, this M6 is very slow but extremely powerful and utterly convincing thanks to conductor's ability to scale up the dramatic elements and measure the tempo, dynamics, and balance as perfectly as one can imagine. Further, the playing by LSO is second to none with absolute focus and concentration. This one is quite different than any other M6ths that Haitink had recorded or conducted before and therefore sounds all the more fresh and revelatory. It's definitely worth poking around.
John,
-
Another reason why Haitink's M6th was so dramatically effective despite its slow speed was because throughout the score he phrased various sections in a very wide dynamic range, sometimes to the point of exaggerating the dynamic markings. If you revisit his early recordings with RCO and BPO, you'll never find such musicality. Got it? ::)
John,
-
Do you have any recommendations as to your favorite M3s?
--John
CzPO/Kobayashi on Exton
VPO/Boulez on DG
and a couple of sleepers:
Dallas SO/Litton on Delos
Bav RSO/Kubelik on Audite
-
I'm not too crazy over Kubelik in this particular instance (M3), but I sure agree about Litton/Dallas (I wrote the 10/10 review of it @ Classicstoday). It's also easy to find cheap now at Amazon, etc.
-
John H,
Here is a review (I repost below) on a real sleeper M3 that I really treasure:
Rogner/BRSO/Berlin Classics
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21NKF235BXL._AA130_.jpg)
I discovered this yesterday and found this little known CD to hold one of the most fantastic renderings of the M3 I ever heard. The sound quality isn't the most optimum in every case, but I could still hear details of the score I never heard on other CD's...the percussion here is simply incredible...the tam tam, snare and the timpani are better heard...(I am tempted to claim)...than any SACD's of this work, it is really a treat. To clearly hear the tam tam makes a HUGE difference in this work...it is so important it is almost a deal breaker for me. It is why I like Abbado/VPO or Zinman's recent account. The brass, especially the trumpets break through with stunning clarity. The first movment is like Abbado/VPO or Zinman's recent but even more fun, wild and loud..almost out of control. The trombone solo is a cross between the Haitink/RCO Kerst matinee and Kobayashi Exton accounts...in other words, grand and epic but with much character in the tone and breath. The second and third movements have slightly more character than Horenstein, with a real flow and "prickly" quality...more rough and rambunctious than usual (again, the orchestral detail is colorful and clearly heard). The third movement uses a "posthorn" that sounds more like a muted coronet than a trumpet...I'm not sure exactly what they're using here, but it's interesting and much better than Horenstein's flugelhorn. The oboe in the "Oh Mensch" is quirky but haunting...the slides are slowed down so the "middle" note in the slide is heard longer...quite unothodox, but yet appealing in it's rough-out-of-tune quality and sounding like a bird like no other performance I've yet heard. The Contralo is heavy but there is no excess in vibrato...she is quite good...almost like Petra Lang but with more nuance in the phrasing.
The sound picture reminds me of the Kondrashin M7 on Tahra...as if we are seated in the middle in the hall, not too far to miss Mahler's intended "blend" that results when seated where everything can be heard correctly. The BRSO give all they've got, which makes up for any lack of refinement heard elsewhere...the work is even all the better for the enthusiastic agression the orchestra uses.
The final two movements don't quite live up to what was heard previously, but they are not bad by any means, there is just not as many musical discoveries as the rest, but the strings are actually quite good in the Adagio...which is very slow until Rogner rushes too much towards the finish. At least the brass has character, such as the wonderful trombones. But still, this is a keeper! Don't hesitate to buy if you see it in the used bin!
--Todd
-
Oh, and I want to place an honorable mention to the Abbado/VPO/DG M3 from the early '80s.
Barry will disagree (and I understand his disagreements), but I really believe this is a very impressive M3, and it may even become my top choice, the last three movements are so rich and devotional, radiant with peace, mystery and joy. I resisted buying the Abbado VPO M3 for years, because the opinions I had read complained about certain aspects of sound, or the slowness of the finale. But I finally found a decently priced used copy and discovered this M3 to be incredible, and it has a unique sound too (not an audiophile experience, but a pleasing recording full of great detail).
The first movement is among the wildest and most confrontational I've ever heard (the Rogner is another)! It soars, it growls and swirls, and then the enchanted quieter moments are captured with presence and atmosphere in the interesting production (not to everyones taste obviously)...indeed it is one of my favorite Mahler recordings in my whole collection. I like the sudden turn into spirituality during the last three movements, more obvious than I'm used to hearing in this work, outlined in the tempos and soaring transparency in the execution of the VPO, especially in the strings. In particular I love the final chord, which seems to hang on forever, but I love the whole way the ending is played...it is not like other recordings, it is more reflective than I'm used to...which is wonderful and fits the concept of the whole performance. Bravo to Jesse Norman for such profound singing here, I really want to hear her in Ozawa's M3 one of these days (I hear she is on that recording as well).
--Todd
-
Yep, I disagree. I don't think that the overly quiet, overly mushy-sounding timpani at the end of the symphony contribute anything useful at all. It's really almost worse than hearing the timpani pounded too roughly - the "building a barn" effect, as I call it. The horns are magnificent throughout (closely recorded), but where are the trombones? They completely drop the ball at the climax of the long brass chorale towards the end of movement 6. Compare this to Boulez/VPO, where the horns aren't quite as strong, but the trombones play their chorale writing with much more audible strength. I also don't care for the "screechy" quality that the trumpets get here and there either. Sorry John, but I do think you're a bit loco in this one case. Devotional? . . . maybe, but Mahler 3 is not a catholic mass. It's not the Mozart Requiem being played in St. Stephonsdom. If anything, I would say that Abbado/VPO are far more "with it" in the first three movements. Then the tension (and thus, the musicality) truly sags in the final three movements. If you think of Mahler 3 as a long winded concerto for strings and horns, then I guess Abbado/VPO would be hard to beat.
It's a small thing, but I really like the short brass line that Boulez adds towards the end of the choral "bim-bam" movement on his M3. They come in with the "Texaco" theme for about four bars ("you can trust your car to the man who wears the star"). I've never seen it written out in any printed version, so I guess Boulez just came up with it on his own; I don't know. Regardless, I like it.
-
Barry, what you hate about the Abbado/VPO M3 is what I love! The different, softer tone (or reverent, devotional tone) in the last three movements is the magic key, so to speak, of this M3. Yes, probably not Mahler's intent...but still works for me. If Mahler's 3rd was a Bruckner work, this performance would be more in character I suppose!
It appears the Ozawa M3 (with M6) had been reissued ( a CDR copy though) by Archivemusic...still pricey, but tempting :)
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=64826&album_group=8
--Todd
-
It's not so much that I hate it, but rather that I think it's an unnecessary deviation from what's written that contributes very little - if anything. Perhaps it would have helped if Abbado - in this particular case - had provided more color & contrast in the "bim-bam" choral movement. As I said, as a concerto for strings & horns, it's hard to beat.
You also need to ask yourselves this question: if Abbado got it so right the first time, why would he have so drastically altered his tempi and balances in his Berlin remake?
By the way, I second your enthusiasm for the Heinz Rogner M3, which I feel is a far more well-rounded presentation of M3 than Abbado/VPO is. If you like the Rogner M3, you'd probably like the Armin jordan one as well.
-
Barry, well considered points there...
By the way, when it really comes to brass tax, I think I hold the Rogner, Kobayashi, Boulez and Zinman as my favorite M3's...they encompass the sublime and the profane best...
As much as I like the Abbado VPO M3, I agree the Rogner has the edge (in being more well-rounded as you say).
And thanks for the heads up on the Armin Jordon...I'm still planning on getting that one.
--Todd
-
I've been looking to re-acquire (for a not totally absurd price) the Abbado/VPO M3 for years after giving it up in the absence of shelf space. I remember it as particularly mesmerizing (a quality, as you say, Todd, of both the performance itself and the fascinating sound image of this recording) and I've regretted letting it go after the new BPO M3 came out (not that the latter is any weaker; on the contrary, rather). Together with the Abbado/VPO M9 it holds a very special place in my aural memory and indeed it made a powerul early impression in its time, making me feel quite viscerally that I now finally "got" the Mahler mystique (but there is no reason to mystify the recording itself, I think; it's not marked by any more hallowed manner than the next guy's, it's just conducting that's exceptionally concentrated and attentive and an orchestra that's motivated and capable of realizing the conductor's vision exceptionally well).
Why Abbado would want a remake of it for the posterity is not such a big mystery. We change, and we want to redo things in the image of our present thinking: artists are engaged in the business of expressing things through themselves. That doesn't mean the previous was bad; at most, it might have been just "youthful" in retrospect, if we think of it from the point of view of the artist's career arc, but who's to say it's not equally or even more valid as a representation it gives of the work itself? Moreover I don't think musicians themselves hold such sacred notions as there being just "one best" performance; being artists they are probably less prone to reifying art and more prone to thinking of it as an ongoing process..
So the upshot is that you leave me feeling very intrigued by the Rogner M3. Is that the one with Jadwiga Rappe? That'd be a plus in my book.
PT
-
Todd recently referred to the Rogner M3:
The third movement uses a "posthorn" that sounds more like a muted coronet than a trumpet...I'm not sure exactly what they're using here, but it's interesting and much better than Horenstein's flugelhorn. The oboe in the "Oh Mensch" is quirky but haunting...the slides are slowed down so the "middle" note in the slide is heard longer...quite unorthodox, but yet appealing in it's rough-out-of-tune quality and sounding like a bird like no other performance I've yet heard.
Has anyone else heard the Rogner, and been able to determine what they're using instead of a flugenlhorn? While you're looking--or rather listening--give a listen to the oboe in the "Oh Mensch" that Todd described above much better than I've ever been able to. Reminds me of Richard Strauss' quote in Ariadne:
"Fremder Vogel, singe wieder, Strange bird, sing on,
Deine Klagen, sie beleben, Your plaintive calls revive us,
Uns entzucken solche Lieder!" Such songs enchant us!
The strange bird (the oboe) adds to Mahler's unearthly atmosphere in this Rogner M3. I don't think it's done this way in any other recording--worth the experience!
John H
-
Please excuse my ignorance on this matter, but is it really possible for an LP on a turntable to sound better than a CD?
Did the CD remastering lose something, or the LP somehow capture something else?
I have the Karajan M9 ( (1st recording- -analog) on both LP and CD. The LP is mint condition - no clicks, pops, or scratches. I have synchronised the two and have played them to 8 Mahler-lovers, switching between the two presentations at random, without the listeners knowing which was which.
Seven of the eight preferred the LP version, with almost all of them convinced that it was the CD. The eighth picked which was which but preferred the digital medium because he listens to everything on an i-pod and can't handle analog sound.
This I think takes care of your misconception.
In a variant of the test I played the beginning of the Ancerl M9 (LP) against the Karajan (CD). These could not be synchronised of course but I told listeners that the turntable was running slightly off-speed and needed service. Both performances feature multi-miking which fleshes out inner detail often unheard, but they are totally different in character - Karajan cool to the point of detachment and Ancerl urgently passionate.
The Ancerl LP was preferred 5 to 3. Only one of my 8 listeners wondered why I was playing two different performances.
Presented for what it is worth.
-
I have the Karajan M9 ( (1st recording- -analog) on both LP and CD. The LP is mint condition - no clicks, pops, or scratches. I have synchronised the two and have played them to 8 Mahler-lovers, switching between the two presentations at random, without the listeners knowing which was which.
Seven of the eight preferred the LP version, with almost all of them convinced that it was the CD.
Good to hear people's good verdict on Karajan's first M9th :D
I've been telling the same story - the LP sounds better than the CD(s).
John,
-
I have the Karajan M9 ( (1st recording- -analog) on both LP and CD. The LP is mint condition - no clicks, pops, or scratches. I have synchronised the two and have played them to 8 Mahler-lovers, switching between the two presentations at random, without the listeners knowing which was which.
Seven of the eight preferred the LP version, with almost all of them convinced that it was the CD.
Good to hear people's good verdict on Karajan's first M9th :D
I've been telling the same story - the LP sounds better than the CD(s).
John,
While I'm glad they finally (about 10 years ago) got around to putting his first M9 on CD, I am beginning to prefer its LP incarnation as well. I do prefer the huge tam tam crash in the the first movement on CD. The rest is more airy and open on LP, and less plastic-ky, if that makes sense.
-
As I explained before, the Karajan M9th LP has a better balance from bottom to top with good emphasis on the low bass lines, with closer and stronger timpani. Unfortunately, when they transferred it to CD the upper instruments got boosted resulting in bright, shrill sound; you can hear high trumpets, woodwinds, and cymbal rolls all clearly but the low instruments sound tiny. The biggest disappointment is the weak timpani at the major climax of the 1st movt.
John,
-
Thanks John and Logan,
I guess this is yet another daily reminder that I am still learning. I never would have imagined that an LP could produce sound preferable to that of a CD. Now, I wish I'd hung onto more of my LPs.
John H
Well, there are several opinions AND viewpoints on this. Number one, not everyone thinks digital is inferior (count me among those). Objectively speaking it ain't, either, regardless of what and how you measure (dynamic range & frequency range reproduced, various types of distortion, etc.). Add to that the inherent stability, durability, storability, user-friendliness, cost of acquisition & maintenance, availability etc. of the medium and for many you have a winner at hand. Second, in the early going they didn't quite know how to make digital recordings yet, hence the "bad" sound of the early DDD issues. Nothing inherent about the medium in this, the same was true for the early stereo and the early DSD/MC as well. Things improve. (How long did it take to get the monaural techniques honed to the level by which we now know them in our recollections? 50 years?) Third, there are psychoacoustic phenomena that may be responsible for the preference that many show for their old LPs. Analog had lots (and I mean LOOOTS) of various types of distortion which is entirely lacking in the digital format and may be what makes people prefer the "analog sound." So it wouldn't be more accurate but in fact less accurate (more distorted) but people for some reason like "the sound" of that distortion. Certain kind of harmonic distortion gives a feeling of there being more "air" in the upper range, for instance. That distortion can also be the product of the playback equipment. The distortion is then not there in the music, it's not there in the signal feed, it's not there in the master tapes (or comparable), but it's introduced in it by the analog playback rig. In a somewhat similar fashion some people prefer 78 rpm monos. This medium simply contains so little information (compared to PCM digital and SACD especially) that it's really nicer and easier ("smoother") to listen to, claim some. Fourth, there is the force of habit. We all grew up with the sound of our LPs and even 78s, and that's how we learned to recognize a good sound and know our music by. Digital is simply so much more accurate to the original signal feed and so much greater dynamic range (the difference between the quietest and the loudest sounds) and frequency range (the lowest and the highest sound produced) that it can simply be a bit "disturbing" to listen to, in your own living room where you are habituated to the limitations of the LP medium.
So I'd say anyone can have a preference, but to talk about the "better" sound of LPs to my ears is just nonsensical, unless it's heavily qualified somehow. It simply isn't any better, no matter how you look at it; but it may be "nicer" in several ways. And in many cases it's also not about the product itself but about what the playback chain that you own does to it.
Comparisons are very dubious unless there is careful enough level matching (in blind tests people *always* prefer the sound that is even a little bit louder), the switch component (A/B) is reliable, and the test is really blind (not even the switcher knows what he/she is switching to, so as to be unable to give unconscious signals to the testee).
Anyway, if you take almost any of the current PCM recordings (have you heard what they can do these days? Try for example the new Pollini/Mozart cto recordings, or the Boulez Mahler 2, whatever), I doubt you can maintain it's inferior to anything you've heard in the past, including SACD. Interestingly, to date there hasn't been one single blind test in which the listeners could have reliably been able to tell apart a hi-rez recording from a normal PCM variant of the same, when all other conditions were controlled.
I'm also tickled by the ease by which a very large number of the analog fans are now making the transition to hard disc based systems. That's the same digital as in your CD but without the aluminum around it.
But this is really another discussion.
PT
-
Has anyone else heard the Rogner, and been able to determine what they're using instead of a flugenlhorn?
It's just a rotary valve trumpet with a mute stuck in it.
-
PT may be wrong, but I doubt it.
Funny! But thanks all the same.
I was actually considering between that, "Abbado Will Wipe the Floor with Karajan!," "Bernstein's Shaking It and Faking It!," and "Am I right, or am I right?" for my motto.
(The formative influences of my youth were NBA and Dennis Potter.)
PT
-
Thanks John and Logan,
I guess this is yet another daily reminder that I am still learning. I never would have imagined that an LP could produce sound preferable to that of a CD. Now, I wish I'd hung onto more of my LPs.
John H
Well, there are several opinions AND viewpoints on this. Number one, not everyone thinks digital is inferior (count me among those). Objectively speaking it ain't, either, regardless of what and how you measure (dynamic range & frequency range reproduced, various types of distortion, etc.). Add to that the inherent stability, durability, storability, user-friendliness, cost of acquisition & maintenance, availability etc. of the medium and for many you have a winner at hand. Second, in the early going they didn't quite know how to make digital recordings yet, hence the "bad" sound of the early DDD issues. Nothing inherent about the medium in this, the same was true for the early stereo and the early DSD/MC as well. Things improve. (How long did it take to get the monaural techniques honed to the level by which we now know them in our recollections? 50 years?) Third, there are psychoacoustic phenomena that may be responsible for the preference that many show for their old LPs. Analog had lots (and I mean LOOOTS) of various types of distortion which is entirely lacking in the digital format and may be what makes people prefer the "analog sound." So it wouldn't be more accurate but in fact less accurate (more distorted) but people for some reason like "the sound" of that distortion. Certain kind of harmonic distortion gives a feeling of there being more "air" in the upper range, for instance. That distortion can also be the product of the playback equipment. The distortion is then not there in the music, it's not there in the signal feed, it's not there in the master tapes (or comparable), but it's introduced in it by the analog playback rig. In a somewhat similar fashion some people prefer 78 rpm monos. This medium simply contains so little information (compared to PCM digital and SACD especially) that it's really nicer and easier ("smoother") to listen to, claim some. Fourth, there is the force of habit. We all grew up with the sound of our LPs and even 78s, and that's how we learned to recognize a good sound and know our music by. Digital is simply so much more accurate to the original signal feed and so much greater dynamic range (the difference between the quietest and the loudest sounds) and frequency range (the lowest and the highest sound produced) that it can simply be a bit "disturbing" to listen to, in your own living room where you are habituated to the limitations of the LP medium.
So I'd say anyone can have a preference, but to talk about the "better" sound of LPs to my ears is just nonsensical, unless it's heavily qualified somehow. It simply isn't any better, no matter how you look at it; but it may be "nicer" in several ways. And in many cases it's also not about the product itself but about what the playback chain that you own does to it.
Comparisons are very dubious unless there is careful enough level matching (in blind tests people *always* prefer the sound that is even a little bit louder), the switch component (A/B) is reliable, and the test is really blind (not even the switcher knows what he/she is switching to, so as to be unable to give unconscious signals to the testee).
Anyway, if you take almost any of the current PCM recordings (have you heard what they can do these days? Try for example the new Pollini/Mozart cto recordings, or the Boulez Mahler 2, whatever), I doubt you can maintain it's inferior to anything you've heard in the past, including SACD. Interestingly, to date there hasn't been one single blind test in which the listeners could have reliably been able to tell apart a hi-rez recording from a normal PCM variant of the same, when all other conditions were controlled.
I'm also tickled by the ease by which a very large number of the analog fans are now making the transition to hard disc based systems. That's the same digital as in your CD but without the aluminum around it.
But this is really another discussion.
PT
Perhaps objectivity is in the eye of the beholder on this one. Sure, compact discs are more widely availably, and I can't imagine even the most absolute analog fan disagreeing. I'll grant you the advantage of storability, but cost? As I said earlier, I picked up Mehta's Mahler Fifth for a quarter. You'd be hard pressed to find anything on CD, even by the Novosibirsk Philharmonic for that price. So I don't quite understand your cost point.
An important reminder for the vinyl vs. compact disc debate is that it is NOT always analog vs. digital...although for some it is. For me, some Telarc digitally recorded LPs slay their CD counterpart. I prefer the Slatkin M1 and the Cleveland Winds Holst Suites recordings to their CD equivalents. And it's not because of any "distortion."
Unlike a few vinyl disciples, I'd never say "chuck your cds." But in certain cases I think many would agree that a well-engineered LP beats a poorly or indifferently remastered CD. And sometimes even on equal footing, a record can have an edge.
At the very least, remastering can goof up a good recording, whatever the format. Now, perhaps theres no absolute truth in any of this, but I'll share an example of why I'm sometimes fed up with the "new improved" sound. Karajan's DG account of Respighi's Pines of Rome is one of my favorite party records because he brings out the so-called buccine in the last movement to such prominent levels. The first cd incarnation, and the LP, had them really loud to nearly train horn levels. Cool stuff. The "better" DG Originals account, hyped because of the "careful attention of the tonmeister" (if I remember the blurb correctly) made them much more polite. I had to track down the LP for the proper sound. Now, how do we know that the tonmeister is "wrong?" Because Herb's Philharmonia account has almost equally obnoxious buccine. He very clearly wanted this part brought out.
In the end, those who want to stick to CDs or digitial downloads or whatever comes down the road, should. But newer, faster, or more user-friendly isn't always better, just as microwaved food generally doesn't taste better than a home-cooked meal. Vinyl can be a nice alternative, and until EVERYTHING is accessible, is a nice way to hear stuff that's out of the current catalogs.
-
I still love LP's because I can get a bunch on a new composer for real cheap. I especially like collecting Haydn's stuff on LP...and Stravinsky. I'm actually going to the LP store today to pick up some Bruckner Masses! And Sibilius (thanks John for the recommend).
--Todd
-
An important reminder for the vinyl vs. compact disc debate is that it is NOT always analog vs. digital...In certain cases I think many would agree that a well-engineered LP beats a poorly or indifferently remastered CD.
There are two separate issues: What a medium allows, and how these possibilities are taken advantage of.
In the first regard, CDs or PCM recording and replay allow a much broader spectrum of what's possible for the sound engineers to achieve than analog tape. (That's not even questioned by anyone.) That's in principle. Another thing is what's done about those possibilities (think of, e.g., dynamic compresssion in pop and -- apparently -- increasingly also jazz; but also of the learning curves in implementation).
Mastering seems indeed much more important than the medium as such. Like you say, a well-mastered analog LP beats a sloppy-job digital CD and even SACD. But a well-done CD/digital can give you clearly more than a well-done LP/analog. Then it also depends how well you yourself take advantage of that which is offered (primarily, how good your speakers are and did you set them up about right).
The rest is kind of peripheral as considerations, I think (cost, etc.). But the lost cost of LPs that you mention applies to used LPs only, to that corner-store second-hand and flea-market business that constitutes a hobby in itself and an additional attraction yet (search & discovery...) for LP collectors. Were you to buy new prime LP issues today you'll invariably pay a lot more than for the prime CD issue of the same. Likewise for the equipment: What would an analog rig cost that's performancewise comparable to (=near approximate of) a $500 digital setup? $3,000?
I love LPs and always have but I think we can make the distinction between hobby fascination vs. pure performance specs.
Methinks,
PT
-
I don't know. For all the talk of compression, I still think it is the compact disc that sounds bound up. I can't comment too much on SACD, for I only have a few hybrids. But I keep hearing that SACDs are supposed to bring the listener closer to the vinyl warmth that many miss with CDs.
But I don't have anything close to $3000 in my turntable set up, and I'm thrilled. I have an old Dual 1219 turntable I traded for (it would have been $80 had I paid for it.) And a phono preamp (a little more pricey for sure at $400, and a $100 cart.) Maybe someday if a few ebay sales go well, I'll upgrade to the really good stuff. Otherwise, I think I get some pretty good music out of those.
I think the jury will be deadlocked on this one.
-
I think the jury will be deadlocked on this one.
It is, and has been from the start. But the specs is really what I mean to speak of, not so much the subjective perception or preference. People seem to like that less accurate and less than neutral sound that their analog rigs deliver, even with all the cracks and pops and rumbling present. (And tape saturation in climaxes.) One point that I think is interesting is that for obvious evolutionary reasons we tend to listen more attentively (and thus hear better) in the presence of, say, low-level white noise or some other form of distortion (whether we "hear" it or not). But yes, the analog "softness" or "smoothness" AKA "warmth" is the usual desciption here. I myself much prefer the sharpest possible delineation, and anyway can't even subjectively compare (best would be to run some blind tests on this) as I no longer own a turntable. Then again I've never looked back, which I guess I leave as my bottom line.
Happy listening.
PT
-
Happy listening.
PT
And to you, too!
-
If I could have just one it would be the completed 10th. Any would suffice, except the Mazzetti #1. And if I had no other choice I would take that one!
-
Hello, this is my first post. My background : I have been listening to Jazz music for more than thirty years. I only started listening to Mahler late last year and I am addicted to his music almost to the point of obsession.
I will comment if I may on the off topic discussion on this thread of the relative benefits of Vinyl versus CD. I prefer Vinyl and I have a much better turntable than CD player. The quality of the equipment is critical of course when making comparisons between the two methods of playback.
Anyway, my desert island disc? A few months ago I would have said the von Karajan/BPO recording of Mahler's Fifth (no laughing please) followed very closely by the Szell/PO Fourth and perhaps even the Barbirolli/BPO Ninth. However, as some contributors have been stranded with Bertini's box set I would dearly love to be stranded on a desert island with a vinyl copy of the Kubelik/BRSO box set.
-
Welcome to the board Sean!
I really love the karajan BPO M5, a top tier M5 to be sure.
--Todd
-
Yes, the Karajan M5th has a great finale - the best coda to V? - and an incredibly intense playing. Alas, Karajan's phrasing in the first two movts. strikes me as pointless and unfocused making the symphony sound less organized than it really is. That's the impression I still get.
John,
-
My choice would be the Kubelik Das Lied von der Erde (Audite).
Off topic, I'd like to say how much I appreciate this discussion board. I'm not a music critic or analyst, but I love Mahler and find very many of the topics and posts to be helpful, informative and much fun to read. Thanks all.
db
-
Karajan's M5 and the Kubelik/Baker (Audite) "DLvdE" are certainly excellent desert isle selections. Thank you for those sensible contributions.
Cosima Wagner pulled big-time strings for G.M., in spite of his being Jewish, simply because his conducting of Wagner's opera - not to mention the the demands he would place upon his entire production team on any given opera - was so outstanding. This whole topic is dealt with in the most humorous way imaginable in Ken Russell's "Mahler" movie; if also just a tad tasteless as well. So yes, Mahler was Hitler's favorite conductor of Wagner (if only A.H. had sold more paintings!!!)
Barry
-
Ken Russell's Mahler movie shocked me a bit the first time--especially seeing a Cosima Wagner figure in a stylishly-scant, black leather Nazi outfit. Yet the more I learned of Mahler, the more I saw how Russell's film was really making valid statements about Mahler and the Vienna of his time.
If only the would-be landscape painter, A.H. had seen a bit deeper into Wagner's Ring, and perhaps noticed its commentary on the human condition, rather than its "exploitability" for political utility.
--John H
-
If only the would-be landscape painter, A.H. had seen a bit deeper into Wagner's Ring, and perhaps noticed its commentary on the human condition, rather than its "exploitability" for political utility.
I couldn't possibly agree with you more. It seems to me that Wagner was warning against everything that the Third Reich eventually did. The nazis exploited that entire, back to medieval time; more simplistic; more agrarian based notion does come up in Wagner and German lit. at that time. In other words, they were warning against further alienation of the human spirit through the unstoppable exploitation of the earth's resources; further industrialization, and hence, further bulid-up of military arms. That message is certainly valid today.
-
I think the jury will be deadlocked on this one.
It is, and has been from the start. But the specs is really what I mean to speak of, not so much the subjective perception or preference. People seem to like that less accurate and less than neutral sound that their analog rigs deliver, even with all the cracks and pops and rumbling present. (And tape saturation in climaxes.) One point that I think is interesting is that for obvious evolutionary reasons we tend to listen more attentively (and thus hear better) in the presence of, say, low-level white noise or some other form of distortion (whether we "hear" it or not). But yes, the analog "softness" or "smoothness" AKA "warmth" is the usual desciption here. I myself much prefer the sharpest possible delineation, and anyway can't even subjectively compare (best would be to run some blind tests on this) as I no longer own a turntable. Then again I've never looked back, which I guess I leave as my bottom line.
Happy listening.
PT
I have to agree with sbugala on this one. As someone who ditched vinyl in 1984 and came back to it about 5 years ago I can honestly say that good vinyl sounds much more realistic to me than a CD. CDs often sound too clinical, which can be great for certain things. Good vinyl makes you feel as if you are in the room with the orchestra or band (lots of jazz LPs here).
A CD sometimes may sound more "exact", but does it sounds real?
I guess it depends on what you are looking for. I have amazed people with multi-channel SACD at my place. I have made jaws drop this way. However, I have had more of these same people shake their heads in disbelief after hearing Starker's classic recordings of Bach's cello suites on high-quality LP (I also play the SACD for them and all so far have said the LP box set from Speaker Corner is better. Both are excellent IMO. When my son was 2 I would play the SACD for him and he would stop for a few seconds and listen, then go about his business playing. He loves this recording. When I would put the LP of the same sessions on he would stand at rapt attention for minutes as if he was seeing God). Led Zeppelin's 45 RPM of "Stairway to Heaven" does the same thing for EVERYBODY I have ever played it for, and I don't think there is a person 30 years old or older who hasn't heard the song enough times that they could probably figure out how to play it out guitar from just hearing the song so much over the years. Bill Evans' "Waltz for Debby" and "Sunday at the Village Vanguard" also do the same for jazz fans. I have never heard these sessions from 1961 not sound good in any format, but the LPs make you feel like you are sitting in the middle of the club (I also own the SACDs of the two Evans' classics, as well as the XRCDs and red book CDs, and, great as the SACDs are, the LPs are the ones that make your heart skip a beat).
Could it be that analog is more natural and "human" sounding, whereas digital is more alien? I'm not very good at describing this, and maybe someone could help me out here, if they can see where I'm trying to go with this.
I'd love to have a listening party with my Mahler friends here and see what you think in person. Maybe one day this could happen.
-
For me, the ease and convenience of CD's far outweigh any supposed defects in sound. I also feel that many people who are playing back LPs at optimum conditions (excellent turntables & cartridges, vacuumed LP's, etc.), are not doing anywhere the same sort of stuff with their CD's. By aside for those subjective opinions, here's something interesting that I can contribute:
A good friend of mine was a friend of the original designer of Quad electrostatic speakers and amps, both of which he used exclusively. He had a super-dooper, heavy base turntable (I don't remember what), numerous expensive cartridges (he liked Grados), and a vacuum machine for his LPs. He also used CD players that could be described as high-end mass production models, or low-end audiophile ones (again, I don't remember what make). He would A/B demo. the exact same recordings on LP and CD for me. In nearly every case, the sound was nearly identical between the LP and CD. True story.
Barry
-
Well, here's something that doesn't quite contribute to the whole LP vs. CD debate, but it does involve one of my near desert island recordings...
I received Bernstein's complete Columbia Mahler cycle on LP in the mail today. I purchased it on ebay. The black leather bound set usually sells for at least $40 on average. But I got mine for a mere $10, much to my shock. Perhaps it was because the auction ended at 4 or 5 in the morning, but no one else bid.
I'm pleased at the beautiful program notes, and the cool bonus LP of musicians who played under Mahler giving their thoughts. (That's also included in the NY Phil Mahler set that I ended up selling.)
But I have yet to play any of the music because of that cool interview disc. Bernstein's Sony set is pretty nice on CD. I like the multiple tracks they've added to certain works. But I freaking hate the cheesy tie dye look to that box. Does Sony swear to make ugly looking Bernstein releases? First there was the Royal Edition that has mediocre watercolors by Prince Charles. (Could be worse, I guess. They could've been watercolors OF Prince Charles.) Then, there was Bernstein Edition, with cool photos of Bernstein, made ugly by weird color filters. Now the tye die. Perhaps there will be an original Jacket collection someday. Oh well.
You know, here's one musing from the OTHER side of the fence. One thing that's cool about CDs is the fact a Mahler cycle can fit in the palm of your hand. It's almost like you're carrying around a warhead...a superpowerful package loaded with stuff like the Resurrection Symphony or the Ninth. A digital download just doesn't deliver that (rather subjective) feeling.
-
How come you only have two stars :-\ - you've been around for a long while. :D
-
Can I get cumulative stars from posts from other Mahler boards from yesteryear?
So, just to show my objectivity, as much as I love my Mehta M5 with LA on LP, can I equally state that Bernstein's Columbia cycle in the famous black leather case sounds worse than expected? (Little soundstage, nasally winds, thin string tone.) Perhaps I can flip this on ebay and put it towards a Bernstein Mahler SACD that some have raved about recently? Bernstein's M3 on an early pressing sounds better on vinyl than the Bernstein Century edition. But that's obviously not the case with the M7 and M9 that I've sampled tonight.
-
How come you only have two stars :-\ - you've been around for a long while. :D
sbugala,
Why not reply to this post so you'll get over the hump (100 posts) and earn your third star? It's irritating to see someone so close (you have 99 posts as we speak).
To make matters easier for you I'll put up a provocation: yes, those newly remastered Bernstein Sony issues on DSD/SACD sound much better than in any previous incarnation, yet they still won't even come close to anything recorded in the last 10 - 15 years or so using standard PCM technology (as in "CD digital"). And in any case, it seems it's basically all about the mastering process (how good the guy pulling the levers is), not about the medium as such (analog vs. PCM vs. DSD), if listening tests are to be trusted.
So, are we getting there or not! :D
PT
-
Ok, well, here we go for 100...
My luck will be that the nanosecond I finally get the Bernstein SACDs from Japan, they'll be released here domestically in a fine Original Jacket Collection.
As an aside, are the program notes for the SACD's exclusively in Japanese?
-
As an aside, are the program notes for the SACD's exclusively in Japanese?
Congrats for the new star! and, judging from the titles I have, the Jpn SACDs reproduce the original album back cover in entirety, incl. notes, on the back of the CD booklet, but the font size is equally smaller, i.e., you may need a magnifying class. Any new notes would be in Japanese, it seems.
I think if we are to not just survive but thrive in this world we need to enroll language courses in Japanese AND Chinese. I already feel the handicap.
PT
-
Japanese and Chinese classes? Oh no--I have enough trouble understanding a few lines of German here and there! Thank heavens David Hurwitz's book on Mahler symphonies is in English. With Dave's help, I may arrive at an understanding of M7 that will elevate it to "desert island must-have" consideration status.
--John H
No worries, we already have machine translation to help us along. The below is an English translation of the Japanese translation made of your post:
The Japanese and China class? Oh NO--I who have understood the small-numbered line of German here and there possess sufficient trouble! Heaven Deivuitsudo Hurwitz' appreciate; as for the book of s of the symphony of Mahler there is English. Dave using the help of s, as for me perhaps, it arrives with the understanding of M7 which increases that; as for the unmanned island have which becomes state of consideration.
PT
-
Machine not worry. 8)
. & '
-
I am a little late to this topic but I must say one-two things:
Polarius T,
I sign myself everything you said about vinyl and analog and cd and digital sound.
I was in this debate for long time and it costs me a lot, in time and money and mood for listen to music.I have a lot of good vinyl's and a costy and audiophile turntable system, but I listen to cd and sacd and dvd( which i believe has extremelly good sound. And this in my 45dollars,yes 45US dollars dvd player). In cd we have a lot new releases, great dynamic sound, very practical use etc.And best of all you can concetrate to music alone.The disc is the medium and not the utmost goal for a true musiclover.
As for desert island disc( Mahler or other), I hope not to be in such an island. If this going to happen I prefer something else, easily anybody can guess.
And I will be liberating from all this thousands of discs that keep us in chains. Of course i just kiding and exagerate, but there is some truth in this.
-
It would help you pass the time, until you could escape from the deserted island situation.
Yes JH, in that certain situation I hope I will be in some tropical beach, like these in the travel commercials.
So there i will not want to be in suicidal mood so no M9 or M6. But i can't be without the numerous nostalgic Adagios. So a combination of M2 movement ii, M3 finale, M4 mov.iii, M5 Adagietto, M6 Andante will be very pleased to me.Also, this way I could dream of Alpine highs and meadows, which will be so far away.
But for my desert island in real life( i mean,my home), I will choose M9, Bernstein, Abbado or Giulini conducted. ( Haven't hear yet a lot of M9 a pocess. Among them Macal, Kobayashi, Rattle both,Barenboim, Sinopoli Dresden, a lot of live Haitink, Ozawa, Maazel etc. You see I want time to absorb any performance, and I don't listen too often the works I like a lot, so not to burn them out.)
-
I could certainly survive with alpsman's choices. I'm especially glad he included the Andante moderato from M6. I was listening to several versions of it just this afternoon, and I think the glorious last five minutes of the andante (yes, especially with audible cowbells!) makes for one of the "most magical moments" ever in music.
JH
-
I'm especially glad he included the Andante moderato from M6
I can't decide betwen M6 Andante and M3 finale for my favorite slow movement. I exclude the M9 Adagio(iv), because this is such an outworldy music and in a higher point.25 years ago as a newbie to Mahler(as i am now in this forum), I was very fond for M4 adagio. But the two i said before are now my favorites.
M3 Adagio is somehow philosophical and M6 is more green, ecological and nostalgic.
-
What is your single "must-have on a desert island" Mahler work?:
Difficult question. I dare to name Sinopoli's Eighth and Bertini Ninth (Tokyo Metropolitan).
-
Very hard indeed, to choose between the Adagio of M3 vs M6. I can't yet put into words the difference, although I think alpsman's descriptive words of "green, ecological and nostalgic" for M6 are definitely on the right track. Perhaps they are reminiscent of Mahler's Alpine hikes.
--JH
-
What is your single "must-have on a desert island" Mahler work?:
Difficult question. I dare to name Sinopoli's Eighth and Bertini Ninth (Tokyo Metropolitan).
Good choice with the Bertini TMSO M9! This M9 is very powerful indeed...one of my ultimate favorites (with his EMI M9).
--Todd
-
Sorry I'm very late - couldn't find my cufflinks anywhere.
Avoiding the eccentric's choice, 2 under Oscar Fried, I'd choose 6 under Mitropoulos, late 50s,
1)Because it's my fave symph
2)because the Mitropoulos is amazingly electric
and 3) Because in my world, whenever I play 6. dramatic things happen in my life; so I'll be saved soomer and be able to get back to the rest of the ouevre.
Ivor
-
Ivor, I see your point.
For me, M6 fights the whole struggle of life, even confronting that inconvenient truth for all of us of the inexorable approach of death.
If we can taste the delight of the sweeping theme of joy for life, and still watch Mahler play out the inevitable end for all of us, then everything else in life seems easy.
JH
-
[I mean 'oeuvre', natch.]
Ivor
-
Certainment!
-
Thomas Sanderling's M6 (St. Petersburg) is so exceptionally full of life that it is tempting me to consider it as a solitary companion, if stuck marooned on a desert island.
Is this a failing on my part, to be so taken with a symphony that does not end triumphantly?
JH
-
Thomas Sanderling's M6 (St. Petersburg) is so exceptionally full of life that it is tempting me to consider it as a solitary companion, if stuck marooned on a desert island.
Is this a failing on my part, to be so taken with a symphony that does not end triumphantly?
JH
This CD would be an exceptional choice indeed! One of my all time favorite Mahler performances.
--Todd