The reason I pre-ordered Zinman's Mahler 8th is due to my experience with his M1, M5 and M6. I had the impression that they all follow the letter of the score very precisely, what I tend to call objective music making, almost to a fault. Here's one example from M5:
The underwhelmed brass chorale at the end of M5 is actually exactly what is in the score. The horns have fff, the trumpets and trombones only ff. One might say "so what?", but if we compare that to the climax of the second movement (it's even called as such in the score with "Höhepunkt") where all instruments should play fff, the thought, that it might be just a technicality, rather than Mahler's intent is an argument I don't follow in light of the precision of the composers instructions in his scores.
(I have to admit here, that I only have the public domain score of the first edition from
IMSLP, so Mahler might've changed it, and since Zinman used the critical edition, all my reasoning might be wrong!).
I found the sonics excellent as well, with the caveat that I have the impression of standing on the podium with Zinman rather than sitting in the hall, which some listeners might find "too direct" into their face, and some balancing issues that come with this kind of sound engineering.
The seating of the orchestra is another important matter for me, thus I was very happy to hear, that Zinman divides the violin sections antiphonally. Interestingly, he places the celli not on the left next to the 1st violins (that is more usual), but places them on the right together with the 2nd V (the violas are thus together with the 1st V. on the right). The double basses are right behind the celli (visible on the photo in the booklet to M6 as well).
Combine this with high expectations that come with loving this symphony and there's a distinct probability of disappointment. No less due to Antoni Wit's recording on Naxos, which presents to me an objective view of the score with tempi, that never disappoint.
After a first listen-through, I can already tell, that I will gladly come back many times to this recording. Thus, this is not a review but more like short notes that I extended in parts.
(note, I listened through headphones and not through speakers)
For some listeners, the very first note of a performance of Mahler's 8th might say more than a whole minute of Doctor Marianus praising the Mater gloriosa, so I will say it here in no uncertain terms: the organ is an
earthquake! Not only at the begin, but throughout the symphony! Only on the last page of the symphony does it get less noticeable, but only because the whole orchestra is trying to make a crack in the roof of the Tonhalle!
Each time I listen to a recording that has a great organ in the hall (Nagano and Wit come to my mind), it is obvious what a crucial part it plays in Part 1 and in the last two minutes of Part 2. Listening to this one it became obvious to me, that the organ pedal has the important function of being the foundation to the polyphony of Part 1 which usually belongs to the low instruments in the orchestra. Due to the mass of sound, the organ pedal is perfect for this role before having triple contrabasson/tuba and 16 double basses on the podium. From that it follows, that the organ is very essential part of a performance of this work.
Tempo I is held back a bit. Same goes to the relative tempi throughout Part 1. Maybe it was the late hour when I listened, but I would've liked a bit more motion.
The stereo separation of the choirs is quite apparent. Not sure if it would be natural to the Tonhalle and the placing of the choirs or if it was due to sound engineering, but it allows to hear even more details than usual.
The bells sound as if they were an octave higher than I'm accustomed to at the begin of the orchestral interlude.
Beginning with "Accende..." through the double fugue and the return of the "Veni"-theme at the recapitulation, I noticed how the orchestra is either held back (except the organ); at least more than usual. The lows and the very highs are apparent, but the instruments of the middle register (the ones that double the choir) are not discernible. Without the choir, the sound picture of the orchestra is at its usual detail. Double timpani quite loud at "Gloria Patri...".
Zinman takes the "Etwas drängend bis zum Schluss"
very literally! After the last note I thought: "Wait, didn't I just miss something?!". I deliberately didn't go back for a re-listen to describe here my first listening, but the problem lied in the too sudden change of tempo and the very fast accelerando that Zinman employs.
Based on Part 1 I thought that Part 2 could end up being sluggish but Zinman actually takes what I could even describe as a "relatively brisk" tempo. Thanks to the divided violin sections there are some great moments of "dialog" between them (notably after the second loud outburst of the orchestra: it's a downward motive with triplets and und sixteenths).
Some of the quiet tremoli of the violins are sul ponticello even though the score doesn't indicate to play this way.
The troublesome "Löwen, sie schleichen an" where Mahler writes p for some of the voices and pppp for other is nothing like indicated (in words as well), nevertheless I always wonder how Mahler realized this in his performance almost 100 years ago.
Pater ecstaticus is very good! Pater profundus sings as if he were a bit tipsy.
D.M. first entrance is *not* held back as it is requested by Mahler. The tenor sounds a bit whiny (can't think of any less derogatory word, though it was not that appalling). Tempo is quite brisk at this point. The instrumental interlude afterwards is taken very slowly (just as the score indicates) but then Zinman, just before the entrace of the choir, doubles the tempo. It seemed quiet seemless to me, but of course, it surprised me. The boys choir was in stereo at this point (lower voices left, higher ones right), which was the first time I heard it this way; in Part 1 they were in central position.
M. gloriosa has a wonderful voice.
The tempo of the last two pages of the symphony are taken Pesante as indicated, and I guess, his motivation for ending Part I so suddenly (and thus, underwhelmingly) is having the wider picture in mind: Part 1 is not the very end of the work. Mahler scores the whole orchestra at that point with ff, in contrast to fff at the very last note of the work. I found it remarkable how carefully Mahler put the dynamics: there's only one explicit fff on the last page (beside the aforementioned very last note), which is for the horns (playing the inverted "Veni" motif with the trombones).
Tam-tam has a nice big "glowing" to the lower end. The timpani have the same hard-edge "whack" as at the end of Part 1.
And as it should be with every performance when I'm in the mood for this work, I had teary eyes during the last bars.
Overall, I found the performance interesting, surprising even, considering the opinion I had about Zinman's "objective" view on Mahler's music. I know haven't said much about the singers but I don't think I can give a qualified opinion about them at this point.
I'm anxious to here the work again where I might be able to give a more definite answer to the overall shape that Zinman tried to mold Mahler's 8th considering some unusual tempi and tempo relations (like the end of Part 1), as well as having perhaps a thought or two about the soloists.
Until then, I hope to hear from others listening to this performance as well!
Topic: Mahler 8th -- Tonhalle-Orchester-Zinman (Read 9666 times)