# For Mahler addicts only, how do you like Berstein's Mahler?



## Zarathustra

Leonard Bernstein was unquestionably a great advocate and promoter of the music of Gustav Mahler. But he is a divisive character when it comes to actual performances. 

How do you feel about his Mahler recordings? Do you like them, hate them?

Some people like his New York cycle but dislike his Vienna one for being too indulgent, others see it as a unique perspective. Other people hate all of it on account that it's not really Mahler but rather Lenny's Mahler.

So I ask, where do you stand?


----------



## Marschallin Blair

I think his Mahler's Fifth with Vienna is among the better ones out there, though I confess I haven't been won over by anything else; aside from some of his Concertgebouw Mahler's Fourth.

I love his perfervid_ advocacy _of Mahler. I just wish I could love his_ readings_.


----------



## ptr

There's not an adequate choice for me, both cycles have ups and downs, averaging on quite fine, but none of them are at the top for me!

/ptr


----------



## hpowders

Yes! One must possess both cycles! New York for unbelievable passion; Vienna/Concertgebouw/"later" New York, for nuances and terrific orchestral playing and engineering that were lacking in early New York.

A few of the early New York performances are better however than Vienna/Concertgebouw/"later" New York and they are Mahler 3-early New York is the best ever performance of this sprawling symphony; Mahler 4-Reri Grist is terrific in movement 4, whereas the Concertgebouw recording is spoiled by using a boy soprano.

For me the finest later recordings are Mahler 6, Vienna and Mahler 7, "later" New York, Mahler 9 Concertgebouw.


----------



## JACE

I love Lenny's Mahler.

A couple recordings from his DG cycle were instrumental (no pun intended!) in "converting" me to Mahler -- although neither of these two were with the VPO. The two recordings were the M2 (with the NYPO) and the M9 (with the Concertgebouw). Among Bernstein's recordings with VPO, my favorite is probably the Fifth. But I haven't heard all of them.

I'm not as familiar with Bernstein's Columbia/Sony recordings. But I do like his M3 and his M7.

Plus, I really like Lenny's _Das Lied von der Erde_ on Decca. It isn't my _favorite_, but it's still wonderful.

When it comes to Mahler, I wouldn't EVER want to be without Bernstein. (Or Walter. Or Horenstein. Or Tennstedt. Or Kubelik.)


----------



## elgar's ghost

I've got a Bernstein cycle, but it's a mix of NYPO on Sony (1/3/4/7), NYPO on DG (2), the LSO (8) on Sony plus the VPO (5/6) and Berlin PO (9) on DG. I suppose in a perfect world I would have them all, but as a Frankenstein job I think my combination works well enough. 

I deliberately chose the 2nd and 6th on DG rather than Sony because I did read that they were more - for want of a better word - expansive than the earlier Sony recordings - not that I'm suggesting that the earlier ones were anything like cursory. All I can tell you is that I love them all! After having these in my collection for a number of years now there's no doubting in my mind that Bernstein was one of the greatest Mahlerians.


----------



## JACE

Reading elgar's ghost post above, I realized that I forgot about Lenny's M6 with the VPO. 

Another GREAT record, imho.


----------



## starthrower

I'll be picking up Bernstein's no. 5 on DG. I was thinking of going with a left field choice for no. 6, in Joel Levi's Telarc recording. I've read several positive reviews from critics and fans.


----------



## merlinus

For the Mahler symphonies I enjoy (1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9), no one comes close to Lenny! The DG boxed sets (1 and 2) and #9 with BPO are the best of the best, in terms of SQ and interpretation.


----------



## Mahlerian

I enjoy both sets, though Bernstein's interpretations are quite idiosyncratic and I disagree with him in regards to the Ninth, for example. His Sony 1st and DG 6th are two favorites of mine.


----------



## Itullian

Lenny all the way for me. Love em both.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Mahlerian said:


> I enjoy both sets, though Bernstein's interpretations are quite idiosyncratic and I disagree with him in regards to the Ninth, for example. His Sony 1st and DG 6th are two favorites of mine.


Does that apply to all of his 9ths, M?


----------



## DavidA

His Song of the Earth is tremendous with the VPO. Pity he opted for the baritone version with D F-D though. The alto is much more appropriate.


----------



## Itullian

DavidA said:


> His Song of the Earth is tremendous with the VPO. Pity he opted for the baritone version with D F-D though. The alto is much more appropriate.


That was a curious choice.


----------



## Mahlerian

elgars ghost said:


> Does that apply to all of his 9ths, M?


No, musically, I enjoy his Sony Ninth a good bit; I primarily disagree with what he says about the piece.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Mahlerian said:


> No, musically, I enjoy his Sony Ninth a good bit; I primarily disagree with what he says about the piece.


Yes, now I understand.


----------



## realdealblues

I would never be without Lenny's Mahler.

The only real flop in his catalog for me is the 4th with the boy soprano. Thankfully we have his sony recording with Reri Grist.

1st Symphony - I love both Sony & DG. Slight edge to DG.
2nd Symphony - Slight edge to DG for sound.
3rd Symphony - Lenny's Sony recording is the only recording I feel I actually "need".
4th Symphony - Sony with Reri Grist as mentioned.
5th Symphony - Lenny's DG account fairs better than his Sony account, although I still listen to both.
6th Symphony - Lenny's DG, but I often return to the Sony for the supercharged opening.
7th Symphony - Lenny's Sony account, like the 3rd Symphony is the only one I feel I actually "need"
8th Symphony - Sony although the live video is excellent as well.
9th Symphony - Sony is my preference.
10th Symphony (Adagio) - Either, but I usually go for the Sony.

Das Lied Von Der Erde - The Decca recording with Baritone & Tenor is my perfect recording. As always I remain in the minority, but the Baritone works so much better in this work for me. It balances with the orchestra much better creating far more impact in my opinion.

Des Knaben Wunderhorn - Sony with Ludwig and Berry.

Kindertotenlieder - Sony with Janet Baker

Various other Lieder - You've got the Sony with Lenny playing Piano and Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, You've got Orchestral with Thomas Hampson and a few with Jennie Tourel so it's really apples and oranges.

I have every recording that's been commercially available from Lenny and Mahler. I like it all. I wouldn't want to be without Klemperer or Walter or Kubelik or many, many others just like many other folks here, but Lenny was fairly consistent with his Mahler and both Sony and DG are worth owning in my opinion.


----------



## hpowders

DavidA said:


> His Song of the Earth is tremendous with the VPO. Pity he opted for the baritone version with D F-D though. The alto is much more appropriate.


Nobody did Das Lied von der Erde better than Dame Janet Baker did. DFD was a poor substitute. Same for Kindertotenlieder with Baker.

Bernstein/Baker has my favorite Kindertotenlieder with the Israel Philharmonic. Simply devastating.


----------



## starthrower

realdealblues said:


> I would never be without Lenny's Mahler.
> 
> The only real flop in his catalog for me is the 4th with the boy soprano. Thankfully we have his sony recording with Reri Grist.
> 
> 1st Symphony - I love both Sony & DG. Slight edge to DG.
> 2nd Symphony - Slight edge to DG for sound.
> 3rd Symphony - Lenny's Sony recording is the only recording I feel I actually "need".
> 4th Symphony - Sony with Reri Grist as mentioned.
> 5th Symphony - Lenny's DG account fairs better than his Sony account, although I still listen to both.
> 6th Symphony - Lenny's DG, but I often return to the Sony for the supercharged opening.
> 7th Symphony - Lenny's Sony account, like the 3rd Symphony is the only one I feel I actually "need"
> 8th Symphony - Sony although the live video is excellent as well.
> 9th Symphony - Sony is my preference.
> 10th Symphony (Adagio) - Either, but I usually go for the Sony.


I'm listening to all of these on YouTube to see what I like. I'm blown away by no. 3. This has to be one of the most beautiful works I've ever heard! Already ordered the CD.


----------



## Marc

Here's a thumbs up for Helmut Wittek!

I would not dare to call (t)his performance a 'real flop'.
Yes, if you want vocal perfection: stay with your favourite female soprano (Grist is good!). But if you want the wonderment of a young child, then Lenny's 4th in Amsterdam is a great alternative. Besides that: check out the entire performance. IMO, one lesser movement (if you think there's one) doesn't make an entire recording a flop.


----------



## realdealblues

Marc said:


> Here's a thumbs up for Helmut Wittek!
> 
> I would not dare to call (t)his performance a 'real flop'.
> Yes, if you want vocal perfection: stay with your favourite female soprano (Grist is good!). But if you want the wonderment of a young child, then Lenny's 4th in Amsterdam is a great alternative. Besides that: check out the entire performance. IMO, one lesser movement (if you think there's one) doesn't make an entire recording a flop.


If you like it than good for you, that's all that matters. But for myself it completely rules it out as one of the "great ones" to own. Had Mahler wanted a boy singing the last movement I believe he would have said so in the score. There are so many great 4th's (Levine, Maazel, Kletzki, Reiner, Levi, Gielen) just to name a few and all ones that I would recommend to anyone, but for someone looking to get into Mahler or starting a good collection of great recordings, the Bernstein DG just doesn't fit the bill.

I do the same thing when it comes to the 8th Symphony. I rule out Tennstedt's studio recording and Sinopoli's recording for using a single choir. Mahler calls for "double" chorus and while those recordings may be well played and sang, they don't have the proper impact or reach of what Mahler was going for which is why he specified to use such large numbers of people. Therefore I personally wouldn't recommend them as "must have" recordings because there are many other recordings that use the proper numbers to convey what Mahler wanted much better in my opinion.

If you want a child singer or a small choir and it works for you, then great, more power too you, but in sticking with Mahler's wishes it's not something I would recommend for someone wanting to get into Mahler.


----------



## Marc

Yes, of course, it's all about personal preferences. I just wanted to say something positive about Wittek's performance. All in all, I really think that Bernstein's Concertgebouw 4th it's a very good recording, and one lesser movement doesn't make it a real flop. 
Personally, I also prefer a female soprano btw, especially Elly Ameling (Haitink 1), Lucia Popp (Tennstedt, Bertini) or Helen Donath (Inbal).


----------



## Guest

I read somewhere that the trombones missed an entrance (or didn't come in at all) on the DG version of the 9th--is that true? If so, I can't imagine that DG would release it...or that they didn't patch it up after the audience left.


----------



## Radames

Zarathustra said:


> Leonard Bernstein was unquestionably a great advocate and promoter of the music of Gustav Mahler. But he is a divisive character when it comes to actual performances.
> 
> How do you feel about his Mahler recordings? Do you like them, hate them?
> 
> Some people like his New York cycle but dislike his Vienna one for being too indulgent, others see it as a unique perspective. Other people hate all of it on account that it's not really Mahler but rather Lenny's Mahler.
> 
> So I ask, where do you stand?


Some are great and some ain't. I never liked his way with the 2nd. His 3rd is one of the best though. His NY 8 is awesome but the sound is sub par. His 6th is also one of the best. I prefer the earlier NY recordings for the most part.


----------



## Marc

Kontrapunctus said:


> I read somewhere that the trombones missed an entrance (or didn't come in at all) on the DG version of the 9th--is that true? If so, I can't imagine that DG would release it...or that they didn't patch it up after the audience left.


It's true. It happens in the Finale, in that bloodcurdling orchestral climax.

A concertgoer right behind the trombone section collapsed of a heart attack and almost immediately died. The doctor came and the man had to be carried away, which (of course) caused a bit of turmoil, and because of all the commotion, the trombonists missed their entrance in the dramatic climax.
The reason why it wasn't patched up is probably because the recording was, at first, not meant to be released on disc. IIRC, the first release was (shortly after Bernstein's death) in 1991 or 1992, as a tribute to the conductor. A (very) good decision IMHO, because it's a great, dramatic and intense performance .... despite or maybe even 'thanks' to the historic trombone miss.


----------



## nightscape

ptr said:


> There's not an adequate choice for me, both cycles have ups and downs, averaging on quite fine, but none of them are at the top for me!


This. His 5th with Vienna is a must hear, probably my favorite version of the work. Outside of that, I can't get into most of his performances of Mahler. I tried, really tried, to like his 2nd (also with Vienna), but just didn't feel anything. The final movement is great, though.

The others are hit or miss. 6th with Vienna, 3rd with NYP, 4th with NYP/Gist, either 1st, all great. 2nd, 7th, 8th and 9th, not a fan. I totally get why certain people would like his conducting on these, but his Mahler is mostly not for me.

EDIT: I forgot about Das Lied. His '66 recording of the tenor/baritone version is fantastic.


----------



## Albert7

Of course, I really enjoy both of Bernstein's Mahler cycles... however there are hits and misses in each.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Depending on the day, I would take either as my favourite. Today is one of my DG days I think, but the Sony 7th is one of the best recordings of the work.

His live performances available on DVD with the Vienna Philharmonic definitely beat his other two cycles!!!!


----------



## BartokPizz

Has anybody yet mentioned Bernstein's Live 9th with the Berlin PO? His only BPO recording if I recall. It's absolutely overwhelming. Possibly my favorite Mahler recording of all.


----------



## BartokPizz

Marc said:


> It's true. It happens in the Finale, in that bloodcurdling orchestral climax.
> 
> A concertgoer right behind the trombone section collapsed of a heart attack and almost immediately died. The doctor came and the man had to be carried away, which (of course) caused a bit of turmoil, and because of all the commotion, the trombonists missed their entrance in the dramatic climax.
> The reason why it wasn't patched up is probably because the recording was, at first, not meant to be released on disc. IIRC, the first release was (shortly after Bernstein's death) in 1991 or 1992, as a tribute to the conductor. A (very) good decision IMHO, because it's a great, dramatic and intense performance .... despite or maybe even 'thanks' to the historic trombone miss.


Marc, the only source I know of for the heart attack story is a post on an Amazon Customer Review, written by someone who claims to have been in the orchestra. Do you know if this story is true? I find myself a bit skeptical.

Here is a blog post discussing this: http://ypsmusic.blogspot.com/2012/06/missing-trombones-in-bernsteins-famous.html

Also, Kontrapunctus, to be clear, the recording in question in the Berlin Philharmonic recording. There is also a Bernstein DG recording with Vienna: I haven't heard it, but it has a reputation for being one of LB's more indulgent Mahler recordings.


----------



## elgar's ghost

BartokPizz said:


> Has anybody yet mentioned Bernstein's Live 9th with the Berlin PO? His only BPO recording if I recall. It's absolutely overwhelming. Possibly my favorite Mahler recording of all.


Yep (post #6). I haven't heard Lenny's other 9ths, so I can't say how his recording with the BPO measures up in comparison.


----------



## hpowders

Why must people see such a vast output as an individual cycle?

The finest Vienna performance is No. 6.

There are fine NY performances such as No. 3, 4 and 7 (second NY recording).

He is not consistently great through either cycle.

His best Mahler 9, IMO, is with the Concertgebouw.

His best Mahler 8 is with the London Symphony in awful sound.


----------



## Vaneyes

Sony - 2, 3*, 6, 7, 9*.

DG - 1, 5*.

Doesn't matter - 4, 8.

Essential*


----------



## Vaneyes

hpowders said:


> His best Mahler 8 is with the London Symphony in awful sound.


I agree it's LB's best M8. For those interested, there's very good sound with this 24-bit remastering.


----------



## Marc

BartokPizz said:


> Marc, the only source I know of for the heart attack story is a post on an Amazon Customer Review, written by someone who claims to have been in the orchestra. Do you know if this story is true? I find myself a bit skeptical.
> 
> Here is a blog post discussing this: http://ypsmusic.blogspot.com/2012/06/missing-trombones-in-bernsteins-famous.html
> [....]


Yep, it seems that all _facts_ are uncertain, unless they're _facts_ of course.


----------



## almc

When younger, I used to hate Bernstein's Mahler ... I was thinking that he took all the credit, as the composer's (re-)introducer to the masses, in the 2nd part of 20th century, forgetting to pay homage to his mentor and predecessor in NY, the great Dimitri Mitropoulos, who did all the dirty job...

Growing old, I've learned to love Lenny's idiosyncrasies, his unique point of view, and finally understood how to translate [what I initially thought as] self-assertion to an extemely personal and hyper-sentimental reading, that has its own merits ...

I don't care anymore, if what Ι hear is not Mahler, Mahler's intentions, Mahler's directions, etc., etc. . I do know that I love it & need it in my collection. Thanks god, our shelves are full with accurate, puristic and straight to the point Mahler readings (Boulez, Neumann, etc.) that I highly rate & regard too. But, for any insightful and caring Mahlerian, Lenny must be present to lighten the other side of the corner ...

Here's a perfect example of a totally insane analysis. The man correlates ''ode to a nightingale'' with ''das abschied'' ... my mind understands how stale and suspended such a correlation is, but at the end I'm so fascinated and moved, that i simply surrender my everything to LB.


----------



## padraic

I wish the DG cycle wasn't so expensive. The Sony cycle is available for around $35 - if the DG was similarly priced, I'd just get both in a heartbeat. As it stands, I'll try and carefully pick and choose. Despite the proclivity of many on here for the early 3rd, I've been listening to the later NYPO 3rd (DG, Christa Ludwig) on Spotify and it's definitely my favorite so far.


----------



## Albert7

I love both cycles equally in fact. They are moving in their own way and I feel that to listen to both is a key highlight for Mahler interpretation.


----------



## dieter

realdealblues said:


> If you like it than good for you, that's all that matters. But for myself it completely rules it out as one of the "great ones" to own. Had Mahler wanted a boy singing the last movement I believe he would have said so in the score. There are so many great 4th's (Levine, Maazel, Kletzki, Reiner, Levi, Gielen) just to name a few and all ones that I would recommend to anyone, but for someone looking to get into Mahler or starting a good collection of great recordings, the Bernstein DG just doesn't fit the bill.
> 
> I do the same thing when it comes to the 8th Symphony. I rule out Tennstedt's studio recording and Sinopoli's recording for using a single choir. Mahler calls for "double" chorus and while those recordings may be well played and sang, they don't have the proper impact or reach of what Mahler was going for which is why he specified to use such large numbers of people. Therefore I personally wouldn't recommend them as "must have" recordings because there are many other recordings that use the proper numbers to convey what Mahler wanted much better in my opinion.
> 
> If you want a child singer or a small choir and it works for you, then great, more power too you, but in sticking with Mahler's wishes it's not something I would recommend for someone wanting to get into Mahler.


I agree about a child singing adult music. Witness Harnoncourt and Leonhardts merry boys butchering Bach.


----------



## KJ von NNJ

Keep in mind that in Bernstein's 80's "Vienna" cycle on DG, only four of the symphonies were with the Vienna Philharmonic. That would be the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th (which was actually recorded in the mid-seventies. Way before Lenny recorded the rest of the cycle for DG). The 1st, 4th, and 9th were with the Concertgebouw. The 2nd, 3rd and 7th DG's were with the New York Philharmonic.

If one wants all save the 2nd (LPO) recorded by the VPO, the DVD box set recorded in the 70's is the ticket. I feel that the 5th in DVD is the best of the three commercial recordings Bernstein released. Unfortunately the set is not cheap. It can be purchased in separate sets but if you want all of them one would end up spending more. There is always u-tube, which carries all of them for nothing!
My personal preferences are in swings and roundabouts. The 1st;DG Concertgebouw, 2nd, DVD LPO, 3rd DG NYPO, 4th either the Sony or DVD with Edith Mathis. I do like the Concertgebouw and it is a good alternative with the boy soprano.
For the 5th, DVD VPO, the 6th, VPO DG. The 7th, either will do but I prefer the DG with the NYPO by a hair. For the 8th I would take the Sony and the DVD although the DG is fine. For the 9th it's a tough call. The Sony is more direct and a bit quicker. A great recording. The Concertgebouw on DG is very slow and powerful. It may be too slow for some and I can understand that. It's Mahler 9 for extremist listeners. Some would say it's the best ever and others would call it a travesty. Then there is the BPO recorded on DG in the late seventies. Many call this the best one. One more is the DVD with the VPO, which seems to me to be more like the BPO recording but not quite as concentrated. For me it would be the Sony. It flows so naturally and there are few distortions. For the 1st adagio of the 10th, I can not say that I have a preference.
Another great thing about the DVD set is that it contains a wonderful Das Lied von der Erde with the Israel Philharmonic. It's probably my favorite of all Das Lieds. It also contains interviews with Lenny and rehearsal segments with the VPO going over the 5th and the 9th. A must for Bernstein fans.


----------



## Heck148

I generally love Bernstein's conducting, over a very wide range of repertoire, but I've never been a big fan of his Mahler. for me, he tries too hard....he goes overboard trying to convince us that this is great music to which we _must_ respond....it doesn't need that kind of help. the music speaks for itself - I like what Walter, Solti, Abbado, Giulini do with it, generally much more.

that said - I do greatly enjoy his 1st Sym #7 with NYPO from 60s....
I also like his 2nd Mahler #3, with NYPO from '87


----------



## Becca

My feeling about Bernstein's Mahler, particularly the later symphonies, can be summed up in one word ... overwrought. Bernstein would have done well to pay attention to Bertrand Russell's admonition _"Nothing great is achieved without passion, but underneath the passion there should always be that large impersonal survey which sets limits to actions that our passions inspire."_


----------



## bigshot

I prefer Mick Jagger's quote, "Too much is never enough." If you want the music to speak for itself, then get a mediocre performer to play it for you.


Like Abbado!


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> I prefer Mick Jagger's quote, "Too much is never enough." If you want the music to speak for itself, then get a mediocre performer to play it for you.


Bull....Mahler's music speaks very well for itself....with Lenny, at what point does it cease being Mahler, and it starts becoming Bernstein??
I've heard Abbado give some really terrific Mahler performances - both live and on record...


----------



## bigshot

Ideally Mahler and Bernstein should both be involved in the proceedings. The composer provides the notes written on paper, and the conductor is the one who brings them to life. You can say you don't personally like what a conductor does, but you can't say he isn't doing his job if he interprets the music in an unique and personal way... because interpreting in an unique and personal way is the job of the conductor.


----------



## Becca

bigshot said:


> Ideally Mahler and Bernstein should both be involved in the proceedings. The composer provides the notes written on paper, and the conductor is the one who brings them to life. You can say you don't personally like what a conductor does, but you can't say he isn't doing his job if he interprets the music in an unique and personal way... because interpreting in an unique and personal way is the job of the conductor.


... but at what point does the conductor's "unique and personal way" start to become a distortion of the composer's intent?


----------



## bigshot

When you personally don't like it, then I guess you get to project your own tastes on the composer. Isn't that how it works?


----------



## Byron

Is there ever any concrete way to determine the composer's intent? I think the more important question is whether the performance is compelling or dull and uninspired. I've heard some technically proficient performances of music that may have been "accurate" as far as following the score goes, but we're completely cold and clinical and lifeless. Give me Lenny's conviction and passion anytime in Mahler, it works.


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> You can say you don't personally like what a conductor does, but you can't say he isn't doing his job if he interprets the music in an unique and personal way....


Yes, agreed...I certainly wouldn't accuse Bernstein of not doing the job....he had very definite ideas about everything he conducted. As I said, Lenny is one of my favorite conductors....regarding his Mahler, I think the term "overwrought" has a valid application....however, that is just my opinion. for others, his approach is most effective.


----------



## bigshot

It could be argued that Mahler is intrinsically overwrought. Playing up that aspect makes sense to me. Performing Mahler even tempered would be worse than performing it with exaggerated emotions.

There are a lot of conductors that even everything out to the point of just performing the notes on the page and following metronome markings and dynamic notes, and when it's all over, they politely nod their head in satisfaction of a job well done. That's what I think of when I hear the phrase "let the music speak for itself". It's like Goldilocks and the Three Bears except with music. That sort of approach is what packs the catalog with lifeless, bland, boring recordings that turn people off to classical music. I'd rather see a spectacular mistake than be overrun with tepid correctness. At this point, there are enough "safe" choices. It's time for experimentation and taking chances. In fact it was time for that back in the early 60s when Bernstein first hit the top. Now fifty years along from then, it should be a given... but blandness endures.

"The chief enemy of art is good taste." --Pablo Picasso


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> It could be argued that Mahler is intrinsically overwrought.


yes, my point exactly - the music can speak for itself, it does not require an extra layer of applied "overwrought-ness"



> Performing Mahler even tempered would be worse than performing it with exaggerated emotions.


yes, agreed, but conductors like Walter, Solti and Abbado don't play it even tempered - they let the drama and hyper-emotionalism come thru as written.



> There are a lot of conductors that even everything out to the point of just performing the notes on the page and following metronome markings and dynamic notes, and when it's all over, they politely nod their head in satisfaction of a job well done.


von Karajan and N. Jarvi spring to mind.



> That sort of approach is what packs the catalog with lifeless, bland, boring recordings that turn people off to classical music.


agreed I don't care for those sort of performances at all. but that does not warrant an exaggerated, even distorted approach either....

With Lenny and Mahler, I quickly become put off by this constant effort to hyper-dramatize the music, beyond what the composer may have intended......Bernstein does not need to keep hitting me over the head to convince me that this is great music. The music can speak for itself....it does not require another layer of conductor-added "drama" to succeed.


----------



## bigshot

Abbado is one of the blandest conductors I've ever heard. I'd take Bernstein at his most overwrought than Abbado any day. Mahler is supposed to be performed emotionally. Mahler himself was accused of being over emotional. That was the composer's intent.


----------



## Heck148

we'll have to just disagree on this...I think Abaddo is a great conductor, and his Mahler really excellent. his #5 and 7 with Chicago are top level all the way. Bernstein's Mahler for me is overkill much of the time, overwrought is a good description. I don't need to be constantly hit over the head that this is great music. it's almost condescending, patronizing to me, that I'm too unperceptive, insensitive to the music to appreciate its essential value, without Bernstein's added emphasis.. Lenny's approach reminds me of a sample of text, in which EVERYTHING is highlighted in yellow magic marker.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Heck148 said:


> I think Abaddo is a great conductor, and his Mahler really excellent. his #5 and 7 with Chicago are top level all the way. Bernstein's Mahler for me is overkill much of the time . . . Lenny's approach reminds me of a sample of text, in which EVERYTHING is highlighted in yellow magic marker.


Finally, somebody who thinks like I do! I came into Mahler late, so I missed the Bernstein-induced Mahler craze back in the day, and it didn't influence my perception of this music. Personally, I think the music is effective in itself and doesn't need a lot of exaggeration. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Abbado's cycle; it got me back into listening to his music. Before that, I'd have to have gaps in between listening sessions because it was too draining.

I also realize that puts me into the minority around these parts. Oh, well, it's my ears, and I have to live with them.


----------



## Merl

I don't mind Bernstein in Mahler (his Tchaikovsky and Schumann I really rate but hate his Beethoven). However it is a 'don't mind' and nothing more. Much prefer others for Mahler performances. I'm sitting on the fence for this one, really. Am I?


----------



## bigshot

Well I guess if you like low fat/high fiber, there's Abbado and if you like it with whipped cream and nuts on top, there's Bernstein!

I do have problems myself with conductors that goose the dynamics too much in Bruckner, because Bruckner's construction and pacing can get tiresome with alternating stripes of loud / soft /loud / soft. But I don't find any problem with emotion being amplified. That is what I'm looking for in music. The more the merrier.

I feel the same about Tchaikovsky as I do Mahler. If you aren't playing the emotions for all it's worth, you aren't really getting the music. I hate it when someone plays the Pathetique symphony like it's a technical exercise in correctness. Hyper romantic music demands hyper romantic performance.

If you don't want an emotional performance of emotional music, the fault may lie just as much with the composer as the conductor. I'm sure there are people who prefer Tristan played as notes are written on the page and no more too. I can't picture it myself though.


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> Well I guess if you like low fat/high fiber, there's Abbado and if you like it with whipped cream and nuts on top, there's Bernstein!


"Whipped cream and nuts" sounds more like von Karajan!! everything rounded off, smooth, legato......yuck.....



> I do have problems myself with conductors that goose the dynamics too much in Bruckner,


interesting - to me this is vital in Bruckner, the dynamic contrasts are all-important, otherwise it just becomes a loudfest, with everything played at _forte - fortissimo._



> I feel the same about Tchaikovsky as I do Mahler. If you aren't playing the emotions for all it's worth, you aren't really getting the music. I hate it when someone plays the Pathetique symphony like it's a technical exercise in correctness. Hyper romantic music demands hyper romantic performance.


OK, but I like my Tchaikovsky emotion "lean and mean" a la Mravinsky or Reiner. the excessively melodramatic, schmaltzy approach - Stokowski, Ormandy, doesn't work so well...again, the emotion is already in the written music...in fact Stokowski's major distortions in Sym #4 over the years become almost comical....[I generally like Stokowski very much as a conductor, but when he's off, he's really off...]



> If you don't want an emotional performance of emotional music, the fault may lie just as much with the composer as the conductor. I'm sure there are people who prefer Tristan played as notes are written on the page and no more too. I can't picture it myself though.


not sure to what conductors or composers you are referring....I have little patience with routine run-throughs, dutiful execution of the notes, with little or no excitement, etc.....


----------



## Larkenfield

———-duplicate———-


----------



## Larkenfield

I like the conductor who can bring out the emotion in the music without wetting his pants—knowing how far is to go too far.


----------



## DarkAngel

bigshot said:


> I'd take Bernstein at his most overwrought than Abbado any day. Mahler is supposed to be performed emotionally. Mahler himself was accused of being over emotional. That was the composer's intent.


I think it is generally true that Mahler performances recently have become slower and not dramatic enough, I always marvel at the 38 Walter Mahler 9th which clocks in at 69:50 compared to todays 2 CD sets pushing 80-90 minutes, Walter had known Mahler personally and seen him perform his own work.....makes me wonder what has happened over time










Getting back to original poll question, there are actually 3 Bernstein Mahler sets:

1960s NYPO Sony
1970s WP available on video but not CD
1980s multiple orchestras DG

I prefer the early 1960s Sony set.......


----------



## Woodduck

DarkAngel said:


> I think it is generally true that Mahler performances recently have become slower and not dramatic enough, I always marvel at the 38 Walter Mahler 9th which clocks in at 69:50 compared to todays 2 CD sets pushing 80-90 minutes, Walter had known Mahler personally and seen him perform his own work.....makes me wonder what has happened over time.


There's a difference between expressiveness and self-indulgent wallowing and stretching music near or past the breaking point, as Bernstein did late in his career (and not only to Mahler). We don't have recordings of Mahler conducting his music, but we have Walter and Mengelberg who knew what Mahler himself did on the podium. Compare Mengelberg in 1926 with Bernstein in the "Adagietto" of the 5th:











Mengelberg left a remarkable recording of the complete 4th symphony as well: 




The amazing sense of freedom and flexibility, responsive to every mercurial change of emotion, is in the tradition of conducting originated by Wagner and described in his essay, "On Conducting." Mahler himself was a clear disciple of this tradition, and Mengelberg continued it. Needless to say, no one performs Mahler (or Wagner, or anything else) like this today. No one would dare risk such spontaneity (if they could even understand how to achieve it), if only out of a fear of not being clinically perfect in the way recordings have led audiences to expect.

We have recordings of Elgar and Rachmaninoff conducting and playing their own works, and they are every bit as fearless: object lessons in authentic Romantic music-making. HIP has yet to catch up.

(Btw, I'm not a Mahler addict. But they didn't turn me away at the door.)


----------



## Heck148

Woodduck said:


> There's a difference between expressiveness and self-indulgent wallowing and stretching music near or past the breaking point, as Bernstein did late in his career (and not only to Mahler). We don't have recordings of Mahler conducting his music, but we have Walter and Mengelberg who knew what Mahler himself did on the podium.


There is a piano roll version of Mahler performing mvt I of Sym #5, which is very interesting - it is much like Walter's 1947 recording, IIRC - pretty straight ahead, but certainly with tempo variations and flexibility, which is inherent in the score...there were no major distortions, or overwrought, drawn-out, or rushed passages. It was all quite logical and coherent...would not be far out of step with Walter, Solti, Abaddo etc....of course, the piano doesn't do justice to the orchestral sonorities contained in the score, but it was most useful regarding tempo, phrasing, expression, etc.


----------



## bigshot

I prefer conductors who have an unique approach. When I hear Toscanini or Stokowski, I know it's them. The same is true of Bernstein and Karajan and instrumentalists like Gould and Heifetz. The musicians I've just mentioned are all over the map stylistically and I like all of them. That's because I don't have a fixed opinion about how the music should be performed. I don't care about "composer's intent". I would rather have someone alive bringing the music to life in a personal way than have someone do it the way a dead person used to do it. There are certainly dangers in taking chances and occasionally it results in a train wreck. But it's never bland or boring that way, and I can't think of anything more deadly to art than blandness and boredom.

It's OK not to like Bernstein's Mahler. But it was an interpretation based on knowledge of the music and it was a unified approach to interpreting it. That is just as valid as any other approach creatively as far as I'm concerned. It isn't "wrong". In fact, it's more "right" than a conductor who just plays what's on the page and follows the lead of conductors who went before him. A thought out personal approach is what I look for in classical music. Otherwise, I would just buy one "proper" recoding of a work and be done with it. I learn more about a composer from the differences between great interpretations than I do from the similarities in interpretation.

I also prefer composers whose works lend themselves to a wide range of interpretation... Bach, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Wagner, Mahler... Their work is highly emotional and provides many different angles to relate to them. I'm "interested" in HIP, but I could never live only with HIP any more than I could only live on pheasant under glass. Sometimes you want a hamburger or a bowl of chili... perhaps caviar or an empanada. The longer I live, the more I realize that there's no single pathway to truth. That only works for people with OCD or ones who live entirely in their head. I'd rather look outwards.


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> I prefer conductors who have an unique approach.


that would apply to most great conductors.



> That's because I don't have a fixed opinion about how the music should be performed. I don't care about "composer's intent".


What's written in the score is the best clue we have regarding composer's intent.



> I would rather have someone alive bringing the music to life in a personal way than have someone do it the way a dead person used to do it.


I think most music lovers would agree with this.



> It's OK not to like Bernstein's Mahler. But it was an interpretation based on knowledge of the music and it was a unified approach to interpreting it.


OK, but for me, that approach is overwrought, at times. I on't need to be hit over the head with the greatness of Mahler's work.



> That is just as valid as any other approach creatively as far as I'm concerned.


fine, it works for you...for me, not so good. others make it sound better, more convincing.



> I would just buy one "proper" recoding of a work and be done with it.


Ha! not many of those around!!



> I'm "interested" in HIP, but I could never live only with HIP any more than I could only live on pheasant under glass.


agreed , I don't care for HIP - it sounds too wimpy for me. It's kind of a curiosity, I guess. but I freely admit - I was trained, and performed my professional career on modern instruments. I have a tough time taking the tonal and technical shortcomings of original instruments seriously...but, that's my opinion....


----------



## bigshot

When you have to do line by line responses, it's a good time to hang your hat up. Coherent paragraphs with an introductory sentence, supporting arguments, and a closing summation are much better ways to communicate.


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> When you have to do line by line responses, it's a good time to hang your hat up. Coherent paragraphs with an introductory sentence, supporting arguments, and a closing summation are much better ways to communicate.


??? How I respond is up to me....I don't generally care for Bernstein's Mahler...too much Lenny, not enough Gustav....that's how I feel[with aforementioned exceptions]. I also totally reject the implication that great Mahler conductors like Solti, Walter and Abaddo are simply producing straight, pedantic, carbon copy run-thrus of Mahler. that is nonsense, and not supportable by any audible evidence. I find these conductors get to the essence of the music, without the excessive overlay of personal conductor hyper-drama.


----------



## Larkenfield

I consider the Sony Bernstein cycle as indespensible. He was in the freshness of the discovery and I very much hear this in his early recordings.

There seems to have been an evolutionary leap of interest in Mahler, as I would call it, that coincided with the _centenary_ of the composer's birth. Consequently in 1960, Bernstein and the NYP held a Mahler Festival with Bernstein, Walter and Mitropoulos conducting performances, and Alma Mahler was in attendance and an important living link with the composer himself, plus there were musicians who had played with Mahler more than 50 years before in the NYP who were still living and had admired him so.

So I'd say this was the period when Bernstein's name started to become indelibly linked with the composer and Mahler became something of a household name through the power of Bernstein's engaging personality on TV, not to mention that Bernstein had simultaneously started to record all the Mahler symphonies between 1960-67 (though actually it was Maurice Abravanel and the Utah Symphony who made the first-ever complete recording of the nine Mahler symphonies).

The impact of the Young People's Concerts, which I was lucky enough to watch as a kid, also had a galvanizing effect on Mahler's appeal and popularity, and these Bernstein presentations are still being watched today on YouTube around the world.

Overall, I believe that Mahler's time had simply come for a new generation, and from that point in time, at least in America, there was a deeper understanding and appreciation of his music and a continuity of interest that has remained.

There are a number of interviews on YouTube with some of the most famous conductors in the world talking enthusiastically about their profound interest in Mahler, from Boulez to Rattle and on and on, perhaps more than any other composer who wrote during the 20th Century. While some listeners still wonder what all the fuss is about, even whether he was a great composer or not, there's no doubt in my mind that Mahler has been one of the greatest sustained sensations of the 20th Century with a fascination that has yet to run its course in the 21st. Lark ♬

https://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Complete-Symphonies-Gustav/dp/B005SJIP1E


----------

