# Mahler's Most Accessible Symphony?



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

I was wondering if I could get some thoughts on what you think is Gustav Mahler's most accessible symphony. 

I'm new to the forum and relatively new to classical music, I started off with Mozart's 40th and Requiem (like I'm sure many have) and then I found Beethoven and fell in love with his music. After that, I discovered Brahms, Bruckner, and Schubert. I find that I have a "comfort-zone" with the composers that I listen to and would very much like to step out of it. Mahler seemed like the right composer to delve into, so if you could give me your suggestions on which is his most accessible symphony to begin with, I would greatly appreciate it. 

Also, feel free to suggest who is the best Mahler conductor for that symphony, which is the best recording, or any other pertinent information. Thanks!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

My apologies for not taking the time to write something new, but as this topic came up pretty recently, I'll just repost what I wrote then.

_____

All of Mahler's symphonies are mature and fully characteristic works. That is to say, there's no work that bridges the gap between him and his predecessors (Bruckner, Berlioz, Wagner, and of course Beethoven and Mozart) in the way that Beethoven's first two symphonies can be heard in the context of Haydn or Wagner's early operas in the context of Weber and Meyerbeer. That said, all of them are great works, and fully worth getting to know (not something I'd say about Bruckner or Shostakovich, for example).

That said, the 4th one is a great one to start with because it's as fully Mahler-like as any of them, and certainly as dense and well-developed, but all with a lighter tone than normal.

The 5th is popular partially because of its beautiful Adagietto fourth movement, and because the work embodies the recognizable darkness to light journey of symphonies like Beethoven's Fifth. Some people on this forum have found it difficult as a whole, though; all of the movements are interconnected via various motifs and the structure of the movements is quite complex.

The perennial favorite is the 2nd, which is a fine work and quite unique, despite its kinship to Beethoven's Ninth (complete with choral finale). It's the most popular Mahler symphony, and was even during his lifetime.

My personal favorite is the 6th, which is the tightest and most tense, a brilliantly written work from start to finish with the most exquisite and ingenious slow movement I know.

The 9th may be the most moving; it has the odd form of two fast movements sandwiched in-between two slow ones, and the contrasts make for a work that feels unlike pretty much anything in the repertoire.

The 1st is vigorous and youthful, and a lot of people find they take to this one easily, even if they find the others hard going. I think it's Mahler's weakest and most disparate overall on critical reflection, though I enjoy it just fine when simply listening.

The 8th is famous for being big and requiring the largest forces of any standard repertoire work (and for having a dumb nickname the composer despised). It's the first all-choral symphony (meaning there's choral and solo singing pretty much from start to finish), which leads to some people wondering why it's a called a symphony (it's because "symphony" designates the form and style of writing, not the forces used, and Mahler's 8th is, most definitely and without any question whatsoever, a symphony). It's not bombastic or overwhelmingly climax-filled as its reputation might suggest, and the composer considered it his best work at one point; every single melody and theme is connected to every other melody or theme, and much of the writing is very subtle.

The 3rd is the longest work in the standard repertoire, and first impressions might lead one to think that it's a disparate collection of movements (six of them) without much connection, but despite including just about every kind of expression and form and mood Mahler could think of, the work holds together remarkably well, and every one of those movements is excellent taken by itself.

The 7th is the odd duck, though it has a few champions around here (ComposerofAvantGarde in particular). Its finale is...strange. I love the first movement in particular.

The 10th was left complete aside from the orchestration at Mahler's death, and it's perhaps a harbinger of a new direction for the composer, as it seems different even from his other late works, the Ninth and Das Lied von der Erde. Often, conductors have performed the opening Adagio (the first movement of five) alone, and it's quite an amazing movement even taken by itself.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

@Mahlerian

Very comprehensive, thank you! From what you wrote, I think I'll start with the 2nd and then perhaps the 6th. Mahler intimidates me, musically that is, but if I can find a good starting point, the rest should fall into place.
Thanks again.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Mahler's Sixth is a personal favourite. I have the Pierre Boulez/Vienna Philharmonic recording, that just seems to sit right with me


----------



## DrMuller (May 26, 2014)

I am also very new to Mahler but I found his symphony 5 pretty accessible, same for symphony 4. I'd start with those two. But you have to check out Brahms too.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

For me the fourth is his most accessible, but it's probably still a difficult listen for a novice, especially the long slow movement.


----------



## Guest (Jul 22, 2014)

Another thread to which the only correct answer is another question, for whom?

I started with 5. 4 I have never really liked, though I can listen to it in Gielen's recording. I have liked little bits and pieces of 8 over the years until just recently, when I found that I didn't like any of it. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 have always been fine, _for me._ 9 also has to be Gielen, but in 9's case, it is now one of my favorite Mahler symphonies. I just now started to wonder, can I listen to non-Gielen performances of this piece now with pleasure?

Only one way to find out.

And that, of course, is the one real, genuine, board-certified answer to all threads of this sort.


----------



## merlinus (Apr 12, 2014)

You might consider beginning with M1, as it is not nearly as long as most of the others, and is fairly straightforward. Quite amazing for a first symphony. For me, M5 is in somewhat the same ballpark, so to speak.

After a few decades of listening, though, my favorites are 2, 3, 5, 6, and 9. I cannot stand 4 and 8, and 7 is not far behind those two.

Obviously listen to them all. What speaks to me might be irrelevant for you!

I greatly prefer Bernstein on DG for all of them.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

No. 4 ... No. 4 ... No. 4 ....


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

SOME GUY does make a valid point to the extent that of course it's very personal of what you find accessible. However, I'm sure there would be a consensus if you took 100 or 1000 people who are unfamiliar with Mahler's symphonies as to what is most approachable, but... you would have to break those people up into two groups

Depending on which group you would fall into would be where I would direct you first to Mahler.

GROUP 1: You are new to classical music in general
GROUP 2: You are familiar and a fan of classical music, but are new to exploring Mahler.

GROUP 1 (In order of suggestion): M4, M1, M2, M8, M9 and then you're on your own for the rest.

GROUP 2 (In order): M2, M9, M8, M6, M1, and then you're on your own.

Personally (and this is where SOME GUY makes a great point), I have NEVER found M5 to be that accessible, and it was probably one of my least favorite symphonies of his until a few years ago, regardless of the magnificently beautiful Adagietto movement which I fell in love with on first hearing. I now love then entire symphony.

Which goes to show you that the old adage, "familiarity breeds contempt" RARELY applies to music, in fact, it's usually the opposite. And of course keep in mind the witty response to that adage by Winston Churchill, _"Yes, but without some form of familiarity, we couldn't breed anything."_

Good luck and enjoy exploring the wonderful world of Mahler, and if you want to know anything about Mahler, do NOT ask MAHLERIAN. He doesn't know anything about him [psst... we're actually all wondering why he chose that moniker].

V


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

I have introduced approximately 10 friends to Mahler over the last 10 years. 

NONE of them had ever really listened to classical music. They've heard the popular works on TV shows or commercials. Things like the 1st movement from Beethoven's 5th Symphony and Mozart's Eine Kleine Nachtmusik, etc, but none of them had ever sat down and listened to a Classical Music album or a Symphony from start to finish.

All of them instantly took to Symphony 5 and then Symphony 6. They also instantly liked the 1st movements from Symphonies 2 & 3 but were lost by the later movements. 

So while I'm surprised by the inability for some to bond with Symphony 5, maybe it's different for those who have been classical music fans and just not experienced Mahler, compared with those who knew nothing about Classical Music beyond the pop hits.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

I would also recommend the 4th, and the 1st as well. 

A slightly unusual recommendation would be to listen to Part 2 of the 3rd (i.e. movements 2 - 6). I found the epic first movement to be a lot to take in, and still do, but the rest of the work isn't as "difficult" and contains some of his most beautiful music imo.

Of course, you don't have to begin with the Symphonies, and if you really want "accessible" you could try the wonderful Piano Quartet in A minor, even if it is not very Mahlerian at all.


----------



## JACE (Jul 18, 2014)

It took me a long while to warm to the Fifth. (But I love it now.)

The Ninth was my entry-point into Mahler's works. It was Bernstein's recording with the Concertgebouw. After that it was Bruno Walter's Second with the NYPO. The M9 and the M2 are _still_ probably my two favorite Mahler symphonies. (Still like those particular recordings too! Along with a few others.  )

I was already familiar with quite a bit of classical music before I got bit by the Mahler bug.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

The fifth is a good trip, if the conductor/orchestra keeps the 1st mvt from going very dark, and heads up from there. It can be done.

The fourth was done good by Abravanel/Utah SO and Davrath - especially Davrath. Some recordings lose my focus (lost it even back when I could focus better).

The first is episodic - turn the sound down some and you'll hear what I mean - and carries you from start to finish maybe only if you've been there before.

[I have tried to make this as annoying for _some guy_ as possible while telling the truth as I hear it.]


----------



## nightscape (Jun 22, 2013)

When this came up not too long ago, I recommended 5, 4, 1 as his most accessible for the novice Mahler listener. Not necessary in that order.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Another vote for No. 4. That seems to be the one you hear in music appreciation classes. Though once I caught the Mahler bug, I had to hear them all. They have aspects that relate to each other.


----------



## jdcbr (Jul 21, 2014)

So with you re No. 6. There is something so poignant and valedictory about the slow movement. So much of Mahler is so hyper-Romantic, a sort of aural version of Klimt- beauty taken to a stage of over-ripeness just shy of decay.


----------



## jdcbr (Jul 21, 2014)

4 is certainly the sunniest and perhaps most naive of the symphonies. I would say it and No 1 are the most accessible. The last to explore would be Das Lied von der Erde. The finally of No 2 is quite a rush.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

I'd say 

No. 1 ~ Heroic adventure on a heroic scale and I think just about accessible as a great children's storybook -- not needing much understanding outside the experience of 'just listening,' not so 'demanding,' and an immediate in.

No. 4 ~ the shortest, the most 'classical' in the relative lightness of its material, style and scoring, and again, a very cohesive work very easy to follow. It's sentiment is more child-like, yet poignant.

For the 4th, at least, I recommend Boulez conducting. He is a master of balance and overall pacing, and for me he gets 'just right' the shifts of tempo (written) and gives these late romantic works (and the early 20th century second Viennese school composers) the perfect rubato, just enough, always sounding 'right' to me.

I'm very much the odd guy out in opinion on no.2 -- and I still think the textual content unduly sways audiences in their preference for this one.

The Adagio movement (the 1st) from his unfinished Symphony No. 10 is fantastic. To me, the 'right tempo' means its duration is ca. 18 to 20 minutes.


----------



## Wicked_one (Aug 18, 2010)

I agree with nightscape. The 1st symphony and the 5th were the 1st I listened to and they were easy, lovely and... Mahler..esque


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

From my own experience with students...#1 is quite popular. Whilst you may be new to Mahler, it sounds like you're not new to music so you'll probably be fine with any of them. Fortunately, Mahler was consistently good.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

PetrB said:


> I'd say
> [...]
> I'm very much the odd guy out in opinion on no.2 -- and I still think the textual content unduly sways audiences in their preference for this one.
> [...]


Long, long ago, the 2nd was one of the few recordings (LPs) I owned. As was and is my preference, I listened to the music a couple times before reading the jacket notes. I was shocked to learn that the 'program' had it all wrong.


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I'm very much the odd guy out in opinion on no.2 -- and I still think the textual content unduly sways audiences in their preference for this one.


I personally don't give two hoots for the textual content. I love the music and it talks directly to my soul.
My first introduction to it was when I played the cello in it many moons ago. As an orchestra we rehearsed it for a week before the choir came along and completed it. I was completely smitten long before that moment. And it remains an indispensable favourite all these years later. 
Perhaps the textual content unduly puts you off the piece


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

I think #1 and #2 are the best options for a newcomer. For an inexperienced listener it can be difficult to concentrate for the entire duration of those long and agonising 25 minute slow movements that show up in most Mahler symphonies. Luckily symphonies #1 and #2 don't really have slow movements. Instead the inner movements are either dances or comedy funeral marches. This can be easier for the newcomer to make sense of. Even #4 which starts and ends on a light note becomes sort of heavy in the middle.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

MagneticGhost said:


> I personally don't give two hoots for the textual content. I love the music and it talks directly to my soul.
> My first introduction to it was when I played the cello in it many moons ago. As an orchestra we rehearsed it for a week before the choir came along and completed it. I was completely smitten long before that moment. And it remains an indispensable favourite all these years later.
> Perhaps the textual content unduly puts you off the piece


I never pay attention to the text when music is involved, even when it is in my native language: I initially go on 'what the sound is / tells me for several hearings at least; if the sound has pulled me in, then I will see what the text is about.

In my experience, too, being a player in a piece _is always an in,_ and forever colors what I think of it, usually associated with some sort of pleasure / fun -- where if I have not participated, I am less subjective about a piece... quite normal, I think.


----------



## nightscape (Jun 22, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I never pay attention to the text when music is involved, even when it is in my native language: I initially go on 'what the sound is / tells me for several hearings at least; if the sound has pulled me in, then I will see what the text is about. .


Knowledge of text completely changes the 4th symphony though. It's not nearly as sunny as everyone here makes it out to be.


----------



## Declined (Apr 8, 2014)

I'm just getting into Mahler. I find 1,2, and 4 to be quite accessible.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

PetrB said:


> In my experience, too, being a player in a piece _is always an in,_ and forever colors what I think of it, usually associated with some sort of pleasure / fun -- where if I have not participated, I am less subjective about a piece... quite normal, I think.


THIS!!! There are a number of solo piano pieces that if I had never played, I'm sure I wouldn't have such an affinity towards them as I do now. Great point! One that I have thought about quite often.

To that point, I have always tried to listen to music as if I were performing them and really try to "dig" into the music and it's structures, hence giving me a better and more whole appreciation and understanding of the piece. Which is why I'm going to start listening to orchestral music WITH the scores.

V


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

nightscape said:


> Knowledge of text completely changes the 4th symphony though. It's not nearly as sunny as everyone here makes it out to be.


Lol. Another _Very Romantic piece_, about death, again. Typical.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Winterreisender said:


> I think #1 and #2 are the best options for a newcomer. For an inexperienced listener it can be difficult to concentrate for the entire duration of those long and agonising 25 minute slow movements that show up in most Mahler symphonies. Luckily symphonies #1 and #2 don't really have slow movements. Instead the inner movements are either dances or comedy funeral marches. This can be easier for the newcomer to make sense of. Even #4 which starts and ends on a light note becomes sort of heavy in the middle.


It's only agonizing if you don't enjoy it. It's not as if there's any deadweight or filler in those movements.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

I started with the 1st, and quite enjoyed it. However, as others have said - it does feel, now, to be the odd sheep in the group. It doesn't feel, somehow, as Mahlerian as the others. Still, I find it very accessible, and it is quite a good symphony.

2 is my favorite, but might be a bit daunting for someone just starting. But there are some hauntingly beautiful melodies in there, among the other wonderful movements. The Urlied is among my absolute favorite movements/lieds/whatever.

Lately, I have really enjoyed the 6th - the 3rd movement alone I find to be more beautiful than the oft-cited Adagietto from the 5th. 

For me, I like Mahler for the ways he is not like others, and too often I find the 4th and the 5th, in their greater accessibility, to not be as interesting.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

DrMike said:


> For me, I like Mahler for the ways he is not like others, and too often I find the 4th and the 5th, in their greater accessibility, to not be as interesting.


Ouch! Give them a bit of time, the fifth is an incredibly fast paced roller coaster ride with one of the best scherzos ever. And the fourth... that may be one of my favorite pieces of all time.

A lot of people are saying here that the fourth is one of Mahler's most accessible, and while that might have some truth to it, it needs a lot of repeated listening to grasp the subtleties that make it so magical.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Thanks to everyone for their opinions, I listened to Symphony #2 yesterday on YouTube (Bernstein/LSO), definitely not super accessible, but I really enjoyed it! 
My next one will be Symphony #6, I enjoyed Tom Service's article on it in his 50 Greatest Symphonies guide, and it seems to be quite a lot of people's favorite. The dark tone of #6 is right up my alley, so I think I'm gonna enjoy it. I'm just having trouble on finding the right recording to listen to, I was doing some research yesterday and narrowed it down to Boulez (DG), Bernstein (DG), Karajan (DG), and Abbado (DG)

I'm thinking of Karajan, only because he's my go-to, but I'm tired of playing it safe all the time, perhaps I should go with Bernstein.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Make sure that whatever version you get for the sixth, that you listen to the Andante third, not second!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> I'm thinking of Karajan, only because he's my go-to, but I'm tired of playing it safe all the time, perhaps I should go with Bernstein.


No, not Karajan! His Mahler is very unidiomatic and sounds wrong to me. The other three are definitely great recordings, as is Klaus Tennstedt's live recording with the London Philharmonic (released on the LPO house label).


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Make sure that whatever version you get for the sixth, that you listen to the Andante third, not second!


Agreed. I think it more than likely that Mahler made the right choice at first and then lost his nerve. The andante second flattens out the whole symphony, readjusts all the balances, makes it more ordinary.

It's an extraordinary work. Andante third keeps it that way.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

I know right! I've listened to it Andante second once or twice, and I was heavily disappointed with how the Andante emotionally overpowered the Allegro. It almost felt that the work was about to go in an entirely different direction.

And then having the Scherzo right after the Andante is so underwhelming... it might as well not even be there.

I wanted to ask the experts here something: I heard that Mahler initially had three hammer blows in the final movement, with the last one appearing when the introductory theme is played at the coda for a final time. What's the best recording (or at least a decent recording) that has the third hammer blow?


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

I'm wondering what's *not* accessible about the 2nd? Such overt drama in the opening movement, such haunting beauty (or sardonic bitterness) in the middle movements, such heaven-storming zeal in the finale. I'm not saying the work is to everyone's taste, but what leaves listeners' puzzled?


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Thanks to everyone for their opinions, I listened to Symphony #2 yesterday on YouTube (Bernstein/LSO), definitely not super accessible, but I really enjoyed it!
> My next one will be Symphony #6, I enjoyed Tom Service's article on it in his 50 Greatest Symphonies guide, and it seems to be quite a lot of people's favorite. The dark tone of #6 is right up my alley, so I think I'm gonna enjoy it. I'm just having trouble on finding the right recording to listen to, I was doing some research yesterday and narrowed it down to Boulez (DG), Bernstein (DG), Karajan (DG), and Abbado (DG)
> 
> I'm thinking of Karajan, only because he's my go-to, but I'm tired of playing it safe all the time, perhaps I should go with Bernstein.


I'm with Mahlerian - Karajan isn't really that great of a Mahler conductor. He does great in so many other things - just not Mahler.

There are many really good recordings of the 6th, and maybe someone else could recommend them all to you, but my personal favorite is one that I actually stumbled on completely by accident. It is the recording by Christoph Eschenbach with the Philadelphia Orchestra on Ondine. I bought the recording, actually, because it also contains Mahler's Piano Quartet, of which I was curious. But the recording of the 6th is incredible, and the sound quality is wonderful. That is my top recommendation for the 6th.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

amfortas said:


> I'm wondering what's *not* accessible about the 2nd? Such overt drama in the opening movement, such haunting beauty (or sardonic bitterness) in the middle movements, such heaven-storming zeal in the finale. I'm not saying the work is to everyone's taste, but what leaves listeners' puzzled?


I think that coming from Beethoven, Schubert, and Brahms (and to a lesser extent, Bruckner), where there's such a tightness of structure and not to mention much shorter lengths (not including Bruckner), Mahler is bound to be "inaccessible" or "difficult" to listen to at first. Especially for someone like myself who is still in their first year of listening to Classical music. 
But yes, I agree with you, though. There was nothing too out there in the 2nd symphony, I really liked it a lot.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

SeptimalTritone said:


> Ouch! Give them a bit of time, the fifth is an incredibly fast paced roller coaster ride with one of the best scherzos ever. And the fourth... that may be one of my favorite pieces of all time.
> 
> A lot of people are saying here that the fourth is one of Mahler's most accessible, and while that might have some truth to it, it needs a lot of repeated listening to grasp the subtleties that make it so magical.


While I am not as experienced as some others here, I am not a recent convert to Mahler. The 4th and 5th simply aren't my favorites, and they don't stand out as much to me as the 2nd, 3rd, 6th, and 9th. I enjoy them, though, just not as much. The only ones that get only rare listenings are the 7th and 8th. The Solti 8th was my first experience with that one, and it did nothing for me. I have the Nagano HM recording of it, and that has helped me in my appreciation of it, but the 8th is still the one I turn to least. The 7th has grown on me some, but I feel little or no attachment to it, as I do to others.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Symphony 1 by far. Of this time in music, I find Sibelius more accessible.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> I think that coming from Beethoven, Schubert, and Brahms (and to a lesser extent, Bruckner), where there's such a tightness of structure and not to mention much shorter lengths (not including Bruckner), Mahler is bound to be "inaccessible" or "difficult" to listen to at first.


I see your point; in comparison to those composers, Mahler can seem chaotic and sprawling. Maybe I respond more to the emotive content than to the structural coherence.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

amfortas said:


> I see your point; in comparison to those composers, Mahler can seem chaotic and sprawling. Maybe I respond more to the emotive content than to the structural coherence.


Mahler's music _is_ structurally coherent, though, especially in the later works. I don't find his music chaotic or sprawling at all. The first two symphonies are the _least_ structurally coherent Mahler, for sure (though they still surpass some Bruckner or Tchaikovsky in that regard).

I think people would find Mahler's music more accessible if it _were_ a series of disparate unrelated episodes rather than developmental symphonic statements.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> The first two symphonies are the _least_ structurally coherent Mahler, for sure (though they still surpass some Bruckner or Tchaikovsky in that regard).


You wouldn't include the 3rd?


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

My favorite is the 6th.

As a very, very first approach to Mahler you can try the famous Adagietto from the 5th.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

I'd say the Fifth is Mahler's most _accessible_ symphony: the high-drama and cascading climaxes of the second movement are thrilling; the Adagietto is absolutely sublime; the ending is pure joy.

And, bucking the received wisdom: the Karajan/BPO just outclasses the competition in these three movements in spades.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Thanks to everyone for their opinions, I listened to Symphony #2 yesterday on YouTube (Bernstein/LSO), definitely not super accessible, but I really enjoyed it!
> My next one will be Symphony #6, I enjoyed Tom Service's article on it in his 50 Greatest Symphonies guide, and it seems to be quite a lot of people's favorite. The dark tone of #6 is right up my alley, so I think I'm gonna enjoy it. I'm just having trouble on finding the right recording to listen to, I was doing some research yesterday and narrowed it down to Boulez (DG), Bernstein (DG), Karajan (DG), and Abbado (DG)
> 
> I'm thinking of Karajan, only because he's my go-to, but I'm tired of playing it safe all the time, perhaps I should go with Bernstein.


I concur...go with Bernstein. You will not be disappointed.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

amfortas said:


> You wouldn't include the 3rd?


No, it doesn't have the problems of episodic parts in any of its movements that the earlier two have in their finales. The six movements of the third cover a wide range, to be sure, but it's really a standard four-movement symphony, plus the two vocal movements, both of which are relatively brief and both of which relate musically to the others around them.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> No, it doesn't have the problems of episodic parts in any of its movements that the earlier two have in their finales. The six movements of the third cover a wide range, to be sure, but it's really a standard four-movement symphony, plus the two vocal movements, both of which are relatively brief and both of which relate musically to the others around them.


Whatever explanation you have for the first not being as accessible, it has some of his memorable and melodic parts. Symphony 2 is great to. Symphony 3 is where I lose interest.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

neoshredder said:


> Whatever explanation you have for the first not being as accessible, it has some of his memorable and melodic parts. Symphony 2 is great to. Symphony 3 is where I lose interest.


I wasn't saying that the First is not as accessible. Far from it. A number of people who find later Mahler hard to understand enjoy the First.

I was saying that the First and Second are not as structurally focused as the later works.

I find all of Mahler melodic and memorable, so I really can't say that any one work is his most melodic or memorable to me. I don't feel like I can judge what others will find accessible, as it differs so much from person to person based on their individual tastes and experiences.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

@Mahlerian and @anyone else reading,

Out of Bernstein, Abbado, and Boulez's recordings, If you could only listen to *one * recording of the 6th, which would it be? Reasons?

I know it's up to me to make up my mind on what I like, but a little guidance from more experienced listeners would help in arriving to that point. For instance, I know the context and history in which Beethoven wrote the 3rd and 5th, so I have strong opinions as to what type of conducting style goes best with those symphonies.


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> It's only agonizing if you don't enjoy it. It's not as if there's any deadweight or filler in those movements.


I wasn't really critising those movements. Being able to convey such agony and despair is no mean feat! On other occasions he can be more optimistic, which is also nice. I just think that it requires patience and concentration to fully get to grips with Mahler's lengthiest slow movements. Purely from my personal experience, #1 and #2 were the most instantly appealing because they don't really have slow movements.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> @Mahlerian and @anyone else reading,
> 
> Out of Bernstein, Abbado, and Boulez's recordings, If you could only listen to *one * recording of the 6th, which would it be? Reasons?
> 
> I know it's up to me to make up my mind on what I like, but a little guidance from more experienced listeners would help in arriving to that point. For instance, I know the context and history in which Beethoven wrote the 3rd and 5th, so I have strong opinions as to what type of conducting style goes best with those symphonies.


Boulez, but it must be pre-DG Boulez. This because of the details he reveals. He loses just a little of the zippedy doo-dah while doing that... .


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Winterreisender said:


> I wasn't really critising those movements. Being able to convey such agony and despair is no mean feat!


Which slow movements did he write that convey "agony and despair"? Strife, yes, conflict, yes, but agony and despair? That sounds like a description of the second movement allegro of the Fifth or the Burleske of the Ninth or the beginning of the First's finale.

I suppose perhaps the opening funeral march for the Fifth, but that's more of a moderate tempo.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> @Mahlerian and @anyone else reading,
> 
> Out of Bernstein, Abbado, and Boulez's recordings, If you could only listen to *one * recording of the 6th, which would it be? Reasons?
> 
> I know it's up to me to make up my mind on what I like, but a little guidance from more experienced listeners would help in arriving to that point. For instance, I know the context and history in which Beethoven wrote the 3rd and 5th, so I have strong opinions as to what type of conducting style goes best with those symphonies.


Bernstein is pretty reliable with Mahler, so it is hard to go wrong with him. Boulez is also a very good conductor for Mahler - I enjoy most of his Mahler recordings. His 6th is very good. Abbado's 6th was the first I heard, but I didn't really care for it. The Boulez is better.

As I said, my top recommendation is Eschenbach on Ondine. It is a live recording (which I prefer in most cases), but you wouldn't know it until the very end when you hear the applause.

I have no insight as to why one should be better than another. I haven't studied scores - I just have listened to numerous recordings (for a time I was fairly obsessed with Mahler and sampled as many different recordings of his works as was possible - something made very easy by an excellent library system where I was at the time).

Incidentally, another fairly good recording of the 6th comes from Michael Tilson Thomas with the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra. He has done the entire cycle, and he also has recorded the early Das Klagende Lied. I don't see him mentioned as much here, but he can also be a very good Mahler conductor, and his recording of the 4th has received high praises.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

Ukko said:


> Boulez, but it must be pre-DG Boulez. This because of the details he reveals. He loses just a little of the zippedy doo-dah while doing that... .


Did he record the 6th on any label other than DG? I am thinking of the one with Vienna. I know there are some Boulez/Mahler recordings on Sony, but I haven't seen the 6th. I would be interested in that.


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Which slow movements did he write that convey "agony and despair"? Strife, yes, conflict, yes, but agony and despair? That sounds like a description of the second movement allegro of the Fifth or the Burleske of the Ninth or the beginning of the First's finale.
> 
> I suppose perhaps the opening funeral march for the Fifth, but that's more of a moderate tempo.


Well I suppose that's just a question of interpretation. Nevertheless, that's always the vibe I've got from the finale of the 9th. On the one hand you have familiar hymnal-like passages running throughout, which offer moments of respite. But then there are several grand climaxes which never seem to fully resolve. At the end, the symphony just seems to peter out. I have always interpreted that as despair and hopelessness.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Winterreisender said:


> Well I suppose that's just a question of interpretation. Nevertheless, that's always the vibe I've got from the finale of the 9th. On the one hand you have familiar hymnal-like passages running throughout, which offer moments of respite. But then there are several grand climaxes which never seem to fully resolve. At the end, the symphony just seems to peter out. I have always interpreted that as despair and hopelessness.


To me it's nothing of the sort. I agree with La Grange on this one:
"The whole of this final movement, like that of _Das Lied_, is imbued with the feeling that God is present in all things and that man aspires to union, not to say fusion, with the consoling world of Nature. The reconciliation between these two worlds-man and Nature-is one that Mahler may well have wanted to suggest in the two main episodes of this Finale, and it is achieved at the very end of the work, with its sense of acceptance, silence, and peace....
Like that of _Das Lied_, this ending is in no way pessimistic or tinged with despair. Whether one discovers here a message of hope, a farewell of heartrending tenderness or a serene acceptance of fate, it cannot be denied that this final Adagio brings with it a sense of supreme fulfillment, an ideal catharsis."

I don't think Mahler was inherently pessimistic at all. Pessimistic about life on Earth? Yes. Pessimistic about the cosmos and metaphysical questions? Not one bit. This comes through in his works, which invariably end in triumph or serenity, save for the Sixth, which was written at the happiest time of his life.


----------



## Winterreisender (Jul 13, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> To me it's nothing of the sort. I agree with La Grange on this one:
> "The whole of this final movement, like that of _Das Lied_, is imbued with the feeling that God is present in all things and that man aspires to union, not to say fusion, with the consoling world of Nature. The reconciliation between these two worlds-man and Nature-is one that Mahler may well have wanted to suggest in the two main episodes of this Finale, and it is achieved at the very end of the work, with its sense of acceptance, silence, and peace....
> Like that of _Das Lied_, this ending is in no way pessimistic or tinged with despair. Whether one discovers here a message of hope, a farewell of heartrending tenderness or a serene acceptance of fate, it cannot be denied that this final Adagio brings with it a sense of supreme fulfillment, an ideal catharsis."
> 
> I don't think Mahler was inherently pessimistic at all. Pessimistic about life on Earth? Yes. Pessimistic about the cosmos and metaphysical questions? Not one bit. This comes through in his works, which invariably end in triumph or serenity, save for the Sixth, which was written at the happiest time of his life.


That's an interesting interpretation, but I'm not sure if I entirely agree with the whole "god is present in all things" idea. I feel more of an emptiness when listening to it. Yes there are loud bursts of prayer, bursts of desperation, but then no answers, no solutions. The excruciating stillness at the end is like a slow farewell to life, whilst the world around just seems to disintegrate. That's vaguely the interpretation of Leonard Bernstein, if I recall correctly, and I think he is right to detect pessimism and impending doom in the work's finale.

And although Mahler may have been more optimistic about the state of the cosmos as a whole (that's something I'd not really considered), I also think of him as a composer of great humanity, for whom the imminent collapse of human society is still something we should be very fearful of.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

DrMike said:


> Did he record the 6th on any label other than DG? I am thinking of the one with Vienna. I know there are some Boulez/Mahler recordings on Sony, but I haven't seen the 6th. I would be interested in that.


There is this:

http://smile.amazon.com/Mahler-Symp...d=1406155849&sr=1-12&keywords=boulez+mahler+6

A bit pricey, eh? It doesn't say there, but this may be the 1973 live recording. I have it on an Enterprise "Documents" CD. Don't remember if I ever had an LP of a performance pre-DG.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Ukko said:


> There is this:
> 
> http://smile.amazon.com/Mahler-Symp...d=1406155849&sr=1-12&keywords=boulez+mahler+6
> 
> A bit pricey, eh? It doesn't say there, but this may be the 1973 live recording. I have it on an Enterprise "Documents" CD. Don't remember if I ever had an LP of a performance pre-DG.


1973 live recording, London, BBC Orchestra, per the third picture...


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

KenOC said:


> 1973 live recording, London, BBC Orchestra, per the third picture...


Thanks; can't make that come up.


----------



## spradlig (Jul 25, 2012)

I'll echo what Mahlerian and several others have written. The First may be the most accessible. Maybe even _too_ accessible. Much of it is catchy and/or loud, and easy to grasp on first hearing, but not very profound, and it may not hold up over repeated listens. The Fourth is almost as immediately accessible, but more nuanced and just plain better.

Those are my opinions, of course.

I find all of his symphonies quite accessible.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2014)

Ukko said:


> There is this:
> 
> http://smile.amazon.com/Mahler-Symp...d=1406155849&sr=1-12&keywords=boulez+mahler+6
> 
> A bit pricey, eh? It doesn't say there, but this may be the 1973 live recording. I have it on an Enterprise "Documents" CD. Don't remember if I ever had an LP of a performance pre-DG.


As much as I love this symphony, I can think of a lot better ways to spend close to $1000. I guess I'll have to be satisfied with the DG recordings.

Maybe they have it cheaper as a digital download on iTunes.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Winterreisender said:


> That's an interesting interpretation, but I'm not sure if I entirely agree with the whole "god is present in all things" idea. I feel more of an emptiness when listening to it. Yes there are loud bursts of prayer, bursts of desperation, but then no answers, no solutions. The excruciating stillness at the end is like a slow farewell to life, whilst the world around just seems to disintegrate.


But that's just it. To me the final pages of the Ninth, with their near silence and the melting down of the music into its barest essence are not "excruciating" at all, but a prolonged and sublimated contentment, finally coming to a close on a widely spaced major triad. A number of Mahler's works end similarly, though the Ninth's ending is the most sparse of them all. But there is nothing "empty" in it. Every pause is pregnant, every note is meaningful.



Winterreisender said:


> That's vaguely the interpretation of Leonard Bernstein, if I recall correctly, and I think he is right to detect pessimism and impending doom in the work's finale.


I think that Bernstein's interpretation of Mahler (philosophically, not musically) is wrong. Mahler was not a prophet, he was an artist. His Ninth is not a farewell to the world, it is an affirmation of life and humanity. If it can be construed as a farewell to anything, it is perhaps to the world that he lost when he was forced to leave Vienna, or to the daughter whom he dearly loved.



Winterreisender said:


> And although Mahler may have been more optimistic about the state of the cosmos as a whole (that's something I'd not really considered), I also think of him as a composer of great humanity, for whom the imminent collapse of human society is still something we should be very fearful of.


But Mahler was not a pessimist. He did not believe that human society was on the brink of collapse. He had nothing to say about World War I, World War II, the Holocaust, or nuclear weapons, much less of the Internet and its concomitant horrors.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> @Mahlerian and @anyone else reading,
> 
> Out of Bernstein, Abbado, and Boulez's recordings, If you could only listen to *one * recording of the 6th, which would it be? Reasons?


I respectfully disagree with MAHLERIAN (To me the ONLY way to disagree with Mahlerian is respectfully - the man is a VAT of knowledge and his take on things should be weighed seriously) on this but I would stick with Bernstein, but you might want to look into Levine on RCA for the 6th. His M2 is also amazing. I am NOT a Levine fan, but I think Levine does Mahler VERY well in most of the symphonies, particularly #'s 2 & 6.

I'm not a naysayer of Karajan on all Mahler. In fact I think Karajan's M9 is hard to beat.

To me, once you find a symphony (or any piece of music for that matter), try out different recordings. Compare them. To me, this is one of the greatest pleasures in listening to classical music. Have fun. Let us know what you get and what you think.

V


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

DrMike said:


> As much as I love this symphony, I can think of a lot better ways to spend close to $1000. I guess I'll have to be satisfied with the DG recordings.
> 
> Maybe they have it cheaper as a digital download on iTunes.


I suspect that my 'anti-DG' stance needs clarification. I have nothing against the recording quality; it's my sense that Boulez started a downhill slide as an interpreter around the time he started with DG. During the time he was director with the NYPO and then Chicago, he was as good as anybody - as detail conscious as Stokowski without the irrepressible urge to 'improve' the score.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Varick said:


> I respectfully disagree with MAHLERIAN (To me the ONLY way to disagree with Mahlerian is respectfully - the man is a VAT of knowledge and his take on things should be weighed seriously) on this but I would stick with Bernstein, but you might want to look into Levine on RCA for the 6th. His M2 is also amazing. I am NOT a Levine fan, but I think Levine does Mahler VERY well in most of the symphonies, particularly #'s 2 & 6.
> 
> I'm not a naysayer of Karajan on all Mahler. In fact I think Karajan's M9 is hard to beat.
> 
> ...


Agree with the take that Mahlerian knows what he's talking about - and is right over 50% of the time probably  - and especially agree with the interpretive variability among recordings of a specific work. Unfortunately the variability among sets of discretionary funds is a factor too. The 'bromide' is to read TC enough to find members with music tastes resembling yours, and so narrow the possibilities. Good luck with that.


----------



## Cygnenoir (Dec 21, 2011)

As mentioned 1st and 4th symphonies, are relatively short, accessable and straight forward. I would think the 2nd also would be quite accessable for "newbies", esp. the 2nd and 3rd mvts. 

Also mvts. 2-6 of symphony #3, mvt. 4 from #5, andante from #6, mvts. 2 and 4 from #7, and mvt. 2 from #9.

It's always a very deep and spiritual experience listening to Mahler  My favourite is the finale of #2, but there are so many great highlights in all of them! Like the finale of #3, that always gets me - so simple and majestic - pure love!


----------



## Brad (Mar 27, 2014)

Just wondering since I haven't had a chance to hear Mahler's seventh yet...

Mahlerian said that it's the "oddball" of them all, particularly the last movement. What's unique about it?


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

I s'pose it varies amongst people. For me, early on, it was Nos.1 & 5.:tiphat:


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> I think that Bernstein's interpretation of Mahler (philosophically, not musically) is wrong.


I have an interesting Bernstein recording of Mahler's fourth, in which he uses a boy soprano in the final movement, instead of a female one as indicated by the composer. I find it very refreshingly different, though I suppose purists may disagree.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Thought I'd update you all on my progress, I just finished the 6th-Boulez/VPO (on Spotify, but I ordered the CD yesterday)... Wow. That was an experience, I don't know how or why I avoided Mahler all this time! It was an emotional ride, similar to my first time hearing Bruckner's 9th (Giulini/VPO). I can definitely say it's an instant top 10 symphony for me, just from the first listen alone.

PS. Since I'm trying to stay off the beaten path, away from my comfort-zone conductors, I also just ordered Symphony No. 2 with Mehta/VPO. So, I'm definitely looking forward to that, I read good things about it.


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2014)

Whatever else you do, don't watch _Death in Venice_ before you listen to the 5th...


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

MacLeod said:


> Whatever else you do, don't watch _Death in Venice_ before you listen to the 5th...


Some people make a film and then use music as a soundtrack for it. In the case of _Death in Venice_ they found music and made an image track for it.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> PS. Since I'm trying to stay off the beaten path, away from my comfort-zone conductors, I also just ordered Symphony No. 2 with *Mehta*/VPO. So, I'm definitely looking forward to that, I read good things about it.


Ahhh, now you blew it. You had to go and get something with Mehta.

I'm sure there are some Mehta fans here, but to me, he could take almost any great piece of music and turn it into a snooze fest. I'm sure there are a few things (even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then), but I have yet to hear ANYTHING he has done that excited me. He does have a talent mind you: It's taking a piece of music and sucking every ounce of life out of it and smothering it in blandness. One of these days I'll tell you what I really think about his conducting.

Oh well, that's what makes a ball game. Enjoy!

V


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

berghansson said:


> As mentioned 1st and 4th symphonies, are relatively short, accessable and straight forward. I would think the 2nd also would be quite accessable for "newbies", esp. the 2nd and 3rd mvts.
> 
> Also mvts. 2-6 of symphony #3, mvt. 4 from #5, andante from #6, mvts. 2 and 4 from #7, and mvt. 2 from #9.
> 
> It's always a very deep and spiritual experience listening to Mahler  My favourite is the finale of #2, but there are so many great highlights in all of them! Like the finale of #3, that always gets me - so simple and majestic - pure love!


I find myself in absolute agreement with this post. It so well speaks my own experience with Mahler.

In an earlier post on this thread, I promoted Symphony 4 as the "most accessible", but gave no explanation. I never found Mahler to be inaccessible. Symphony No. 1 is certainly a favorite of mine, but the 4th has the song included, which should make it for a new listener a more "Mahlerian" experience, perhaps. The lovely sleighbells in the opening, the tunefulness throughout, and the relatively short span are all positives, providing a fine introduction to Mahler's work.

But don't stop there. As berghansson insightfully notes, the finales of Nos. 2 and 3 can certainly convert one into a Mahler fan. The 2nd was my first experience with Mahler, way way back, and it was that final movement that sold me. Still sells me. I've collected quite a few interpretations of that 2nd Symphony, but I still heavily rely upon the old Bruno Walter Columbia recording for the sheer "first experience" joy the movement provides. I've literally worn out my original black disc of this recording.

The finale of the Third remains a stunning experience, further enhanced when one is aware of the parallel to Beethoven, the slow movement of whose final quartet Mahler invokes as a starting point for the movement. This is another work (and movement) that goes way back for me, being, if I recall correctly, the second Mahler symphony I experienced. In fact, when I first heard that finale, I did not know it quoted Beethoven. But was stunned by it nonetheless. I do recall turning to the Beethoven quartet upon learning of the fact and listening to the Beethoven with intense concentration. I came to admire both the Mahler and the Beethoven more.

Mahler provides so much in his music, which explains why folks like me turn towards his music, not just the symphonies but also the songs, so often. He's one of the giants who is able to make us appreciate our humanity to an intense degree.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

Varick said:


> Ahhh, now you blew it. You had to go and get something with Mehta.
> 
> I'm sure there are some Mehta fans here, but to me, he could take almost any great piece of music and turn it into a snooze fest. I'm sure there are a few things (even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then), but I have yet to hear ANYTHING he has done that excited me. He does have a talent mind you: It's taking a piece of music and sucking every ounce of life out of it and smothering it in blandness. One of these days I'll tell you what I really think about his conducting.


This is generally true of Mehta, but he had the odd habit of turning in the occasional stellar performance. Such was the case with his _Turandot_, and his _Trovatore_. His Mahler 2nd is a recognized classic, and far from lifeless.

True to form, though, it's the *only* Mahler symphony for which he's even in the running.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Brad said:


> Just wondering since I haven't had a chance to hear Mahler's seventh yet...
> 
> Mahlerian said that it's the "oddball" of them all, particularly the last movement. What's unique about it?


On the surface, the finale of the Seventh is a rondo, like in a classical symphony, which brings back the theme from the first movement at the end, now transformed into the major. All of this is pretty normal stuff, but when you actually listen, it's just so bizarre on a musical level. A boisterous parody of the Meistersinger overture (which was intentional on Mahler's part; he programmed the two works together to highlight this connection) rubs shoulders with peasant dances with sudden shifts of tempo, meter, and key left, right, and center. All of this is combined contrapuntally as motifs develop into new motifs which spin off into further motifs, and so forth. When the theme from the first movement reappears, it, too seems like a parody rather than a transformation, and the movement ends with a diminuendo followed by a sforzando.


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2014)

In Mehta's defense, I must say that he was (is?) one of those conductors whose live performances were quite different from his recordings. I lived in L.A. in the Mehta years, and those concerts were stellar.

Then there were some other people and then Esa-Pekka Salonen, whose recordings I quite like. I didn't like any of his live performances. Eventually I went only to hear guest conductors. And continued to buy his recordings.


----------



## Cygnenoir (Dec 21, 2011)

SONNET CLV said:


> I find myself in absolute agreement with this post. It so well speaks my own experience with Mahler.
> 
> In an earlier post on this thread, I promoted Symphony 4 as the "most accessible", but gave no explanation. I never found Mahler to be inaccessible. Symphony No. 1 is certainly a favorite of mine, but the 4th has the song included, which should make it for a new listener a more "Mahlerian" experience, perhaps. The lovely sleighbells in the opening, the tunefulness throughout, and the relatively short span are all positives, providing a fine introduction to Mahler's work.
> 
> ...


I remember my first experience with Mahler was the 1.mvt. of No. 1, when I was 17 or so. I was completely overwhelmed, music like I've never heard it before, certainly better than all the techno and house music I was so hung up on.

The second experience was the "Alles vergängliche" finale of the 8th, separately from the rest (even how sick and twisted that is ).

It wasn't until I got 20, 5 years ago, I started listening to all the symphonies. And I believe the 3rd was the one that spoke to me the most. It embraces the whole aspect of being a human, from the barbaric, somber and then heroic 1. part, to the lighter and dancelike 2. and 3. mvts., the dark night in the 4. mvt., the bright sphere in the short 5. mvt., and then the conclusion of pure awe. I think his 3rd symphony gets too little mentioned here. It is a long one, I know, but a trip unlike any other. It has this feeling of time standing still, not that the other symphonies lack that! All of Mahler's music has timelessness in it, more or less. Das Lied von der Erde has to be mentioned.

If there is one mvt. of Mahler's symphonies I would not recommend to an unexperienced listener, it's the rondo (3. mvt.) of No. 9. I still find it bizarre, and somewhat strenuous, but that quite resembles Mahler's life near the end. The rest of the 9th could turn the most restrained person into an emo (in a good way). The same with the No. 10 adagio.

If you ask me, Mahler was pretty pretty good at writing symphonies.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

As has been pointed out here several times, and I'm sure you are aware of, essentially non-vocal music of any significant length has two interpretations - the performer(s) and the listeners. Your interpretation of the Mahler's 3rd sounds like a blast.

Even keeping in mind that I hear most vocals sung in German or otherwise, as music sans language, it still is possibly strange that in Mahler's 3rd I hear almost-references to Mozart's Magic Flute.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Well, I think we can establish this thread as a Mission Accomplished. I'm an official Mahler convert. :tiphat:

I just heard Kubelik's Mahler #1 (and ordered on Amazon as well, I'm one of those old fashioned people who *needs *to have the physical CD). I thought it was excellent, the highlight for me was the slow third movement (Feierlich Und Gemessen). It's definitely very vigorous and youthful like Mahlerian said.
The 6th is still currently my favorite so far, but that may change. 3 down, 7 to go.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Kubelik also has a wonderful "live" performance with the NY Philharmonic of the Mahler 7th, which to me is the most difficult Mahler symphony to interpret.

I too "need" to have actual CD's as well as real books with real pages to turn.

If that makes me a dinosaur, I accept the designation proudly.


----------



## billeames (Jan 17, 2014)

I say 1. I have listened to many. (I have many also). To me, best recording is Abbado CSO DG. (Why, engergy, speed, intonation) Other good ones are Sinopoli (balance), Levine, Tennstedt LPO EMI, Litton Virgin (fresh sounding), Boulez CSO (quick, a bit objective). Bernstein DG, 3rd movement to quick for my taste. Solti good too, not quite as in my opinion. Ozawa BSO has the Blumine. Thanks. Bill


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

The 6th I have is Pierre Boulez with the VPO on DG. He places the *Scherzo as the 2nd movement* and the *Andante as the 3rd*, and a couple of you on this thread said that's the best ordering of the movements. I was wondering your thoughts on this excerpt from Tom Service's 50 greatest symphony guide, on Mahler's 6th (it's an incredibly informative article, if you haven't read it yet. As is the entire series).

"So let's deal with these crazy facts first. There ought to be no confusion about the order of the movements (read Jeffrey Gantz's excellent digest of these issues here), since Mahler never conducted the piece in any order apart from Andante-Scherzo; he felt so strongly about it that, despite having originally conceived the inner movements the other way round, he asked his publisher to insert an erratum into every copy of the first edition, making sure that the symphony would always be played with the slow movement second. Mahler must have felt incredibly strongly since in changing a published score, he was incurring extra costs and risking a critical backlash. The confusion comes only posthumously: Alma Mahler sent conductor Wilhelm Mengelberg a telegram in 1919 suggesting the piece should be played Scherzo-Andante. And then there's Erwin Ratz's seemingly unfounded decision to reverse Mahler's final order in his critical edition of 1963, ever since which conductors and record companies have taken this version as gospel, even though it directly goes against the only Sixth Symphony that Mahler ever knew, conducted, or heard in his lifetime."

Here is one of the comments from the article, I agree with his assessment. 
"I've always felt that the andante moderato should act as a final vision of (comparative) tranquillity for our protagonist before he (or, if indeed not Mahler himself, she) is subjected to the torments of the finale"


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2014)

The article by Tom Service was interesting and informative - though I've not yet listened to the symphony, so will reserve judgement overall. The one point that puzzled me was this.



> the problem with Walter's and Furtwängler's descriptions of the Sixth Symphony, and even the "Tragic" epithet: if you hear the piece thinking only of the implacable darkness with which it ends, you miss the true drama, which is that a completely different emotional outcome is possible until the final few minutes. Everything is at stake right until the end of this music, and it's the fact that this symphony consistently strives for a victory that it doesn't ultimately win that makes it so emotionally devastating; in that sense, this symphony is the exact opposite of "nihilistic".


Surely it's the fact that the darker emotional outcome 'wins' at the last that makes it seem nihilistic?


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> Surely it's the fact that the darker emotional outcome 'wins' at the last that makes it seem nihilistic?


Wikipedia (the final authority on everything) defines nihilism as "a philosophical doctrine that suggests the negation of one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life," among them the notions that life has "objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value."

From that standpoint, it would seem to make a difference whether you're talking about an eleventh-hour defeat after a valiant struggle that could have gone either way, as opposed to a bleak, desolate world devoid of hope from the very start.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2014)

amfortas said:


> Wikipedia (the final authority on everything) defines nihilism as "a philosophical doctrine that suggests the negation of one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life," among them the notions that life has "objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value."
> 
> From that standpoint, it would seem to make a difference whether you're talking about an eleventh-hour defeat after a valiant struggle that could have gone either way, as opposed to a bleak, desolate world devoid of hope from the very start.


I guess Tom goes with your second option - rejecting the 'nihilistic' tag as the symphony offers hope in the valiant struggle.


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

You wont go far wrong with No 1 and 2 both bu Solti and the LSO on Decca Legends at near bargain price. No 4 which seems to be much mooted here is a little trickier with its long slow third movement and seemingly short fourth movement. The fifth is also very accessble. Bernstein is good in this but the 4th movement drags on for an interminable 12-13 minutes.


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2014)

Anyone else hear the Radio 3 programme that discusses the merits of different interpretations of Symphony 6?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01sr0qd

Interesting views, but making Mahler more attractive the more I listen.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> Anyone else hear the Radio 3 programme that discusses the merits of different interpretations of Symphony 6?
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01sr0qd
> 
> Interesting views, but making Mahler more attractive the more I listen.


This is very interesting, listening to it right now. Thanks for the link!


----------

