# My interest in Mahler and Tchaikovsky have been restored - thank you Gergiev



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

I have been on these forums for sometime now, and I think some people still remember my issues that I had with Mahler and Tchaikovsky. I hated listening to their symphonies, either Mahlers were too long and boring, or Tchaikovsky's were too gentle and felt poorly orchestrated.

This all changed when I listened to Gergiev conduct. Now I am a fully converted Mahler fan and Tchaikovsky fan. Bernstien, Karajan, and others I heard conduct just didn't do it for me, the texture was either too muddy or there sense of accents in the music was confusing and turned me off.

Gergiev is my go to conductor from this point on, I can actually hear the music in its completeness when he conducts !


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Awesome... glad that you are liking both composers. They are wonderful for sure .


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

Bravo. Nobody should be without either! :tiphat:


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

I am rather curious in fact. Which Mahler symphonies did you get a chance to hear?


----------



## Marilyn (Jan 26, 2013)

Mahler and Tchaikovsky are my two personal favorites. I don' t know what you've heard up to now, but if you want to continue exploring their work, Abbado and Boulez are great for Mahler's symphonies and Mravinsky, in my opinion, is the best for Tchaikovsky's.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

That is a really powerful reaction! 

I have not warmed so much to Gergiev, but I've also never had such a problem with Tchaikovsky. I will consider his Mahler....


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

Albert7 said:


> I am rather curious in fact. Which Mahler symphonies did you get a chance to hear?


I've listened to the 1st, 2nd, 5th and 6th. I may have listened to the others but I don't remember them all that well. One of the challenging things with Mahler is his length. The 6th in particular is roughly 80 minutes, and I find it really difficult to maintain interest after 60 minutes. Some movements just feel too long or outstay their welcome. But Gergiev did an exceptional job conducting the 5th and 6th.



Marilyn said:


> Mahler and Tchaikovsky are my two personal favorites. I don' t know what you've heard up to now, but if you want to continue exploring their work, Abbado and Boulez are great for Mahler's symphonies and Mravinsky, in my opinion, is the best for Tchaikovsky's.


I've listened to Abbado as well, and I was turned off by him. I might try Boulez if I can find some on youtube. Haven't heard Mravinsky, which might be worth a try too.



science said:


> That is a really powerful reaction!
> 
> I have not warmed so much to Gergiev, but I've also never had such a problem with Tchaikovsky. I will consider his Mahler....


Strange, I find everything he conducts to be extremely clear and I agree with where he decides to put emphasis in the music, it more or less matches what my expectations are. Thats probably why I have such problems with other conductors for this music.

He conducts the 5th here gloriously: some can argue that the triplets are played too slowly, or aren't played as Mahler intended. But I very much like the speed and the articulations he emphasized.


----------



## Guest (Mar 17, 2015)

I certainly agree with you on the Tchaikovsky side. Gergiev's take on the 5th and 6th symphonies, recorded with the Wiener Philharmoniker, are my favorites. Some say Gergiev is inconsistent, but when he is good he is over-the-top GREAT! I would recommend his recording of Stravinksy's Rite of Spring with the Kirov Orchestra. Fabulous!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Igneous01 said:


> I have been on these forums for sometime now, and I think some people still remember my issues that I had with Mahler and Tchaikovsky. I hated listening to their symphonies, either Mahlers were too long and boring, or Tchaikovsky's were too gentle and felt poorly orchestrated.
> 
> This all changed when I listened to Gergiev conduct. Now I am a fully converted Mahler fan and Tchaikovsky fan. Bernstien, Karajan, and others I heard conduct just didn't do it for me, the texture was either too muddy or there sense of accents in the music was confusing and turned me off.
> 
> Gergiev is my go to conductor from this point on, I can actually hear the music in its completeness when he conducts !


Whatever floats your boat. Enjoy the music!!


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

Jerome said:


> ...Some say Gergiev is inconsistent, but when he is good he is over-the-top GREAT! I would recommend his recording of Stravinksy's Rite of Spring with the Kirov Orchestra. Fabulous!


Seconded! The greatest recording after the composer's one, imo


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

GioCar said:


> Seconded! The greatest recording after the composer's one, imo


That is amazing! i didn't know people felt that strongly about it. How do you feel about that old Ozawa recording? It seems to me to be the most popular.


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

science said:


> That is amazing! i didn't know people felt that strongly about it. How do you feel about that old Ozawa recording? It seems to me to be the most popular.


That one with the Chicago SO? I have it on LP, but it's quite a long time I haven't played it... 
Honestly I don't remember of being particularly impressed but you have just raised my curiosity.

Sooner or later I'll have to convert my vinyl collection to digital music files...


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I noted the incredible detail in Gergiev's Prokofiev.


----------



## almc (Jan 26, 2013)

Igneous01 said:


> I have been on these forums for sometime now, and I think some people still remember my issues that I had with Mahler and Tchaikovsky. I hated listening to their symphonies, either Mahlers were too long and boring, or Tchaikovsky's were too gentle and felt poorly orchestrated.
> 
> This all changed when I listened to Gergiev conduct. Now I am a fully converted Mahler fan and Tchaikovsky fan. Bernstien, Karajan, and others I heard conduct just didn't do it for me, the texture was either too muddy or there sense of accents in the music was confusing and turned me off.
> 
> Gergiev is my go to conductor from this point on, I can actually hear the music in its completeness when he conducts !


Gergiev is a very talented man ... His work, back in his country, with the mariinsky is awesome (excellent or the absolutely best recordings of russian operas and ballets) ...

However, I do believe that since his arrival in the West, he choosed to be a manager in fisrt place, and then a musician ... He still makes good music when dealing with Russians composers, however everything else he makes, looks to me, that is just out of his orchestra contractual obligations. It is just a duty and he accomplishes it mechanically with very mediocre outcome.

His Mahler circle is really awful, just a few good moments here and there ... inconsistency is the first word that comes into mind. And it is logical.... look at the speed this guy bangs out anything. His latest Brahms is a disaster ... And it is trully a pitty...

If you really into Mahler now, do yourself a favour and look somewhere else ... in this forum there are thousands of far better Mahler recordings recommendations ...


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Gergiev's Russian conducting is quite exceptional... it's when he tried to get into Mahler than that was problematic... I would recommend checking out Boulez or Abbado or Bernstein for good starters here.


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

almc said:


> Gergiev is a very talented man ... His work, back in his country, with the mariinsky is awesome (excellent or the absolutely best recordings of russian operas and ballets) ...
> 
> However, I do believe that since his arrival in the West, he choosed to be a manager in fisrt place, and then a musician ... He still makes good music when dealing with Russians composers, however everything else he makes, looks to me, that is just out of his orchestra contractual obligations. It is just a duty and he accomplishes it mechanically with very mediocre outcome.
> 
> ...


I have to disagree, I've heard the champions of Mahler conduct and I was turned off. So many people claim the Bernstein is a master of Mahlers music, yet I hated his interpretations. Gergiev just naturally gels with me. At this point I could care less if its not what Mahler intended, quite frankly I think Mahler's vision was quite a boring one imo. I'm glad that we have such a wide choice of conductors to choose from.



> I would recommend checking out Boulez or Abbado or Bernstein for good starters here.


Like I previously said, I've heard these conductors play Mahler - I wasn't impressed nor engaged.


----------



## Marilyn (Jan 26, 2013)

Igneous01 said:


> I have to disagree, I've heard the champions of Mahler conduct and I was turned off. So many people claim the Bernstein is a master of Mahlers music, yet I hated his interpretations. Gergiev just naturally gels with me. At this point I could care less if its not what Mahler intended, quite frankly I think Mahler's vision was quite a boring one imo. I'm glad that we have such a wide choice of conductors to choose from.
> 
> Like I previously said, I've heard these conductors play Mahler - I wasn't impressed nor engaged.


The truth is, if one is interested in a composer's work, they will eventually be interested in the composer's intentions. Personally, I find Mahler's work very interesting not only in terms of music, but also in the sense that he is very accurate in transforming notes into certain feelings. After spending a lot of time exploring his music, I came to the conclusion that I should not stick to the cycles of certain conductors, but rather choose my favorite conductor(s) for each symphony. Gergiev is not my personal choise, I think there are far better options, but the main thing is to get to know the music, so whatever works for you is fine. And one more thing. Mahler's vision was anything but boring. He was years ahead of his time, a fact that is generally acknowledged between conductors and this is why so many of them (Gergiev included) are doing complete cycles of his works.


----------



## almc (Jan 26, 2013)

Igneous01 said:


> I have to disagree, I've heard the champions of Mahler conduct and I was turned off. So many people claim the Bernstein is a master of Mahlers music, yet I hated his interpretations. Gergiev just naturally gels with me. At this point I could care less if its not what Mahler intended, quite frankly I think Mahler's vision was quite a boring one imo. I'm glad that we have such a wide choice of conductors to choose from.


Like I said, now that Gergiev facilitated your handshake with Mahler's music, try to go back to the conductors that initially didn't manage to intrigue you ...

Just a few recommendations :

Fischer => 1st
Jurowski => 2nd
Boulez / Horenstein => 3rd
Szell => 4th
Barshai => 5th
Abbado / Bernstein (dg) => 6th 
-//- / -//- (columbia) => 7th
Solti => 8th
Abbado => 9th
Haitink => Das Lied ...

And of course you can always try the giants of the past : Mitropoulos, Walter, Klemperer, etc., etc. ...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yes. That's a good idea.

Perhaps, OP, it just took some time for your brain to become comfortable with the music.

Try and listen to a Mahler/Tchaikovsky work other than with Gergiev at the helm.


----------



## almc (Jan 26, 2013)

Igneous01 said:


> I have to disagree, I've heard the champions of Mahler conduct and I was turned off. So many people claim the Bernstein is a master of Mahlers music, yet I hated his interpretations. Gergiev just naturally gels with me. At this point I could care less if its not what Mahler intended, quite frankly I think Mahler's vision was quite a boring one imo. I'm glad that we have such a wide choice of conductors to choose from.


Especially for Lenny you could take a look here ...

As for Pyotr Ilyich, pls follow Marilyn's advice and listen to Mravinsky ...


----------



## Guest (Mar 20, 2015)

Gergiev is one of Putler's pets. I'll probably never buy or listen to anything by him again.










Update: just tossed out another one of his records.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Icarus said:


> Gergiev is one of Putler's pets. I'll probably never buy or listen to anything by him again.


You might want to start a discussion in the "politics and religion in classical music" forum. In that forum, you'll probably be ok with this, but in this one you're taking a risk!


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

So far, the only Mahler symphony I've heard Gergiev conduct is the 6th with the LSO on its own label , but his Tchaikovsky is certainly great . Yes, He can be erratic , but his best 
performances are unforgettale . Like Bernstein, Karajan and Solti , Gergiev divides critics and fans, but you certainly can't call his performances boring !
Gergiev is undoubtedly one of the greatesy conductors of Prokofiev . As an ethnic Ossetian whose family comes from the Caucasus even though he was born in Moscow , he is a descendent of the ancient Scythians , those wild nomadic people of ancient times . You can hear this in his conducting !


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

Icarus said:


> Gergiev is one of Putler's pets. I'll probably never buy or listen to anything by him again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


While I definitely take great interest in this subject because of its political background (and also the fact that I am currently living in Poland, so the fear is real here) I know that you are treading in deep water posting this here. Better suited for the appropriate sub-forum. I'm not going to discuss it here for sanity's sake.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Icarus said:


> Gergiev is one of Putler's pets. I'll probably never buy or listen to anything by him again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have to adjudicate Gergiev with his non-Russian rep...

I also wish now that Pletnev had tried to record Mahler. I would be very curious since I do have his Beethoven cycle how he would have fared with Mahler here. Of course, a Russian-flavored Mahler could be an interesting phenomenon although probably not true to the score's intent.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Igneous01 said:


> I have been on these forums for sometime now, and I think some people still remember my issues that I had with Mahler and Tchaikovsky. I hated listening to their symphonies, either Mahlers were too long and boring, or Tchaikovsky's were too gentle and felt poorly orchestrated.
> 
> This all changed when I listened to Gergiev conduct. Now I am a fully converted Mahler fan and Tchaikovsky fan. Bernstien, Karajan, and others I heard conduct just didn't do it for me, the texture was either too muddy or there sense of accents in the music was confusing and turned me off.
> 
> Gergiev is my go to conductor from this point on, I can actually hear the music in its completeness when he conducts !


 Tchaikovsky "poorly orchestrated"? Really?
You may have a point complaining about the length of Mahler's works...it was offputting to me at first but once you get into his world you wish some of these were twice as long.
Gergiev conducts best while standing on a tank that is crushing some Ukranian Orphans in it's wake. He can be maddingly inconsistent, usually because he jets in at the last minute, grabs the baton, waves it in front of the Orchestra, and is jetting off before the first ovation ends. His First Tchaikovsky cycle was wildly uneven and his Mahler that I heard (6 and 2, I believe) rides roughshod over over every tempo and dynamic marking...kind of like Putin rampaging around Chechnya. I am glad that he awakened your interest in these Composers. When you are ready for Conductors for are more interested in the essence of Music and less into self aggrandizement, come back for some suggestions.


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

Triplets said:


> Tchaikovsky "poorly orchestrated"? Really?
> You may have a point complaining about the length of Mahler's works...it was offputting to me at first but once you get into his world you wish some of these were twice as long.
> Gergiev conducts best while standing on a tank that is crushing some Ukranian Orphans in it's wake. He can be maddingly inconsistent, usually because he jets in at the last minute, grabs the baton, waves it in front of the Orchestra, and is jetting off before the first ovation ends. His First Tchaikovsky cycle was wildly uneven and his Mahler that I heard (6 and 2, I believe) rides roughshod over over every tempo and dynamic marking...kind of like Putin rampaging around Chechnya. I am glad that he awakened your interest in these Composers. When you are ready for Conductors for are more interested in the essence of Music and less into self aggrandizement, come back for some suggestions.


I'm not going to argue this, because it is entirely opinion based. But yes, I'm not interested in your and many others definition of the essence of music, I have my own essence and I follow my instincts. Whether this may lead me back to these conductors is another story. I suspect not for a long time.


----------

