# Help with Mahler 10



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

I have been exploring Mahler symphonies slowly since 2012. They get played as background listens often but I also like to take concentrated time to really dig into each one of them.

I have had successful stints with 1, 3 (multiple times), 5, 4, 6 (multiple times), 2 (which is the only one I have seen live, Summer 2017 with the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra and Manfred Honeck), and half-stinted 9. 

I will be the first to admit the movements and symphonies which I still feel I do not fully understand. For example, I love the 4th Symphony but the 3rd Movement is still a wonderful enigma to me. I have yet to feel it fully laid out before me with all its mysteries finally a formula. This is why I did not mention Das Lied or 8, or to some degree, 7. It is also why I felt I had to half-qualify 9. My point in mentioning the 4th is that even symphonies which I feel I have a pretty complete understanding of, still contain secrets to unearth. Nothing is ever finished here. But this brings me to the 10th.

I have always avoided this symphony. I felt until I had heard and understood the others, I shouldn't try to hear a symphony that requires an other as a mediator between Mahler and myself, be it Cooke, Wheeler, Mazetti, Barshai, etc. However, I am now considering exploring it as a means of understanding, by looking backwards, the intentions of the 8th and the 7th and Das Lied, and even the 9th, which I do not completely encompass. Up to the end of the 6th, I feel a firm grasp on Mahler and most of his conceptions since there are, in many cases, a multiplicity of conceptions. It is his work after 6 that fascinates me now as I understand it least. I can feel a dynamic shift happening from the 6th to the 8th and I want to understand that. I have heard there is another dynamic shift like that from Das Lied through the 10th.

So I would love help in discovering the 10th. I know I sound like a basic Mahlerian when I say I have devoured Duggan's synoptic survey, but I have and I mention that because I am really looking for more information than what that gives me, although personalized recommendations with that detail and depth would ne'er be turned away.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

As a true Mahler-person, I started listening seriously to Mahler in my teens, I absolutely love all symphonies from 1-9. But I just don't consider the 10th as a serious Mahler-piece. I know there are many here who do love it, in all it's recreated beauty. But I will never join them. I don't know if this helps you, but at least you are not alone if it doesn't happen DLVDE also isn't my favorite Mahler piece either. We all have our preferences!


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

I was 22 when I picked him up and by summer 2014, he was my new obsession. For a long time I was working out the superstition of the 'curse of the ninth' and Mahler came up as being most superstitious about it and the curiosity all grew from there.

For a while I was not certain if I would ever have any desire to listen to the 10th at all. As a composer myself, completions exist in a grey area for me. Is it flattering that someone would want it that badly? Or does that end result in distortion? That I have discussed and questioned it this much reckons a listen, I assume. It is much more complete than, say, the last movement of Bruckner's 9th as we have access to it. (Out of respect for Bruckner's lost final coda, I do not listen to completions of that symphony. Any symphony that needs to end with an original invention seems self-defeating from the outset. Some may disagree there.)

In the end, I may join you as feeling unconvinced by it. I have yet to know. The first movement is rather excellent and there are many recordings of that. It was completed by Mahler, if the rest isn't comfortable for me, I will at least have recordings of that movement to continue to wrap myself up in.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Since you are familiar with Duggan's survey, I assume you are already familiar with the work's history, its state in short score and the existence of various performing versions.

If you have not heard Derek Cooke's illustrated talk on the Tenth, released on a Testament CD set, you may want to check it out. It would be informational as well as educational. In Cooke's talk, he explained the structure of the symphony, what Mahler had written, and what he had done to create a performing version of it. As a bonus, the Testament CD set also includes premiere recordings of Cooke 0 and Cooke I. (The talk can also be found on various video sharing sites including youtube.)

For me, the tenth is Mahler's most life-affirming symphony; it's about salvation, about love's triumph over death, despite he was never going to be able to escape death.

You mileage will vary, but please do enjoy you journey .


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

You really have to hear the first movement though, which was almost completely orchestrated by Mahler himself… its bl[censored] awesome. (My tuppence worth.)

The so-called _Catastrophe_ (a multiple harmony of 9 notes, iirc) is one of the most haunting moments in music I ever experienced.


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

Thank you! I am listening to it now. I have read many of these thoughts as quoted by others. I do not always agree with Cooke about Mahler but I am still very interested in what he says.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

The sketches, drafts, and manuscript to Mahler 10 were published in facsimile. I have studied all of it quite extensively, and written about it multiple times. It's actually _substantially_ more complete than a lot of people seem to think, and is not at all fragmentary. Much of it is fully orchestrated, mainly the 1st and 3rd mvts., and the others are near complete in short-score with abundant scoring annotations. The 5th movement is the most spare, but does carry a continuous melodic line with harmony, and its spareness is not at all out of line with Mahler's late style: compare the final movements of _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth Symphony.

Obviously, Mahler would have made innumerable revisions and alterations, but frankly that is also true of _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth. Those are works Mahler never heard performed, and also never got the chance to revise, which he had undertaken in every single earlier symphony, often extensively. Yet we accept them without reservation.

The reasons to avoid the Tenth from a "it's not really Mahler" standpoint are erroneous at best. Obviously if one doesnt like it, that's a different story. But is _is_ Mahler. Mahler's Tenth was far, _far_ more complete than many other pieces in the repertoire, such as the Mozart Requiem, or the Bartók Viola Concerto, among other examples.

The cleanest completion, with the most straightforward editing and least pastiche (which refers exclusively to fleshing out accompanimental passages mostly just in the last movement) is Cooke. And that is also my personal preferred version.

My highest recommendation for a recording is Seattle Symphony with Thomas Dausgaard, on their own label, Seattle Symphony Media.


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

Knorf said:


> The 5th movement is the most spare, but does carry a continuous melodic line with harmony, and its spareness is not at all out of line with Mahler's late style: compare the final movements of _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth Symphony.
> 
> Obviously, Mahler would have made innumerable revisions and alterations, but frankly that is also true of _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth. Those are works Mahler never heard performed, and also never got the chance to revise, which he had undertaken in every single earlier symphony, often extensively. Yet we accept them without reservation.
> 
> ...


Thanks! These are excellent points. I whittled out the ones I specifically wanted to respond to. The connections to those last symphonies and his relation to them, particularly in that he never heard any of them, is exactly what I am looking for. If you have any more thoughts about that interconnectivity with Das Lied and the 9th that you are willing to share, I would be very enthusiastic to hear them.

I have heard many places that Cooke's is purest Mahler although a few claim Wheeler, so I appreciate the opinion of someone who has looked over the actual score!

Also, I will certainly check out that recording. I am listening to Cooke's BBC lecture, and I guess Cooke 0, so I've begun.


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

A couple of my posts are awaiting moderation since I am so new, I am guessing. I really appreciate the replies.


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

Knorf said:


> The sketches, drafts, and manuscript to Mahler 10 were published in facsimile. I have studied all of it quite extensively, and written about it multiple times. It's actually _substantially_ more complete than a lot of people seem to think, and is not at all fragmentary. Much of it is fully orchestrated, mainly the 1st and 3rd mvts., and the others are near complete in short-score with abundant scoring annotations. The 5th movement is the most spare, but does carry a continuous melodic line with harmony, and its spareness is not at all out of line with Mahler's late style: compare the final movements of _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth Symphony.
> 
> Obviously, Mahler would have made innumerable revisions and alterations, but frankly that is also true of _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth. Those are works Mahler never heard performed, and also never got the chance to revise, which he had undertaken in every single earlier symphony, often extensively. Yet we accept them without reservation.
> 
> ...


I once read that Alma, who resisted a performance of Cooke's version until a year before her death, was very moved after hearing it and acknowledged that it was "much more Mahler than I ever thought". I do apologize that I do not remember the source where I read this.


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

I believe she wrote a letter actually, the text of which is online, giving him her blessing to finish it and perform it 'worldwide.'


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

Kiki said:


> Since you are familiar with Duggan's survey, I assume you are already familiar with the work's history, its state in short score and the existence of various performing versions.
> 
> If you have not heard Derek Cooke's illustrated talk on the Tenth, released on a Testament CD set, you may want to check it out. It would be informational as well as educational. In Cooke's talk, he explained the structure of the symphony, what Mahler had written, and what he had done to create a performing version of it. As a bonus, the Testament CD set also includes premiere recordings of Cooke 0 and Cooke I. (The talk can also be found on various video sharing sites including youtube.)
> 
> ...


This was illuminating. It seems exploring the 10th chronologically through the Cooke recordings may be the best way to start. Should I proceed to Ormandy next? Or is there another more complete Goldschmidt recording to appreciate before that?


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

I also came late to 10, having eschewed it for many years for the usual reasons. But when I finally came to it, it became my favorite. I agree with Kiki's description: life-affirming. I love the melodies and rich, profound chords throughout. Now, what version? Here there is a happy coincidence of a recording that has historical significance _and_ is a gorgeous performance with impeccable sound quality. It's Ormandy/Philadelphia, 1965, on Sony. This was the first recorded performance of the Cooke version. There are several recordings of 10 that I like a lot, but this is my favorite. What's interesting and unexpected is that Sony's digital remastering of a really good analog original tape is fantastically successful, and the sound you get here is superior to a lot of DDD recordings, IMO. The venue, microphone placement, and overall audio engineering is about as good as it gets.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Ormandy's version is _NOT_ the place to start, leave it until after you have heard other versions such as Rattle, Dausgaaard, Harding etc., The reason? There are 3 major revisions of the Cooke completion with the first attempt being the one that Alma Mahler came to approve of. After Alma Mahler's death, her daughter gave Deryck Cooke access to a lot of Gustav Mahler's papers, many relating to the 10th which made Cooke rethink his completion and do a substantially revised version (Cooke II). Since then he did a 3rd version which is not as big a difference as between his 1st and 2nd. There are also some tweaks done since Cooke's death by David and Colin Matthews. So back to Ormandy, the reason to not use it as a an entry point is that it is Cooke's first attempt, before he saw more of Mahler's papers and substantially revised the work. Get to know in the form that it is closer to Mahler's intent, *then* listen to the first revision if you really are that interested. I am sure that Ormandy's version is good and in great sound, but as Cooke discovered later, there is more to the story.

Now as to versions, after encountering Dausgaard's version I was willing to agree that it was the best I had heard, however more recently I spent a week or so comparing various recording and found myself changing my mind, it is just a bit too hard driving, I think that both Rattle and Harding find a better balance.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Totally agreed with what Becca said. I'd suggest starting with Cooke II or preferably III, then if you're still interested, explore Cooke I (if you want to hear Goldschmidt, Ormandy or Martinon), or other editions prepared by Barshai, Mazzetti, Wheeler and others.

Among Cooke II/III recordings, my personal favourite is the fluffy Harding. Rattle, Dausgaard, Chailly, Gielen, Inbal, Wiggleswoth, Morris among others have all made very good recordings of the Tenth.

There is also a Mahler 10 thread on TC where lots of recordings have been discussed, in case you have not come across it yet - Mahler Symphony no 10


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

This IS Mahler, all the likes of Deryck Cooke and others have done is put an almost finished work into a performable form, so don't be put off by the incomplete epithet in any way.

What the work does do is indicate clearly that Mahler wasn't a death-obsessed, misery-guts, this is serenely beautiful, positive and life-affirming and accepting music. It's one long struggle, but "Mahler wins".The greater dissonance in this compared to earlier Symphonies can probably be put down to the nightmare that was Alma. 

Fortunately, most conductors have got over the "this ain't Mahler" idea, Bernstein, Solti, Tennstedt, Kubelik never touched it, apart from the Adagio (Solti even avoided that.) Wikipedia lists more than 30 recordings, mostly this century.

My long-time favourite reading is Simon Rattle's Bournemouth recording, it has that sense of revelation to me ,even if it was by no means the first ever recording. Wyn Morris did an intensely personal reading around the same time, and that for me now rivals Rattle. Mark Wigglesworth is a stunner that could easily fly under the radar, and I really like Dausgaard's recent-ish version. Cooke is the best performing edition (imho) but I really think Wheeler's should also get a mention, and the others are emphatically not without merit!


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

Yes, I have read a number of threads about it. I made a big list of all the recommended recordings. I was almost certain starting with Cooke III and moving backwards was the right thing to do, and maybe it is, but after listening to that BBC lecture I am sort of curious to see what happens next, instead of jumping forward to the final result, like I thought I would be. I recognize that choice may leave me questioning the different completions Cooke made and picking them apart, but were I a Mahler fan in the 1960's (which I love pretending to be), I would have had no choice but to do it this way, so maybe it isn't correct but I'd like to recreate that experience as best I can.

It is really the lecture that did it. I think I am going to listen to it one more time before I move on and then give dedicated time to each of the Cooke completions in order. I will hold off on any of the others until after I get to the Rattle Cooke III that everyone is praising so much. I tasted the first movement to check the quality and it sounds tremendous, a little like Bernstein in terms of drama, which I don't find a bad thing at all, especially in this symphony. It seems like it needs that kind of attention.
I am actually so excited that I am pulling out other Rattle Mahler's for the first time in a long time. I have never been certain of Rattle as a Mahler interpreter, but I am always happy to be proven wrong. Experience changes the ears.

In the meanwhile, I think I can handle the imperfections of Cooke 1, which I am getting the feeling from the comments, is not great. I am really excited for that leap in quality between Cooke 1 and Cooke 2 and 3 that Becca described.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Simon Rattle's Mahler 10 with Bournemouth is one of the best recordings he's made, in my opinion. The Berlin one is good, too, but slightly undercooked by comparison.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

blondheim said:


> Yes, I have read a number of threads about it. I made a big list of all the recommended recordings. I was almost certain starting with Cooke III and moving backwards was the right thing to do, and maybe it is, but after listening to that BBC lecture I am sort of curious to see what happens next, instead of jumping forward to the final result, like I thought I would be. I recognize that choice may leave me questioning the different completions Cooke made and picking them apart, but were I a Mahler fan in the 1960's (which I love pretending to be), I would have had no choice but to do it this way, so maybe it isn't correct but I'd like to recreate that experience as best I can.
> 
> It is really the lecture that did it. I think I am going to listen to it one more time before I move on and then give dedicated time to each of the Cooke completions in order. I will hold off on any of the others until after I get to the Rattle Cooke III that everyone is praising so much. I tasted the first movement to check the quality and it sounds tremendous, a little like Bernstein in terms of drama, which I don't find a bad thing at all, especially in this symphony. It seems like it needs that kind of attention.
> I am actually so excited that I am pulling out other Rattle Mahler's for the first time in a long time. I have never been certain of Rattle as a Mahler interpreter, but I am always happy to be proven wrong. Experience changes the ears.
> ...


Just keep it in mind that Cooke wasn't the first to have a go at getting Mahler 10 into a performable form. Wheeler's was earlier (but overlapped), and one could say that his last tweak comes about as close to Mahler's late orchestral style than any. Cooke refines his "Performing Edition" so yes, I think it gets better from 1960 onwards. Personally, I don't think there are huge differences between Cooke II and III, the revisions are minor, albeit quite telling in the instant.

If you fancy an unintentional laugh, the Carpenter "Completion" came first, but shoving in quotes from most of the preceding nine isn't a good idea. Then again, at least he had a go, and it would be better than nothing. Just all the others are so much better.


----------



## Cy Katz (Jul 7, 2020)

The first 10 I owned was directed by Wyn Morris, not particularly persuasive. The second was by Ormandy, to whom a college friend called, a little unfairly, I think, The Dwight D. Eisenhower of Classical Music. A definite pass on Ormandy. Better was a BBC Magazine recording by Mark Wigglesworth, whose Shostakovich 7 is brilliant. But, I'm still now convinced that this Cooke completion deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as any of Mahler's true symphonies. It's kind of like "Turandot" and Alfano, although his work represents the final pages only, and there's so much darn great Puccini in that opera, that it's easy to forget that the work is only mostly his. With Mahler 10, the work is primarily not his. So, I prefer to stick to just the opening glorious Adagio, which even points Mahler towards, perhaps, the Second Viennese School. There are many excellent performances of that first movement, from Bernstein to Boulez to a host of others.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

^^^ The work IS primarily his! Lots of fully orchestrated, most in short score, yes incomplete, but (forgive me for this awfully sweeping statement) I'd have thought the orchestration and adding the final finesse would have been a doddle for him compared with what he had already done.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Cy Katz said:


> With Mahler 10, the work is primarily not his.


This is flatly incorrect, as least regarding the Cooke edition.


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

I was surprised to read that it wasn't much his since I had been hearing so much else to the contrary. I would really love to get my hands on a published facsimile to see for myself what is there. As a composer myself, it would be a joy to pick apart. I have read numerous in-depth analyses of Bruckner's 9th, and although I have not seen a facsimile, I still feel I have seen and heard enough to know how much intervention is required to finish that work. I don't have a sure enough grasp to say that myself with Mahler's 10th, but a lot of studied Mahlerites seem to agree that it is very much _his_ final work.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

^^^^ I've actually held one of the original five facsimiles from the early 1920s in my own hands. Ha!


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

I am curious to hear how every one thinks this symphony connects to the 5th and 7th conceptually, thematically, psychologically, etc. It seems especially tied to those. I have always suspected Mahler's 5th is the skeleton key to the entire canon.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

blondheim said:


> I am curious to hear how every one thinks this symphony connects to the 5th and 7th conceptually, thematically, psychologically, etc. It seems especially tied to those. I have always suspected Mahler's 5th is the skeleton key to the entire canon.


Psychologically, I can't really see much of a link to Nos. 5 and 7, to be honest. This work has more in common with its immediate predecessors, 9 and Das Lied. Beyond that, the five-movement format is the most obvious connection, as well as the symmetry of that structure. No.2 is also in five movements, but that's with a massive finale, and less "palindromic". And I suppose No.1 was also five movements, before the delightful but irrelevant Blumine got dumped.

Maybe No.10 has more inward-looking Angst, so a more illuminating comparison could be made with No.6?


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

I am especially curious if the 'victory' at the end of the 10th is ironic, as many feel the Rondo of the 7th is. I have read that the 10th ends in 'personal victory' for Mahler. Considering his superstitious belief in the curse of the ninth, and his diagnosis at that time, I wonder how he could write a tenth symphony with any sort of hope for the future. Unless maybe he thought he had finally beat the curse/his heart condition? And could write unabashedly? Mahler seems to have written autobiographically, often, so I ponder.

I am reminded again of how Mahler so heavily inspired Shostokovich.

I have also thought about the movements. I have always felt that 1 and 6 were almost brothers. They were both revised to be in practically classical form: the 1 by the deletion of a movement, the 6th by the final restructuring of the inner movements, although regardless of where you stand on that, the classical point remains. The 1st is the journey of the hero, both the broad romantic and also, specifically, Mahler himself. Same with the 6th, although not such a great end for the Mahler/hero in that case. The 9th seems like a Mahler walk through nature, as he ponders his own mortality. The 8th a celebration of humanity and its spiritual place.

I agree with Duggan that the 3rd is by far the least troubled of all his works. The 1st is close. Connections between the 7th and the 3rd still elude me. They may be brothers in some way as well, they both end in light, glorious or ironic. In the 7th, it seems the jury is still out.

Not that conductors can't imply one or the other, or that an ensemble can't color that interpretation. Just thoughts.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

CnC Bartok said:


> ...
> 
> What the work does do is indicate clearly that Mahler wasn't a death-obsessed, misery-guts, this is serenely beautiful, positive and life-affirming and accepting music. It's one long struggle, but "Mahler wins".The greater dissonance in this compared to earlier Symphonies can probably be put down to the nightmare that was Alma.


Well said! It seems that when Mahler was writing his Tenth, his relationship with Alma was as much a problem, if not a bigger problem, than his biological heart. The many comments addressing to Alma in the manuscript also suggests that the Tenth is his positive, musical solution to his Alma-related, mental distress in real life... My two cents.


----------



## blondheim (Jul 6, 2020)

Kiki said:


> Well said! It seems that when Mahler was writing his Tenth, his relationship with Alma was as much a problem, if not a bigger problem, than his biological heart. The many comments addressing to Alma in the manuscript also suggests that the Tenth is his positive, musical solution to his Alma-related, mental distress in real life... My two cents.


I've never thought about it that way! I love how much I have to reflect on with the Tenth now. Thanks!


----------



## vincula (Jun 23, 2020)

Knorf said:


> Simon Rattle's Mahler 10 with Bournemouth is one of the best recordings he's made, in my opinion. The Berlin one is good, too, but slightly undercooked by comparison.


I take your word for it. Have just placed an order on Simon Rattle's Mahler 10 with Bournemouth. Let's _Rattle_ the cage a bit and see how he fares :lol:

Regards,

Vincula


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

vincula said:


> I take your word for it. Have just placed an order on Simon Rattle's Mahler 10 with Bournemouth. Let's _Rattle_ the cage a bit and see how he fares :lol:
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Vincula


Happy listening! I think people are divided a bit between Bournemouth and Berlin for Rattle's Mahler 10. _De gustibus!_


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

CnC Bartok said:


> This IS Mahler, all the likes of Deryck Cooke and others have done is put an almost finished work into a performable form, so don't be put off by the incomplete epithet in any way.
> 
> What the work does do is indicate clearly that Mahler wasn't a death-obsessed, misery-guts, this is serenely beautiful, positive and life-affirming and accepting music. It's one long struggle, but "Mahler wins".The greater dissonance in this compared to earlier Symphonies can probably be put down to the nightmare that was Alma.
> 
> ...


+1 , agree with everything, including the views on Rattle and Wigglesworth.
The 10th is my favourite, together with the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 9th symphonies.


----------

