# Karajan's Mahler 6



## science

Does anyone know the date of the recording?


----------



## Lyricus

For what it's worth, someone on Amazon said 1973. The LP was released in 1978.


----------



## Mahlerian

http://gustavmahler.net.free.fr/symph6.html

The Gustav Mahler discography says that this travesty and utter misrepresentation of the composer's wishes was recorded in two groups of sessions, January and February 1975 followed by February and March 1977.


----------



## Triplets

I bought it in 1980


----------



## shadowdancer

Any DGrammophon record can be checked in their website. Just click on the track and a pop up window appears with relevant information.

If you are talking about the 6th, the DeutscheGrammophon site states:

Recording Information

Recording date: March 1977
Live / Studio: Studio
Recording Location: Philharmonie, Berlin, Germany
Produced By: Dr. Hans Hirsch, Producer
Magdalene Padberg, Producer
Michel Glotz, Recording Producer
Balance Engineer: Günter Hermanns
Format: AAA Stereo


----------



## Vaneyes

science said:


> Does anyone know the date of the recording? {Mahler 6, Ruckert-Lieder w. Ludwig/BPO/HvK DG}


http://www.karajan.co.uk/mahler.html


----------



## TxllxT

Mahlerian said:


> http://gustavmahler.net.free.fr/symph6.html
> 
> The Gustav Mahler discography says that this travesty and utter misrepresentation of the composer's wishes was recorded in two groups of sessions, January and February 1975 followed by February and March 1977.


Never heard more telling cow bells!


----------



## amfortas

Mahlerian said:


> The Gustav Mahler discography says that this travesty and utter misrepresentation of the composer's wishes was recorded in two groups of sessions, January and February 1975 followed by February and March 1977.


That Mahler discography doesn't pull its punches!



TxllxT said:


> Never heard more telling cow bells!


----------



## Barbebleu

I'm not sure the Mahler discography referred to actually says that. I think that the Discography merely informs us of the date of the recording sessions. I think that it is Mahlerian's critique of Karajan's interpretation we are reading! A trifle harsh in my opinion.


----------



## Mahlerian

Barbebleu said:


> I'm not sure the Mahler discography referred to actually says that. I think that the Discography merely informs us of the date of the recording sessions. I think that it is Mahlerian's critique of Karajan's interpretation we are reading! A trifle harsh in my opinion.


Yes, it is my own description. Harsh, perhaps, but certainly not undeserved, in my opinion.


----------



## DavidA

The date when the recording of the Mahler 6 was made is September 1977

“Karajan's classic Sixth confirmed his belated arrival as a major Mahler interpreter. Only Bernstein, in his more emotive, less consciously beautifying way, left recorded performances of comparable strength and conviction. Karajan's understanding of Mahler's sound world – its links forward to Berg, Schoenberg and Webern as opposed to retrospective links with Wagner – is very acute. Combining this with a notable long-term control of rhythm, Karajan is sustains not only the composer's lucidly stated tragic case but also Mahler's exploration of materials drawn from different sound worlds and even, in the Scherzo, from different areas of the inherited musical tradition. This Scherzo is a masterly achievement by composer, conductor, and orchestra alike." (Gramophone Classical Music Guide)


----------



## Barbebleu

Mahlerian said:


> Yes, it is my own description. Harsh, perhaps, but certainly not undeserved, in my opinion.


Not a fan of Herr Karajan's take on the sixth then? What's your favourite recording, Mahlerian? Not the best recording, your desert island recording. Incidentally what is it about this interpretation that upsets you and does it apply to all of Karajan's Mahler?


----------



## Mal

There is no consensus amongst the critics when it come to Mahler. Take Tony Duggen at MWI:

http://www.musicweb-international.com/Mahler/Mahler6.htm

Note Karajan only gets a mention in his "rubbish list":

"Maazel, Järvi and Von Dohnanyi deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement. Chailly, as so often in Mahler, is beautifully finished on the outside, but is all style and less substance. Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it. Leave them all under their tarpaulins."

I did start listening to Karajan, but the chrome was glistening in a lurid and off putting manner, so I turned him off. My library choice (Szell) remains intact. Duggen says:

"Let me draw your attention to another "live" recording much easier to find. This is by George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra on Sony (SBK 47 654 or 88697008132)... Szell conducts a bleak, unforgiving first movement followed by an equally trenchant scherzo where, perhaps more than most, he finds true menace and grotesques. Szell's Andante is quickest of all ... His finale finds the Cleveland Orchestra on top form and there is much drama and an unerring sense of inevitability to be heard."

Maybe having an orchestra based in a city devoted to heavy industry, plus his acknowledged mastery of controlled, precision music making, gives Szell an edge in this symphony. As Duggen says:

"It has always seemed to me appropriate that the work's 1906 premiere took place in Essen, the cradle of German heavy industry. All those driving, relentless, militaristic rhythms, mechanistic percussion and harsh-edged contrasts that permeate so much of this work have always seemed, to me, to share kinship with the place where the work was first heard. "


----------



## Pugg

I really don't care about critics, they are in and out each others backside or fight likes cats and dogs.
As long as I do enjoy the work and know what to expect I will listen to it/ buy it.
If not, I leave it be .

I Like this recording by the way


----------



## DavidA

Mal said:


> There is no consensus amongst the critics when it come to Mahler. Take Tony Duggen at MWI:
> 
> http://www.musicweb-international.com/Mahler/Mahler6.htm
> 
> Note Karajan only gets a mention in his "rubbish list":
> 
> "Maazel, Järvi and Von Dohnanyi deliver the notes but are largely empty vessels, all wheels and cogs but little worthwhile movement. Chailly, as so often in Mahler, is beautifully finished on the outside, but is all style and less substance. *Karajan is chromium plated as usual, and that's it.* Leave them all under their tarpaulins."
> 
> I did start listening to Karajan, but the chrome was glistening in a lurid and off putting manner, so I turned him off. *My library choice (Szell) remains intact*. Duggen says:
> 
> "Let me draw your attention to another "live" recording much easier to find. This is by George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra on Sony (SBK 47 654 or 88697008132)... Szell conducts a bleak, unforgiving first movement followed by an equally trenchant scherzo where, perhaps more than most, he finds true menace and grotesques. Szell's Andante is quickest of all ... His finale finds the Cleveland Orchestra on top form and there is much drama and an unerring sense of inevitability to be heard."
> 
> Maybe having an orchestra based in a city devoted to heavy industry, plus his acknowledged mastery of controlled, precision music making, gives Szell an edge in this symphony. As Duggen says:
> 
> "It has always seemed to me appropriate that the work's 1906 premiere took place in Essen, the cradle of German heavy industry. All those driving, relentless, militaristic rhythms, mechanistic percussion and harsh-edged contrasts that permeate so much of this work have always seemed, to me, to share kinship with the place where the work was first heard. "


The sheer nonsense some of these guys talk is breathtaking. What does he mean? As James Galway said: "They mean all the notes are played well and in tune." As someone has said, critics bite and bicker among themselves. I know what I like. I have Szell and Karajan and prefer the Karajan by miles.


----------



## Mahlerian

Barbebleu said:


> Not a fan of Herr Karajan's take on the sixth then? What's your favourite recording, Mahlerian? Not the best recording, your desert island recording. Incidentally what is it about this interpretation that upsets you and does it apply to all of Karajan's Mahler?


My favorite Mahler Sixths are Abbado/Berlin and Tennstedt/LPO. Szell/Cleveland and Bernstein/VPO were the first versions of the work I heard, and I still like both, but they've been superseded by the above. Among other recordings I've not cared for I would add Bernstein/NYPO and Gergiev.

Karajan's Mahler has the wrong texture, the wrong pacing, and the wrong phrasing throughout, so it sounds nothing like Mahler's music. Other than that, I suppose it's okay.


----------



## TxllxT

Mahlerian said:


> My favorite Mahler Sixths are Abbado/Berlin and Tennstedt/LPO. Szell/Cleveland and Bernstein/VPO were the first versions of the work I heard, and I still like both, but they've been superseded by the above. Among other recordings I've not cared for I would add Bernstein/NYPO and Gergiev.
> 
> Karajan's Mahler has the wrong texture, the wrong pacing, and the wrong phrasing throughout, so it sounds nothing like Mahler's music. Other than that, I suppose it's okay.


I like it that musical taste may differ. I know the recordings mentioned above but I keep returning to the heretic maestro. The Abbado-Tennstedt-Szell interpretations didn't leave a scratch on my soul. Bernstein's Mahlers and Haitink's Mahlers are true soul-searchers, but Karajan's wrong-wrong-wrong interpretation spurs me to immerse into Mahler's sixth even more. :tiphat:


----------



## amfortas

amfortas said:


> That Mahler discography doesn't pull its punches!





Barbebleu said:


> I'm not sure the Mahler discography referred to actually says that. I think that the Discography merely informs us of the date of the recording sessions. I think that it is Mahlerian's critique of Karajan's interpretation we are reading! A trifle harsh in my opinion.


Let me rephrase:

That Mahler discography doesn't pull its punches!


----------



## Mahlerian

TxllxT said:


> I like it that musical taste may differ. I know the recordings mentioned above but I keep returning to the heretic maestro. The Abbado-Tennstedt-Szell interpretations didn't leave a scratch on my soul. Bernstein's Mahlers and Haitink's Mahlers are true soul-searchers, but Karajan's wrong-wrong-wrong interpretation spurs me to immerse into Mahler's sixth even more. :tiphat:


It can only take you further away from the work.


----------



## Jeffrey Smith

TxllxT said:


> I like it that musical taste may differ. I know the recordings mentioned above but I keep returning to the heretic maestro. The Abbado-Tennstedt-Szell interpretations didn't leave a scratch on my soul. Bernstein's Mahlers and Haitink's Mahlers are true soul-searchers, but Karajan's wrong-wrong-wrong interpretation spurs me to immerse into Mahler's sixth even more. :tiphat:


It may be wrong wrong wrong....but I think it is one of the best Sixths around.


----------



## DavidA

He


Mahlerian said:


> My favorite Mahler Sixths are Abbado/Berlin and Tennstedt/LPO. Szell/Cleveland and Bernstein/VPO were the first versions of the work I heard, and I still like both, but they've been superseded by the above. Among other recordings I've not cared for I would add Bernstein/NYPO and Gergiev.
> 
> Karajan's Mahler *has the wrong texture, the wrong pacing, and the wrong phrasing throughout,* so it sounds nothing like Mahler's music. Other than that, I suppose it's okay.


Funny the last time I listened to it it sounded like Mahler's music! Writing ng texture? Playing the notes Mahler wrote?


----------



## Mal

DavidA said:


> The sheer nonsense some of these guys talk is breathtaking. What does he mean? As James Galway said: "They mean all the notes are played well and in tune." As someone has said, critics bite and bicker among themselves. I know what I like. I have Szell and Karajan and prefer the Karajan by miles.


The sheer level of umbridge some guys take is amusing. Could you not just say you don't dig Duggen's metaphors and leave it at that? I dig them, I think. I know what I like, and I liked Duggen's review. They might bite and bicker (and disagree!) but if they didn't where would we start?


----------



## Barbebleu

amfortas said:


> Let me rephrase:
> 
> That Mahler discography doesn't pull its punches!


When I said a trifle harsh I was of course referring to Mahlerians critique not your comment. I recognised your comment for what it was given that my French is not up to reading wordy discographies!


----------



## TxllxT

Jeffrey Smith said:


> It may be wrong wrong wrong....but I think it is one of the best Sixths around.


Wrong, wrong, wrong: it reminds me of the very beginning of the sixth...


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> Funny the last time I listened to it it sounded like Mahler's music! Writing ng texture? Playing the notes Mahler wrote?


Then you don't know what Mahler's music sounds like. The notes are there, but they're not used the way they're supposed to. Karajan changes the carefully constructed balances and destroys the sense of many of the lines with his altered phrasing.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> *Then you don't know what Mahler's music sounds like. * The notes are there, but they're not used the way they're supposed to. Karajan changes the carefully constructed balances and destroys the sense of many of the lines with his altered phrasing.


Sorry but you do? You alone have the wisdom on Mahler? You actually heard Mahler conduct and you know there is only one way of doing things - your way? And people who disagree (including Karajan) know nothing? Come on! That's just not true of musical interpretation!


----------



## DavidA

Mal said:


> The sheer level of umbridge some guys take is amusing. Could you not just say you don't dig Duggen's metaphors and leave it at that? I dig them, I think. I know what I like, and I liked Duggen's review. They might bite and bicker (and disagree!) but if they didn't where would we start?


I don't take umbrage over what a critic says about a recording. I just disagree with the critic! Let's face it, they are usually failed musicians anyway!


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> Sorry but you do? You alone have the wisdom on Mahler? You actually heard Mahler conduct and you know there is only one way of doing things - your way? And people who disagree (including Karajan) know nothing? Come on! That's just not true of musical interpretation!


Karajan didn't even like the work in question, and believe me, it shows in the utter shallowness of his interpretation.

I didn't say that there was only one way. Look at the diversity of the versions I chose for proof of that. But Karajan's take is not merely different, it is contrary to the piece. We have the score, for one thing. I own a copy of it, and can see exactly where Karajan ignores Mahler's directions.


----------



## hpowders

I haven't heard Karajan's Mahler 6, but his Mahler 9 is the best I've ever heard. Puts Lenny to shame despite the latter's numerous attempts to achieve maximum schmaltziness.

Reminders list: Divorce wife; cut grass; house train dog; hear Karajan Mahler 6.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> *Karajan didn't even like the work in question,* and believe me, it shows in the utter shallowness of his interpretation.
> 
> I didn't say that there was only one way. Look at the diversity of the versions I chose for proof of that. But Karajan's take is not merely different, it is contrary to the piece. We have the score, for one thing. I own a copy of it, and can see exactly where Karajan ignores Mahler's directions.


I don't know where you got that information from but it's news to me! I'd like to have chapter and verse!


----------



## joen_cph

The most "eccentrically creative" Mahler 6th is undoubtedly Scherchen´s Leipzig recording





I like such an approach, though it wouldn´t be my first choice.


----------



## Mal

I listened to Karajan's 9 a few years ago and liked it, but I just listened to it again and I was surprised at how little I liked it! Having gone through a full cycle with noted Mahlerians like Kubelik #1, Klemperer #2, Szell #4,#6 and Rattle #5 I think they may have put me off Karajan.


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> I don't know where you got that information from but it's news to me! I'd like to have chapter and verse!


He only ever started conducting Mahler when Mahler became popular to conduct, and then he still disparaged the music as sounding banal under lesser conductors. In the case of the Sixth, he was ready to make a cut in the finale, before the recording engineer talked him out of it.

Moreover, like I said, he disregards even the clearest of Mahler's instructions on balance and tempo, building the wrong kind of sound and rushing through the music, ultimately trivializing it.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> He only ever started conducting Mahler when Mahler became popular to conduct, and then he still disparaged the music as sounding banal under lesser conductors. In the case of the Sixth, he was ready to make a cut in the finale, before the recording engineer talked him out of it.
> 
> Moreover, like I said, he disregards even the clearest of Mahler's instructions on balance and tempo, building the wrong kind of sound and rushing through the music, ultimately trivializing it.


I wish you would quote your source for this. Yes, he did have doubts about parts of the work's finale and even contemplated making cuts. However, this doesn't mean he disliked it. The Serafin / Callas Rigoletto has several cuts. Does that mean Callas and Serafin disliked the work? I think not! The point you make is an extrapolation of your own which does not follow from the evidence available. In any case Karajan didn't make the cuts. He admitted that the symphony as a whole touched him deeply at several levels. 
I'm afraid your literalness to the score would rule out many - if not most - conductors. As Stravinsky once told Colin Davis: "The score is just the starting point!"


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> I wish you would quote your source for this. Yes, he did have doubts about parts of the work's finale and even contemplated making cuts. However, this doesn't mean he disliked it. The Serafin / Callas Rigoletto has several cuts. Does that mean Callas and Serafin disliked the work? I think not! In any case Karajan didn't make the cuts. He admitted that the symphony as a whole touched him deeply at several levels.


Rigoletto is not a continuously evolving structure in the way that a symphony is. It is a numbers opera which starts and stops and is divided into many pieces, some more superfluous than others. You can no more make cuts in Mahler's Sixth than you can in Beethoven's Ninth. It changes the meaning and destroys the structural integrity of the work. The Sixth is such a perfectly constructed and interconnected piece that I cannot imagine anyone who wishes to make cuts in it understands it very well.



DavidA said:


> I'm afraid your literalness to the score would rule out many - if not most - conductors.


You realize that I listed several conductors already, right? That not all of them are known for so-called literal interpretations, right? I'm not a literalist, I simply prefer that the integrity of the score be respected; one doesn't have to be a literalist to consider it going against the work when Mahler says "Slow down" and Karajan barrels right on through.

Unlike Tennstedt, unlike Bernstein, unlike Abbado, unlike Boulez, unlike a host of others whose interpretations differ significantly from each other, Karajan's version stands out for its blatant disregard for Mahler's music.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> Rigoletto is not a continuously evolving structure in the way that a symphony is. It is a numbers opera which starts and stops and is divided into many pieces, some more superfluous than others. You can no more make cuts in Mahler's Sixth than you can in Beethoven's Ninth. It changes the meaning and destroys the structural integrity of the work. The Sixth is such a perfectly constructed and interconnected piece that I cannot imagine anyone who wishes to make cuts in it understands it very well.
> 
> You realize that I listed several conductors already, right? That not all of them are known for so-called literal interpretations, right? I'm not a literalist, I simply prefer that the integrity of the score be respected; one doesn't have to be a literalist to consider it going against the work when Mahler says "Slow down" and Karajan barrels right on through.
> 
> Unlike Tennstedt, unlike Bernstein, unlike Abbado, unlike Boulez, unlike a host of others whose interpretations differ significantly from each other, Karajan's version stands out for its blatant disregard for Mahler's music.


The point I made was that just because someone has contemplated cuts it does not lead to the assumption he hates the work. To say Karajan did not like the work is a totally unsupported assumption you made unless you can bring me some evidence.

Int resting what you say about the interpretation. Another review says:

"There seem to be three ways to approach this symphony, the conventional way, with moderate-to-quick tempi, is the most often taken. The best examples of this are the BPO under Herbert von Karajan (1975), the Chicago Symphony under Claudio Abbado (1980) now available at mid-price, the 1966 Stockholm PO/Horenstein (Unicorn - although the orchestra leaves something to be desired)" The Symphonies of Gustav Mahler on Record by Deryk Barker

Or as another comments:

"The big joke is the invidious notion that Karajan was not an interpreter of the music somehow (or an uncomprehending one); that this is Karajan's Mahler 6 rather than the composer's. Urgh. You could just as easily thrust that argument at Bernstein, or Barbirolli, or Tennstedt. Is not Haitink's Mahler 6 Haitink's as well as Mahler's? Karajan, Haitink and Bernstein are all conductors with massive wide-ranging discographies and all are prone to lazy generalisations about their supposed stamp (beauty / emotion / dourness). The truth is never so simple."

But don't let's fall out over it. I like it you don't. Leave it there.


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> The point I made was that just because someone has contemplated cuts it does not lead to the assumption he hates the work. To say Karajan did not like the work is a totally unsupported assumption you made unless you can bring me some evidence.


Okay, maybe he did love the work. For the life of me I can't imagine his recording would have been much worse if he had abhorred it.



DavidA said:


> "There seem to be three ways to approach this symphony, the conventional way, with moderate-to-quick tempi, is the most often taken. The best examples of this are the BPO under Herbert von Karajan (1975), the Chicago Symphony under Claudio Abbado (1980) now available at mid-price, the 1966 Stockholm PO/Horenstein (Unicorn - although the orchestra leaves something to be desired)" The Symphonies of Gustav Mahler on Record by Deryk Barker


This is probably referring to macro tempi, as reflected in the overall length of the movements, rather than the inflections I was referring to.



DavidA said:


> Or as another comments:
> 
> "The big joke is the invidious notion that Karajan was not an interpreter of the music somehow (or an uncomprehending one); that this is Karajan's Mahler 6 rather than the composer's. Urgh. You could just as easily thrust that argument at Bernstein, or Barbirolli, or Tennstedt. Is not Haitink's Mahler 6 Haitink's as well as Mahler's? Karajan, Haitink and Bernstein are all conductors with massive wide-ranging discographies and all are prone to lazy generalisations about their supposed stamp (beauty / emotion / dourness). The truth is never so simple."
> 
> But don't let's fall out over it. I like it you don't. Leave it there.


I have not applied any generalizations that "because it's Karajan it must be X," and I would be happy to point to specific instances of what I'm talking about. I don't dislike Karajan in everything. He did some fine recordings of Bruckner, Schoenberg, and Beethoven amongst others.


----------



## KirbyH

Mahlerian said:


> My favorite Mahler Sixths are Abbado/Berlin and Tennstedt/LPO. Szell/Cleveland and Bernstein/VPO were the first versions of the work I heard, and I still like both, but they've been superseded by the above. Among other recordings I've not cared for I would add Bernstein/NYPO and Gergiev.
> 
> Karajan's Mahler has the wrong texture, the wrong pacing, and the wrong phrasing throughout, so it sounds nothing like Mahler's music. Other than that, I suppose it's okay.


Ditto to the Abbado/Berlin set - I heard both that and the aforementioned Karajan around the same time. I couldn't bring myself to get through the rest of it, whereas I've listened to Abbado so much the disc is worn out.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> Okay, maybe he did love the work. For the life of me I can't imagine his recording would have been much worse if he had abhorred it.
> 
> This is probably referring to macro tempi, as reflected in the overall length of the movements, rather than the inflections I was referring to.
> 
> I have not applied any generalizations that "because it's Karajan it must be X," and I would be happy to point to specific instances of what I'm talking about. I don't dislike Karajan in everything. He did some fine recordings of Bruckner, Schoenberg, and Beethoven amongst others.


Just your opinion. Others feel differently. In any case what conductors are slaves to the store? Even Toscanini, for all his roaring, took liberties with the score. Beecham laughed at score crazy musicologists. Why are there so many differing interpretations if there is only one meaning to the score?


----------



## DavidA

KirbyH said:


> Ditto to the Abbado/Berlin set - I heard both that and the aforementioned Karajan around the same time. I couldn't bring myself to get through the rest of it, whereas I've listened to Abbado so much the disc is worn out.


Your preferences. I'd get a new disc player btw


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> Just your opinion. Others feel differently. In any case what conductors are slaves to the store? Even Toscanini, for all his roaring, took liberties with the score. Beecham laughed at score crazy musicologists. Why are there so many differing interpretations if there is only one meaning to the score?


If you had read what I said, you would have noted that I am not assigning one meaning to the score, which admits an infinite number of valid interpretations. Mahler would not have wanted a "literal" interpretation of his work, which is why there is so much leeway despite his multitude of instructions.

Karajan goes beyond that to ignore what the score says, and all to the detriment of the work. It no longer sounds like the same music in many places.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> If you had read what I said, you would have noted that I am not assigning one meaning to the score, which admits an infinite number of valid interpretations. Mahler would not have wanted a "literal" interpretation of his work, which is why there is so much leeway despite his multitude of instructions.
> 
> *Karajan goes beyond that to ignore what the score says, and all to the detriment of the work*. It no longer sounds like the same music in many places.


I did read what you said and that was the impression you gave.

In your opinion.


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> I did read what you said and that was the impression you gave.
> 
> In your opinion.


It's not that he ignores the score _in my opinion_, but that _as a matter of fact_, he tramples over the score, and my opinion is that that's not a good thing.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> It's not that he ignores the score _in my opinion_, but that _as a matter of fact_, he tramples over the score, and my opinion is that that's not a good thing.


In your opinion. Others see it differently eg

http://www.mahlerreviews.com/mahler_6_karajan_berlinphilharmonic_dg.html


----------



## TxllxT

KirbyH said:


> Ditto to the Abbado/Berlin set - I heard both that and the aforementioned Karajan around the same time. I couldn't bring myself to get through the rest of it, whereas I've listened to Abbado so much the disc is worn out.


Abbado is one of the best conductors when it comes to relaying the music, while von Karajan is one of the best when it comes to relaying the music *and* the message, the meta-music. Now with regard to Mahler's music, what is more important: the music (musical notes) or the message inside/behind/above  meta) the music. My Mahler is more present in the message, and that's what I admire in von Karajan's interpretation of Mahler's sixth symphony.


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> In your opinion. Others see it differently eg
> 
> http://www.mahlerreviews.com/mahler_6_karajan_berlinphilharmonic_dg.html


Well, he's a reviewer who sees Boulez's Mahler 6 as perverse, when it's actually far truer to the work than Karajan's.



TxllxT said:


> Abbado is one of the best conductors when it comes to relaying the music, while von Karajan is one of the best when it comes to relaying the music *and* the message, the meta-music. Now with regard to Mahler's music, what is more important: the music (musical notes) or the message inside/behind/above  meta) the music. My Mahler is more present in the message, and that's what I admire in von Karajan's interpretation of Mahler's sixth symphony.


I get nothing of Mahler, music or message (whatever you may mean by that), from Karajan's version. It sounds perfunctory and slipshod.


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> Well, he's a reviewer who sees Boulez's Mahler 6 as perverse, when it's actually far truer to the work than Karajan's.
> 
> I get nothing of Mahler, music or message (whatever you may mean by that), from Karajan's version. It sounds perfunctory and slipshod.


The word is opinion! People's opinions differ!

Like part of a review on the Boulez Mahler 6

The Sixth is the only Mahler symphony with a subtitle carrying an emotive adjective, in this case "Tragic". As you would expect, Boulez eschews the tragedy, but as I would not have expected, such a narrow emotional breadth makes it sound a bit hollow. The notes are all there, and the Vienna Philharmonic as per usual plays splendidly, but there's a certain strange vacuum to the expressive facet of this "dark night of the soul" of the Mahler symphonies that is most disconcerting, a much more obvious feeling than Boulez's other Mahler recordings. It's not boring, far from that, but it is neutral, and unwaveringly so: I find the finale completely flat.

Different people different opinions.


----------



## Zarathustra

hpowders said:


> I haven't heard Karajan's Mahler 6, but his Mahler 9 is the best I've ever heard. Puts Lenny to shame despite the latter's numerous attempts to achieve maximum schmaltziness.
> 
> Reminders list: Divorce wife; cut grass; house train dog; hear Karajan Mahler 6.


I agree with Mahlerian that Karajan is not idiomatic when it comes to Mahler but I too am intrigued and will try to listen to this.


----------



## realdealblues

I love Karajan and I love Mahler. I find Karajan's Mahler 5th to be a truly fine account as well as both of his recordings of the 9th, and while I have often disagreed with Mahlerian on interpretations of Mahler I agree with him on Karajan's 6th in that there are many details and instructions that aren't followed in the score and it's more so than in many other recordings.

The 6th is probably my favorite Symphony and I shudder to even think of how many recordings I have of it. I wouldn't put Karajan's in the top tier. I don't find it as unlistenable as Mahlerian does...lol. I can still enjoy the Berlin sound and I will still listen to what Karajan has to say about the work, however it's very true that it doesn't respect a lot of Mahler's directions. 

Since Mahler was both Conductor and Composer he left us far more notes and specific directions than say Beethoven did upon how his works should be performed, and in keeping with his spirit and intentions I would put Karajan's take on the 6th further away than many other recordings that would be more in line with what Mahler wished.


----------



## Becca

realdealblues said:


> Since Mahler was both Conductor and Composer he left us far more notes and specific directions than say Beethoven did upon how his works should be performed, and in keeping with his spirit and intentions I would put Karajan's take on the 6th further away than many other recordings that would be more in line with what Mahler wished.


And just as importantly, there were two major conductors who knew and worked with Mahler and who left us a recorded legacy. And that raises the question, are there recordings of the 6th by either Klemperer or Walter?


----------



## Jeffrey Smith

Becca said:


> And just as importantly, there were two major conductors who knew and worked with Mahler and who left us a recorded legacy. And that raises the question, are there recordings of the 6th by either Klemperer or Walter?


A trawl through Amazon shows a ton of Resurrections, Lieds von der Erde, Ninths, Fourths, Sevenths....but no Sixth from either.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

Jeffrey Smith said:


> A trawl through Amazon shows a ton of Resurrections, Lieds von der Erde, Ninths, Fourths, Sevenths....but no Sixth from either.


I have a large Mahler collection, with the 6th a particular favourite, but none of them a Klemperer. Did he have an aversion to the symphony for some reason? Given that we're talking about Mahler's 6th, that would perhaps not be surprising. All that aside, I'd never noticed that I didn't have a "Klemperer 6th" before... and now I'd really like to hear it!


----------



## Mahlerian

Becca said:


> And just as importantly, there were two major conductors who knew and worked with Mahler and who left us a recorded legacy. And that raises the question, are there recordings of the 6th by either Klemperer or Walter?


Walter disliked the work, ostensibly because of the second theme in the first movement, and never conducted it even once.

I don't know about Klemperer's opinion of it.


----------



## joen_cph

Becca said:


> And just as importantly, there were two major conductors who knew and worked with Mahler and who left us a recorded legacy. And that raises the question, are there recordings of the 6th by either Klemperer or Walter?


No, but there have been (so far non-documented) rumours of a forgotten Klemperer 6th in the archives of the Hungarian radio, meaning relatively early Klemperer.

Neither is there one by Mengelberg.

But there is one by F.C. Adler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Charles_Adler


----------



## damianjb1

Mahlerian said:


> http://gustavmahler.net.free.fr/symph6.html
> 
> The Gustav Mahler discography says that this travesty and utter misrepresentation of the composer's wishes was recorded in two groups of sessions, January and February 1975 followed by February and March 1977.


I know we're specifically talking about Mahler's 6th but I was wondering if you could give me suggestions for recordings of Mahler's other symphonies? I've just started getting into Mahler (it's a great journey of discovery). I've so far bought Klemperer's 2nd (I bought it very cheap but it's pretty good). I've read that Tennstedt's 2nd is also superb so I'm going to buy that. Based on your comments I'm also planning to buy Abbado's Berlin 6th. My local orchestra are doing the 4th and Das Lied von der Erde in the middle of the year so I'll be after recordings of those two works next. Suggestions would be very welcome.


----------



## Mahlerian

damianjb1 said:


> I know we're specifically talking about Mahler's 6th but I was wondering if you could give me suggestions for recordings of Mahler's other symphonies? I've just started getting into Mahler (it's a great journey of discovery). I've so far bought Klemperer's 2nd (I bought it very cheap but it's pretty good). I've read that Tennstedt's 2nd is also superb so I'm going to buy that. Based on your comments I'm also planning to buy Abbado's Berlin 6th. My local orchestra are doing the 4th and Das Lied von der Erde in the middle of the year so I'll be after recordings of those two works next. Suggestions would be very welcome.


I've loved Tennstedt's Fourth with the London Philharmonic and Lucia Popp for a long time, but Rattle did a fine account in Berlin as well which, unfortunately, is not on CD.

For Das Lied, Haitink with Janet Baker and James King is a good bet, although many here love the Kubelik with Baker as well. Klemperer and Reiner have fine soloists, but the former sags and the latter is unidiomatic. I don't like Boulez here, either; his soloists are not nearly as good as most other accounts I know.


----------



## DavidA

Interview with Riccardo Chailly where he talks about Karajan and also praises his Mahler! The Karajan bit starts at 10'48'






He called Karajan's Mahler 6 'phenomenal'!


----------



## Barbebleu

damianjb1 said:


> I know we're specifically talking about Mahler's 6th but I was wondering if you could give me suggestions for recordings of Mahler's other symphonies? I've just started getting into Mahler (it's a great journey of discovery). I've so far bought Klemperer's 2nd (I bought it very cheap but it's pretty good). I've read that Tennstedt's 2nd is also superb so I'm going to buy that. Based on your comments I'm also planning to buy Abbado's Berlin 6th. My local orchestra are doing the 4th and Das Lied von der Erde in the middle of the year so I'll be after recordings of those two works next. Suggestions would be very welcome.


Das Lied with Klemperer, Wunderlich and Ludwig has always appealed to me, personally. The tempi are a bit on the leisurely side for some but they give Wunderlich a chance to really shine on his sections. Ludwig is excellent as usual.


----------



## hpowders

I have the Szell/Cleveland CDs of Mahler's 6th and the best thing I can say about it is it is accompanied by a very fine Mahler 10th (first two original movements).


----------



## Pugg

hpowders said:


> I have the Szell/Cleveland CDs of Mahler's 6th and the best thing I can say about it is it is accompanied by a very fine Mahler 10th (first two original movements).


So, you don't know the Karajan recording et all?


----------



## Konsgaard

Mahlerian said:


> Yes, it is my own description. Harsh, perhaps, but certainly not undeserved, in my opinion.


Really??? God knows how many Mahler 6th CDs I own, still Karajan remains among the top!!! Amazing performance!


----------



## Konsgaard

Everytime I listen to Karajan's Mahler I think this IS what Mahler intended. Just the right textures, colors, phrasing. I find Karajan's 5th, 6th and 9th really great. 

Having said that, it all depends on how you like your Mahler. If you want an objective, close to the score approach then Boulez or Abbado/BPO would do fine. I own both of these but rarely listen to them. I like my Mahler full of drama, passion and explosive climaxes, at the same time I like the orchestral playing to be precise. Difficult combination of elements? No, Bernstein or Karajan seem to get all these just fine. It's funny how contemporary critics tend to prefer the most uninvolved performances nowadays, it is a new kind of trend which, to be honest I feel will fade away in the future.


----------



## Becca

Sir John Barbirolli, definitely a Mahlerian of the more emotive style, kept this quote from Bertrand Russell amongst his papers "Nothing great is achieved without passion, but underneath the passion there should always be that large impersonal survey which sets limits to actions that our passions inspire." I think that sums up my own view of Mahler, the more objective style of Boulez et.al. doesn't work very well, but neither does Bernstein's heart-on-sleeve approach.

I find it mildly amusing to realize that, while HvK built a reputation for his Mahler with the Berlin Philharmonic, it was Barbirolli who brought Mahler back to the BPO In the early 1960s (see his '63 Mahler 9th with them.)


----------



## Pugg

Konsgaard said:


> Everytime I listen to Karajan's Mahler I think this IS what Mahler intended. Just the right textures, colors, phrasing. I find Karajan's 5th, 6th and 9th really great.
> 
> Having said that, it all depends on how you like your Mahler. If you want an objective, close to the score approach then Boulez or Abbado/BPO would do fine. I own both of these but rarely listen to them. I like my Mahler full of drama, passion and explosive climaxes, at the same time I like the orchestral playing to be precise. Difficult combination of elements? No, Bernstein or Karajan seem to get all these just fine. It's funny how contemporary critics tend to prefer the most uninvolved performances nowadays, it is a new kind of trend which, to be honest I feel will fade away in the future.


I whole heartedly agree with you :tiphat:


----------



## Mahlerian

Konsgaard said:


> Everytime I listen to Karajan's Mahler I think this IS what Mahler intended. Just the right textures, colors, phrasing. I find Karajan's 5th, 6th and 9th really great.


Then you don't know what Mahler intended. He obviously didn't intend for his carefully-considered instructions to be directly contradicted.



Konsgaard said:


> Having said that, it all depends on how you like your Mahler. If you want an objective, close to the score approach then Boulez or Abbado/BPO would do fine. I own both of these but rarely listen to them. I like my Mahler full of drama, passion and explosive climaxes, at the same time I like the orchestral playing to be precise. Difficult combination of elements? No, Bernstein or Karajan seem to get all these just fine. It's funny how contemporary critics tend to prefer the most uninvolved performances nowadays, it is a new kind of trend which, to be honest I feel will fade away in the future.


Karajan's Mahler to me seems characterized, not by emotional power, but by an utter lack of the emotion that's in the score. His readings are perfunctory and shallow. Boulez and Abbado, conversely, get into the depths of the score and by so doing find its emotional core.

And your neat categorization ignores the fact that my favorite Mahler conductor is Tennstedt and I greatly enjoy Bernstein's interpretations as well. Karajan's Mahler, on the other hand, is abhorrent to me.


----------



## Fugue Meister

DavidA said:


> The word is opinion! People's opinions differ!
> 
> Like part of a review on the Boulez Mahler 6
> 
> The Sixth is the only Mahler symphony with a subtitle carrying an emotive adjective, in this case "Tragic". As you would expect, Boulez eschews the tragedy, but as I would not have expected, such a narrow emotional breadth makes it sound a bit hollow. The notes are all there, and the Vienna Philharmonic as per usual plays splendidly, but there's a certain strange vacuum to the expressive facet of this "dark night of the soul" of the Mahler symphonies that is most disconcerting, a much more obvious feeling than Boulez's other Mahler recordings. It's not boring, far from that, but it is neutral, and unwaveringly so: I find the finale completely flat.
> 
> Different people different opinions.


Just as I'm sure you'll agree that there were many composers and some are better than others, like Mozart... There are also many opinions and some are better than others, on this particular matter I feel there are better opinions in the mix than some who just like what they like with no consideration for the composer's wishes. The Karajan version is no where near as competent as Abbado or Bernstein, an better opinion shared by many.

Now some may say "yes but there are others who don't share that opinion and like this.." sure, but is it the right one? Have a look at the score sometime and I think you may have a change of perspective.


----------



## Guest

Right or wrong and how many roads are there to Rome?
http://www.mahlerreviews.com/mahler_6_karajan_berlinphilharmonic_dg.html


----------



## Fugue Meister

traverso said:


> Right or wrong and how many roads are there to Rome?
> http://www.mahlerreviews.com/mahler_6_karajan_berlinphilharmonic_dg.html


Yet another "opinion" heard from. Lesser though in mine.


----------



## Mahlerian

traverso said:


> Right or wrong and how many roads are there to Rome?
> http://www.mahlerreviews.com/mahler_6_karajan_berlinphilharmonic_dg.html


How can one call a reading "objective" if it ignores the composer's directions? That is an abuse of terminology. If Mahler says "slow down" and Karajan speeds up or maintains the tempo (this actually happens), it's not "objective," but a subjective imposition on the work.


----------



## bigshot

I generally don't like "objective" conducting. If the conductor can't add anything to the mix, all I need is one recording that hits all the marks.


----------



## Guest

Watching Karajan give a 'masterclass' on how to conduct LvB's 5th Symphony, I wonder that the poor acolyte came away with any better idea of what he should be doing. Rehearsing the opening of the 2nd mvmt, he was told to remember that when a sculptor begins his work, he first goes to the quarry and gets his block of marble...later, that the bar lines - "the curse of our music" - are to be ignored. And if the strings could only stop their bowing action, there wouldn't be accents in all the wrong places.

I don't doubt that he was doing for the benefit of TV, something only approximating to what conductors do - decide how they want the music to be played and work with the orchestra to shape it how they want. Yet he seemed to be imposing his idea on top of LvB's score, not working with it, as if he has own block of marble and there's a 5th symphony somewhere inside it.


----------



## bigshot

It seems that in those three things he is talking about the sound of the orchestra, not the music itself. I haven't heard that particular master class, but it seems he is looking for a seamless flow for the phrasing to create a whole, rather than building it up from separate pieces, which seems to me to be pretty good advice overall, particularly with Beethoven which when done wrong can be choppy and staccato sounding.


----------



## Adamus

bigshot said:


> I generally don't like "objective" conducting. If the conductor can't add anything to the mix, all I need is one recording that hits all the marks.


in the end it's about musicality.


----------



## bisque

First timer here, although I've been lurking for a couple of months. Google told me there was a rousing discussion of Von Karajan's Mahler sixth. Well, fascinating reading, folks, truly. The sixth is my favorite Mahler and I've gone through many, many versions over the years. One year I'll like one version best, then next year I'll like another version best - and so it goes. 

But here's the thing - I never have and never will listen to music with my eyes, i.e. follow a score, noting every marking. The notion that a conductor is not supposed to veer from a marking the composer made is, of course, silly. Playwrights include all kinds of pauses, laughter, stage directions, looks, in their plays, but smart directors and actors ignore them because they are interpreters of the plays, not slaves to what was in the playwrights head. That's creativity. Same thing with film scripts, etc. I've heard so many versions of this symphony and some get to me and some don't. That's music for you - that's performance for you - that's sound for you - most importantly, that's OPINION for you. So, when I read all these absolutes I just have to chuckle. Mahlerian hates this recording of Von Karajan's, while some others love this recording of Von Karajan's. I've been on a new Mahler kick for the last few months (this happens every five years or so - it's like an addiction). 

I recently got the Kubelik set, having become fond of Kubelik in the last year - he wasn't really on my radar before then. I enjoyed it very much, the entire set. I also got Kondrashin's Melodiya set - that's one of the wackiest sets there is, and yet I still found enjoyment in some of it. His sixth in particular is rather insane - his overall performance is something like fifteen minutes faster than any other. The third movement is faster and yet I still found it moving, but that movement kills me anyway. And several days ago I got the Boulez box. I'm not quite through it, but I liked his sixth, which critics didn't seem to cotton to - at least some of them - some, of course did cotton to it - and so it goes. In fact the only thing that bugged me was how buried the cowbells were at the big emotional moment towards the end of the slow movement. He's also very slow at the top of the first movement, but so are the conductors - I find there's no in-between on this - it's either slow or quick. What you get with the Boulez set and this symphony is wonderful orchestral clarity and detail and great sound. 

I enjoy the Barbirolli sixth, but it's never been my favorite. I haven't really liked Rattle, Inbal, Kaplan - those performances just don't get to me - for others they do. Funny how that works. So, as I'm writing this, I just happen to be playing the Von Karajan. Sound is excellent (I have the newer "Originals" pressing), and while some of it is, how shall I say, a little "emphatic" at times, I like it very much. But here's the thing: I'd love to sit people down and do a blind listening test - they wouldn't be allowed to listen to any Mahler for six months, then they'd sit and I'd play various versions and they'd tell me which they liked best and why. I think it would be amusing in certain ways. 

Sorry for such a long post, but it's my first so why not?


----------



## bisque

BTW, is there a way to edit posts? Further BTW - Von Karajan's slow movement is one of my all-time favorites - perfect balances and oh those cowbells have wonderful clarity.


----------



## Larkenfield

science said:


> Does anyone know the date of the recording?


Apologies to those who happen to like this performance... I don't know exactly when this monstrosity was recorded, though I believe it was somewhere in the mid 1970s, and I found the performance an absolute nightmare, full of inappropriate and obscenely loud passages and climaxes, the wrong emphasis on just about every phrase imaginable, as if HVK secretly loathed the symphony and wanted to distort or destroy Mahler's intentions.

I generally don't react this strongly to anything, but I made an exception here... His performance of the 5th Symphony is just about as bad a distortion for similar reasons, IMO. I have a large Mahler collection and these two performances I consider extremely contrary to the spirit and natural idiom of the composer, so much a misrepresentation that I threw them both out the window in disgust after not being able to get through a complete performance of either one -- and I tried. Later on, von Karajan must have gained some respect and understanding, because his performance of the 9th was better and at least acceptable.

My two favorite performances of the 6th are by George Szell and Pierre Boulez but not without placing the Andante before the Scherzo as Mahler played the 6th publicly in his lifetime, never went back to the reverse order, and as he instructed his publisher before he died. Most likely there would have been no controversy about the order had it not been for Alma Mahler's meddling years after the fact and certain dubious scholars and musicologists being swayed by her personal charm... Once again, apologies for my unflattering remarks on this recording for those who happen to like it.

:angel:


----------



## Becca

bisque said:


> BTW, is there a way to edit posts? Further BTW - Von Karajan's slow movement is one of my all-time favorites - perfect balances and oh those cowbells have wonderful clarity.


For some bizarre reasons you have to have made a certain number of posts before you are allowed to edit them!


----------



## Pugg

> Apologies to those who like this performance


Apologies accepted, your opinion is as much worth as any others, I love this recording.


----------



## bisque

Thanks Becca. Oh, and apparently you can't just write "Thanks Becca" - too short. I don't get it.


----------



## bisque

Larkenfield said:


> Apologies to those who like this performance. I don't know exactly when this monstrosity was recorded, though I believe it was sometime in the 1970s, but I found the performance an absolute nightmare, full of obscenely loud passages and climaxes, the wrong emphasis on just about every phrase imaginable, as if HVK secretly loathed the Symphony and wanted to distort or destroy Mahler's intentions.
> 
> I generally don't react this strongly to anything, but I made an exception here... His performance of the 5th Symphony is just as bad a distortion for similar reasons, IMO. I have a large Mahler collection and these two performances I consider extremely contrary to the intentions and natural idiom of the composer, so much a misrepresentation that I threw them both out the window in disgust after not being able to get through a complete performance of either one -- and I tried. Later on, von Karajan must have gained some respect and understanding, because his performance of the 9th was better and at least acceptable.
> 
> My two favorite performances of the 6th are by George Szell and Pierre Boulez but not without placing the Andante before the Scherzo as Mahler played the 6th publicly in his lifetime, never went back to the reverse order, and as he instructed his publisher before he died. Most likely there would have been no controversy about the order had it not been for Alma Mahler's meddling years after the fact and certain dubious scholars and musicologists being swayed by her personal charm. But again, apologies to those who still happen to like this recording.
> 
> :angel:


While I'm not completely in love with the Von Karajan, I like it fine. I would like the Szell more but the sound is so horrible I just can't get past it. I've just played the Boulez, which I thought had nice things in it, too, but burying the cowbells is a deal breaker for me. I'm going to go back and start listening to all the other sixths I have, starting with the Barbirolli, which I certainly remember enjoying. For those who HATE this performance with such breathtaking passion, I recommend you listen to the Kondrashin on Melodiya - it will give you a heart attack


----------



## Pugg

bisque said:


> Thanks Becca. Oh, and apparently you can't just write "Thanks Becca" - too short. I don't get it.


You have to use 15 character or more, it's all in the read the rules topic when signing up.


----------



## bisque

Yes, just reading through these myriad "rules" - I've had a discussion board of my own elsewhere (nothing to do with classical music), and we never had these kinds of rules, but, I'll just rack up the requisite posts and time passed and I guess then I get to be a real human being


----------



## DonCarlos78

The greatest Mahler 6 I have now heard are Currentzis & Barbirolli. Szell does nothing for me if I'm honest. Prefer him for other things. Karajan 6 is an epic movie interpretation and one that doesn't conform at any stage. I love that it ruffles feathers in the Mahler circles.


----------



## Larkenfield

DonCarlos78 said:


> The greatest Mahler 6 I have now heard are Currentzis & Barbirolli. Szell does nothing for me if I'm honest. Prefer him for other things. Karajan 6 is an epic movie interpretation and one that doesn't conform at any stage. I love that it ruffles feathers in the Mahler circles.


 That's right. Herbert von Karajan's Six is an epic movie of a symphony that was never intended to be epic in that mischaracterized way, and that's why Barbirolli's performance is a corrective to such a gross misinterpretation. HvK never should have recorded it because he was not ready and did not understand the composer enough to bring out the right amount of the intensity and power and subtleties in the right places of this great symphony, nor did he play the middle two moments according to Mahler's revised score unlike Barbirolli's great performance that represents the true spirit of the composer. I would also take Szell's live recording over Karajan's any day of the week. It's a tremendous recording, one of the best, as was Szell's recording of the Mahler 4th that's virtually perfect and idiomatic. Karajan played the Mahler 5th and 6th in the Bruckner idiom with exceedingly loud and bombastic climaxes like looking through the wrong end of a telescope. Naughty, naughty.


----------



## Becca

FWIW, Barbirolli did want the order to be A/S but the recording producer changed it to S/A ... Barbirolli was not pleased! There is a performance of the 6th done at the Proms a few days prior to the recording with the correct ordering.


----------



## flamencosketches

edit: post removed for having nothing to do with Karajan. thought I was posting in the general Mahler 6 thread.


----------

