# How many symphonies did Mahler write?



## pianoville

This is a topic which I think is pretty interesting. Some say that Das Lied von der Erde is Mahler's 9th symphony, some say it's not. Some people think he wrote 11 symphonies (DLvdE and 10th), while some don't think Das Lied or the various completions of the 10th count as Mahler symphonies. What do you think about this?


----------



## hpowders

If it looks like a song cycle; sounds like a song cycle and walks like a song cycle...it's a song cycle...which is what Das Lied is.

His Symphony 10 was left incomplete, but I thank Mahler for making sure that what he did leave behind for his 10th, included his greatest adagio. Simply extraordinary!

Therefore he wrote 9 complete symphonies.


----------



## joen_cph

But there seems to have been at least one earlier symphony too, making the total ~12, in a-minor (1882-83), cf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Gustav_Mahler

Maybe two, if that symphony wasn´t a rejected, further Conservatory Symphony

https://books.google.dk/books?id=Ww...epage&q=mahler sinfonie hellmesberger&f=false
https://books.google.dk/books?id=5U... early student symphony hellmesberger&f=false
https://books.google.dk/books?id=_h... early student symphony hellmesberger&f=false


----------



## KenOC

hpowders said:


> If it looks like a song cycle; sounds like a song cycle and walks like a song cycle...it's a song cycle...which is what Das Lied is.


Herr Mahler begs to differ.










IMSLP, who counts 11 Mahler symphonies, differs as well.


----------



## Triplets

hpowders said:


> If it looks like a song cycle; sounds like a song cycle and walks like a song cycle...it's a song cycle...which is what Das Lied is.
> 
> His Symphony 10 was left incomplete, but I thank Mahler for making sure that what he did leave behind for his 10th, included his greatest adagio. Simply extraordinary!
> 
> Therefore he wrote 9 complete symphonies.


I see your point, but Shostakovich, a true Mahler disciple wrote two Song Cycles that he labeled Symphonies-Babi Yar and his 14th Symphony, both of which seem to me to be the offspring of Mahler's Das Lied.
In the end, does it matter what we call Das Lied? It's an incredibly beautiful piece of art.
The Tenth is a whole separate ball of wax. It's form is clearly Symphonic. The debate is over how much Mahler it contains.


----------



## MarkW

How many you got?


----------



## Merl

9 complete, 1 unfinished. DLVE is a song cycle and I've never cared for it much, anyway (contentious!).


----------



## DavidA

Mahler actually completed 9

He left one incomplete which has been completed by others in various versions.

Das Lied us a song cycle. 

Hence the answer is 9


----------



## Larkenfield

Leonard Bernstein often referred to Mahler's _Das Lied von der Erde_ as a "symphony". So it might be argued that there were 11 in all, even if the composer was unable to fully orchestrate and revised his 10th from his piano score, though two movements had been orchestrated. Nevertheless, the official count is usually considered as 9 because Mahler did not include _Erde_ as a symphony and his 10th was never officially completed by him.


----------



## techniquest

Nine and a half. :lol:


----------



## SixFootScowl

9.5 to 10.5 depending. Oh lets just average it out and say 10.


----------



## Granate

I have to disagree with all of you apparently.


DLVDE is a symphony that Mahler avoided to call 9 because he was afraid of the "curse of the 9th".
Mahler completed the score of the 9th so it was able to be performed, but never got to brush up the score with rehearsals. 
Mahler only completed the Adagio of the 10th and left many spare scores of the rest of the Movements. Cooke completed most of the symphony to the point it cannot be understood as a Mahler symphony by itself. There wasn't enough material unlike the Bruckner 9th finale.
That's why I vote for 10.

However, if you ask me why I haven't counted DLVDE in my Mahler symphony challenges, it's because I cannot find a single recording that beats Klemperer.


----------



## mbhaub

11. No Question! Mahler titled DLVDE as a "Symphonie" as KenOC proves. The 10th: Cooke points out in his notes to the score that the entire symphony - start to finish - is there, often threadbare to be sure. The music thought is complete, though. He only had to add supporting harmony, some counterpoint, and of course the orchestration. In any case, Mahler finished two movements - and we give Schubert credit for his 8th and that's all he finished - two movements. What's amazing about the Mahler is that no matter which of the many completions you hear, they all sound like Mahler. The material is so strong.


To be really accurate, Mahler didn't really complete the Adagio. There were lots of pages with many blank staves, especially in the winds. Zemlinsky and others filled it in to make it performable.


There are many works that someone completed for another composer and we don' quibble about it: Puccini's Turandot, Bartok's 3rd piano concerto for example. Others are more tainted because the person doing the completion had so much to do with so little to go on: Elgar's 3rd symphony, Tchaikovsky's 7th symphony and 3rd piano concerto, Mozart's Requiem. Completing the Mahler was no small task (just reading his manuscript is a monumental chore) but at least the musical thread is there all the way to the end.

I also prefer the Bruckner 9th in a completed form. A lot of the finale is Bruckner's own work. It's the ending that's the problem, with few sketches to go on. I have several of them, and I've played Carragan's third version. Admittedly none of them are what Bruckner would have written, and some don't exactly sound like Bruckner, but they're all thrilling. So Bruckner wrote 11, too!


I'm rambling. So, we have the symphonies 1 - 9. DLVDE is clearly a symphony by Mahler's own title; that's 10. And the 
"10th" is acceptable to me as a symphony by Mahler; that's 11.


----------



## elgar's ghost

As far as I'm concerned _Das Lied von der Erde_ is more of a symphony than the 8th but whatever Mahler's designation the point as to whether DLvdE is a symphony or not will always be something of a moot one. For what it's worth, I go for nine numbered symphonies, one unnumbered and a numbered one unfinished.


----------



## Enthusiast

DLVDE is a symphony in all but name. It doesn't matter at all that it is also a song cycle. There are many song cycle symphonies - Britten's Spring Symphony, Shostakovich 14 (and 13 really) - and even if these came after DLVDE they demonstrate the way the word symphony is used these days.

He didn't write his Symphony No. 10 .. he merely started it and what he left was not enough to count as a symphony in the same way that Schubert's Unfinished does.


----------



## Triplets

Listened to a couple of recordings of Das Lied this weekend. If we don’t consider it a Symphony, should it be considered a song cycle, such as Kindertotenlieder or the Wayfarer Songs?


----------



## Jacob Brooks

He wrote 8 symphonies. Neither "Symphony 8" nor Das Lied von der Erde are true symphonies, but what you have been led to believe are symphonies rather than an oratorio/song cycle by the classical music establishment.


----------



## joen_cph

Jacob Brooks said:


> He wrote 8 symphonies. Neither "Symphony 8" nor Das Lied von der Erde are true symphonies, but what you have been led to believe are symphonies rather than an oratorio/song cycle by the classical music establishment.


He repeatedly called it his 8th symphony himself, many times, and on the poster of the premiere it is called a symphony too. The symphonic form has been a field of experiments for centuries.

http://www.haenchen.net/fileadmin/media/pdf/mahler_band10.pdf
http://www.la-belle-epoque.de/mahler/mahler8.jpg


----------



## DavidA

Actually with Mahler the crossover from symphony to cantata in some of his works is pretty fluid. Best to call them what Mahler himself did. He wrote 9 symphonies with one unfinished


----------



## KenOC

Mahler, of course, called _Das Liede_ a symphony.


----------



## Woodduck

The term "symphony," along with its adjectival form "symphonic," underwent so much evolution between the Baroque ("sinfonia") and the modern period that almost any work for orchestra, with or without vocal parts, can be called a symphony, and even operas of the through-composed variety have been called "symphonic." Still, as far as I'm concerned, Mahler's 8th is basically an oratorio, since most of it is sung, and _Das Lied von der Erde_ is unambiguously a song cycle, for the most obvious of reasons. I use the same criterion here as I do in debating whether 4'33" is music: what term is most useful to the understanding? If you tell someone they're about to hear a symphony, do they expect a setting of poetry that's sung throughout? The mere fact that we're having the debate throws suspicion on the use of the term "symphony."

Mahler definitely wrote 8 symphonies, and then two large-scale works to which it pleased him to attach the name.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Woodduck said:


> The term "symphony," along with its adjectival form "symphonic," underwent so much evolution between the Baroque ("sinfonia") and the modern period that almost any work for orchestra, with or without vocal parts, can be called a symphony, and even operas of the through-composed variety have been called "symphonic." Still, as far as I'm concerned, Mahler's 8th is basically an oratorio, since most of it is sung, and _Das Lied von der Erde_ is unambiguously a song cycle, for the most obvious of reasons. I use the same criterion here as I do in debating whether 4'33" is music: what term is most useful to the understanding? If you tell someone they're about to hear a symphony, do they expect a setting of poetry that's sung throughout? The mere fact that we're having the debate throws suspicion on the use of the term "symphony."
> 
> Mahler definitely wrote 8 symphonies, and then two large-scale works to which it pleased him to attach the name.


I like it and now I can delete Mahler 8 from my player and focus on 1-7 and 9. You know, it was much easier, for some reason, for me to toss Mendelssohn's 2nd out of his symphonic cycle and it has a similar situation as Mahler's 8th.


----------



## vesteel

more than 11. We already found sketches of an unknown scherzo dating from his early years, and there are reports of a rejected symphony during his conservatory years and possibly more symphonies from a destroyed archive in Dresden


----------



## elgar's ghost

Perhaps, then, the question should be how many _acknowledged_ symphonies did Mahler write?


----------



## Merl

vesteel said:


> more than 11. We already found sketches of an unknown scherzo dating from his early years, and there are reports of a rejected symphony during his conservatory years and possibly more symphonies from a destroyed archive in Dresden


If it's got more than 3 notes on a piece of paper, Cooke will turn it into a two hour long symphony in 4 movements.:lol:


----------



## Dimace

I voted 10.

Nine completed symphonies and one unfinished (10e, die Unvollendete.) Exactly like Schubert. More I don't know. Very interesting subject though... 


* an adagio alone, makes no symphony. But it's very beautiful and I voted it like a complete symphony. 

* best accomplished 10th by Rudolf Barshai, who is a very good musician. But, after all, I don't like someone to make Mahlers work, because I'm not sure if the composer wanted something like this.


----------



## Dimace

*Everyone who has voted 10 won*. Please watch the beginning of the video.


----------



## Larkenfield

Vocals. If Mahler's Eighth isn't a symphony, then neither is Beethoven's Ninth, nor Shostakovich's Thirteenth. Yet the composers all referred to them as symphonies, as some form of unified whole, and so has the public. In the program notes and the histories, they are referred to as symphonies. Not considering them as symphonies diminishes the importance the composers gave them, and in the matter of the Mahler Eighth, it was lovingly dedicated to his wife, who he was crazy about.

Vocals can also be found in Mahler's Third and Fourth Symphonies, or are they disqualified now from being considered a symphony because somebody sings in it as part of each symphony's overall scheme? Didn't Beethoven change all that and what a symphony could be with his Ninth? Mahler called his 8th a symphony and it's been performed as one for over 100 years. It was his greatest public success and can be just as rewarding now as his other symphonies if one can find the right performance, which can be difficult because it has so many forces contained within it that need to work together, and that's a daunting task for any conductor. While those who really don't care for it, or Mahler to begin with, like to refer to it as a cantata to set it outside of Mahler's symphonic canon, the overall scheme of the symphony is far bigger than any conventional cantata. History is on Mahler's side in counting it in the number of his symphonies... Monumental performance:


----------



## mahlernerd

If Mahler says DLVDE is a symphony, then it’s a symphony.


----------



## mahlernerd

If Mahler says DLVDE is a symphony, then it’s a symphony. It’s his call.


----------



## Ulfilas

I have to agree with Tilson Thomas and Boulez, among others, who can't accept Cooke's "performing version" of the sketches for Mahler's 10th symphony. Boulez had this to say in an interview with Jed Distler:

"At home I have the reproduction of Mahler’s the sketches for the Tenth. And they’re so sketchy that you can not really write anything with that. Deryck Cooke may have been a musicologist, but I’m sorry, he was not a composer. Certainly he did a good job, in a way, but his version has no invention. It is a caricature; it does not have any validity for me...the only one who could authentically complete the Mahler Tenth, and already it was too late, was the early Schoenberg. I mean the Schoenberg of Pelleas and Melisande could have done it. You see the style of Pelleas and Melisande is very close to the style of Mahler in some ways. But the Tenth Symphony was written in 1910, 1911, and by that time Schoenberg had already written his Five Pieces for Orchestra Op. 16. He had gone further."


----------



## mbhaub

Cooke never claimed to complete the 10th in anyway as Mahler might have. What he wanted to do was make it performable, and that he did. He deliberately didn't "invent" much. I've always been impressed just how much his edition does sound like Mahler. Some of the others who completed it did add a lot - counterpoint, speculative percussion, etc and they frequently lose that special Mahlerian sound. 

Funny how Boulez had trouble with this, yet he had no issue with the completion of Berg's Lulu, the Bartok 3rd piano concerto, and other works needing a helping hand. There's a lot music that we have only because of the work of another to finish it - even well known things: Mozart Requiem, Borodin Prince Igor, Puccini Tosca, Elgar 3rd....and we're all the richer for it.

I will always wonder what could have been made of the Mahler 10th if the job had been taken up by one of the great orchestrators of Hollywood's Golden Age, like Murray Cutter, Leonid Raab, Hugo Friedhofer and others.


----------



## pianozach

mahlernerd said:


> If Mahler says DLVDE is a symphony, then it's a symphony.


*Kanye West *just premiered what he said was an "opera".

While the merits of *Nebuchadnezzar* can be discussed separately, I believe, format-wise, it more resembles an oratorio. Saying it's something doesn't necessarily MAKE it so.


----------



## DavidA

Does it matter what we call DLVDE? It doesn't alter it in any way!


----------



## Ulfilas

My problem is, you listen to the 9th and there is a richness of counterpoint and invention. Cooke was not a composer, so I feel we are getting used to hearing something which is a not a real representation of Mahler's wishes. I am not suggesting that it not be performed, and this is just my personal view! Having looked at the sketches, and especially with all those heart-rending lines Mahler writes, I find I can't really accept it as in any way performable. 

Mozart's Requiem is an interesting case; Süssmayer was basically living with Mozart at the time, and his ears were listening to the same music. I guess that's a similar case to what Boulez was suggesting, if Schoenberg had worked on Mahler's sketches back in 1910 or so.


----------



## flamencosketches

Nine (and a half). Das Lied is a symphonic song cycle. The 10th is unfinished.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Eleven. 

Das Lied is indeed a Symphony, and as far as I am concerned, what we have of Mahler 10 is echt-Mahler and about as good as it gets (regrets are there of course...)

Then again, it doesn't necessarily follow that if a composer calls it a symphony, it's a symphony. Ignoring the sketches and Barry Cooper's efforts completely, there is another Beethoven 10 (not Brahms 1!). Wellington's Victory is also known as the Battle Symphony. For some strange reason it doesn't get included in most cycles of the Beethovens, though....


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

flamencosketches said:


> Nine (and a half). Das Lied is a symphonic song cycle.


Interestingly, where where would that put Shostakovich's 14th? And should we classify his 13th as a cantata? (Ditto RVW's Sea Symphony and Mahler's 8th.)


----------



## Enthusiast

I'm not sure I hear DLVDE as a symphony, and certainly not as a Mahler symphony. His symphonies sought to encompass more than DLVDE does. And I've never been happy with completions of the 10th. So he wrote 9 symphonies.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I never got the "DLvdE is a symphony" argument. It's just like his other song cycles except more expanded. For me, he wrote 9 symphonies and a fragment of the 10th.


----------



## Art Rock

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I never got the "DLvdE is a symphony" argument. It's just like his other song cycles except more expanded.


Blame Mahler, who subtitled it in print "A Symphony for Tenor, Alto and Large Orchestra". Had he overcome his fear for the curse of the 9th, and named it Symphony 9 "Das Lied von der Erde", there would not be so much discussion.


----------



## Becca

Unlike (e.g.) Mozart's Requiem, Mahler wrote ALL of the 10th, it is complete in short score. What he didn't do was to complete the full orchestral score, nor to tweak it after hearing it performed. The latter point is often used as an argument against the 10th but those people seem to ignore the fact that he never had the opportunity to hear and perhaps modify the 9th.


----------



## NLAdriaan

To me, Mahler wrote 9 symphonies and 6 song cycles. Deryck Cooke wrote one symphony, based on borrowed inspiration. 

But if I listen to Mahler or any composer for that matter, I don't really care what the piece is called.


----------



## Becca

'Borrowed inspiration'?? Orchestrating parts of a work which already existed complete in short score? A work which was already partly orchestrated and with substantial notes as to intent? Ooooooook, if you insist


----------



## elgar's ghost

NLAdriaan said:


> To me, Mahler wrote 9 symphonies and 4 song cycles. Deryck Cooke wrote one symphony, based on borrowed inspiration.
> 
> But if I listen to Mahler or any composer for that matter, I don't really care what the piece is called.


Are you including _DLvdE_ in the song cycles, NL? If so, wouldn't that make five?


----------



## NLAdriaan

elgars ghost said:


> Are you including _DLvdE_ in the song cycles, NL? If so, wouldn't that make five?


Now that I look into it, it would actually be 6 song cycles, including 'Das Klagende Lied' and DLvdE.


----------



## Becca

Unlike the rest, Klagende Lied is through composed rather than a set of independent songs and so is a cantata not a song cycle.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Becca said:


> Unlike the rest, Klagende Lied is through composed rather than a set of independent songs and so is a cantata not a song cycle.


How about DLvdE unlike the rest being officially named a 'symphonie of songs', making this an endless (and quite irrelevant:tiphat discussion.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I'll continue to hedge my bets by referring to _DLvdE_ as an unnumbered symphony - seems easier to me that way.


----------



## mahlernerd

pianozach said:


> *Kanye West *just premiered what he said was an "opera".
> 
> While the merits of *Nebuchadnezzar* can be discussed separately, I believe, format-wise, it more resembles an oratorio. Saying it's something doesn't necessarily MAKE it so.


Then why aren't there more arguments about Mahler 8 being an oratorio or cantata or Shostakovich 14 being a song cycle. And if DLVDE was named a symphony, I'm sure people would accept it as a symphony, and not have ongoing debates on whether or not it is considered a song cycle. I just don't see why people don't accept song cycles as symphonies and don't not accept symphonies as song cycles.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I would consider DSCHs 14th as a song cycle - in fact, I wish there was a piano/voices version of it.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

elgars ghost said:


> Are you including _DLvdE_ in the song cycles, NL? If so, wouldn't that make five?


If we're including Das Lied, he wrote six: Lieder und Gesange (so underrated!), Songs of a Wayfarer, Des Knaben Wunderhorn, Ruckert-Lieder, Kindertotenlieder.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Allegro Con Brio said:


> If we're including Das Lied, he wrote six: _Lieder und Gesange_ (so underrated!), Songs of a Wayfarer, Des Knaben Wunderhorn, Ruckert-Lieder, Kindertotenlieder.


Thanks for the reminder - I keep forgetting that most of the early songs were published together.


----------



## CnC Bartok

elgars ghost said:


> I would consider DSCHs 14th as a song cycle - in fact, I wish there was a piano/voices version of it.


You a fan of the Shostakovich Michelangelo Suite? About as close to the 14th as you could get from the same composer, originally for voice (exclusively bass??) and piano, but I think it's more commonly performed in the version the composer orchestrated. Might give an inkling of what 14 for piano reduction might sound like?

I will confess I am less than the greatest fan of No.14, but oddly enough I find Shostakovich's songs/Lieder endlessly fascinating, and think it's an area where he genuinely did excel, certainly as much as he did in orchestral music and in quartets. I suppose it's obvious the songs are badly neglected due to the language barrier, and that they do not trans(whatever) into English very comfortably.


----------



## Enthusiast

Becca said:


> Unlike (e.g.) Mozart's Requiem, Mahler wrote ALL of the 10th, it is complete in short score. What he didn't do was to complete the full orchestral score, nor to tweak it after hearing it performed. The latter point is often used as an argument against the 10th but those people seem to ignore the fact that he never had the opportunity to hear and perhaps modify the 9th.


I am confused a little, now. Your account seems to be in contradiction of the Boulez view quoted by Ulfilas in post 31:



> "At home I have the reproduction of Mahler's the sketches for the Tenth. And they're so sketchy that you can not really write anything with that. Deryck Cooke may have been a musicologist, but I'm sorry, he was not a composer. Certainly he did a good job, in a way, but his version has no invention. It is a caricature; it does not have any validity for me...the only one who could authentically complete the Mahler Tenth, and already it was too late, was the early Schoenberg. I mean the Schoenberg of Pelleas and Melisande could have done it. You see the style of Pelleas and Melisande is very close to the style of Mahler in some ways. But the Tenth Symphony was written in 1910, 1911, and by that time Schoenberg had already written his Five Pieces for Orchestra Op. 16. He had gone further."


I never found any completed version of the 10th very convincing as Mahler - but have generally avoided arguments in words on the subject. And now I find myself wondering which account is true (that it was finished but not orchestrated vs. the above). My experience with the music so far (I've tried many times) leads me to find the Boulez account convincing.


----------



## Becca

Enthusiast said:


> I am confused a little, now. Your account seems to be in contradiction of the Boulez view quoted by Ulfilas in post 31:


There seems to be a lot of dubious rationalization about why not to perform the full 10th.

Andante-Adagio: 275 bars drafted in orchestral and short score
Scherzo: 522 bars drafted in orchestral and short score
Purgatorio. Allegro moderato: 170 bars drafted in short score, the first 30 of which were also drafted in orchestral score
[Scherzo. Nicht zu schnell]: about 579 bars drafted in short score
Finale. Langsam, schwer: 400 bars drafted in short score

As to Boulez' comment about Cooke not being a composer, Cooke was very explicit that he was not composing, i.e. completing, but rather making a performable version (as opposed to the Carpenter completion.) The value is that we can see where Mahler was going, his musical thinking processes. For me it puts to rest the types of things said by e.g. Bernstein, that the 9th was Mahler's last word. It was no more so than if we didn't know about the 7th after having heard the 6th. Mahler's symphonies tend to go in multiple-symphony cycles, and to that end, it is important to know where he was going with the 10th.


----------



## MrMeatScience

Enthusiast said:


> I am confused a little, now. Your account seems to be in contradiction of the Boulez view quoted by Ulfilas in post 31:
> 
> I never found any completed version of the 10th very convincing as Mahler - but have generally avoided arguments in words on the subject. And now I find myself wondering which account is true (that it was finished but not orchestrated vs. the above). My experience with the music so far (I've tried many times) leads me to find the Boulez account convincing.


I've examined Mahler's original autograph sketches for the Tenth during some of my research. In my opinion, the reality is somewhere in between "Mahler wrote ALL of it" and it being "so sketchy." The symphony is totally accounted for in the sense that Mahler drafted something for every bar, but in some cases (in the latter portions of the third movement, for instance) there is only a melodic line along with some indication like "da capo." Completions and performing editions of the symphony then have to engage in a bit of educated guesswork as to harmonization, and actual pastiche composition for things like countermelodies if the idea is to get closer to what Mahler could have written (rather then presenting the sketches as they were left). The scherzi are by far the diciest movements in terms of validity -- Cooke had his work cut out for him. The first movement is substantially complete in orchestral draft. Some of the woodwind parts were not finished but they're easily enough surmised. There's a sense of haste in the orchestral drafts which has resulted in them being sloppier than usual for him and there are lots of little mistakes to catch.

However, knowing what we do about Mahler's practices as an editor, it's highly likely that there would have been serious changes made even to this allegedly "complete" movement as he worked further on the piece, all the way through rehearsals and potentially even after the premiere. His general tendency was to overorchestrate and then thin things out in the initial rehearsals in reaction to actually hearing the music. This stage also never happened for _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth -- somewhat obviously in the case of the first movement of DLvdE. If you're going to the Tenth looking for a finished Mahler symphony, you won't find it, even though the Cooke version is roughly 90% Mahler's notes and is orchestrated as faithfully to the indications of the sketches as possible. I still think it's a great work and there's enough genuine Mahler in the symphony to merit performing it, but it in no way represents what the piece likely would have sounded like had he lived longer. He certainly would have been furious that it's been played.


----------



## elgar's ghost

CnC Bartok said:


> You a fan of the Shostakovich Michelangelo Suite? About as close to the 14th as you could get from the same composer, originally for voice (exclusively bass??) and piano, but I think it's more commonly performed in the version the composer orchestrated. _Might give an inkling of what 14 for piano reduction might sound like?_


Good point there. I have got a version of the _Michelangelo Suite_ - arranged for bass voice and organ. Tough and often grim, but perhaps that's to be expected from one of DSCH's 'endgame' works. When imagining a piano reduction of the 14th in my mind's ear I can detect some definite connective tissue with the _MS_.


----------



## Becca

MrMeatScience said:


> I've examined Mahler's original autograph sketches for the Tenth during some of my research. In my opinion, the reality is somewhere in between "Mahler wrote ALL of it" and it being "so sketchy." The symphony is totally accounted for in the sense that Mahler drafted something for every bar, but in some cases (in the latter portions of the third movement, for instance) there is only a melodic line along with some indication like "da capo." Completions and performing editions of the symphony then have to engage in a bit of educated guesswork as to harmonization, and actual pastiche composition for things like countermelodies if the idea is to get closer to what Mahler could have written (rather then presenting the sketches as they were left). The scherzi are by far the diciest movements in terms of validity -- Cooke had his work cut out for him. The first movement is substantially complete in orchestral draft. Some of the woodwind parts were not finished but they're easily enough surmised. There's a sense of haste in the orchestral drafts which has resulted in them being sloppier than usual for him and there are lots of little mistakes to catch.
> 
> However, knowing what we do about Mahler's practices as an editor, it's highly likely that there would have been serious changes made even to this allegedly "complete" movement as he worked further on the piece, all the way through rehearsals and potentially even after the premiere. His general tendency was to overorchestrate and then thin things out in the initial rehearsals in reaction to actually hearing the music. This stage also never happened for _Das Lied von der Erde_ and the Ninth -- somewhat obviously in the case of the first movement of DLvdE. If you're going to the Tenth looking for a finished Mahler symphony, you won't find it, even though the Cooke version is roughly 90% Mahler's notes and is orchestrated as faithfully to the indications of the sketches as possible. I still think it's a great work and there's enough genuine Mahler in the symphony to merit performing it, but it in no way represents what the piece likely would have sounded like had he lived longer. He certainly would have been furious that it's been played.


Thank you, that does help to clarify what I have seen elsewhere.


----------



## Ulfilas

While we're talking about performing versions of Mahler 10, which of those do you find more-or-less convincing?









I find this convinces me more than Cooke's or Carpenter's that I'm listening to Mahler (it uses the revised version by Remo Mazzetti, Jr).

Also helps that it's beautifully performed.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Ulfilas said:


> While we're talking about performing versions of Mahler 10, which of those do you find more-or-less convincing?
> 
> View attachment 131726
> 
> 
> I find this convinces me more than Cooke's or Carpenter's that I'm listening to Mahler (it uses the revised version by Remo Mazzetti, Jr).
> 
> Also helps that it's beautifully performed.


Well, as a first point, I'd say anything is more convincing than Carpenter's "completion". Don't want to be too disrespectful to him, as anything is still going to be better than nothing, but filling the gaps (and there are very few in all honesty) with quotes/allusions from other works isn't the most enlightening.

For me it's swings and roundabouts as to the best edition beyond that. The best performances I have in my collection tend to be of the Cooke(s), but maybe that's down to recording frequency. I certainly prefer the Lopez-Cobos recording to the Slatkin one of the same version...There are details in the Mazzetti that are good/clever/nice/illuminating, but I can't see a whole shift "closer to what Mahler wanted" in it. For that I'd give Joe Wheeler's version an honourable mention, as it pares down the orchestration, which - it is possible - is a direction Mahler might have been heading in?

I'm happy with Cooke in the final analysis.....


----------



## Ulfilas

CnC Bartok said:


> Well, as a first point, I'd say anything is more convincing than Carpenter's "completion". Don't want to be too disrespectful to him, as anything is still going to be better than nothing, but filling the gaps (and there are very few in all honesty) with quotes/allusions from other works isn't the most enlightening.
> 
> For me it's swings and roundabouts as to the best edition beyond that. The best performances I have in my collection tend to be of the Cooke(s), but maybe that's down to recording frequency. I certainly prefer the Lopez-Cobos recording to the Slatkin one of the same version...There are details in the Mazzetti that are good/clever/nice/illuminating, but I can't see a whole shift "closer to what Mahler wanted" in it. For that I'd give Joe Wheeler's version an honourable mention, as it pares down the orchestration, which - it is possible - is a direction Mahler might have been heading in?
> 
> I'm happy with Cooke in the final analysis.....


Do you have a preferred recording?


----------



## CnC Bartok

Several!! But my favourite by quite a distance is Simon Rattle's first recording with the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra. On top of that, I recently got hold of a Japanese release of the Wyn Morris recording, and that one is starting to run it close.....


----------



## Becca

I have been very impressed by the Seattle Symphony / Dausgaard performance.

After having recently seen Harding's BPO concert of the 10th, it is about time that I went back to refresh my memory on his VPO recording.



CnC Bartok said:


> I certainly prefer the Lopez-Cobos recording to the Slatkin one of the same version...There are details in the Mazzetti that are good/clever/nice/illuminating, but I can't see a whole shift "closer to what Mahler wanted" in it. For that I'd give Joe Wheeler's version an honourable mention, as it pares down the orchestration, which - it is possible - is a direction Mahler might have been heading in?


Regarding the Mazzetti, the Slakin recording was of Mazzetti's first attempt at a completion. Some time later, after helping prepare a performance of the Wheeler in Colorado, Mazzetti made substantial revisions which is the edition that was done by Lopez-Cobos.


----------

