# Michael Gielen's Mahler Cycle



## Xaltotun

I'm interested in purchasing Michael Gielen's cycle of Mahler symphonies, on the account of hearing his Mahler third, which is totally awesome. If you have heard Gielen's Mahler symphonies, or have the complete cycle, please post comments here! Thanks in advance.


----------



## Vaneyes

Gielen's is not a good set, with too many stodgy interpretations and so-so playing. His No. 7 is by far the highlight, though falls far behind BPO/Abbado (DG) and CSO/Solti (Decca Originals, rec 1971).

Gielen is a lyrical Mahler interpreter, so if you would like a lyrical set, I recommend Bertini (EMI) or Kubelik (DG).

BTW, if you would some day like to hear a more potent Mahler 3 (my favorite Mahler work), may I suggest Bernstein (Sony), Haitink (1983 Xmas Concert), Horenstein (Unicorn), and Nagano (Teldec).

Hope this helps. Enjoy your quest.


----------



## haydnfan

His cycle is my favorite. I like everything from the 1st to the 9th. His modernist interpretation (combined with excellent sonics) bring alot of details out in the open that I haven't heard in any other recording. His cool approach turns off many though. My favorites are his 1st, 7th and 9th. Perhaps the weakest ones in the set are the 2nd and 6th, not every one likes them as much as I do.


----------



## Ukko

Gielen's Mahler interpretations strike me as 'barely adequate', being rather superficial. I suppose "cool approach" is another way of describing them, since 'Mahler' and 'cool' are terms that don't really go together. If you would prefer to have the Bernsteinian angst turned down a bit, and the details brought out, I suggest Boulez pre-1980.


----------



## scytheavatar

I guess the other guys are a big fan of the "wallow in angst" style of Mahler, but as a "neutral" Mahler set with minimal conductor exaggeration, Gielen's cycle is one of the best. I find him more consistently good and insightful than Bertini or Abbado. But it's a very expensive set and I find it hard to justify paying the full price for it.


----------



## Xaltotun

Thanks a lot guys, your replies have been very informative, and it's interesting to see this dichotomy towards Gielen's cycle. I'm usually a "wallow in angst" kind of a guy, but on the other hand, Mahler's symphonies have a lot of interesting details that I would like to hear clearly.

I know where this will lead, though; to purchasing multiple cycles! Gnnh!

p.s. local store didn't have Gielen's cycle on the shelf, so I purchased Bernstein's Sony cycle instead. I'm still interested in Gielen's cycle though, so if anyone else has something to say about the topic, please keep comments coming


----------



## World Violist

Hilltroll72 said:


> I suggest Boulez pre-1980.


...if you can find anything from it aside from Das klagende lied...



scytheavatar said:


> I guess the other guys are a big fan of the "wallow in angst" style of Mahler, but as a "neutral" Mahler set with minimal conductor exaggeration, Gielen's cycle is one of the best. I find him more consistently good and insightful than Bertini or Abbado.


It's a "neutral" set, yes--in the sense that he's not projecting himself onto it so much as others--but I don't see it as having minimal exaggeration. In the 6th symphony in particular, I've heard some things that made me raise my eyebrows a bit (let's start with the opening tempo!).

Overall I think Gielen's is a maverick cycle, not paying attention to any particular interpretation but excelling on its own terms. I would actually recommend Bernstein on Sony as a first cycle for once, then maybe Gielen.

(and in fact I just noticed you got the Bernstein set; I hope you like it!)


----------



## haydnfan

I hope you like Bernstein's sony cycle. I think he is too fast in some of the symphonies, but he doesn't really do a grievous injustice to any of the symphonies in particular.


----------



## Vaneyes

Xaltotun said:


> Thanks a lot guys, your replies have been very informative, and it's interesting to see this dichotomy towards Gielen's cycle. I'm usually a "wallow in angst" kind of a guy, but on the other hand, Mahler's symphonies have a lot of interesting details that I would like to hear clearly.
> 
> I know where this will lead, though; to purchasing multiple cycles! Gnnh!
> 
> p.s. local store didn't have Gielen's cycle on the shelf, so I purchased Bernstein's Sony cycle instead. I'm still interested in Gielen's cycle though, so if anyone else has something to say about the topic, please keep comments coming


On your Sony Bernstein purchase, good for you. From that set I'm fond of Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 9. 
2 has blemishes, but the ride's still fun. 6's opening is a little faster than I like, but thereafter I appreciate its urgency, versus the later DG interpretation. 3, 7, and 9 are glorious, and stand proudly with the best. 9 is fast, but it works, and was recorded in one take! Enjoy.:tiphat:


----------



## Xaltotun

I've given Bernstein's cycle some preliminary listens now, and I do like it! His conducting is powerful and very personal, and thus it gives a personal, "microcosm" feeling to the symphonies. I think it benefits the symphonies that have that deep personal feeling, like for example #7... it's incredible. There, he just seems to GRAB the listener to that specific point of view, that nocturnal ghost train in 3D, and doesn't let go until it's all over. Also, this very same urgency turns #6 into a terrifying, uncontrollable spiralling funeral march to oblivion! But perhaps it takes a bit away from the "macrocosm"/universal side of things? It might be a bit of a false dichotomy, though. On #2, he is perhaps a bit too fast and urgent - thus, it seems to take a form of a personal Resurrection, rather than a full-blown Book of Revelations. It's a good #2, sure - but the feeling seems to be more like "woe is me!" than "oh no, what's happening around me?". To succeed on all levels, to bring that spiritual horror up to eleven, #2 needs a bit of both I think. "Totenfeier" - death is universal of course, but it happened to YOU, so it should be a bith of both - the cold and unfeeling scythe swiping at personal, living flesh. Second and third movement - personal memories of life, but you're no longer there so it should be a bit detached. Fourth movement - obviously personal, and fifth - universal at first, then finally both at the end.

Ok, now I'm getting all esoteric again, I'd better stop before I start babbling about Eisenstein's art theories in relation to Mahler. Bottom line is that Bernstein's is a very good set, but I'm still considering buying Gielen's at some point, just for the joy of hearing different interpretations. There's certainly room for them!


----------



## scytheavatar

I recommend getting Solti's set next, it's not very expensive and his style is a good complement to Bernstein's, being a lot more direct, focused and in your face.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

Maybe it is better to buy individual disks? For example Solti has a great recording of Second Symphony with London Symphony Orchestra which can be found on a twoofer with a good recording of the First. His recording of Seventh with Chicago is also very good. It was recorded not in Medinah and not in Chicago Hall, but in another venue, I forgot the name, which was much better. And I think that the fast tempi in the Seventh' finale is right.

But in some other recordings DECCA has serious problems with microphones' placement, etc. 

In the Eighth Symphony I - suprisingly - like Boulez.

About Gielen... I want to try him too, but didn't have a chance yet. 

Maybe I should start with his Third... I'm not satisfied with Chailly, despite the good singing of Petra Lang and playing of my favorite Concertgebouw, Chailly always seems to me to be lost in the sound details, not having some general picture. He is better in Hindemith and in Brahms' Concertos.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

I've listened only to Gielen's Seventh yet. I like it. The last movement is longer than in Solti's recording (which is great in its way), but it never drags. Gielen impressed me much more than Jansons with Oslo.

Maybe I will buy his 3rd.


----------



## Itullian

I like Karajan's Mahler best, intensly beautiful, powerful.
Wish he'd have done more.


----------



## itywltmt

More on Mahler cycles here: http://www.talkclassical.com/13570-best-mahler-5-recording.html

As I stated in that thread, I own the "budget priced" Decca reissue of the complete Mahler symphonies by *Riccardo Chailly and the Concerttgebouw *(with the Deryk Cooke reconstruction of the 10th featuring the Berlin RSO).

It can be argued you can find _better _performances of the _individual _symphonies, but you would be hard-pressed to match Mr. Chailly's "unity of vision" for the entire cycle, and the price is hard to beat. The only one that compares (or bests) this cycle IMHO is the *Kubelik/Bavarian RSO *cycle recorded for DG in the early 1960's.


----------



## itywltmt

Vaneyes said:


> On your Sony Bernstein purchase, good for you. From that set I'm fond of Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 9.
> 2 has blemishes, but the ride's still fun. 6's opening is a little faster than I like, but thereafter I appreciate its urgency, versus the later DG interpretation. 3, 7, and 9 are glorious, and stand proudly with the best. 9 is fast, but it works, and was recorded in one take! Enjoy.:tiphat:


I happen to think the DG/Bernstein set (despite involving several orchestras) is better than the Sony set. I especially am disappointed with the 2nd, which I find muddled and tentative in the first movement compared to my favourites, Klemperer/Philharmonia and Kubelik/Baravrain RSO.


----------



## Itullian

the Kubelik 2nd is glorious. don't like Klempy's final 5 minutes.


----------



## Itullian

i own both and love them. great sound on the Chailly


----------



## itywltmt

Itullian said:


> i own both and love them. great sound on the Chailly


Which both? You earlier post referred to the Resurrections by Klemperer and Kubelik, and you said you didn`t like the Klemperer so much... I guess you mean the Bernstein/CBS cycle and the Chailly cycle...


----------



## Itullian

itywltmt said:


> Which both? You earlier post referred to the Resurrections by Klemperer and Kubelik, and you said you didn`t like the Klemperer so much... I guess you mean the Bernstein/CBS cycle and the Chailly cycle...


sorry, meant the Chailly and Kubelik.


----------



## Notwithstanding

This thread hasn't been updated recently but I'll still give state my opinion on the Gielen set. His 5th and 6th are my favorites. for the best 7th his recording is head to head with Abbado CSO. I like his 9th, too, but Rattle BPO and Abbado BPO are superb, so his is third. 

In fact his style is very detailed and the sound quality is superb. So the Gielen set is great for me. All his Mahler performances are consistently good, so this is not a set that is full of one good performance and eight rotten apples. Though, I'm not very much into Mahler's 2nd,3rd,4th and 8th symphonies, so I'm not really sure how Gielen's performances compare against others' in those symphonies.


----------



## Vaneyes

itywltmt said:


> I happen to think the DG/Bernstein set (despite involving several orchestras) is better than the Sony set. I especially am disappointed with the 2nd, which I find muddled and tentative in the first movement compared to my favourites, Klemperer/Philharmonia and Kubelik/Baravrain RSO.


I can understand preferences for the DG set--for sound, and in some cases more lyrical interps. and leisurely pace. DG Nos. 1 & 5 are decisively better. And for Sony, 3, 7, & 9. The others are toss-ups, with you and I giving more weight to DG and Sony respectively.

I think it's fair to say DG is the more even set, and Sony the more exciting... with LB taking more chances.


----------



## Vaneyes

If I can think back some years, to what was said on other classical websites, the Gielen, and the later Chailly set, created a lot of buzz. My impression was that most who liked the performances, were more in love with the recorded sound offered by both. Some, if not all of Chailly's singles were released in CD and SACD, and the subsequent boxset was released fairly quickly.

Gielen's Hanssler releases were CD, and harder to come by in both distribution and price. That boxset took a long time. The heavily-favored recording was M7. Not many talked about the others. When they did, it wasn't nearly as complimentary.

I bought a few singles from each. My eventually impressions-- Chailly, good playing, so-so interps; Gielen, so-so playing, good interps. There was much better in the catalogues already, on both counts.


----------



## Notwithstanding

Vaneyes said:


> I bought a few singles from each. My eventually impressions-- Chailly, good playing, so-so interps; Gielen, so-so playing, good interps. There was much better in the catalogues already, on both counts.


I guess you would agree what constitutes "much better" may vary for different individuals. I compared Gielen performances with many others (including the favorites) for each symphony: I did my comparisons by listening to multiple sections of each symphony in each recording one after the other and going back and forth between recordings (apart from listening to each recording on its own multiple times). And the result I came up with is that Gielen's interpretations, style and command as well as his orchestras performance is at least on the same level as others' in most of the symphonies. My judgement may be faulty, but that's my conclusion.



Vaneyes said:


> My impression was that most who liked the performances, were more in love with the recorded sound offered by both.


Yes, the sound quality of the recordings affect my final decisions. But I have Chailly's Mahler box set and none of his performances made to the top of my list. I guess that shows I'm not basing my judgement on sound alone. I have multiple favorites for each symphony and I listen to each of them from time to time, but the recording that becomes my default version for a particular symphony is always the one that offers me both great performance and great sound. I personally enjoy hearing details and hearing instruments and groups of instruments interact with each other clearly, which may not be everyone's preference; some may like a dramatic reading which puts a lot of effort in emphasizing climactic passages while rounding out details. Gielen is keen on bringing out details and the great sound of the recordings make it possible for such detailed style of conducting to be heard. And he nevertheless misses out on bringing forth a healthy doze of emotion, too. That's my humble opinion.


----------



## Notwithstanding

Correction: And he nevertheless doesn't fail to bring forth a healthy doze of emotion, too. That's my humble opinion.


----------



## Vaneyes

Notwithstanding said:


> I guess you would agree what constitutes "much better" may vary for different individuals. I compared Gielen performances with many others (including the favorites) for each symphony: I did my comparisons by listening to multiple sections of each symphony in each recording one after the other and going back and forth between recordings (apart from listening to each recording on its own multiple times). And the result I came up with is that Gielen's interpretations, style and command as well as his orchestras performance is at least on the same level as others' in most of the symphonies. My judgement may be faulty, but that's my conclusion.
> 
> Yes, the sound quality of the recordings affect my final decisions. But I have Chailly's Mahler box set and none of his performances made to the top of my list. I guess that shows I'm not basing my judgement on sound alone. I have multiple favorites for each symphony and I listen to each of them from time to time, but the recording that becomes my default version for a particular symphony is always the one that offers me both great performance and great sound. I personally enjoy hearing details and hearing instruments and groups of instruments interact with each other clearly, which may not be everyone's preference; some may like a dramatic reading which puts a lot of effort in emphasizing climactic passages while rounding out details. Gielen is keen on bringing out details and the great sound of the recordings make it possible for such detailed style of conducting to be heard. And he nevertheless misses out on bringing forth a healthy doze of emotion, too. That's my humble opinion.


Don't I get a "Like"? We agree on certain points. 

I'm not surprised to hear of your preference. As I said at the top, a lot of buzz was created with both sets. It's understandable that they still have fans. But, certainly not the numbers of the early bandwagons. Neither set has sustained that enthusiasm, and I doubt we're in the midst of rebirth.

No matter. As with any recording criticism, If you like it (there's that word again), nothing else should matter. :tiphat:


----------



## Notwithstanding

You tickled my curiosity now as to what recordings you consider to be the best ones for each symphony. I know you like the Abbado CSO recording for the 7th... What about the rest?


----------



## Vaneyes

Notwithstanding said:


> You tickled my curiosity now as to what recordings you consider to be the best ones for each symphony. I know you like the Abbado CSO recording for the 7th... What about the rest?


No, no, it's the BPO/Abbado M7, I *like*. I try not to say best. I *like* the following two or three for each work. :tiphat:

1. Muti, Solti ('83)
2. Scherchen, Suitner
3. Bernstein (Sony), Horenstein, Nagano
4. Horenstein, Harding
5. Shipway, Bernstein (DG)
6. Barbirolli (EMI, S-A), Boulez (DG)
7. Abbado (BPO), Solti ('71)
8. Bernstein (Sony, LSO), Boulez (DG)
9. Karajan (DG, 1st), Bernstein (Sony), Barbirolli (EMI)
10. Harding, Ormandy
DLVDE Tennstedt (EMI), Herreweghe


----------

