# I'm giving Mahler's Symphony no.1 a second try.



## ericdxx

Putting it on, on the stereo....volume cracked up, bass on max....the whole nine yards..

How do learn to appreciate it? The first time I tried it I hated it...I'm a huge fan of his Symphony no.5 and I read that many fans consider the first symphony his 2nd best.....so


----------



## Guest

Well, make sure you have a good recording. I recommend Bernstein with the Concertgebouw on DG, or Kubelik on Audite. But honestly, if you don't like it, don't worry - as you have noticed, Mahler has something for everyone. You don't like #1, but you like #5. Incidentally, have you heard the 2nd? It is always (at least around here) ranked among the best symphonies, not just of Mahler.


----------



## Mahlerian

ericdxx said:


> Putting it on, on the stereo....volume cracked up, bass on max....the whole nine yards..
> 
> How do learn to appreciate it? The first time I tried it I hated it...I'm a huge fan of his Symphony no.5 and I read that many fans consider the first symphony his 2nd best.....so


I don't. I don't consider his 5th his best, either, though.

It might help if your stereo has a balanced EQ setting, though. Mahler is all about orchestral balance.... 

Other than that...the First Symphony is a bit of an odd duck. The first movement really only has one main theme (and a few side motifs), which moves out of its original key almost immediately. The second movement scherzo has a lovely trio portion, and the third movement has that beautiful quotation from the Wayfarer Songs. The finale is a bit imbalanced, and I don't think its themes are all that strong by Mahler's standards. The most important things here are the returns of the themes from the first movement, especially in the coda where the opening motif becomes a triumphant peroration.


----------



## Ukko

Leave the bass control in its center detent. Whasamatterferyou?


----------



## Celloissimo

The funny thing is that I share a similar experience with the OP. My first impression of Mahler's 1st was that it was overly bombastic and shallow, using a lot of loud brass and string ostinato to compensate for the composer's lack of actual creativity, and this is when my conductor showed it to us my freshman year of high school. However, with Mahler's 2nd and 8th being some of my favorite symphonies of all time, I bought a box set of Mahler's whole cycle under Bernstein. I wanted to make the most out of what I got (it wasn't cheap) and listened to the whole thing, including Mahler's 1st while following along with the score. Analyzing the form of the piece and opening my mind to it, it suddenly clicked with me and it started to make sense. Some of the sections that seemed awkward and bombastic seemed to come naturally and expected. 

Not sure why exactly, but it made sense to me after studying the score.


----------



## Garlic

I haven't listened to the 1st in a while, I remember liking the individual parts but finding the whole thing a bit disjointed. Time to listen to it again with the above comments in mind.


----------



## Vaneyes

A certain performance can sometimes make a difference. If bombastic such as Muti, Solti, LB is scary for some, then try the more lyrical ways of Kubelik, Bertini, Walter. There is no right or wrong way, only preferences. :tiphat:


----------



## realdealblues

I loved the 1st Symphony the first time I heard it. 

Some works I envision things when I listen to them which often makes the experience even more enjoyable. This is especially true with Mahler. 

With the 1st Symphony it that reminds me of John Williams' scoring for the movie Jaws. Not the actual shark theme, but later in the movie when they are off at sea. I always wondered how much John Williams may have been inspired by this particular symphony, then again, maybe it's just me that hears the similarities. :lol:

Anyway, I love the movie Jaws and it's score and when I listen to Mahler's 1st I can't help but close my eyes and picture myself at sea aboard an old ship racing across the waves. I'll picture an entire journey at sea. Days and nights, sunny skies, cloudy skies, big waves, little waves, etc. I always go on a wonderful voyage when I hear that Symphony.

It might not be for everyone but you might try listening to it and picturing yourself on a ship and see what happens. It works for me 

As far as recordings. I will also recommend Bruno Walter, Rafael Kubelik and Leonard Bernstein as my favorites for this particular work.


----------



## Pip

I once recommended to a friend Mahler's Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen Song Cycle as an introduction to the Great Gustav.
He enjoyed it so much he then asked for more tips. I suggested Symphony no 1. As Mahler adapted his song cycle's themes into the first symphony, it was an easy progression.
this may help you. Try Fischer-Dieskau or Hampson. There are different versions with F-D including the one that was recorded at the end of the Tristan sessions in London in 1952 conducted by Furtwängler. Although in Mono, it is marvellous.
This may help get you into this symphony.


----------



## Pip

The Kubelik recording on DGG is very good, very lyrical, his live performance on Audite is better but not as beautifully recorded.
I love Barbirolli in this symphony, his commercial recording from 1957 is not easy to find these days, except on a JB Society re-issue, and his live NYPO in 1959 is great.
Also Abbado and Haitink have made very fine recordings of this.
Bernstein's more recent version from a live concert in Amsterdam on DGG is good but I prefer the others more.
I was never a fan of the NYPO sound under Bernstein, a bit too harsh and aggressive.
The sound of the NYPO with Barbirolli and the sound that Bernstein got would convince a blind sampling that they were two different orchestras.


----------



## DeepR

I've listened to it only twice but it hasn't clicked so far. To me it felt like it's continuously working towards something that never gets fully realized. I found it a bit frustrating to listen to actually. But maybe I got spoiled from listening to the second before the first, because the second has the most satisfying conclusion imaginable.


----------



## chalkpie

ericdxx said:


> Putting it on, on the stereo....volume cracked up, bass on max....the whole nine yards..
> 
> How do learn to appreciate it? The first time I tried it I hated it...I'm a huge fan of his Symphony no.5 and I read that many fans consider the first symphony his 2nd best.....so


What recordings are you listening to?

You should hear all 9 (plus Das Lied) in a row. Don't try so hard, and definitely DON'T listen to the opinion that M1 is the 2nd best or whatever. Mahler fans are all over the map, and when you place expectations on top of listening, you may be doing yourself (and the music) an injustice. Use your own ears and imagination.


----------



## Becca

I remember the first time that I listened to any Mahler, it was the 1st ... actually I should be totally honest, I remember nothing at all about it, it went by without making any impact whatsoever. Now however, many, many years later, I rank Mahler's symphonies amongst my favourites, and the 1st is high on the list. I won't try to rank them as it would change day by day.


----------



## SONNET CLV

ericdxx said:


> *I'm giving Mahler's Symphony no.1 a second try.*


Great! I've given this same work about a hundred tries ... and I'm open to a hundred more.
A great piece. You should never be able to get enough of it.
I envy you your newness to this Mahler classic.
And wait till you get a chance to hear the "Blumine" movement!


----------



## Zarathustra

SONNET CLV said:


> Great! I've given this same work about a hundred tries ... and I'm open to a hundred more.
> A great piece. You should never be able to get enough of it.
> I envy you your newness to this Mahler classic.
> And wait till you get a chance to hear the "Blumine" movement!


Seconded. Happy listening.


----------



## tdc

I'm listening to Mahler's 1st myself for the first time in a while, and I like it more than I thought I did. Really love that big and little 2nd movement. The 3rd movement is the only one that I don't enjoy as much in this Symphony.


----------



## ahammel

tdc said:


> I'm listening to Mahler's 1st myself for the first time in a while, and I like it more than I thought I did. Really love that big and little 2nd movement. The 3rd movement is the only one that I don't enjoy as much in this Symphony.


The third movement sounds very first-symphony-ish to me. Like he's saying "ok, I've decided my style is going to involve incorporating so-called 'light music into my symphonies, so here's a bunch of 'light music' themes that you can't possibly mistake for anything else".


----------



## JACE

tdc said:


> I'm listening to Mahler's 1st myself for the first time in a while, and I like it more than I thought I did. Really love that big and little 2nd movement. The 3rd movement is the only one that I don't enjoy as much in this Symphony.





ahammel said:


> The third movement sounds very first-symphony-ish to me. Like he's saying "ok, I've decided my style is going to involve incorporating so-called 'light music into my symphonies, so here's a bunch of 'light music' themes that you can't possibly mistake for anything else".


Funny how perspectives can differ. I've always LOVED the third movement in the M1.


----------



## Xaltotun

I find the whole work to be very tongue-in-cheek; I only put it on when I'm in a lighthearted mood.


----------



## Becca

JACE said:


> Funny how perspectives can differ. I've always LOVED the third movement in the M1.


Many, many years ago a friend of mine was trying to describe a work to me such that I could identify it for her. After a few weeks she gave up until she saw another friend and she mentioned it to her ... Friend: "Ohh, the one with Frere Jacques?" Me: "NOW I know which piece you meant!"


----------



## Badinerie

With Mahler, I find consuming half a bottle of a decent Claret often helps before putting needle to groove. 
No's 1 and 2 I play more than any of the others. Keep trying, it'll click soon!


----------



## Cosmos

Don't have to force yourself to like it. As shown by all the previous comments, the first has mixed opinions.

I personally love it because it's the first work that really got me into Mahler. It's not his best symphony, but it's still one of my favorites. The orchestra is pretty electric, and the first movement is so optimistic it makes me want to take on the world!

I don't know what others think of Gregiev's cycle with the London Symphony Orchestra, but that album's very bombastic and fun


----------



## Becca

I have a number of versions of the first. Personally I most like the Barbirolli version but there is a lot to be said for Dudamel/LA Phil on YouTube from his first season in LA. Rather a young man's version.


----------



## hpowders

His first symphony his second best? I do not know where you were getting this information...

probably from the dude who guaranteed the Titanic would float.

The best of Mahler is middle Mahler-symphonies 4,5 and 6. You can take that to the bank!

Anyhow, there is nothing inferior about any of the Mahler symphonies.

Repetition is your friend. After 2 or 3 listenings, put it aside.

Come back to it a week or two later. You may find it less difficult at that time.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I first heard Mahler's 1st symphony last October (and a live performance ) and now I want to get a copy. It was CSO with Muti and so I am leaning to the Philidelphia Muti CD. But then I thought, why get one symphony when there are nine. I think I need a complete cycle.


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> I first heard Mahler's 1st symphony last October and now I want to get a copy. It was CSO with Muti and so I am leaning to the Philidelphia Muti CD. But then I thought, why get one symphony when there are nine. I think I need a complete cycle.


Good on you. :tiphat:


----------



## clavichorder

Xaltotun said:


> I find the whole work to be very tongue-in-cheek; I only put it on when I'm in a lighthearted mood.


Even the finale? To me that is a stormy and fearsome movement, with Tchaikovsky-esque thematic material and a certain 'futuristic' expansiveness that he went further with for sure in the next symphony.

From what I read on wiki, which cited a personal Mahler quote, tongue in cheek was not at the core of what was causing him to write it. It has an intense romanticism in it to me. But I was initially off put by the first movement and many aspects of the orchestration with the melodies(the orchestration seemed harsh, overdone, and stringent initially, but after understanding many more modern works, none of this is at all a problem, it's just a thing to interest me in it's character), which just seemed to me to have tons of pastiche like ideas from other composers in a new frame(most notably that the intro sounds a lot like the much briefer one in Beethoven's 4th symphony) It doesn't bother me anymore, because it's like these ideas are just resting in a very large space, which makes a lot of sense and tells a sort of emotional narrative, the more you hear it.


----------



## Lenny

My first post on the forum!

For me, the 1st was actually a stepping stone for Mahler's music. Before that I didn't quite understand "all the fuzz" about Mahler. 1st changed all that, now I consider him one of the greatest. My current favourites are 2nd and 8th.

I guess this is no wonder - 1st is quite accessible, it has lots of themes that are in a way independent, can be enjoyed in smaller dozes. Maybe because of its connection to that earlier song cycle? Great music.


----------



## Pugg

Lenny said:


> My first post on the forum!
> 
> For me, the 1st was actually a stepping stone for Mahler's music. Before that I didn't quite understand "all the fuzz" about Mahler. 1st changed all that, now I consider him one of the greatest. My current favourites are 2nd and 8th.
> 
> I guess this is no wonder - 1st is quite accessible, it has lots of themes that are in a way independent, can be enjoyed in smaller dozes. Maybe because of its connection to that earlier song cycle? Great music.


Welcome to TalkClassical Lenny.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Lenny said:


> My first post on the forum!
> 
> For me, the 1st was actually a stepping stone for Mahler's music. Before that I didn't quite understand "all the fuzz" about Mahler. 1st changed all that, now I consider him one of the greatest. My current favourites are 2nd and 8th.


Welcome to TC. I had a similar experience. Was just not even going to try Mahler and then went to see Beethoven's 5th last October and it included Mahler's 1st. Well, I thought the 1st was a nice piece of music, quite interesting, but didn't go anywhere with it. Then while searching out other composers' symphonies and buying a few cycles, I came back to Mahler and thought I will give that first another try, but then when searching for a good 1st, a whole cycle popped up on Ebay for a really good price and so I ended up grabbing it on bid.

So far have ever and only heard Mahler's 1st and 5th, but now that I have my cycle, that will all change. And from what I have heard in those two symphonies, it will be hard to keep from whipping through the whole cycle, but I want to take it nice an slow, savor them one at a time.


----------



## Lenny

Florestan said:


> So far have ever and only heard Mahler's 1st and 5th, but now that I have my cycle, that will all change. And from what I have heard in those two symphonies, it will be hard to keep from whipping through the whole cycle, but I want to take it nice an slow, savor them one at a time.


Interesting approach! These days I'm more into listening to music all day in background while working on other things. If my subconsciousness (or whatever) catches on something interesting, I start digging deeper. With this "method" I learned to enjoy longer pieces like Bruckner (I'm a huge Bruckner fan). Mahler is in my opinion very rare in one particular thing: there's no weak pieces at all! Usually I find at least something weaker from any composer. For example, Bruckner's 1st is a mess IMHO, but the 2nd and everything from that on... just marvelous.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Lenny said:


> Interesting approach! These days I'm more into listening to music all day in background while working on other things. If my subconsciousness (or whatever) catches on something interesting, I start digging deeper. With this "method" I learned to enjoy longer pieces like Bruckner (I'm a huge Bruckner fan). Mahler is in my opinion very rare in one particular thing: there's no weak pieces at all! Usually I find at least something weaker from any composer. For example, Bruckner's 1st is a mess IMHO, but the 2nd and everything from that on... just marvelous.


I was looking into Bruckner a couple weeks ago but it seemed to speak to me as Brahm's symphonies do--weakly. I am sure glad I thought to check out Mahler. Mahler is so good I am thinking that he may be right up there with Beethoven as my two favorite symphony cycles.

By the way, is your user name after Leonard "Lenny" Bernstein?


----------



## Lenny

Florestan said:


> By the way, is your user name after Leonard "Lenny" Bernstein?


Yes it is. Years ago I saw a very good perfomance of him conducting Nielsen 3rd and I just used the name for some other forum, and it kinda stuck.. So I've been using it since then .


----------



## DeepR

DeepR said:


> I've listened to it only twice but it hasn't clicked so far. To me it felt like it's continuously working towards something that never gets fully realized. I found it a bit frustrating to listen to actually. But maybe I got spoiled from listening to the second before the first, because the second has the most satisfying conclusion imaginable.


A little off topic, but I had the same feeling today while listening to Sibelius 2. Lots of wonderful promises, not enough fulfillment in the end. Or maybe I just need to listen to both of these works some more...


----------



## clavichorder

Lenny said:


> Interesting approach! These days I'm more into listening to music all day in background while working on other things. If my subconsciousness (or whatever) catches on something interesting, I start digging deeper. With this "method" I learned to enjoy longer pieces like Bruckner (I'm a huge Bruckner fan). Mahler is in my opinion very rare in one particular thing: there's no weak pieces at all! Usually I find at least something weaker from any composer. For example, Bruckner's 1st is a mess IMHO, but the 2nd and everything from that on... just marvelous.


Well, I think the 1st of Bruckner and great and much more thematically interesting than 2 and 3.


----------



## clavichorder

DeepR said:


> A little off topic, but I had the same feeling today while listening to Sibelius 2. Lots of wonderful promises, not enough fulfillment in the end. Or maybe I just need to listen to both of these works some more...


And that's how I felt when I first heard all the Brahms symphonies. For many of us, this can be a good sign for the works in question. I kept coming back to them after intervals and now they are among my favorites.


----------



## Lenny

clavichorder said:


> Well, I think the 1st of Bruckner and great and much more thematically interesting than 2 and 3.


I'm sure some day I also get it. At the moment, 1st has too much everything for my taste.


----------



## Pugg

Lenny said:


> I'm sure some day I also get it. At the moment, 1st has too much everything for my taste.


And even if you don't, it's your life.


----------



## Merl

Mahler's 1st is my favourite symphony. I must have about 20 different recordings of it. So many good 'uns but it's different strokes for different folks. I've never cared for most Brahms but I love his 3rd. We all have a different ear for stuff. Similarly Schoenberg to me sounds like some guys falling over in a musical instrument shop. I've tried but I still dont get it.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Mahler's first is a delightful symphony! Love the Frère Jacques'ish part.


----------



## Becca

FWIW ... the famous 3rd movement quote was known to Mahler as "Bruder Martin". He supposedly put it into the minor key but that apparently was how it was sung in Austria in the 19th & 20th century.


----------



## techniquest

> I've listened to it only twice but it hasn't clicked so far. To me it felt like it's continuously working towards something that never gets fully realized. I found it a bit frustrating to listen to actually. But maybe I got spoiled from listening to the second before the first, because the second has the most satisfying conclusion imaginable.


I've always felt that the ending of the 1st is a very difficult thing to pull off satisfactorily. There are two elements to this; firstly it's damned hard work for the orchestra to be on full pelt at a fast pace for that long at the end of an already long and involved work, so maintaining the volume and the 'oomph' requires a lot of concentration and commitment from both orchestra and conductor. It also requires a recording producer who understands the work and can mic the orchestra appropriately so that everything is heard.
Secondly, after all that build up, it ends on two very short notes (actually the same notes as those that open the 2nd movement of Beethoven's 9th), and these can be very anti-climactic until you learn and appreciate the symphony, especially in the wrong hands.


----------



## Becca

That's what makes the difference between an average and a very good conductor, i.e. someone who can see the larger picture and not let their enthusiasm run away with them. The last movement of the Mahler 5th presents some similar issues in that it can see anti-climactic if the conductor doesn't correctly gauge the last few minutes.


----------



## Mal

I also like Kubelik and the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra, can't imagine better for a first or second listen. Walter/NYPO 1954 is superb, but the old mono sound makes the strings sound less than luxurious - vivid certainly, but might be off putting for a newcomer to this symphony. I think Walter and his hard working New Yorkers pull off the final movement very well.


----------



## Weird Heather

This thread is interesting to me; my first experiences with Mahler were the First and Fifth. Neither ended up being my absolute favorites, but I have always enjoyed them. I mentioned in another thread that I compare Mahler's symphonies to literature. I detect a distinct narrative flow, and his narratives sometimes move from one symphony to the next. For example, the Third symphony is so closely connected to the Fourth that I have trouble considering either one in isolation. A few years ago, I wrote a term paper for an English class on Nietzsche's text from Mahler's Third, but I found it impossible to complete my analysis without making references to the Fourth Symphony. Similarly, I find that the narrative in the First flows neatly into the Second, and I find that if I listen to the First, and then immediately afterwards, I listen to the Second, I find the experience to be eminently satisfying. If you find that you are having some issues with the First, you might give this a try.

Incidentally, although I have listened to the Fifth many times, I still find it to be quite the mystery, and it seems like every time I listen to it, I gain some sort of new insight. This is why I am drawn to Mahler. I feel like there is always something new to learn or appreciate.

Also, as has already been mentioned, if you haven't had the chance yet, you should listen to the "Blumine" movement, which Mahler initially included with the First Symphony but later rejected. I don't necessarily want to second guess Mahler's decision, but nonetheless, I find it to be an enjoyable piece of music.


----------



## LOLWUT

The first is a great symphony, in particular the second movement and slow parts of the fourth. I have never been too fond of the third movement. However, it ranks low among Mahler's symphonies, but given Mahler's extreme talent, high in the symphonic repertoire.


----------



## FDR

I always found Mahler's First Symphony to be the most accessible Mahler symphony. I haven't listened to it for a long while though so I too might give it a second try of sorts soon.


----------



## Rach Man

I forget where I saw this on TalkClassical. But someone suggested the Keeping Score PBS series by Michael Tilson Thomas. He does several of these instructional videos. In one of them, he discusses Mahler's 1st Symphony. This is a wonderful program. Thomas is not only a talented musician, he is also a talented teacher. Those don't always go hand-in-hand. (I am a teacher so I look for these traits in people trying to teach.)

You may be able to find this at your local library. I just went out on eBay and bought the two-disc set a few days ago and figured that it would be great. So I also bought his Keeping Score DVDs on Beethoven's Eroica and Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony. I haven't watched them yet. But if they are any where near as good as the Mahler presentation, these will be wonderful, too.

In conclusion, if you want to learn a bit about Mahler's 1st Symphony, this is a very good instructional and entertaining video. BTW, on the 2nd disc, the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra plays the symphony.


----------



## Becca

Along the same lines, here is Gustavo Dudamel and Simon Bolivar Orchestra doing a 'School of Listening' on the Mahler 1st from the Salzburg Festival...


----------



## hpowders

The first is the least favorite of the Mahler Symphonies for me.


----------



## Merl

hpowders said:


> The first is the least favorite of the Mahler Symphonies for me.


----------



## motoboy

Rach Man said:


> I forget where I saw this on TalkClassical. But someone suggested the Keeping Score PBS series by Michael Tilson Thomas. He does several of these instructional videos. In one of them, he discusses Mahler's 1st Symphony. This is a wonderful program. Thomas is not only a talented musician, he is also a talented teacher. Those don't always go hand-in-hand. (I am a teacher so I look for these traits in people trying to teach.)
> 
> You may be able to find this at your local library. I just went out on eBay and bought the two-disc set a few days ago and figured that it would be great. So I also bought his Keeping Score DVDs on Beethoven's Eroica and Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony. I haven't watched them yet. But if they are any where near as good as the Mahler presentation, these will be wonderful, too.
> 
> In conclusion, if you want to learn a bit about Mahler's 1st Symphony, this is a very good instructional and entertaining video. BTW, on the 2nd disc, the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra plays the symphony.


His Shosty 5 Keeping Score is pretty good too.


----------



## hpowders

Merl said:


>


Yes! Yes! Yes!!!

Why am I getting the feeling that you don't agree with me? 

It's just that symphonies 2-10 are higher quality music, in my opinion.


----------



## Canaeus

I listened to Mahler's First since the age of 14, on LP, directed by Bruno Walter. I liked it from the beginning. Still have it, still like it. Haven't played it since a looong time, so yeah, I guess now is the right time


----------



## PeterKC

Have to say I learned to love classical music because of this symphony. It was the first LP I owned and I find today, one of the best interpretations of the work. Adrian Boult, LPO, (Everest).


----------

