# Mahler's 8th Symphony (Studio Vs. Live)



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

In honor of getting my tickets yesterday to go see Mahler's 8th Symphony live in April  I started thinking about recordings. _(As a side note, I've been able to see Mahler's 3rd, 5th, 6th & 7th performed live by the Grand Rapids Symphony orchestra which is a couple hours away from me. I think they are probably the best semi-local orchestra around me and always do a pretty good job. The Devos Performance hall isn't huge per say, so it's a pretty rare treat for me to see the 8th performed live. Needless to say I'm pretty excited.)
_
Anyway, it seems like I read some time ago the 8th symphony has been recorded the least (other than maybe the unfinished 10th) do to the amount of performers needed. It is also most often recorded live instead of in the studio.

Wikipedia says there have been around 70 recordings made, but some were private pressings and not commercially released. They list like 56 commercial recordings, around 18 of those being recorded in the studio, and the rest being live.

They are listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._8_(Mahler)_discography

Some say you can only capture a work like this "Live", yet usually the recordings I always hear/see reviews rave about, are like Solti's 8th, which is a Studio recording.

So here are my discussion questions.

1. What is your favorite Studio recording of the 8th?
2. What is your favorite Live Recording of the 8th?
3. Which do you prefer (Studio vs Live) and why?


----------



## itywltmt (May 29, 2011)

Studio: Solti / Chicago Symphony + assorted choral forces (DECCA)
Live: Dimitri Mitrpoulos/ Vienna Festival Orchestra (the recording I own was ON A SINGLE LP, so I can't say much for sound quality...) (EVEREST)

Usually, Live performances of anything have more spontaneity and exuberance, due to the energy of performing in fromnt of an audience. Because of the forces required (and many of the live performances do all they can to assemble 1000 performers...), I could imagine how the performances can lack preparation and finish. I would therefore argue that such performances could be inferior to the studio versions, which have the benefit of preparation, and multiple takes.

I envy you for attending a live performance of the Eighth - I expect it to be electric and memorable. The "being there" dimension is something no recording of a live performance can truly capture.

Just my thoughts...


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

I agree with a lot of your points.

I always prefer a studio recording but I think the 8th really needs that "Live" feeling to be incorporated into it to really pay off. Very few studio recordings capture that for me with the 8th. Wyn Morris comes to mind as I think he did a good job of conveying this in his recording but his take on the 8th was a little different on the whole.

After spending a few days thinking about it, my favorite recordings of the 8th are all live. I think Horenstein's version on the BBC Legends label is perfect. It holds everything for me, but unfortunately as someone else once wrote in a review, it must have been "Cold & Flu" season because you can hear the audience coughing through the whole recording and it really ruins what was an absolutely monumental performance for me.

Abbado's recording is probably the next best, followed by probably Bertini & Rattle.

Solti and Kubelik have nice studio 8th's but they don't "wow" me I guess. The 8th is probably Solti's best Mahler recording and it's held up a long time and I do enjoy hearing it from time. Tennstadt and Sinopoli both did nice jobs with studio recordings as well, but they both used one small choir (which they tried to make sound much bigger than it really did) which kind of ruins it for me as well.

Overall I guess I haven't been totally happy with any of the studio recordings out there of the 8th and I always come back to the Live versions.


----------

