# Best Mahler 5 recording



## Saturnus

Dear Mahlerians of the Talk Classical forum, 
what is the best recording of Mahler symphony nr. 5? 

I really need a recording of the piece but the sheer number of different interpretations is overwhelming. 
(Also, if there are any big oboe solos in the symphony could you also name the recording with the best soloist?)


----------



## Aramis

I have no idea which is the best but I would mention Karajan because in his recording Mahler runs out from his composing hut in the end with great awe and he (Mahler) understands the world and rejoices, the birds sing all around and he run and jump around surrounded by bright life of nature. The other recordings don't understand it and spoil this fragment. I think all the rest is not bad as well. It's good actually. I disliked Bernstein, I liked Wit and then Kubelik but Karajan, well, like I said already.


----------



## Vaneyes

VPO/Bernstein (DG), RPO/Shipway (RPO, latest remastering 2003), great performances, strong dynamics.


----------



## itywltmt

I own three versions, ranked in order of preference:

1 - Hermann Scherchen and Vienna Staatsoper Orchestra (Uniiversal Music CD)
2 - Rafael Kubelik and Bavarian RSO (DG, vinyl)
3 - Riccardo Chailly and Concertgebouw (Decca, CD)

I should really rank them 1a, 1b and 1c, as I think they are all excellent, but I have a bias towards the Sherchen interpretation, though I find the issue I have (part of the MCA "Millenium" series) has inferior sound quality to the other two, IMHO.

The Chailly version is part of the Mahler cycle Decca released about 5 years ago (budget priced box set). As a whiole, the Chailly Cycle shows a unity of vision that makes it a great buy.

The Kubelik disc is a vinyl third generation re-issue by DG of the great Kubelik Mahler cycle of the early 60's, of which I own a few recordings, my favourite of which being his "Resurrection".


----------



## tdc

I am still stuck on Chailly, because I enjoy his Mahler interpretations so much I haven't really sought out many other recordings just yet. His Mahler 5 is great. I've tried to seek out other conductors on youtube, but felt that Gergiev and Bernstein didn't do it for me at all on the 6th (too fast) so I have shied away from their sets, but I may just have to seek out some of the other sets mentioned here.


----------



## Ukko

If by 'best' you are referring to the recording I most enjoy, it is this one:

Orchestre National Bordeaux Aquitaine, Alain Lombard. The only performance I have heard that is in 32 bit color rather than 8 bit grayscale.

It's listed at Amazon.com, both in CD and mp3.


----------



## Vaneyes

Hilltroll72 said:


> If by 'best' you are referring to the recording I most enjoy, it is this one:
> 
> Orchestre National Bordeaux Aquitaine, Alain Lombard. The only performance I have heard that is in 32 bit color rather than 8 bit grayscale.
> 
> It's listed at Amazon.com, both in CD and mp3.


I was disappointed. To my ears, it's an odd interpretation much of the way. French Mahler?

For those interested, there's a healthy sampling available here...

http://www.we7.com/#/album/Alain-Lombard/Gustav-Mahler-Symphony-No-5-In-C-Sharp-Minor-Death


----------



## Stasou

Bernstein is my favorite Mahler interpreter. Try Bernstein with Wiener Philharmoniker.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant

There are plenty of good performances and to try and order them is a pointless exercise - they are different form each other, not better or worse than each other.
I rate Abbado on DG and Haitink's seventies recording on Philips.


----------



## Conor71

I like Bernstein and Karajan as well  - Barbirolli also has an excellent Mahler 5th:


----------



## Ukko

Vaneyes said:


> I was disappointed. To my ears, it's an odd interpretation much of the way. French Mahler?
> 
> For those interested, there's a healthy sampling available here...
> 
> http://www.we7.com/#/album/Alain-Lombard/Gustav-Mahler-Symphony-No-5-In-C-Sharp-Minor-Death


I don't know that it's particularly French, but it's certainly not 'standard' Mahler, because it's more upper than downer. :cheers:


----------



## Vaneyes

Jeremy Marchant said:


> There are plenty of good performances and to try and order them is a pointless exercise - they are different form each other, not better or worse than each other.
> I rate Abbado on DG and Haitink's seventies recording on Philips.


Abbado with Chicago or BPO?


----------



## Jeremy Marchant

Vaneyes said:


> Abbado with Chicago or BPO?


Chicago.
I'm not suggesting that's better than Berlin - I haven't heard the latter, or most of the other available recordings


----------



## itywltmt

Jeremy Marchant said:


> There are plenty of good performances and to try and order them is a pointless exercise - they are different form each other, not better or worse than each other.
> I rate Abbado on DG and Haitink's seventies recording on Philips.


I don't disagree wuth your point about "ranking". Since I was the culprit yesterday, my intent was to simply give my "wholly subjective" impression of the three versions I own. Also note how I called them "1a, 1b and 1c", essentially echoing your sentiment that they are all really equal. I may be naive in saying this, but - for the most part - I think that interpretations that are worthy of being captured on a recording have some merit.

Mind you, this was probably true 20+ years ago when making a recording was a "big dfeal", that the technology meant that orchestras had to go to studios because moving all the bulky analogue recording equipment was problematic, and there wasn't as much of an entrepreneurial spirit at play with professional orchestras (they had to align themselves with recording labels rather than be their own producers and distributors).

On-line distribution and the low cost of CD media production (vice vinyl) changed the equation, and you now have labels/series like the SFSO's label, "LSO Live", and others that are price-comparable to the old--school DG, Deca, EMI, etc.

My 2 cents for a Friday...


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Topic also covered here.

My input on that thread is here.


----------



## Ukko

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Topic also covered here.
> 
> My input on that thread is here.


Jeez, Chi..., that was a long time ago! You have probably changed your mind 3 times since then.


----------



## Vaneyes

Chi_townPhilly said:


> Topic also covered here.
> 
> My input on that thread is here.


Tennstedt, '78 or '88? Solti, '70 or '90?


----------



## Guest

I have to add my vote to the several already for Bernstein on DG with Wiener Philharmoniker. In fact, after I listen to a little Beethoven, I just might pop that recording into my computer and listen. It is one of the few CD's I have here in my office. Anybody who walks by can often hear classical music playing.


----------



## Vaneyes

Jeremy Marchant said:


> Chicago.
> I'm not suggesting that's better than Berlin - I haven't heard the latter, or most of the other available recordings


Thanks, understood. Do hear the BPO/Abbado, if you have the chance. IMHO it is better.

On your other point about ranking recordings. First and foremost should come a mutual respect for listening. If someone likes something, or many things, good for him or her.

That said, I do think there are good, bad, and indifferent recordings, especially now that Mahler's performed so much. Overkill, I believe, but their is method in this madness. It sells!

Selling to Mahlerites. I'm beginning to believe that any new release of a Mahler recording could sell 10,000 copies or more, mostly to hardcore Mahler collectors who have to have everything.


----------



## TxllxT

3 times Haitink with the 5th from the Christmas Matinées being my favourite (_live_ with an enormous tension building up).


----------



## haydnfan

Yet another person that loves the powerful yet intimate Bernstein DG. For a more recent recording, Zander ain't bad, and imo is the highlight of his Mahler survey.


----------



## Saturnus

Thank you all for great responses! They were very helpful. 

Chi_TownPhilly: I'm sorry for making a duplicate thread, but believe me, before I made this one I made a search, which gave simply too many results and your thread was not on the first 3 pages. 

Anyway, I ended up buying both Karajan with Berliner and Bernstein with Wiener and I like Berstein way more. I don't know about interpretation but the Wiener Philharmoniker sound seems to suit the music so much better. Mahler must have had the Wiener sound in mind when he wrote the music.


----------



## World Violist

I was disappointed in both of Bernstein's recordings, though it's probably just that the 5th is antithetical to me in some way.

The only recordings of it I've ever liked were Barbirolli's and Saraste's.


----------



## tahnak

Will consider Georg Solti and Chicago symphony as the best recording followed by
Zubin Mehta and the New York Philharmonic
Claudio Abbado with the Berlin Philharmonic
and Kirill Kondrashin with the Moscow Philharmonic


----------



## samurai

I am coming to this topic as both a non-musician and a fairly recent "convert" to the wonders of classical music. I am interested in finding out what criteria my fellow members--who are both musicians themselves and/or "veteran" listeners and adherents of classical music--choose to apply when they are rendering an assessment of whether a particular interpretation of a work by a conductor is "good" or not. What elements go into one's making such a decision? Should the conductor religiously follow the score as it was written by the original composer, or is he/she to take liberties with it based on his own philosophy or feelings about it? 
In other words, should this be more of an objective or subjective, personal type of undertaking?

Just how much should the passionate feelings brought to the work by the individual conductor {a reflection, no doubt of the composer as well} be credited--whether the score is being followed exactly--or not? Should this be part--or perhaps all--of the "equation", then? 
p.s. I do hope that I haven't placed this in the wrong thread or strayed too far from the original Mahler topic. Please forgive me if I have. :scold:


----------



## kwansk

I always liked the recording of Berlin Phil with Simon Rattle the most. The Adagio movement is just heart tearing. I would also suggest the recording with London Phil/Tennstedt- one of the best live recordings of Mahler 5 ever.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Saturnus said:


> Chi_TownPhilly: I'm sorry for making a duplicate thread, but believe me, before I made this one I made a search, which gave simply too many results and your thread was not on the first 3 pages.


No need to apologize. There's always room for a follow-up Mahler symphony discussion!


samurai said:


> Should the conductor religiously follow the score as it was written by the original composer, or is he/she to take liberties with it based on his own philosophy or feelings about it?
> In other words, should this be more of an objective or subjective, personal type of undertaking?
> 
> Just how much should the passionate feelings brought to the work by the individual conductor {a reflection, no doubt of the composer as well} be credited--whether the score is being followed exactly--or not? Should this be part--or perhaps all--of the "equation", then?
> p.s. I do hope that I haven't placed this in the wrong thread or strayed too far from the original Mahler topic.


_I_ certainly don't think this is too much of a digression- at least insofar as we're able to discuss these approaches apropos Mahler, or even more specifically apropos Mahler's 5th symphony.

The most frequent criticism levelled against Bernstein interpretations of Mahler is that they allow for some willful exaggerations of the material in the score. Speaking for myself, I don't particularly favor them- but there are lots of people whose opinions I respect who DO favor them- and if that's the way they like it, that's cool by me.

A common complaint about Solti's Mahler is that it lacks subtlety and that the direct way in which the musical challenges are surmounted attentuates some of the real turmoil inherent in the works. "He makes Mahler sound easy, and Mahler should NEVER sound easy!" is a typical refrain. Me? I kind of like it when the instrumental parts are played in an audibly oustanding manner... but I can see how some would conclude that a degree of the pathos and drama are lessened by that perspective.

One thing that I would counsel is to avoid being doctrinnaire towards one approach or another. The classic chestnut apposition between "devotion-to-the-score" and "inner-spiritual-meaning" in the conducting world are the twin titans Toscanini and Furtwängler. In spite of their very different styles, there's a lot of material that suggests that (musically speaking) they respected one another's work.

One thing that the current age has brought us is an unprecedented ability to compare and contrast recorded interpretations by different ensembles and conductors. This opportunity is especially rewarding for works at or near the top of one's "favorite" lists.


----------



## Ukko

samurai said:


> [...] I am interested in finding out what criteria my fellow members--who are both musicians themselves and/or "veteran" listeners and adherents of classical music--choose to apply when they are rendering an assessment of whether a particular interpretation of a work by a conductor is "good" or not. What elements go into one's making such a decision? Should the conductor religiously follow the score as it was written by the original composer, or is he/she to take liberties with it based on his own philosophy or feelings about it?
> In other words, should this be more of an objective or subjective, personal type of undertaking? [...]


I am a 'veteran listener'. There is no assignable qualitative weight between the options you list; as your sig says, it's 'whatever rocks your boat'.

Personally, I like both approaches. Bernstein's Mahler 5 and pre-DG Boulez's Mahler 5 interpretations are equally valuable to me. I don't recall if Stokowsky recorded that symphony; if he did I would expect him to attempt to 'have it both ways'.

And then there is Alain Lombard's interpretation (mentioned earlier in this thread), which pretty much changes everything; I like that one too.

[Much of my on-the-road music is jazz, except when it's bluegrass. Music has multiple pathways into the soul.]

:tiphat:


----------

