# Which Mahler cycle should I hear next?



## Lord Lance

I finished the remaining of the chronological 1-9 from Bernstein's NYP cycle recently [After a rather long _Bruckner _extravaganza, might I add.]

So, I decided the best next thing to do was: Traverse through the 9(10) again. Plenty of options to choose from as the poll will attest.

What do you think I should pick? Oh, and pointing out the flaws of famed and "revered" cycle earns you bonus points.


----------



## Albert7

Sinopoli's cycle. And Boulez.


----------



## ptr

Why not use a very good survey like the late Tony Duggan's to guide You, like Tony wrote in is fore word, no one conductor is optimal in all the symphonies! Is better to use his wise scribblings as a starting point for a new traversal (may include some interesting reading!)

You'll find Tony's survey here

/ptr


----------



## Lord Lance

*UPDATED! *Poll has been added.



ptr said:


> Why not use a very good survey like the late Tony Duggan's to guide You, like Tony wrote in is fore word, no one conductor is optimal in all the symphonies! Is better to use his wise scribblings as a starting point for a new traversal (may include some interesting reading!)
> 
> You'll find Tony's survey here
> 
> /ptr


Like many, you think I am in it for the "best" or superior performances. I have a different approach to this: I listen to the nine chronologically as a natural, organic whole under one conductor to fully understand and comprehend his vision, his style and his approach to what is essentially one of the most popular and the - arguably - finest symphonic output from Twentieth Century Germany.

Why, you may ask? Because I have conductor fetish.

Anywho, I do these things often out of a psychologically compulsion to assess and compare differing performances in an endless quest to satisfy my inner hunger.


----------



## Lord Lance

Albert7 said:


> Sinopoli's cycle. And Boulez.


Please elaborate on the reasons of your recommendation and/or the manners in which it excels/supersedes its competition.


----------



## Albert7

Lord Lance said:


> Please elaborate on the reasons of your recommendation and/or the manners in which it excels/supersedes its competition.


The verbs excels/supersedes are a social construct and sorry I don't understand what the term "best" or "better" means from your perspective.

Can you explain what you mean by recording A being better than recording B? For me, there is no scientific way to measure that.


----------



## Mahlerian

Lord Lance said:


> Like many, you think I am in it for the "best" or superior performances. I have a different approach to this: I listen to the nine chronologically as a natural, organic whole under one conductor to fully understand and comprehend his vision, his style and his approach to what is essentially one of the most popular and the - arguably - finest symphonic output from Twentieth Century Germany.


Turn of the century Austria, you mean.

Also, each work is separate and should be approached separately.


----------



## Becca

Lord Lance said:


> Like many, you think I am in it for the "best" or superior performances. I have a different approach to this: I listen to the nine chronologically as a natural, organic whole under one conductor to fully understand and comprehend his vision, his style and his approach to what is essentially one of the most popular


But this assumes that a conductor did the works in some logical order and that they represent a snapshot of their career, which is rarely the case.


----------



## Kivimees

Mahlerian said:


> Turn of the century Austria, you mean.


Ouch! :devil: ...............


----------



## omega

My favourite Mahler condeuctor is Claudio Abbado. I highly recommend his performances with the Lucerne Festival Orchestra (it is not a complete cyle, though, since it does not include the Eighth). His cycle with the Berliner Philharmoniker (on DG) is also a first rate choice; I think it is better than the earlier cycle you listed.

As for Sinopoli, his Mahler is rather... special. I own his cycle, and I can tell you there are very good surprises (No.3, No.5, No.6, and why not No.8), but also some disappointing stuff. But this is only a personal opinion... up to you to make up your own opinion!

:tiphat:


----------



## Heliogabo

Lord Lance said:


> *UPDATED! *Poll has been added.
> 
> Like many, you think I am in it for the "best" or superior performances. I have a different approach to this: I listen to the nine chronologically as a natural, organic whole under one conductor to fully understand and comprehend his vision, his style and his approach to what is essentially one of the most popular and the - arguably - finest symphonic output from Twentieth Century Germany.
> 
> Why, you may ask? Because I have conductor fetish.
> 
> Anywho, I do these things often out of a psychologically compulsion to assess and compare differing performances in an endless quest to satisfy my inner hunger.


Try Deutsche Grammophon Bernstein's cycle. You'll compare a conductor and a composer at the same time so, perhaps you"ll satisfy that "inner hunger".


----------



## Guest

I love the Solti/CSO. The playing is staggeringly good, Solti's interpretations are very intense, and the sound is great, if a bit overly spotlit at times. Second choice would be Sinopoli. Absolute last would be Gergiev--did he just phone in his conducting? The sound isn't that great for SACDs, either.


----------



## Nereffid

I voted for the Abbado DG set.
Reason: I picked a random number between 1 and 15. There were already 5 voters and 5 different votes, so it looks like a random choice might be just as useful as a carefully considered one.


----------



## GreenMamba

Albert7 said:


> The verbs excels/supersedes are a social construct and sorry I don't understand what the term "best" or "better" means from your perspective.


Why did you recommend Sinopoli and Boulez? Why recommend anything?


----------



## Albert7

GreenMamba said:


> Why did you recommend Sinopoli and Boulez? Why recommend anything?


Because those guys are the results of my personal biases. I recommend any Mahler but why not go for things that I have enjoyed in the past?


----------



## elgar's ghost

As you've tried the heart-on-the-sleeve option with Bernstein maybe you should try Chailly for a different approach. His cycle has been criticised for being, among other things, too reserved/detached but I appreciate the overall control he maintains. I think much of Mahler's symphonic music allows for interpretation to cut either way of the emotional scale. The recording quality of Chailly's cycle is also very good.


----------



## Lord Lance

*Replies...*



Mahlerian said:


> Turn of the century Austria, you mean.
> 
> Also, each work is separate and should be approached separately.


Yes, Austria. Thank you for the correction, Mahlerian. I don't know about the latter though. I like to listen to them continuously successively. And = assuming they aren't done in the span of decades - show a vision which all great conductors have when creating their Mahler cycle. Example: Zinman.



Albert7 said:


> The verbs excels/supersedes are a social construct and sorry I don't understand what the term "best" or "better" means from your perspective.
> 
> Can you explain what you mean by recording A being better than recording B? For me, there is no scientific way to measure that.


"better" is assessable. Would you not rank Bernstein's Second Mahler at least better than Kaplan's? Or would you simply ridicule any parameters for such measure? Orchestral playing? Clarity? Perfection in tempo [i.e. following conductor's tempo marking]? orchestral balance? Recording quality? Errors in playing? Live vs Studio? Emotional reaction? These are sometimes "scientific" and sometimes "emotional" and other times "preferential". There are several ways in which "better" can be said for a record. "best" on the other hand is an entirely different, implausible construct.



Heliogabo said:


> Try Deutsche Grammophon Bernstein's cycle. You'll compare a conductor and a composer at the same time so, perhaps you"ll satisfy that "inner hunger".


"inner hunger" in quotation marks? We all have it, you know? And no, sorry, but I cannot access Bernstein's DG Mahler cycle; hence, it is not in the list. Please select from the list.



Kontrapunctus said:


> I love the Solti/CSO. The playing is staggeringly good, Solti's interpretations are very intense, and the sound is great, if a bit overly spotlit at times. Second choice would be Sinopoli. Absolute last would be Gergiev--did he just phone in his conducting? The sound isn't that great for SACDs, either.


I've read mixed response for his Mahler but not negative or, as in your case, scathing. Why do you think Gergiev's "phoned in his conducting" in his Mahler cycle?



elgars ghost said:


> As you've tried the heart-on-the-sleeve option with Bernstein maybe you should try Chailly for a different approach. His cycle has been criticised for being, among other things, too reserved/detached but I appreciate the overall control he maintains. I think much of Mahler's symphonic music allows for interpretation to cut either way of the emotional scale. The recording quality of Chailly's cycle is also very good.


Very good. Thank you! To hear the anti-thesis to my beloved, Bernstein and really most Mahler performances is refreshing. Would you say the same for Boulez's Mahler?


----------



## Lord Lance

What is the general consensus regarding Levine's various Mahler recordings?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Boulez and then Gielen. Both amazing, both absolute masters of bringing out every single intricacy in the scores.


----------



## Triplets

The only Gielen that I am familiar with is the 7th, which I have just heard and admire, so I would be interested in exploring his 
Mahler more. I also wasn't aware that he had recorded the entire canon.


----------



## Triplets

elgars ghost said:


> As you've tried the heart-on-the-sleeve option with Bernstein maybe you should try Chailly for a different approach. His cycle has been criticised for being, among other things, too reserved/detached but I appreciate the overall control he maintains. I think much of Mahler's symphonic music allows for interpretation to cut either way of the emotional scale. The recording quality of Chailly's cycle is also very good.


for Maximal Emotionally Detached Mahler, try Boulez.


----------



## Mahlerian

Triplets said:


> for Maximal Emotionally Detached Mahler, try Boulez.


I don't hear that at all. Boulez's Mahler isn't emotionally detached; in fact I find it very engaging and moving.


----------



## Triplets

Lord Lance said:


> What is the general consensus regarding Levine's various Mahler recordings?


 His 3rd with the CSO is stupendous, imo, but I was greatly dissapointed with his 6th, which struck me as lightweight and superficial, two words that I previously never would have associated with that work. The rest of what I've heard, which I believe is 1,5,and 9, are good without displacing any other favorites.


----------



## Triplets

Mahlerian said:


> I don't hear that at all. Boulez's Mahler isn't emotionally detached; in fact I find it very engaging and moving.


Different strokes for different folks. Mahler's music can tolerate many approaches and still reveal new insights. Boulez is a valid viewpoint but I certainly wouldn't want it to be my only window to GM. For me, and I know the ae others in TC and elsewhere, that agree with this, Boulez approaches the music from a bit of an emotional distance. Since Mahler's music runs the gamut of emotions, detachment can occassionally pay some dividends.


----------



## Mahlerian

Triplets said:


> Different strokes for different folks. Mahler's music can tolerate many approaches and still reveal new insights. Boulez is a valid viewpoint but I certainly wouldn't want it to be my only window to GM. For me, and I know the ae others in TC and elsewhere, that agree with this, Boulez approaches the music from a bit of an emotional distance. Since Mahler's music runs the gamut of emotions, detachment can occassionally pay some dividends.


I agree with you that Mahler's music can withstand a variety of approaches, and also in that Boulez's take on Mahler is neither my favorite nor my first choice as a recommendation.

But I don't agree that his conducting is emotionally detached. It is not exaggerated, to be sure, but it has a sure pulse, a subtle rubato, and command of form: these readings are built over the course of a work, not simply movement by movement or, even worse, moment by moment, as if Mahler's music were mere collage.


----------



## ptr

So You are not interested in Mahler, just want to bang the conductor, then Herbert von Karajan must be Your ideal fetish! No depth just polish! :devil:

/ptr


----------



## FLighT

I like the recent remastered Bernie cycle (Sony/Carnegie Hall Presents), and the Boulez makes a nice contrast and is fully satisfying for me. Then for a conductor who seems to combine the best of both of those approaches I like Tennstedt. I have the complete Gielen cycle as well but haven't listened enough to it to know where it ranks in my personal hierarchy of favorites yet. Same for Tilson-Thomas. I also have numerous individual symphonies in partial cycles by all the usual suspects.


----------



## Lord Lance

*Update #2*

Looks like Boulez is being voted for the most right now with a 1 point lead. I suppose his somewhat "detached" [only in comparison to Bernstein; sorry Mahlerian] and more level-headed interpretations have their charm. Not to mention including almost all of Mahler's orchestral music. Not to mention the infinitely useful booklet containing all translations of the songs/poems except Das Lied von der Erde. Which translation is more accurate - Boulez's or Bernstein's booklet?

Anybody have a view on Chailly's second foray (on video) of Mahler's symphonies?


----------



## Albert7

ptr said:


> So You are not interested in Mahler, just want to bang the conductor, then Herbert von Karajan must be Your ideal fetish! No depth just polish! :devil:
> 
> /ptr


Okay... that's just gross. Bear + human being = very bad mess.

I didn't know that Herby was that attractive to the ursine species.

And yes, Boulez is worth exploring. Tennstedt too!


----------



## Lord Lance

Albert7 said:


> Okay... that's just gross. Bear + human being = very bad mess.
> 
> I didn't know that Herby was that attractive to the ursine species.
> 
> And yes, Boulez is worth exploring. Tennstedt too!


Fool! Karajan is my Lord and I shall worship him.

Which one, though? The live performances or EMI?


----------



## Albert7

Lord Lance said:


> Fool! Karajan is my Lord and I shall worship him.
> 
> Which one, though? The live performances or EMI?


Wow, if you really do worship him ummm.... okay.

"Why all this deference to Alfred, and Scanderbeg, and Gustavus? Suppose they were virtuous; did they wear out virtue?"

― Ralph Waldo Emerson

EMI for the Tennstedt.


----------



## Ali Ben Sawali

Haitink is a great antidote to egotistical Bernstein. Stay away from Karajan. Abbado offers excellent readings but Haitink offers an excellent 6th on Naive and gets the movements in the right order.


----------



## padraic

Lord Lance said:


> What is the general consensus regarding Levine's various Mahler recordings?


They are on the whole excellent. His 7th is among the best I've heard, perhaps my #1. Sadly, the cycle is incomplete, you'll be missing #2 and #8, but for me no one will surpass Tennstedt in these anyways.


----------



## padraic

Triplets said:


> His 3rd with the CSO is stupendous, imo, but I was greatly dissapointed with his 6th, which struck me as lightweight and superficial, two words that I previously never would have associated with that work. The rest of what I've heard, which I believe is 1,5,and 9, are good without displacing any other favorites.


I haven't heard his 6th enough to form his opinion. Concur that he does a great 3rd, but for me Lenny owned that work.


----------



## realdealblues

I voted for Gielen. If you've listened to Bernstein and want something that is less heart and more head Gielen is a wonderful contrast. Kubelik is also worth owning if you do not already have it as he lies somewhere in between for me.


----------



## Lord Lance

padraic said:


> They are on the whole excellent. His 7th is among the best I've heard, perhaps my #1. Sadly, the cycle is incomplete, you'll be missing #2 and #8, but for me no one will surpass Tennstedt in these anyways.


He has recorded all the symphonies including #10's Adagio. In studio (on RCA), however, it may be incomplete - 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10's Adagio - but there exist other performances: Mahler's Second on Helicon with Israel Philharmonic Orchestra and on Orfeo with Wiener Philharmoniker; Mahler's Das Lied von Der Erde with Berliner Philharmoniker on DG; Mahler's Tenth [Orchestrated by Dercyk Cooke - Final Version] with Philadelphia Orchestra on RCA.

Yes, the Eighth isn't recorded but its inclusion wouldn't have mattered - not a fan. Hence, Levine has recorded all of Mahler's symphonies.



Albert7 said:


> Wow, if you really do worship him ummm.... okay.
> 
> "Why all this deference to Alfred, and Scanderbeg, and Gustavus? Suppose they were virtuous; did they wear out virtue?"
> 
> ― Ralph Waldo Emerson
> 
> EMI for the Tennstedt.


You know very well that I was speaking in hyperbolic languages and I am a hardcore atheist.

But, yes, as a musician and his inimitable skill and his insight is breathtaking and awe-inspiring. People suffer from psychological biases in his records. He may've done certain records which were clean and smooth to the point where a majority dissented his vision but that doesn't make all his 400-ish discs and two dozen or so video performance the same. Karajan-bashing is "hip" just like Lang Lang bashing or Beaver bashing is. *sigh*

But, to say, he is a commercial machine or "egotistical in his records" or hearing Karajan and not the composer or to say his records were bangfest or they were excessively manipulated just show how little you understand or know of him truly. *sigh*

He may have went a little over-the-top in a few records but never have they been just bangs or loud empty noises.

I am out.


----------



## Albert7

Ali Ben Sawali said:


> Haitink is a great antidote to egotistical Bernstein. Stay away from Karajan. Abbado offers excellent readings but Haitink offers an excellent 6th on Naive and gets the movements in the right order.


Shhh.... bear doesn't like negative stuff about Karajan btw...


----------



## Polyphemus

Hello people how many times does one have to say it.
There is no perfect Mahler cycle.
If every contributor to this thread listed their 'perfect' Mahler cycle then the variation in choices would be staggering. I have a personal battle at the moment between the long term leader Solti and Chailly for the 8th Symphony. This statement alone will cause raised eyebrows and cries of 'Tosh'.
Do we opt for the ego driven approach of Bernstein or Karajan (again a controversial statement) bound to ruffle some feathers. 
The only way to collect the 'perfect' Mahler cycle is to listen to every recording you can lay hands on. Beg them from friends borrow them from libraries and only by this accumulated listening will you decide on the perfect cycle.
*However be warned this 'perfect cycle' will change as you discover new or old performances you consider more fitting to be in your perfect Mahler cycle. *


----------



## Adam Weber

I voted for Zinman. A very clear, almost willfully "straight" cycle, a la Boulez or Chailly, but faster, and more "melodic" (he downplays the effects for the sake of the line, whereas Boulez or Chailly or Gielen bring out more "Schoenbergian" effects). The anti-Bernstein, if you will. Not my favorite cycle, but very good and in excellent sound. An extremely cogent and sunny 7th is probably my favorite point in the cycle. Really helped me understand the piece.


----------



## Lord Lance

Albert7 said:


> Shhh.... bear doesn't like negative stuff about Karajan btw...


If its justified, then sure. Criticize his manipulation of sound or - if you are that type - his habit of re-recording twice or five times. Or, perhaps, his sense of ego and dictatorial rule which permanently harmed his relations with Berliner Philharmoniker.

But, criticizing his style altogether is something which varies from person to person and hence, should not be denounced.

For the record, except his Schubert 9 on EMI and DG, I haven't found any mediocre records in almost 4 dozen discs and various YouTube videos. And half a dozen of video performances. His Beethoven 4 from the 1980s may've been of debatable quality but his mastery and drive towards his singular vision is unquestionable.



Adam Weber said:


> I voted for Zinman. A very clear, almost willfully "straight" cycle, a la Boulez or Chailly, but faster, and more "melodic" (he downplays the effects for the sake of the line, whereas Boulez or Chailly or Gielen bring out more "Schoenbergian" effects). The anti-Bernstein, if you will. Not my favorite cycle, but very good and in excellent sound. An extremely cogent and sunny 7th is probably my favorite point in the cycle. Really helped me understand the piece.


Zinman's Mahler isn't exactly mentioned with the frequency of either Walter or Klemperer or Bernstein. Why is that? The sound is excellent - one its main selling points, the playing is.. competent? He adopts much swifter tempi, correct? "straight" as in unemotional?


----------



## Lord Lance

Polyphemus said:


> Hello people how many times does one have to say it.
> There is no perfect Mahler cycle.
> If every contributor to this thread listed their 'perfect' Mahler cycle then the variation in choices would be staggering. I have a personal battle at the moment between the long term leader Solti and Chailly for the 8th Symphony. This statement alone will cause raised eyebrows and cries of 'Tosh'.
> Do we opt for the ego driven approach of Bernstein or Karajan (again a controversial statement) bound to ruffle some feathers.
> The only way to collect the 'perfect' Mahler cycle is to listen to every recording you can lay hands on. Beg them from friends borrow them from libraries and only by this accumulated listening will you decide on the perfect cycle.
> *However be warned this 'perfect cycle' will change as you discover new or old performances you consider more fitting to be in your perfect Mahler cycle. *


*sigh* How many times do I have to state that I know this well and am *not *in search of this mythical perfection. I am merely in search for a cycle of Mahler from a single conductor to assess his abilities and his style and his method. There's a level of stability and "homogeneity" that exists in a cycle. Its odd a goal, I know but its my fetish.

I want to include Klemperer; alas, he recorded only five of his symphonies - 2, 4, 7, 9, Das Lied von Der Erde. Maybe in my next poll.


----------



## Adam Weber

Lord Lance said:


> Zinman's Mahler isn't exactly mentioned with the frequency of either Walter or Klemperer or Bernstein. Why is that? The sound is excellent - one its main selling points, the playing is.. competent? He adopts much swifter tempi, correct? "straight" as in unemotional?


Middle-of-the road tempi from what I remember, and by "straight" I mean a lack of rubato. I haven't seen the scores (and couldn't do much to read them if I did), but there are spots that sound more metrical than usual, as if Zinman's not only avoiding rubato, but altering the score as well. Like I said, a focus on the "melodic" aspects prevails. Less dramatic Mahler, but, when it works, it's very pastoral and lovely. Less "summer storm," more "alpine meadow." For example, the clicking bells and strings in the first movement of the 6th, between 17:50 and 18:12, are especially precise in Zinman's recording and have a wholly unique clockwork sound.


----------



## david johnson

I have too much Mahler to count, Klemperer, Solti (cso and lso), Leinsdorf (his 1 is my favorite), Kubelik...you get the idea. However, the only cycle I have is Rattle. The price was right at the time and it's finely done.


----------



## Lord Lance

And Edo de Waart's cycle stands at the last place with zero votes; same for Levine [My vote]; no lovers for Gergiev or Abravanel.

Must I presume then that these four are unworthy of inspection?


----------



## Adam Weber

I like Abravanel's Mahler quite a bit. I would say it most closely resembles Kubelik's Mahler, but with a less virtuosic orchestra. Still, they're committed performances and the woodwinds are very colorful. Gergiev is... weird. Sometimes fast, sometimes slow, usually interesting. Worth hearing at least once, I'd say, to see if you like what he does with Mahler. Levine gets good reviews, but I haven't heard those recordings. As for Edo de Waart, I didn't even know he had a cycle.


----------



## Triplets

padraic said:


> I haven't heard his 6th enough to form his opinion. Concur that he does a great 3rd, but for me Lenny owned that work.


Well, there are a lot of Mahler recordings out there...I haven't heard LB in this piece for many years but I remember liking it. The Levine was the recording that really got me into the 3rd so it will always be special for me.


----------



## Triplets

Adam Weber said:


> I like Abravanel's Mahler quite a bit. I would say it most closely resembles Kubelik's Mahler, but with a less virtuosic orchestra. Still, they're committed performances and the woodwinds are very colorful. Gergiev is... weird. Sometimes fast, sometimes slow, usually interesting. Worth hearing at least once, I'd say, to see if you like what he does with Mahler. Levine gets good reviews, but I haven't heard those recordings. As for Edo de Waart, I didn't even know he had a cycle.


 Pretty spot on comments, i think. I have the Abravanel in DVD-A. The 5th is the real standout. It's true that the Orchestra just can't compare to the VPO, CSO or Berlin, but they are surprisingly good by any standard.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

For a good many years I collected individual recordings of Mahler by any number of conductors. Among those I have greatly enjoyed are Rattle, Klemperer, Bruno Walter, and Mehta's 2nd, Walter & Kubelik's 1st, Leinsdorf's 1st & 3rd, Abbado's 3rd, Reiner and Abbado's 4th, Karajan, Barbirolli, Bruno Walter, and Shipway's 5th, Abaddo, Karajan, & Tennstedt's (live) 6th, Abaddo's 7th, Solti's 8th, and Walter, Barbirolli, and Abaddo's 9th.

I have several recordings by Boulez, who contrary to Mahlerian, I also find too detached. Stilll they are worth hearing.

I left Bernstein and Tennstedt off the list for the simple reason that these are the two conductors by whom I have the entire cycle. Tennstedt (with London/EMI) has become my one of favorite Mahler conductors. The live recordings I have heard by him are equally good... and perhaps a bit more exciting.

I have and greatly admire almost the whole oeuvre by Abaddo and so I'd have to suggest his entire cycle as another worthy choice.

Bruno Walter is another essential conductor. His _Das Lied von der Erde_ with Kathleen Ferrier is unsurpassed. His history of working with Mahler and helping to establish his music within the repertoire alone makes him a conductor worth exploring.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

StlukesguildOhio said:


> For a good many years I collected individual recordings of Mahler by any number of conductors. Among those I have greatly enjoyed are Rattle, Klemperer, Bruno Walter, and Mehta's 2nd, Walter & Kubelik's 1st, Leinsdorf's 1st & 3rd, Abbado's 3rd, Reiner and Abbado's 4th, Karajan, Barbirolli, Bruno Walter, and Shipway's 5th, Abaddo, Karajan, & Tennstedt's (live) 6th, Abaddo's 7th, Solti's 8th, and Walter, Barbirolli, and Abaddo's 9th.
> 
> I have several recordings by Boulez, who contrary to Mahlerian, I also find too detached. Stilll they are worth hearing.
> 
> I left Bernstein and Tennstedt off the list for the simple reason that these are the two conductors by whom I have the entire cycle. Tennstedt (with London/EMI) has become my one of favorite Mahler conductors. The live recordings I have heard by him are equally good... and perhaps a bit more exciting.
> 
> I have and greatly admire almost the whole oeuvre by Abaddo and so I'd have to suggest his entire cycle as another worthy choice.
> 
> Bruno Walter is another essential conductor. His _Das Lied von der Erde_ with Kathleen Ferrier is unsurpassed. His history of working with Mahler and helping to establish his music within the repertoire alone makes him a conductor worth exploring.












The 'best,' 'bested.'


----------



## Lord Lance

StlukesguildOhio said:


> For a good many years I collected individual recordings of Mahler by any number of conductors. Among those I have greatly enjoyed are Rattle, Klemperer, Bruno Walter, and Mehta's 2nd, Walter & Kubelik's 1st, Leinsdorf's 1st & 3rd, Abbado's 3rd, Reiner and Abbado's 4th, Karajan, Barbirolli, Bruno Walter, and Shipway's 5th, Abaddo, Karajan, & Tennstedt's (live) 6th, Abaddo's 7th, Solti's 8th, and Walter, Barbirolli, and Abaddo's 9th.
> 
> I have several recordings by Boulez, who contrary to Mahlerian, I also find too detached. Stilll they are worth hearing.
> 
> I left Bernstein and Tennstedt off the list for the simple reason that these are the two conductors by whom I have the entire cycle. Tennstedt (with London/EMI) has become my one of favorite Mahler conductors. The live recordings I have heard by him are equally good... and perhaps a bit more exciting.
> 
> I have and greatly admire almost the whole oeuvre by Abaddo and so I'd have to suggest his entire cycle as another worthy choice.
> 
> Bruno Walter is another essential conductor. His _Das Lied von der Erde_ with Kathleen Ferrier is unsurpassed. His history of working with Mahler and helping to establish his music within the repertoire alone makes him a conductor worth exploring.


Which of Abbado's Fourth. Seventh and Ninth? Walter's mono/earliest Mahler 9 or CSO remake?


----------



## JACE

Marschallin Blair said:


> The 'best,' 'bested.'


Speaking of Kubelik...

I find nearly all of his Mahler with the Bavarian Radio SO to be extraordinary.

Some find his studio cycle on DG to be under-powered and too fleet. Not me. On the contrary, I think Kubelik is an absolute MASTER of pacing. He seems to find the inner logic in Mahler's long paragraphs, so the music coheres in ways that completely convinces me. Everyone talks about Kubelik's M1, and I agree that it is very good indeed. But listen to his M3, those LONG stretches might sound more grand or imposing with a conductor like Bernstein or Horenstein, but -- to my ears -- no one makes the Third as unified, as WHOLE, as Kubelik. And I think this strength is on display in nearly all of his DG studio cycle. In particular, Kubelik's Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh exhibit this same quality.

Audite has now released a second Kubelik/BRSO cycle, and I've read very positive things about it. So far, I've only heard Kubelik's DLvdE, which MB cites above, and the Fifth. Both of these are glorious. I agree with MB that Kubelik's DLvdE with Baker & Kmentt is desert-island music. I MUCH prefer it to Walter's DLvdE with Ferrier. (In fact, I prefer Walter's later DLvdE with Mildred Miller to the famous Ferrier recording -- but I know that I'm certainly in the minority with that opinion.)

I hope that helps.

BTW: 
Since Kubelik isn't on the list, I abstained from voting. But, if I were to vote, based on the choices on your "ballot," I'd go with Tennstedt's live recordings.


----------



## padraic

Yes, I suppose I should indicate that I too voted for Tennstedt live recordings.


----------



## Lord Lance

Unexpected...~ Gielen at the top with four votes. I was certain that Boulez or Chailly would come ahead of Gielen; also didn't except such dismal vote for Levine. Tennstedt remains consistently favored.


----------



## omega

I have heard many enthousiast reviews concerning Gary Bertini's cycle, which I cannot find on Spotify . Does someone have an idea about it?


----------



## realdealblues

omega said:


> I have heard many enthousiast reviews concerning Gary Bertini's cycle, which I cannot find on Spotify . Does someone have an idea about it?


I have it. Bertini is excellent. He's a lot like Kubelik as far as interpretative style. Definitely worth owning for anyone who is a great fan of Mahler.


----------



## Lord Lance

And, it appears that the grand wise man, Boulez, has won again.


----------



## AnotherSpin

Why I am not surprised nobody wants Gergiev?


----------



## Albert7

Looks like Boulez is the winner now. Woot.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Albert7 said:


> Looks like Boulez is the winner now. Woot.


I suppose taste by definition is always a minority view.


----------



## AnotherSpin

I think I know why Boulez favorited here. It is very much in tune with today's world to arrive from Barbirolli' fury to out of this world numbness of Boulez readings.


----------



## Lord Lance

AnotherSpin said:


> I think I know why Boulez favorited here. It is very much in tune with today's world to arrive from Barbirolli' fury to out of this world numbness of Boulez readings.


Indeed. Boulez's conducting can leave one entirely numb. Stupefied even.

Barbirolli is... talented with his Mahler. I must listen to it to give it a more concrete assessment. I'll post my thoughts someday perhaps.



Marschallin Blair said:


> I suppose taste by definition is always a minority view.


I was definitely expecting people Boulez to be high or even win. Lots of Boulez loyalists/supporters. Although, Gielen was one I definitely did not except. Shame about Zinman. Seems like people don't give in to him.


----------



## DavidA

Why do we always have to go with cycles with one conductor? This is the way the recording industry likes to package it but one usually finds that no one conductor is supreme in every work. So why not pix and mix?


----------



## Marschallin Blair

DavidA said:


> Why do we always have to go with cycles with one conductor? This is the way the recording industry likes to package it but one usually finds that no one conductor is supreme in every work. So why not pix and mix?


Individual performances all the way.


----------



## Lord Lance

DavidA said:


> Why do we always have to go with cycles with one conductor? This is the way the recording industry likes to package it but one usually finds that no one conductor is supreme in every work. So why not pix and mix?


As stated before, twice:



Lord Lance said:


> *UPDATED! *Poll has been added.
> 
> Like many, you think I am in it for the "best" or superior performances. I have a different approach to this: I listen to the nine chronologically as a natural, organic whole under one conductor to fully understand and comprehend his vision, his style and his approach to what is essentially one of the most popular and the - arguably - finest symphonic output from Twentieth Century Germany.
> 
> Why, you may ask? Because I have conductor fetish.
> 
> Anywho, I do these things often out of a psychologically compulsion to assess and compare differing performances in an endless quest to satisfy my inner hunger.





Lord Lance said:


> *sigh* How many times do I have to state that I know this well and am *not *in search of this mythical perfection. I am merely in search for a cycle of Mahler from a single conductor to assess his abilities and his style and his method. There's a level of stability and "homogeneity" that exists in a cycle. Its odd a goal, I know but its my fetish.
> 
> I want to include Klemperer; alas, he recorded only five of his symphonies - 2, 4, 7, 9, Das Lied von Der Erde. Maybe in my next poll.


Although, Bernstein's NYPO cycle was absolutely superb except for the Seventh - I can't quite put my finger on it; is it good, is it bad? Work is as such, rather. Confounds one. I shall re-visit the Bernie/NYPO M7 later. Speaking of whom, Bernie's Unitel cycle was no slouch either. A fine legacy. Chailly's brave attempt at recording them on tape [after Bernie, Abbado, P. Jarvi] is laudable.



AnotherSpin said:


> Why I am not surprised nobody wants Gergiev?


It most certainly surprised me! I thought Gergiev was well-respected and considering his talent, his Mahler would've had at least some takers. No takers on TC. Even Levine. Pity. Both sound absolutely promising.


----------



## AnotherSpin

Lord Lance said:


> It most certainly surprised me! I thought Gergiev was well-respected and considering his talent, his Mahler would've had at least some takers. No takers on TC. Even Levine. Pity. Both sound absolutely promising.


 Gergiev was a promise unfulfilled. Even Putin's money can not help him to advance into good conductor. He is not even a history now, just a bad smelling anecdote.


----------



## Nereffid

I'm no statistician, but it's not much of a "win" for Boulez if 85% of people don't choose him, is it?


----------



## Mahlerian

Nereffid said:


> I'm no statistician, but it's not much of a "win" for Boulez if 85% of people don't choose him, is it?


Well, good taste is a minority position.


----------



## EDaddy

realdealblues said:


> I voted for Gielen. If you've listened to Bernstein and want something that is less heart and more head Gielen is a wonderful contrast. Kubelik is also worth owning if you do not already have it as he lies somewhere in between for me.


I personally find that much of Mahler's densely cerebral symphonic music can often use a good dose of "heart" to offset the "headiness". But that's just my humble/ not-so-humble opinion.


----------



## Lord Lance

Nereffid said:


> I'm no statistician, but it's not much of a "win" for Boulez if 85% of people don't choose him, is it?


Dear Statistician,

Your concerns are warranted but that does not change the leader of the pack, does it? And, my word wasn't "majority". Now, *that *would be a battlefield.


----------



## Lord Lance

I spoke too soon.

I am truly surprised that people endorse Abbado's DG cycle. I've always read that it is the most inferior one and his Lucerne is the best and Berliner Live second-best. DG was a hit-and-miss, etc. Sinopoli? Haven't heard from him.


----------



## Corvus

I noticed that Ivan Fischer is not on the list. One of my favorites...I have been purchasing each of his Mahler symphony recordings as they come out. I noticed number 9 is now available.


----------



## Corvus

Wait...what the heck? Francois Xavier Roth is not on the list either? Sheesh!


----------



## Lord Lance

Corvus said:


> I noticed that Ivan Fischer is not on the list. One of my favorites...I have been purchasing each of his Mahler symphony recordings as they come out. I noticed number 9 is now available.


Ivan Fischer and Mahler? Doesn't seem like a good joining. His Mozart and Haydn remain good sets.


----------



## AnotherSpin

No Fischer, no Bertini, no Kubelik, no Rattle, no Haitink, no Bernstein... But, Gergiev. Funny.


----------



## Lord Lance

*....*



AnotherSpin said:


> No Fischer


Fischer and Mahler? I wouldn't want to give this a cycle a chance when so many others exist.



AnotherSpin said:


> no Bertini


No reliable torrents and better are found.



AnotherSpin said:


> no Kubelik


Done.



AnotherSpin said:


> no Haitink


Haitink is a marvellous conductor and he is one of my all time favorites, but as of right now, I do not own any of his Mahler or his RCO Mahler cycle and considering the poll's number, I have enough cycles for now.



AnotherSpin said:


> no Bernstein


His video DG and NYP cycles are done. Only his audio DG remains. But, I cannot find reliable torrents for it as of yet and plus after two cycles, I want to give the others a chance.



AnotherSpin said:


> no Rattle


You are kidding, right?



AnotherSpin said:


> But, Gergiev. Funny.


Not funny at all. Have you heard all nine performances off the album before reaching an opinion? If so, I can respect it. But that doesn't mean I won't like Gergiev's performances. And having bought them, I shall obviously include them in the poll.


----------



## Kivimees

Lord Lance said:


> Have you heard all nine performances off the album before reaching an opinion?


I have it from a "reliable source" that it isn't necessary to hear a work in order to form an opinion or to make a recommendation. :devil:


----------



## Corvus

"No reliable torrents"? subscibe to Spotify premium and you will have much to explore without the risk of torrents. $10 per month has saved me about $100 per month in music I would have otherwise purchased.


----------



## hpowders

Why are people so hung up on "cycles"? Isn't it a well-proven fact that well-chosen individual performances are preferable to "cycles" if one is looking for the finest performances possible?


----------



## AnotherSpin

Lord Lance said:


> Not funny at all. Have you heard all nine performances off the album before reaching an opinion? If so, I can respect it. But that doesn't mean I won't like Gergiev's performances. And having bought them, I shall obviously include them in the poll.


 One doesn't need to eat whole jar of dung to find out it is not a chutney. I listened two or three Gergiev's.


----------



## Corvus

Mmmmm...dung chutney. Somebody should let Mozart know...


----------



## AnotherSpin

hpowders said:


> Why are people so hung up on "cycles"? Isn't it a well-proven fact that well-chosen individual performances are preferable to "cycles" if one is looking for the finest performances possible?


I believe both approaches would make sense. Good cycle opens a developing of single minded reading through material and time. Great versions of single symphonies sometime came from those, who never bothered to record whole set, as Barbirolli, Leinsdorf or Mitropoulos as example.


----------



## Becca

AnotherSpin said:


> I believe both approaches would make sense. Good cycle opens a developing of single minded reading through material and time.


The flaw in that logic is that most so-called cycles are not done with the intent of being a unified cycle, rather they are recorded piece-meal, in no particular order over a considerable period of time.


----------



## Becca

Lord Lance said:


> Fischer and Mahler? I wouldn't want to give this a cycle a chance when so many others exist.
> 
> [Rattle:] You are kidding, right?


_"Not funny at all. Have you heard all nine performances off the album before reaching an opinion? If so, I can respect it."_


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> Why are people so hung up on "cycles"? Isn't it a well-proven fact that well-chosen individual performances are preferable to "cycles" if one is looking for the finest performances possible?


True. Very true, Mr. H. But I already know fine performances for each symphony - that phase happened. Off to exploring conductors now, really. The list is made up of conductors who excite me and make me curious as to what they do with each work.



Corvus said:


> "No reliable torrents"? subscibe to Spotify premium and you will have much to explore without the risk of torrents. $10 per month has saved me about $100 per month in music I would have otherwise purchased.


You must be very naive, Mr. Corvus, if you think that hackers would insert virus into torrents as unlikely to be picked up as classical music. Also, one can very easily detect these. But, I suppose, you don't have experience in that field. And, in India, Spotify isn't available. Unlikely to get consent to ten dollar subscription by my parents too. And lastly, Naxos is a much better investment of funds. Jaw-dropping collection. Having been a faithful consumer of Toronto Symphony Orchestra's Beethoven-on-Demand program, I can attest to that fact. But subscribing allows me to further unlock their massive library.



AnotherSpin said:


> One doesn't need to eat whole jar of dung to find out it is not a chutney. I listened two or three Gergiev's.


If you vehemently dislike it, then of course it won't. Even if one of the fifteen performances isn't that awful. I can relate. Dudamel and Rattle make me want to burn their records.



Becca said:


> _"Not funny at all. Have you heard all nine performances off the album before reaching an opinion? If so, I can respect it."_


Touché.


----------



## hpowders

AnotherSpin said:


> I believe both approaches would make sense. Good cycle opens a developing of single minded reading through material and time. Great versions of single symphonies sometime came from those, who never bothered to record whole set, as Barbirolli, Leinsdorf or Mitropoulos as example.


I'm thinking of folks who buy a complete set of 104 Haydn symphonies, expecting 104 great performances.

I like Boulez in Mahler, but as far as his cycle goes, I would toss #2, #3 and #4 and #9 replacing them with Mehta/NY ("live") in #2, Bernstein/NY in #3, Bernstein/NY in #4 and Karajan/Berlin in #9.


----------



## Corvus

Lord Lance, I was not referring to viruses being picked up from torrents but Rather how unethical it is. But hey, why should we care if we are accessing another artist's work for free?


----------



## AnotherSpin

hpowders said:


> I'm thinking of folks who buy a complete set of 104 Haydn symphonies, expecting 104 great performances.
> 
> I like Boulez in Mahler, but as far as his cycle goes, I would toss #2, #3 and #4 and #9 replacing them with Mehta/NY ("live") in #2, Bernstein/NY in #3, Bernstein/NY in #4 and Karajan/Berlin in #9.


I have some sets which are good to me and I have a lot of separate performances of my favorite symphonies. See no reason to put limits here or there.


----------



## AnotherSpin

Becca said:


> The flaw in that logic is that most so-called cycles are not done with the intent of being a unified cycle, rather they are recorded piece-meal, in no particular order over a considerable period of time.


 First, I was not intended to be logical. Second, when somebody is doing parts not in follow-the-number order it doesn't mean he/she couldn't have an idea about the sequential development or idea about whole cycle.


----------



## Lord Lance

Corvus said:


> Lord Lance, I was not referring to viruses being picked up from torrents but Rather how unethical it is. But hey, why should we care if we are accessing another artist's work for free?


Its a well known fact that the percentage of profits that go to the artists is very slim. Financially and otherwise, me not deciding to purchase the records, is going to impact the artists by them not getting my two cents.

EDIT: Unless you were Karajan. That's a different story for another time.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> I'm thinking of folks who buy a complete set of 104 Haydn symphonies, expecting 104 great performances.
> 
> I like Boulez in Mahler, but as far as his cycle goes, I would toss #2, #3 and #4 and #9 replacing them with Mehta/NY ("live") in #2, Bernstein/NY in #3, Bernstein/NY in #4 and Karajan/Berlin in #9.


I am sorry but I have to ask, which Mahler 9 from Kapellmeister Karajan? Live or studio?


----------



## hpowders

Becca said:


> The flaw in that logic is that most so-called cycles are not done with the intent of being a unified cycle, rather they are recorded piece-meal, in no particular order over a considerable period of time.


Yes! Exactly right!


----------



## Mahlerian

Lord Lance said:


> Its a well known fact that the percentage of profits that go to the artists is very slim. Financially and otherwise, me not deciding to purchase the records, is going to impact the artists by them not getting my two cents.
> 
> EDIT: Unless you were Karajan. That's a different story for another time.


The fact that artists don't receive much of the money from record sales doesn't mean that they aren't impacted financially by whether or not their records sell well. Clearly, better sales mean further records which contracts will bring them money.

The idiocy of this unfortunately ubiquitous self-serving logic is obvious. Pirate music or don't as you please, but don't justify it on such a flimsy basis.


----------



## Lord Lance

Mahlerian said:


> The fact that artists don't receive much of the money from record sales doesn't mean that they aren't impacted financially by whether or not their records sell well. Clearly, better sales mean further records which contracts will bring them money.
> 
> The idiocy of this unfortunately ubiquitous self-serving logic is obvious. Pirate music or don't as you please, but don't justify it on such a flimsy basis.


Hey, hey, I am not saying everyone should do it. Not everyone is financially weak enough/not permitted to purchase. Me pirating doesn't mean, in general, people shouldn't. Because if no one did, well, where would the artists go?

Also, have you ever considered the scenario in India? There is *no* market for these things. Physically or on the internet, you can forget it. What costs you 100 dollars there might be 150 or 200 after the profit percentage and export charges, *if *you can find it, which I doubt.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> Yes! Exactly right!


Not always, Mr. H. Not always. And there is a level of unity in vision in the "good" ones. Bernie's NYP Mahler being an example.


----------



## Albert7

Mahlerian said:


> The fact that artists don't receive much of the money from record sales doesn't mean that they aren't impacted financially by whether or not their records sell well. Clearly, better sales mean further records which contracts will bring them money.
> 
> The idiocy of this unfortunately ubiquitous self-serving logic is obvious. Pirate music or don't as you please, but don't justify it on such a flimsy basis.


Yes yes y'all here.

Seriously, That is why I support iTunes all the way. Legit pay for these artists who work so hard.


----------



## Lord Lance

Albert7 said:


> Yes yes y'all here.
> 
> Seriously, That is why I support iTunes all the way. Legit pay for these artists who work so hard.


Ah, you listen to living artists. There you go. Also, iTunes is woefully insufficient in its collection of Western Classical Music.


----------



## sharik

http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2994009


----------



## sharik

http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4742277


----------



## Lord Lance

sharik said:


> http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4742277


Russian? But your name is Sharik and that is Indian or within its subcontinent.

Bought Boulez's set off iTunes and already heard Bernstein's NYP cycle as the initial post will show.

Also, I am not Russian, so I do not use rutracker.


----------



## DavidA

_Why, you may ask? Because I have conductor fetish. _

'Conductor fetish'? Now I've heard everything!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

hpowders said:


> I'm thinking of folks who buy a complete set of 104 Haydn symphonies, expecting 104 great performances.
> 
> I like Boulez in Mahler, but as far as his cycle goes, I would toss #2, #3 and #4 and #9 replacing them with Mehta/NY ("live") in #2, Bernstein/NY in #3, Bernstein/NY in #4 and Karajan/Berlin in #9.


What......Boulez's 2, 3, 4 and 9 are the best in his cycle. As well as 6 obviously.


----------



## sharik

Lord Lance said:


> Russian? But your name is Sharik and that is Indian or within its subcontinent.


in Russian normally Sharik is a dog's name.


----------



## Albert7

Lord Lance said:


> Ah, you listen to living artists. There you go. Also, iTunes is woefully insufficient in its collection of Western Classical Music.


Then it's pretty evident that you haven't a single clue about what I was referring to.

Either that or iTunes in India must be pretty limited relative to that here in the States.

And what happened to your bear avatar? Oh, hibernation strikes again.


----------



## Corvus

Becca said:


> The flaw in that logic is that most so-called cycles are not done with the intent of being a unified cycle, rather they are recorded piece-meal, in no particular order over a considerable period of time.


Fascinating and somewhat dissapointing! I was not aware of this. I had assumed most cycles were planned in advance such as Vanska's recent in-progress Sibelius cycle with the Minnesota Orchestra.


----------



## hpowders

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> What......Boulez's 2, 3, 4 and 9 are the best in his cycle. As well as 6 obviously.


I favor his performances of 1, 5, 6 ,7 and 8. I prefer a bit more passion in 2,3,4 and 9. I didn't mean I was throwing any of them away-just that I prefer Mehta in 2, Bernstein/NY in 3 and 4 and Karajan in 9.


----------



## Lord Lance

DavidA said:


> _Why, you may ask? Because I have conductor fetish. _
> 
> 'Conductor fetish'? Now I've heard everything!


Haha. Yes you have. Welcome to the world of Lord Lance.



Albert7 said:


> Then it's pretty evident that you haven't a single clue about what I was referring to.
> 
> Either that or iTunes in India must be pretty limited relative to that here in the States.
> 
> And what happened to your bear avatar? Oh, hibernation strikes again.


The standard social protocol would be to explain the person what you were trying to communicate. Oh and its not India's fault. You just don't listen to the sort of albums I hunt out for, Alfie.

Right, bear avatar.


----------



## AnotherSpin

There is somebody who prefer dung instead of chutney. Or, he want to demonstrate it.


----------



## Lord Lance

AnotherSpin said:


> There is somebody who prefer dung instead of chutney. Or, he want to demonstrate it.


What exactly is this long running gag and what does it mean? Is it an American/European thing?


----------



## Corvus

Speculation that Mozart and possibly his family had an obsession with feces (Google it).


----------



## Corvus

Word of warning though: it is one of those things you may wish you could un-read after you have read it.


----------



## Lord Lance

Corvus said:


> Speculation that Mozart and possibly his family had an obsession with feces (Google it).


You've scarred me for life.


----------



## Corvus

That is how I felt. Thank God I don't know any intimate details concerning Mahler!
But, back to the original post: I have symphonies one and two conducted by Fischer which I just listened to consecutively. If you ever get the opportunity, give them a try. I find them quite pleasing. If there is one word to describe Fischer's interpretations it is "beautiful". Some might not like their Mahler that way but I think its a nice change of pace. Besides, I also have Jurowski's and Zinman's versions if I want more drama.


----------



## AnotherSpin

Corvus said:


> If there is one word to describe Fischer's interpretations it is "beautiful"


 Agree. Also the quality of recordings is outstanding, those who have audiophile sets may enjoy it immensely.


----------



## Lord Lance

Corvus said:


> That is how I felt. Thank God I don't know any intimate details concerning Mahler!
> But, back to the original post: I have symphonies one and two conducted by Fischer which I just listened to consecutively. If you ever get the opportunity, give them a try. I find them quite pleasing. If there is one word to describe Fischer's interpretations it is "beautiful". Some might not like their Mahler that way but I think its a nice change of pace. Besides, I also have Jurowski's and Zinman's versions if I want more drama.


And now you've got me interested in Fischer. Ah, damn it!


----------



## Lord Lance

I forgot to mention that I didn't just read Mozart's scatophilic obession but the letters too... Such terrifying and almost adolescent writing. The words shall haunt me in my grave. Thanks, Corvus~

Terrifying when you realize the genius' character. He was eccentric and bizarre for this reason alone, I suppose.


----------



## Lord Lance

What are the main features of Sinopoli's Mahler?


----------

