From: conrad@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Mahler's 8th Symphony
Date: 6 Oct 92 20:36:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.Bvpvw4.76F
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <1992Oct5.225548.29390@athena.mit.edu> syliao@athena.mit.edu (S Yi-Huang Liao) writes:

>I'm seeking recommendation on this Symphony.  I have listened to the following
>recordings:

>Tennstedt (London SO)

No, it's the London Philharmonic.

>Solti (Chicago)
>Kubelik (Bavarian Radio)

>and have found various bugs with each.  Among some of the most annoying bugs
>are:

>(1) The London's brasses are kind of sloppy in many passages.  Also, the organ
>did not play its full sound at towards the climax "Alles Vergaenliche" where the
>score marks "Volles Werk".  That's a true disappointment because the tension of
>the entire piece sort of builds towards this climax.

On the other hand the organ shouldn't blot out the massed vocal sound,
right?  Where do you find the LPO sloppy?  I remember them as pretty
strong.  My main problems with this recording were the female vocal
soloists.

>(2) Chicago has a much, much better brass section than London, although at some
>passages they are out of tune, too.  

Example please?  (I'm a Chicago boy--I have to defend local honor! :-))

>The tenor and baritone soli don't seem to
>hit the precise pitch right on the note.

True of some of the tenor line in the ensembles of Part I (he was a
last-minute replacement, had to learn the part in 4 days, and they
dubbed in his ensemble contributions later).  Not true of any of their
solos in part II though--they're as good as you'll hear.  In fact this
is a stellar lineup of soloists, the best of any.

>(3) The male soli in Kubelik's are more precise than those in Solti's.  However,
>the female soli often have intonation problems.  Some phrasings were also
>inconsistent with the score and the lyrics.

Aren't you being awfully picky, especially for music that's almost
unsingable?  Further, you let the tenor off too easily here--he has a
piercing voice that refuses to blend.  And again I'd like to see
citations for the "frequent intonation problems"--Soprano I (Martina
Arroyo) and Alto II (Julia Hamari) sounded mighty fine to me.

>I know this is a difficult piece to perfrom, but given the professional quality
>of modern orchestras and recording technology,
>I expect more than these have to offer.  

Too bad.  You might consider taking human fallibility into account.

>I'd like to listen to your opinions
>on the following recordings and any others:

>Bernstein

He was ill-served by both his recordings (he may have had the best
*conception* of anybody).  Too many flubs and glitches and bad balance
on his LSO/CBS version, bad sound and various live-performance mishaps
on the DG live tape.

>Ozawa

Capable, nicely played, not exactly boring but uninvolving.

>Shaw

Bad news.  Amateur-night choruses, sloppy playing, safe and slow
conducting, surprisingly artificial sound for Telarc.

>Inbal

Very good.  My own "top of the line" for this piece, along with Solti
and Tennstedt.  Inbal is a little laid-back as far as interpretation
goes, which leads to a dull stretch or two in Part II, but he has
everything well in hand and it builds beautifully and is well recorded.

Any of the three I just named catch the spirit of the work, and have
capable enough executants to bring it to life.  I alternate among all
three.  (And I'm curious to hear how the new Sinopoli turns out.  And
when will Abbado allow himself to get around to it???)

Jon Alan Conrad
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical