What an absolutely astonishing interpretation and performance. Jukka-Pekka Saraste puts himself aside to be a conduit of Mahler's intentions. No showmanship. None necessary. Everything must have gone into the rehearsals. This isn't one of those over-the-top (and over-emotional) "neurotic" performances of Mahler 6 which some have felt obliged to create. But it is an utterly transparent one. To have a transparent performance of a Mahler symphony is a real treat. Everything was so clear, helped by the superb recording, the miking of which brought every nuance out of the morass of music. For once, the counterpoint of the strings could be heard in all its glory. And, as for the reinstatement of the 3rd hammerblow... it took my breath away. It belongs there, in spite of Mahler's superstition! Thank you. And if it is any consolation to know, I rank the WDRSO as the #1 orchestra in Deutschland ;-)
I wish though he had a MUCH BETTER ORCHESTRA .The VIOLIN SECTION IS SCREAMING THE HIGH PITCH PASSAGES TOTALLY OUT OF TUNE. THE OTHER GROUPS ARE NOT MUCH BETTER .However , SARASTE HIMSELF SHOWS IMPECCABLE MUSICIANSHIP. He IS the MOST GENIUS CONDUCTOR OF OUR TIMES
@@gregoryludkovsky5185 Whatever your opinion, it is very poor taste to SCREAM it. If you are going to write a comment, no matter how ill-informed, please do so with appropriate decorum
@@gregoryludkovsky5185 Back again. Just what performance were you listening to? Quite obvoously not the one here. Or did you place that oderiferous comment just to stir the pond? The strings are superbly in tune and play the high harmonics notes and passages with the skill and musical committment one would expect for this fine orchestra. Take your screamingcomments and put them on Fac..ock where they would be better-suited.
Truly, I don't quite know what to make of this performance. It is polished, it is smooth, it is suave. In all of these things it sounds to me as if it might have been performed by an orchestra of old Hollywood (which is not a put-down, the orchestras of the big movie studios were among the best US symphonic orchestras of their time). I can see a big, period action drama fitting to all of this music. Some might quite validly state that this is right, the Hollywood composers, back 80 years ago, drew on the music of Mahler etc as well as the pure Romanticism of Tchaikovsky and his ilk. But alternatively, I can see the more usual approach to Mahler, with times of cutting edges, and incisive drama in the music that isn't quite present in this performance. Is this a work where Mahler wanted a more sunny approach? In places, it's structure harks back more to the Romantics. But is Mahler doing that on purpose, softening the edges a little, to contrast with his 5th. All I know is that just before the end, I can visualise Robin Hood swinging through the trees, with a triumphant grin on his face - all the while this music mixing at ease, with the genius of Korngold. No? Ah well, just my musings. All I know is that I will be returning to this performance, more than once, to enjoy, but also to seek answers.
Mahler also you gives a lot of place for fantastic pictures of fantasia. When a first listened Mahler M Y idea was "STARWARS." . Also I'm convinced Hollywood learned and stole a lot from Mahler. It is his multiinstrumentual use to build symphonic sound. Mahler opened soul in his musics and everybody can find or not find a way to him. Is o.k., no words against.A tip: Look into Berlioz, f.i. Requiem, or better Beethoven "War and Peace" in 9th, a n d so on............................................................
When it's a live performance I love to hear the audience reaction-ALL of Mahler's performances were in front of live audiences (obviously) but it gives a glimpse of the people that got to then ( and now) hear this absolutely ASTONISHING music! Even though Mahler used more 19th than 20th century forms in his music, this piece sounds like a prophecy of World War One-very eery and passages of such loneliness and desolation . I always find myself either tapping a pencil on my desk or just staring up into space for about five minutes after this piece, before I can get up to do anything 🤭What a masterpiece!!
So very annoying that the audience reaction is left on the cutting room floor. It is such an integral part of the experience that missing out on the applause is a complete let-down and a horrible way to end a wonderful performance!
The order of the inner movements performed here is not the order Mahler finally settled on, which is Andante then Scherzo. Strange to hear this nowadays. The performance itself is excellent. Is WDR considered No. 2 or 3 in Germany?
@@Balfour. "more of the same" feel: True word. But on the other hand, scherzo being the second movement gives a sense of continuity to the music: 1st movement (at least by its 1st theme) is a march-like movement. When placed as second, scherzo, sort of, picks up from where 1st mov. finishes. And more importantly, end of scherzo matches perfectly with the beginning of the andante. Also symphony appears to be more in balance when andante is played as the 3rd mov. In that case, before andante you have two 'marches' adding up to some 35 min roughly (22+13) and after andante you again have roughly some 30 min music. When you place andante as second, after andante you happen to have a 45 minute non-stop-'torture' which I find too much!
Mahler never finally settled on the order. He conducted them the other way round but he composed and conceptualized them as in this order. It's very much the preferable one. The island of respite which the Andante offers, comes too early in 2nd Place. And the harmonic progression of the ending of the Andante to the opening of the Finale which leads back to the home key of A-minor is much more logical than when you play the Scherzo in 3rd place. So Mahler the conductor was wrong and Mahler the composer was right.
Best Andante I’ve found on TH-cam. Right tempo & plays the opening simply, not over-phrased
What an absolutely astonishing interpretation and performance. Jukka-Pekka Saraste puts himself aside to be a conduit of Mahler's intentions. No showmanship. None necessary. Everything must have gone into the rehearsals. This isn't one of those over-the-top (and over-emotional) "neurotic" performances of Mahler 6 which some have felt obliged to create. But it is an utterly transparent one. To have a transparent performance of a Mahler symphony is a real treat. Everything was so clear, helped by the superb recording, the miking of which brought every nuance out of the morass of music. For once, the counterpoint of the strings could be heard in all its glory. And, as for the reinstatement of the 3rd hammerblow... it took my breath away. It belongs there, in spite of Mahler's superstition! Thank you. And if it is any consolation to know, I rank the WDRSO as the #1 orchestra in Deutschland ;-)
I wish though he had a MUCH BETTER ORCHESTRA .The VIOLIN SECTION IS SCREAMING THE HIGH PITCH PASSAGES TOTALLY OUT OF TUNE. THE OTHER GROUPS ARE NOT MUCH BETTER .However , SARASTE HIMSELF SHOWS IMPECCABLE MUSICIANSHIP. He IS the MOST GENIUS CONDUCTOR OF OUR TIMES
@@gregoryludkovsky5185 Whatever your opinion, it is very poor taste to SCREAM it. If you are going to write a comment, no matter how ill-informed, please do so with appropriate decorum
:)
@@gregoryludkovsky5185 Back again. Just what performance were you listening to? Quite obvoously not the one here. Or did you place that oderiferous comment just to stir the pond? The strings are superbly in tune and play the high harmonics notes and passages with the skill and musical committment one would expect for this fine orchestra. Take your screamingcomments and put them on Fac..ock where they would be better-suited.
Truly, I don't quite know what to make of this performance. It is polished, it is smooth, it is suave. In all of these things it sounds to me as if it might have been performed by an orchestra of old Hollywood (which is not a put-down, the orchestras of the big movie studios were among the best US symphonic orchestras of their time). I can see a big, period action drama fitting to all of this music. Some might quite validly state that this is right, the Hollywood composers, back 80 years ago, drew on the music of Mahler etc as well as the pure Romanticism of Tchaikovsky and his ilk. But alternatively, I can see the more usual approach to Mahler, with times of cutting edges, and incisive drama in the music that isn't quite present in this performance. Is this a work where Mahler wanted a more sunny approach? In places, it's structure harks back more to the Romantics. But is Mahler doing that on purpose, softening the edges a little, to contrast with his 5th. All I know is that just before the end, I can visualise Robin Hood swinging through the trees, with a triumphant grin on his face - all the while this music mixing at ease, with the genius of Korngold. No? Ah well, just my musings. All I know is that I will be returning to this performance, more than once, to enjoy, but also to seek answers.
Mahler also you gives a lot of place for fantastic pictures of fantasia. When a first listened Mahler M Y idea was "STARWARS." . Also I'm convinced Hollywood learned and stole a lot from Mahler. It is his multiinstrumentual use to build symphonic sound.
Mahler opened soul in his musics and everybody can find or not find a way to him. Is o.k., no words against.A tip: Look into Berlioz, f.i. Requiem, or better Beethoven "War and Peace" in 9th, a n d so on............................................................
I have to play this piece next year and this is one of my favourite versions of Mahler 6, congratulations for the principal trumpet!
Such a great performance with a great video work! Thank you.
Our pleasure!
We are glad that you like it.
When it's a live performance I love to hear the audience reaction-ALL of Mahler's performances were in front of live audiences (obviously) but it gives a glimpse of the people that got to then ( and now) hear this absolutely ASTONISHING music! Even though Mahler used more 19th than 20th century forms in his music, this piece sounds like a prophecy of World War One-very eery and passages of such loneliness and desolation . I always find myself either tapping a pencil on my desk or just staring up into space for about five minutes after this piece, before I can get up to do anything 🤭What a masterpiece!!
Happy you enjoyed the performance!
1:00:47
1:05:17
hammer time!!!!
you forgot the 3rd at 1:15:27 :)
Wonderful performance. Compliment also to the very professional videography!
Thank you very much! 🤗
sehr bewegt, danke°
Dankeschön :)
Absolutamente maravilloso!!!
Muchas gracias! :)
Magnifique!
Merci 😊
3rd movement not slow at all! How it should be played - it is marked 'Andante'
Brilliant!
Thanks!
와우~말러~
bravo !
This is supposed to be tragic and they are having fun, and so am I. Am I imagining things or is Mahler playing the violin here?
So very annoying that the audience reaction is left on the cutting room floor. It is such an integral part of the experience that missing out on the applause is a complete let-down and a horrible way to end a wonderful performance!
Agree.
1:17:00
The order of the inner movements performed here is not the order Mahler finally settled on, which is Andante then Scherzo. Strange to hear this nowadays. The performance itself is excellent. Is WDR considered No. 2 or 3 in Germany?
I think there is no real order in the best orchestras in gernany. There are so many excellent, hard to put them in an order.
The Scherzo right after first the movement gives kind of a "more of the same" feel. In that sense the Andante works perfectly fine in second place.
@@Balfour. "more of the same" feel: True word.
But on the other hand, scherzo being the second movement gives a sense of continuity to the music: 1st movement (at least by its 1st theme) is a march-like movement. When placed as second, scherzo, sort of, picks up from where 1st mov. finishes. And more importantly, end of scherzo matches perfectly with the beginning of the andante.
Also symphony appears to be more in balance when andante is played as the 3rd mov. In that case, before andante you have two 'marches' adding up to some 35 min roughly (22+13) and after andante you again have roughly some 30 min music. When you place andante as second, after andante you happen to have a 45 minute non-stop-'torture' which I find too much!
Mahler never finally settled on the order. He conducted them the other way round but he composed and conceptualized them as in this order.
It's very much the preferable one. The island of respite which the Andante offers, comes too early in 2nd Place. And the harmonic progression of the ending of the Andante to the opening of the Finale which leads back to the home key of A-minor is much more logical than when you play the Scherzo in 3rd place.
So Mahler the conductor was wrong and Mahler the composer was right.
C'est mou...