Repertoire: Mahler's Problematic Tenth Symphony
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2020
- Mahler's incomplete Tenth Symphony has received more than enough attention to alert us to the fact that a fully satisfying version remains pretty much a pipe dream. The best attempt at completion is still Deryck Cooke's, and I'll tell you which recordings are the best. All of the other completions are junk and should be ignored, at least as plausible representations of Mahler's intentions.
- เพลง
![Yoshi Rinrada - 'มาทำไม' [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r41xbfRLkLs/mqdefault.jpg)
Ormandy, Chailly, and Sanderling are the greatest. It's my favorite Mahler symphony. I think the Finale is one of the most beautiful, moving pieces of music I've ever heard. Mahler gives us a shattering victory over death through art.
Mahler 10 is my favourite of his symphonies! The whole conception is so wonderful, I can forgive the rough patches.
I agree, it's astonishing. Probably the most sincere of all of his Symphonies, really sounds like his very last, bitter outburst while he was leaving us. And because he also has left so much material which would have eventually to form his last Symphony, I think listening to a good completion of it is worthy of the fact no one can unfortunately (and obviously) write exactly what he would have written.
Mine too. Among the later works I've never understood the adulation heaped on the 9th, which to me is only meh, while the 8th is bombastic and, frankly, unmemorable. The 7th is pretty good, but the 10th and Das Lied beat them all hands down in my book.
@@jonathandore7521 I came across this 2yr old chat by Dave just now. (My cell phone works very slow).
I too am sold on the Deryck Cooke performing version, particularly after hearing it performed by Simon Rattle at Severance Hall by the best band in the land, the Cleveland Orchestra.
Quite simply it works.
I admit being conflicted over which symphony, the 9th or the 10th should be considered the composer's valedictory.
I tend toward the final adagio of the 9th.
I wouldn't want to be without either.
The 8th?
For me it is the equivalent of a very long "Bronx cheer". It's an overwrought mess.
The central core, 5,6,7 remain my favorites.
Bruckner? Leave the 9th alone!
Never tamper with perfection.
It's still possible to disagree over musical works without being banished to a gulag, I hope.
@@jonathandore7521 the 8th is plenty memorable once you dive into it
I am greatly enjoying your channel. Thank you for the videos! And, for what it is worth, you have spurred me to spend actual $$$s to enlarge my personal library for the first time in years with your recommendations.
You are so welcome! Enjoy your new purchases,
For the first time last summer before I found your channel, I had did a long overdue Mahler cycle listen because I hadn't before. And to my surprise I had ABSOLUTELY no clue that he had a tenth that went unfinished. It was baffling to me because Mahler is one of favorite composer and for the decade or so that I've been playing an instrument and knew about Mahler, 1-9 was only evered mentioned to me. So when I actually listened to the 10th I was blown away by how it sounds and I've been hooked on trying to find completed recording....but then I found out that there's a crap ton of sketches and I gave up. Then looked up the scherzo and purgaturio along with the 1st movement and found your video coming in CLUTCH ONCE AGAIN! Thanks again for the help and now I can listen to the best version of the first 3 movements because the other two kinda stink to me.
You can only experience a first hearing of a Mahler symphony once in your lifetime. For me, when as a young man in college I heard the Rattle/Bournemouth recording, it blew me away. I've never heard anything so heartfelt, so perfectly realized as this Mahler 10th recording. I dare you to listen to the first 4:30 of the finale and tell me that this conductor and this orchestra don't have Mahler in their souls. And those hammer blows! I've never heard anything like it in other Mahler 10th recordings. The whole performance is devastatingly, achingly beautiful. I've heard many other fine recordings of the work, but in my opinion, this one is the most moving of them all.
They don't have Mahler in their souls. Boy was that easy!
@@DavesClassicalGuide :)
Totally agree. This was exactly the same for me, and my first experience of any Mahler work. The Rattle/Bournemouth 1980 version remains my favourite version, and my favourite of all his works!!!
I have always thought that given how much Mahler revised his symphonies after performance that the late works might have changed as well had he lived long enough to direct performances of them. I strongly think that a genuinely complete 10th from Mahler himself would have been very different to what we have. I find the Adagio on its own such a magnificent piece of music I am happy that it survived (even then I am not sure it would have remained exactly as it is had Mahler lived to complete it).
I agree with your call & also endorse Deryck Cooke's. Have you any thoughts on Tovey's completion of Bach's Art of Fugue? Really love your go to performance choices. Thank you!
I first heard the symphony via Szell's Cleveland recording of the Adagio and Purgatorio and still rate it very highly, especially the single layer SACD. Of the various Cooke completions, I have the Ormandy, both Rattle's - there are moments when I prefer the earlier Bournemouth performance where I feel there is sometimes more vitality in the playing - and the Seattle/Dausgaard, which I also think is very fine.
Dear Dave, thanks for your recommendations! I didn’t knew Dausgaard’s recording before. But now it has become one of my favorites. In your talk you only mentioned competitions of M10. What do you think are the best Adagio only recordings? - If there are any better one then those from the “full” versions you mentioned... Maybe for those who only want what Mahler really wrote.
Can't argue over Ormandy, Gielen and Sanderling - Gielen's probably my favourite overall, but the other two are excellent. I have a soft spot for Berthold Goldschmidt's recording of the première performance on Testament; mostly for "historical" reasons, but also because it has a fascinating illustrated talk about the symphony and its reconstruction by Deryck Cooke himself.
Not only that, but there are numerous small additions and slight changes to the orchestration that Goldschmidt did, that don't show up on any printed score or any other recording. Good changes, too.
David, have you listened to Wigglesworth's rendition with the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra? If so, what do you think of it? (If not, please consider giving it a try)
Thomas Dausgaard with Seattle!!! This is the one. I know Chailly and Rattle well, then Dausgaard blew me away. Also, Montreal OM under Nézet-Séguin is surprisingly good. I am so thankful that Cooke prepared a preforming version of this incredible work.
I agree. I love the Dausgaard.
Dausgaard’s version finally made me consider the 10th as a real Mahler symphony.
I’ve collected many 10ths over the years and I have always been drawn to the recordings that I really enjoyed regarding the overall performance and interpretation, with the details of the various reconstructions being much less of a concern. That said, thank you for your insights regarding all of the available versions of a completed score. I’m eager to dig into my discs and revisit them with a more discerning ear regarding the success or failure of each version.
As I only care about the finished 1st movement, the Adagio, do any of you recommend a best recording of that? Of the 21 recordings I've heard so far, the 1965 Ormandy/Phila is the most ravishing to my ears, with a pretty daring stereo soundstage, and the 1986 Chailly the most perfectly conducted, exquisitely tense and immersive, especially over the alternately catastrophic and redemptive final 8 minutes.
I heard an interesting rendition of The 10 Adagio conducted by Boulez.
It kind of stuck in my head for a while.
Glad you mentioned Ormandy. Thank you.
Absolutely!
The Ormandy recording is, as I recall, the only one of Cooke's first performing version, the one which convincingly put forth the case for making a completion of the tenth possible. Have a great weekend, wherever you're having it. 🐧
@@DavesClassicalGuide The mention of Ormandy serves as an excuse to say that I am looking forward to the Ormandy Columbia Legacy boxed set that will be released soon. There are many first cd releases in the set that offset the usual duplications....I am particularly interested to hear his take on Gliere’s 3rd.
THERE IS ONLY THE ADAGIO!!! This is heartbreaking. What a gorgeous, beautiful adagio it is. Enjoy it. We're lucky to have it.
I'm with you 💯 % we have 9 completed Symphonies!!! a shame he didn't complete the 10th, I'm in agreement with Dave, I'd rather not listen to it
I think you both are missing the point here. The point Dave was trying to make is not “Mahler 10 doesn’t exist” or “only the Adagio” exists. The point is don’t pretend any completion, even the Cooke, is what Mahler would have done. It doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy the piece as it is. And it is complete one way or another.
@@bingbongtoysKYas a matter of fact, Dave has several favorite recordings of the entire symphony.
Yeah, that and the Purgatorio. Check out Szell's recording of those two. From the late fifties, early sixties! One of his best recordings, IMO.
Yes, my goodness Sanderling's Mahler 10 is of divine quality.
What are your recommendations for just the adagio?
What are your thoughts on the completions/truncations/reassemblages of Mozart's Requiem and Mass in C minor?
They all suck.
Including Süssmayr's, presumably.
Dave, any thoughts on Sanderling's Mahler 9 and Das Lied von der Erde that come with his 10th by Berlin Classics?
I discussed in the videos, and you can find my reviews on ClassicsToday.com.
I really enjoy the enhancements (percussions, xylophone) added to the Gielen+SWGRSO performance, but overall I think Dausgaard+SSO is my favorite. The recent Vänskä+Minnesota recording is great, too.
David, thanks for this discussion! I have always loved some of the moments in the unfinished portions, especially in the Finale. But, I listen to it acknowledging it for what it is, a case of "what if?" The Ormandy was really fine, so underrated. The Chailly is great! Your opinions on conductors and large forms is spot on...a lost art in some ways... Have you ever visited the site in Vienna where Mahler died? There is a commemorative plaque on facade of the building, quoting from the opening of the 10th. Quite moving to stand there.. Lastly, do you feel the same about the Mozart Requiem?
About the Mozart, yes.
David Hurwitz I saw a concert in 1980 in Berlin with what was then the RSO, called “musical torsos”. Schoenberg Moses and Aaron and the Mozart Requiem. Only notes written by the composer. Nothing added. It was quite spooky at the end of the “Lacrymosa”...
David, you have a great sense of humour! Your kitchen sink analogy of Barshei's version gave me a good laugh! Do you know anything about Mark Wigglesworth's BBC live recording of Mahler 10th Cooke version...and the coughing campaign behind it? I think personally this performance has never been surpassed for its raw energy and intense beauty at the closing - sadly marred by outrageous coughs (possibly on purpose). It was issued with the BBC Music Magazine. I hope they reissue it without coughs one day...if that's possible by today's technology.
Wigglesworth also recorded Mahler 10 with the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra (a breathtaking performance) and there are no coughs there!
You are wonderful, Mr. Hurwitz! Thanks for sharing your opinions. 💛🎵💛
Thanks for listening
What are your thoughts on performing Mahler's 10th as a transcription rather than a completion? There are a couple of transcriptions for two pianos around, for example. Since most of what is missing is the orchestration, a transcription feels to me like a way of presenting Mahler's conception of the work without too many questions about instrumentation getting in the way.
I agree with you on the problems of trying to complete Mahler's work, but the tenth (unlike the finale of Bruckner's ninth) feels like a complete enough conception that it deserves to be listened to in some form.
Well, it's complete as a melodic line, but the problem is as much contrapuntal and harmonic filling out as it is orchestration. I don't think transcription changes anything in that regard.
Is there a 2 piano version, ? I only have a single. piano version
@@DavesClassicalGuide The MS is in four staves throughout, so not just the basic melody but the harmony and a couple of other lines of counterpoint as well. For an unfinished work it's remarkably close to being, if not finished, then at least thoroughly realizable, since it's already complete as a continuous span of music (unlike many other completions, e.g. Elgar's 3rd, which was still in fragments not definitively stitched together). To me, that justifies the attempts to complete it, even if Cooke's is the only one that works.
@@jonathandore7521 That is very true, and the parts that aren't worked out (such as big climax in the finale) wouldn't sound better in a transcription as opposed to a full orchestral realization.
Gielen and Sanderling have excelled in other Mahler symphonies so I'm not surprised at your conclusion. Although not quite top-tier, I enjoy the Ormandy and Dausgaard versions. I also agree that Ormandy's Bruckner is underrated, especially the 5th.
I completely agree that the symphony really shouldn’t have been completed, and all performing versions expect Cooke are unmahlerian trash, especially Barshai. You’re completely right on why Cooke is so good too, he does the least and doesn’t pretend that we can know all of what Mahler wanted with a completion not by the guy himself.
However, I’m extremely grateful for the Finale, which (despite it’s errors you pointed out) is some of the most beautiful stuff Mahler wrote, in my opinion. The beginning dark atmosphere with the big military drum thud thing that quotes the Purgatorio is so wonderfully dark, and the flute solo after it is one of his best ever solos, transcendent beauty. And the main theme after the flute solo in B Major! God! I honestly think it may be the most beautiful melody I’ve heard. Mahler is, I think at his best when he writes more simple things like this. And the sort of climax or string chorale (titled Immer Langsam, I believe) is the most passionate thing I’ve ever heard from Mahler. It seems like the orchestration through out the whole thing (though we can really only use the Adagio for an example) was attempting a whole new modern atmosphere for his music, and I think, if he finished it, would be one of the most important symphonies, and maybe his best. Some of the stuff you can use in a film score today and no one would scrunch an eyebrow and notice.
In all, if I got a Time Machine, the only thing I’d do is try and prolong Mahler’s life so he can truly finish it.
I’m about 15 years younger than you. If the lifespans work out right, I’ll start publishing my completions of Hurwitz reviews and tell them how you were secretly a big Currentzis fan.
Very interesting Video. What do you think about the Samale-Mazzuca-Phillips-Cohrs-completion of Bruckner 9? I think it's pretty much the same case as with Cooke's Mahler 10, far from perfect, but the only one that's halfway decent
No, I think it's horrible, but a lot of the problem is Bruckner's.
Gerd Schaller wrote the best of the Bruckner 9th finale completions IMO but the coda can only be speculation. Whether you agree with Cohrs' or Schaller's choices in the missing transitions and which sketches he chose, Schaller's working knowledge of both orchestration and organ playing gives him the edge. Both have excellent performances from which to judge their relative success.
The SPCM peaked with the 2005 completion (recorded by Bosch), then rapidly went down hill as they kept tinkering and made it much less idiomatic. Post-2005, their completions are unlistenable IMO.
I haven't been able to listen to Schaller's version because I can't stand how he interprets Bruckner - horribly sterile and "professional".
@@ThreadBomb If sterile means that he doesn't inject drama where none exists in the score, I'm fine with that. Part of the issue stems from the very reverberant Abteikirche where he performed most of the Bruckner cycle. When he performed in the more conventional but still warm-sounding Regentenbau, his interpretation gained life and momentum. Compare and contrast the Linz Bruckner 1st which sounds rather distant with the Vienna Bruckner 1st which sounds more immediate.
Happy with the 9th as a torso. It doesn’t seem wanting in any way.
There's too much original music out there to hear, to worry about completions. I have just listened to Peter Boyer Symphony No 1 (Naxos) with a marvelous Adagio! Deserves highest praise..
David, what do you think, in principle, about composers that take another composer's unfinished work as the basis for their own composition, such as Helge Evju did with Grieg's sketches for the 2nd Concerto (ignoring the specific example)?
BTW, a hearty disagree here. I want to hear it all, sketchy completions included. Art is also about variation, "riffing", experimentation, trial and error, seeing what sticks.
I have no problem with one artist using another's work. The best example, I think, is Berio's "Rendering," but there it is absolutely clear what he is doing and that is a good part of the joy of it.
@@DavesClassicalGuide That's just what came to mind for me, too. Rendering is a joy. But it's not Schubert, and that's OK.
The work is very interesting and contains quite amazing music, but I think the finale is largely under-orchestrated compared to how Mahler would have realized it if he had worked the draft through to a finished version. This is quite in tune with what Cooke set out to do, of course; he didn't want to add on big clouds of speculative new orchestrations; it's just that some people listening to Mahler/Cooke don't recognize that the work rem ains a "performance version" of the draft!). Much of the fifth movement is played by small chamber groups in piano or pp, a very low level of sound: this can work tolerably well for modern audiences because we're used to being able to go back, listen and relisten at leisure when a work interests us, or even turning up the volume knob at such places. In Mahler's day, the technology of recording music for playback later was in its absolute infancy, and the ONLY way to get to hear anything extended was to hear it live, right where it was played. And Mahler's own symphonies were not near as popular in his lifetime as they are now (of course) so it was important (to him) that they would get to make an impression already by one single, non-repeatable performance.
So, a symphonic finale that's largely played by only fractions of the orchestra in pianissimo would not have been seen as a valid resolution to this massive work, not by audiences at the time and most likely not even by the composer himself. Mahler surely envisaged a grander and richer orchestration for this one, a movement that was important to him both as a personal and musical statement.
I agree about Simon Rattle's recording from 2000 with the Berlin Philharmonic, it's a very cohesive and luminous one, not overly heavy, and a version that respects the diversity of styles in the work.
GREAT VIDEO DAVE!!!
Thanks!!
What do you think about the version with Daniel Harding?
www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14430/?search=1
All said and considered, I own and listen to the Ormandy version.
The orchestra sounds wonderful and Ormandy makes it work PLUS I studied with the principal Trumpet. I also don't listen to it as a "Mahler " symphony, but more as a study/arrangement.
I sometimes see the painter, Munch's, "The Scream" when hearing the big moment in this work.
The Scream was painted in 1893. Is it possible Mahler saw it?
I’ve listened to your favourites, and I still prefer Wyn Morris for a couple of moments: his sudden Tutti in the Adagio has the most startlingly instantaneous attack (and I wonder how you get That WHAM!). I also love his tempo when the flute comes in in the finale, which the others seem to elongate into treacley hyper-‘expressivity’
You make a good case and cause me to reconsider.
Interesting that your top two choices come from orchestras that are not considered major league, although I have enjoyed recordings by both of those orchestras in the past. In that regard, I have had Eliahu Inbal's Mahler 10th recommended to me many times, and his Frankfurt band is not particularly major league either. Thank you for the recommendations!
Inbal recorded it again with Tokyo, and I'm my opinion that version is also worth listening to (if you don't mind occasionally hearing Inbal's humming, that is)
I wonder how Mozart's Requiem sits in this framework. Or Berg's Lulu.
Thank you for a good, very timely discussion. I have never wanted to listen to a Mahler 10 completion other than Cooke's; that may not be fair, but I don't see the point of numerous different attempts to complete the piece, and I like what Cooke has accomplished. I have heard Morris (on LP), Ormandy, Rattle/Bournemouth, and Rattle/BPO, which is my current favorite despite sounding somewhat lightweight, as you say. I imprinted on the Ormandy back in the 1970's and it is excellent.Will check out the Sanderling very soon. Thank you!
The various Elgar completions are superfluous, but I like most of the other famous completions, which have given us some good music which would otherwise be unknown. Sussmayr's completion of the Requiem, which uses tunes so good they can't be by him, and must be Mozart. All those pleasant early Schubert piano sonatas. Providing a head for what I always found an unsatisfying torso (Bruckner 9). But I wonder how you feel about that flute solo in the finale of Mahler 10? For me it seems a totally wrong choice of instrument.
It doesn't bother me especially.
That flute solo is one of my best loved passages in all Mahler symphonies. The choice of flue is right at that point, and it's Mahler's choice (see his sketches).
Any thoughts, feelings about the Mark Wigglesworth recording of 10? I am no expert on these matters.
Soory, no. I don't get BBC cover CDs.
@@DavesClassicalGuide My mistake! Ah, that BBCSO (?) disc from the mid-90's. I 'de-cluttered' that ages ago.
Wigglesworth later recorded a far superior rendition with the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra
[English is not my first language, so I may not have chosen the nicest wording but I really hope this doesn't sound rude. It's just a genuine question that I have.]
Something I never understood is how you could write about Noseda's Mahler 10 that "In the second movement he’s far too slow; the music lacks the requisite snap and urgency" while at the same time recommending Sanderling, being that the Scherzo lasts 12:46 under Noseda, but 13:10 under Sanderling. OK, you may say, maybe Sanderling spends more time with the slower parts of the movement? Nope, Sanderling reaches that Waltz-like melody in E-flat at 3:34, while Noseda reaches it earlier, at 3:29. So I'm really puzzled. I ask because I really admire your work and love your no-nonsense attitude, and I'm sure you have a sensible explanation for this.
Sure. It's all relative to the overall context, and your perception of tempo has as much to do with rhythm, phrasing, accent and the character of the playing as with sheer speed. You make a valid point, but Noseda sounds dull, and hence slower than it should be.
I see. But I can't imagine how it sounds dull to you, I hear quite the contrary.
Great commentary and great recommendations! I love the Dausgaard/Seattle one for Cooke III - it's similar to Ormandy, but with updated sound quality. For variety, I do occasionally enjoy hearing the Samale/Mazzuca version (Exton). Regardless, I agree with your points and your recommendations.
Thank you. Remember when we talked about making our own version? Aren't you glad we never did?
@@DavesClassicalGuide Yep. Life is too short . . . or too long, depending on your point of view. Not only that, I more or less 'lived' Mahler 10 in my own Inge escapade. Enough is enough. Haydn rules.
@@barryguerrero7652 Wise man...
I agree Maestro @@DavesClassicalGuide that Barshai subjects Mahler to a Borschtification frequently resembling a russian circus act but he nevertheless does something with the last movement that makes more of an impact on me emotionally than the majority of recordings of Cookes versions has done as they frequently leaves me questioning if Mahler wouldn´t have rethought and restructured the finale had he lived long enough. Barshai however makes a case for it that works (for me).
And he was a sterling Mahler conductor.
My favorite of the two movement version remains Szell’s. Of the completed work I like every Mahler fan I knew got Ormandy on LP. I still preferred Szell in the Adagio and Putgatorio, but Ormandy was fine overall. On CD I have Rattle/Berlin, Chailly, and Dausgaard. I like them all for different reasons, but my favorite is Dausgaard’s swift, sonically terrific account. Agree, that I don’t listen to it as often as I do the other symphonies, except for the 8th which I have never taken to.
You inspire me, David. Maybe I'll try my own hand at completion...and then transcribe it for marching band.
At 1:00 in:
Dave, I agree, but I fear that things can only get worse. I am alluding to the potential chaos that Artificial Intelligence will bring to the mix. It's already started with a slew of "in the style of..." mash-ups, and it will only get worse when our computer overlords begin to consume unfinished symphonic manuscripts and orchestral fragments. In the words immortalized by Slim Pickens in Blazing Saddles, "I am depressed..."
I think it will be fun, and funny.
It's like how many times Mozart's Requiem has been completed by others. Though I'm guilty of buying so many versions of that work.
This is not a completion, it’s finishing the missing orchestration. Mahler wrote the music to the end on 2 staves. This is not patching random sketches together. Add to this the totally competent yet sel-effacing work of Cooke.
Yes, it is a completion by any definition. A single melodic thread is not a complete work, especially when a composer, like Mahler, writes in a highly contrapuntal style. Whole sections of texture, countermelody, and harmony are completely missing, never mind the orchestration which is not some sort of "color in the lines" filler. I admire Cooke's work, but even he never said that the work was complete before he got to it, merely that what he was doing was making a performable version out of Mahler's sketch at the stage that he left it. I see no need to make greater claims for it than that.
Unfortunately the dilemma for Mahler lovers is that we are always curious to hear just a little bit more. Of course we know it's not Mahler's final word, but I think we want to grasp the beauty that's still there, that we know is still Mahler's.
Yes, I get that, but I really do believe that we need to be content with what we have. I don't object to Cooke, as I said. I object to the industry trying to piggy back on Mahler's remains. You can only dress a corpse so many ways.
Barshai's version has a lot of problem, but I'd say he did a really good job with the Finale. The faster tempo made the ending section after the scream one of the most emotional and beautiful passage I've ever heard in Mahler's music. The greatest problem I have with the Finale is the middle section. I get that it's a very good contrast that leads to the ending, but it is way too long, so much to the point it becomes boring.
If you enjoyed Rattle/BPO Mahler 10th maybe you should give a chance to Rattle/BPO Bruckner 9, this is the only completion that really works in my opinion. I also heard most every B9 completion out there and I agree most of those are meh at best. Also thanks for pointing out Chailly, I guess getting the full boxset is the way to go, even though in Maher I highly prefer getting separate recordings of particular performances I am interested in.
Believe it or not I agree with you about the Rattle Bruckner 9th, even though I still think the finale is a waste of time.
I agree with your views on Sanderling Gielen and chailly.However the rest aren't very good at all.
I know this is out of the clear blue, but I think I've figured out why you like Cooke's version of Maher's 10th best (and I agree it's the best overall, though I like some aspects of some of the others better). His rendering uses a rute. LOL !!!!! Again, I love your strong opinions and your great sense of humor.
I must have kind of a morbid fascination for “Mahler’s Tenth”, because I own about a dozen recordings. The Cooke performing version is the best. My favorite recording is Rattle with the Berlin Philharmonic. Chailly and Sanderling are great. The Clinton Carpenter “realization” sounds goofy and weird to me.
I agree that Cooke’s version may be the best, but Mazetti to me is a close second. The rest is um........questionable.
We can follow David's tradition and nominate the worst... Gamzou?
Doesn't bother me a bit. Mahler sketched it through completely, with instrumental indications. It's a complete skeleton, and like facial reconstruction, we can tell what skin would have gone over the bones. And it's a thrilling piece!
That's not entirely true. There is a melodic line from start to finish, and instrumental indications for the first 3 movements--but virtually nothing after that, and you certainly cannot say that the works was sketched "completely" when much of the harmony and contrapuntal lines are missing. I am not saying that you shouldn't enjoy it fully--merely that you have not described what is actually there accurately.
Just found the channel and am binge-watching, playing catch up. Relieved to find the one classical review channel on TH-cam that isn't just a bunch of old white dudes with no classical knowledge pulling out a bunch of classical thrift-store vinyl from their shelves and talking about nothing but what the inner labels look like while completely botching the names of the composers and conductors. Wow, it's a "shaded dog." Welcome to thirty years ago, old dudes. Lol. This channel should correct that imbalance nicely.
Thank you. I had no idea those other channels existed. At least I'm (aging) white dude who talks about music, I guess!
@@DavesClassicalGuide You're not missing anything, believe me. In any case, I'm an old-white dude too. I'm sort of in the middle, between them and you, as far as collecting and knowledge goes. Trying to do zen breathing exercises and Om-chants to center myself and stave off binge purchases whenever you suggest CDs I don't have in my already copious collection.
In Peter Heyworth's book Conversations with Klemperer, is this.
PH: "What about Deryck Cooke's realisation of Mahler's Tenth Symphony?"
OK: "A scandal. Mahler told his wife to burn the sketches in the event of his death. She didn't do so. Apart from the adagio, which I have conducted, there is nothing more than sketches, sometimes only a single line of a few notes. When I heard that a man called Cooke had completed them, I asked for a score. It's impossible. I mean, if Cooke were a second Mahler, then it might be all right."
That sums it up for me. The only person who could complete Mahler's 10th was Mahler himself. Any 'completion' or 'realisation' or 'performing version' is of academic interest only.
I love Klemperer a lot, but I do disagree with his statement right there. The truth is that Cooke is not a second Mahler, but he himself said that it was impossible to "complete" the symphony as Mahler would have done, and called it a performing edition. I think this term is perfect and that anyone who terms anything a "completion" (as many people do to those who did the job and didn't call it this way). In my opinion, anyone who calls what he does a "completion" is a selfish prick, and Cooke was very modest (and certainly did the right thing) in calling it "a performing edition". And here I go against Mr. Hurwitz's opinions: I do admit that in a case such as Beethoven's 10th (where there *are* only preliminary sketches) it doesn't even make sense worrying about it. Mahler's 10th, on the other hand, has a pretty detailed draft for its movements at least, and can be done into something (minor unimportant sidenote: I don't know versions, but I would begin with Cooke and he is probably the only one to care about. Barshai might be interesting, but it's much less Mahler)
Wasn't it later discovered that there was a whole lot more sketches, amounting to a fairly complete draft of all five movements, than what Klemperer alluded to in this interview?
@@henriquelohmann yes, that is so. Alma, Mahler's widow, was vehemently opposed to what Cooke and his associates were undertaking; but she was persuaded to listen to the broadcast of the performing version, after which she changed her mind completely. She wrote a letter of gratitude to Cooke and passed on to him the additional sketches which she had had in her keeping. I don't know how much more complete they were because Cooke's initial version was only revised, not rewritten.
Klemperer is simply lying here. The symphony is beautiful, and Mahler wrote every bar of it, orchestrated half of it and gave indications on the orchestration of the remaining half. I'm glad that Alma didn't burn the sheets, and personally don't give a damn about Mahler's irrational and superstitious wishes.
I've enjoyed the chamber symphony version by Michelle Castelletti, recorded on BIS by the Lapland Chamber Orchestra (really!) cond. John Storgårds. Except for the lack of percussion at the opening of the finale, I find these smaller forces feel right-sized for the sketchy music, unlike the "full-blown" symphony reconstructions which are too much like a thin man floundering in a large man's suit.
Mind you, I know DH judges differently, having branded this disc a "CD from Hell" !
You got it. It's revolting, especially since we know more or less the size of the forces that Mahler intended. I despise these chamber-music reductions of works written for large forces, particularly in this day and age when recordings make such things completely unnecessary; and to do it just because the work happens to be incomplete strikes me as a final insult. But as I always say, if you like it, that's your prerogative, and I mean that sincerely.
The problem with the Castelletti - for me - is that he put all his gratuitous and fortissimo (loud) tam-tam smashes in the wrong places. That aspect is a real head-scratcher for me.
I quite agree. That"s why I will NEVER wish to hear "Elgar's" third symphony.
I got Andrew Davis’ recording of the Elgar 3 purely out of curiosity. Listened to it once. You’re not missing anything.
@@barrygray8903 Thanks for the confirmation of my scepticism!
@@barrygray8903 It's supreme arrogance of so-called musicologists, or whoever, to assume what a genius composer WOULD have written. Fact is, the composer DIDN'T write it! The very concept is anathema to me.
Agreed. Payne’s “completion “ of the Elgar 3 comes across as “mishmash with tambourine obligatto.”
After the first movement, which has a lot of vintage Elgar, the rest is more Anthony Payne channeling his idiom by using whatever material is there. It's a great idea (I have the Daniel recording), but if Elgar had wanted a third symphony, he would have done his best to have sketched out a lot more material and put it in some sort of coherent form. But...you'll have some conductors that will do it just to be "completists".
Now with AI it is just going to get worse.
It's not only annoying when classical music gets completed. Lately it's been happening a lot in pop music where a singer dies and the record labels make a whole album post mortem.
Yes, but when that happens it's hard to tell the difference from when they were still alive.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Hahahahahahahaha
id rather enjoy Mahler/Cooke symphony 10 times before i return to Rachmaninovs 5th piano concerto, YES YOU HEARD ME CORRECTLY FOLKS, they actually made a piano concerto out of Rachmaninovs 2nd symphony and made a big deal out of it.
There's also a Brahms Piano Concerto no. 3, someone transcribed the Violin Concerto for piano! A recording of it came out a few years ago.
For the sake of curiosity , I’m glad the Tenth exists but I can’t view it as part of the official Mahler canon. The Adagio is another matter, but even this he would have tweaked ( as was his way).
Very true.
There should be a law banning using Mahler name or anyone else's name on something they did not write,end of story.peter.
I can guess what Gielen's philosophy was.
I assume he was a Frankfurt-school post-Marxist. Theodor W. Adorno, Walter Benjamin etc.
Nothing wrong with that, if true. I suspect it's something more gothic- romantic, though.
"Flies on a corpse"... love it. My feeling is that the 10th Adagio is a great experienced after listening to Mahler 9 but with a break of about 1-2 minute silence. The emotional bond between the final notes of the 9th and the opening of the 10th adagio are like crossing an ocean into the cosmos .......... I don't know if any conductor has performed the 9th with the 10th adagio integrated into a program but I reckon that this may in fact come close to "completing 'Mahler. Rattle conducting a completed 10th is a crime against humanity.
You literally just called one of Mahler’s greatest conceptions a “crime against humanity”.
Honestly would you prefer the symphony were left more unfinished? Why can’t you just be glad it was complete enough that it could still be performed and not a recipe for disaster like the Bruckner 9 completions?
@@macmadnes5262 When we die we leave much unfinished business and in the case of another person attempting to complete an unfinished symphony, well I suspect the artist would not appreciate any attempt to do so. My point was that there is most likely a reason that Mahler completed the adagio rather than a first movement because the adagio contained the core emotional drive of the work. It sounds and feels ethereal and mystical and at peace with mortality. It stands alone but my point was that it has a relationship to the adagio last movement of the ninth and being performed as a postscript to the ninth may satisfy the need for closure. Personally I dont think that Simon Rattle should be allowed near a Mahler score let alone satisfy his enormous ego by imagining for a second that he has fulfilled Mahler's wishes by indulging in a delusional attempt at completion.... no one knows or should conjecture that what is left in sketches would not have undergone revisions etc by the composer. I am more than happy with what Mahler did complete. It may sound extreme my statement "crime against humanity". But I am a person who takes art seriously and subscribe to the idea that in creating an artwork, only the artist knows when a work is complete. WE have a magnificent expansive and encompassing finished symphonic movement completed as a work of magnificent grandeur and expressive singularity. We don't need the 'words' of lesser men completing the deceased's parting sentences or imagining they can fill in the blanks for such a towering figure of musical imagination.
@@neilmurphy7554 all valid points. As a composer, I wouldn’t want people thinking they could say what i wanted to say either, no matter how specific my sketches were. Nor would I do it to my colleagues. I never said that this piece was perfect or even complete. But in my honest opinion, the Cooke edition of the full Tenth still outclasses a lot of symphonies that other composers “completed” themselves.
And let me make two counter points to your position against completions as practice:
(1) Mahler himself would complete and/or tinker with unfinished opera scores by obscure Baroque and Classical composers. Having done this sort of work before, when he told Alma to discard the sketches, it’s not because he thought people SHOULDN’T help him, it’s because he thought they COULDN’T. That was his ego speaking, not his moral code
(2) The statement “we should not play the full 10th because it doesn’t sound like Mahler wanted” applies to ALL of his symphonies. He was never satisfied with anything he wrote. And the other two he never heard, Das Lied and the 9th, are only about ~30% less of a draft than the 10th is. If we’re going to abort the 10th just because it’s not what Mahler would’ve approved, then we should also abort Das Lied and the 9th at least
I agree nearly totally with your view about completions. In my opinion, they are gravedigging, especially in the case of Bruckner. I know personally one of the guys, who made one (not Carragan...) - and the completion is as the person: the result of thinking oneself a genius. Awful!
But there are exceptions: „Turandot“ fe - not that I would miss this opera, but I would miss Busonis „Faust“...
And now the Mahler: I think, one should perform just the first movement. Krenek once told me that he thought over a completion, but it ist far too less material, and, moreover, nobody can know, what Mahler would have changed. The best completion seems to be Cooke - I have the score, and I guess, he did the best in adding as few as possible. Nevertheless, at least the last two movements sound, as if another composer tries to imitate Mahler.
My suggestion for Tinnitus Recordings would be all completions of Mozart’s Requiem WITHOUT the parts by Mozart himself. Wouldn’t this be great?
Fabulous!
I am fine with just the 1st movement of Mahler's 10th. It stands on it's own as a great piece of music. The final movement is far too depressing for my tastes. Mahler already put dying into musical terms with his 9th and Das lied Von Der Erde. The finale of the 10th is overkill. I rarely listen to it, and when I do, I come away in a very depressed mood for days. Blah!
That's a very interesting response. I don't think the finale is all that depressing (or at least it shouldn't be), but it is too long, especially the last ten minutes or so. One of the problems with these completions is that the impulse is always to add as much or possible or include every available scrap because the composer himself left the piece unfinished, but there is just as much compositional work involved in editing, trimming, and deleting as in writing, and to my mind no one was gotten a handle on the ideal shape of the movement. The same holds true, by the way, for the finale of Bruckner's Ninth.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Most seem to not find the finale depressing. It does seem a bit longish. I hear a longing in it, a longing for something unattainable. It makes me think of the past and the beloved people in my life that are now gone. What I would give for just another minute of time with them. I guess it was what he was experiencing with the unfaithfully Alma at the time that caused such emotions to come forth in the music. Anyway, I liked your analysis very much. I will check out the performances you recommended.
Personally, I'm glad that people finish incomplete works by dead composers. Imagine no Turandot! Alma gave her approval for Cooke's version. She was deeply moved by the music. The Cooke version is still the best overall, the Carpenter by far the worst. And Sanderling is tops in my book. But anyone who really is interested in this music needs to hear the original broadcast with commentary by Cooke that explains a lot of his decisions. Berthold Goldschmidt and the Philharmonia from 1960.
No, I disagree with this. Turandot without that horrible ending would be just great, and if you have to listen to a lecture by Cooke then there's no point in listening to the music at all. Either the works stands on its own merits or it's a waste of time. I agree that the piece CAN work (in the performances I suggest, for example), but I've heard that original broadcast and I will never bother with it again.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I totally agree, the Alfano ending to Turandot is a travesty.
I don't know Turandot, but I know Berio tried to do his ending
@@michaweinst3774 Well if you like the tunes of 'Nessun dorma' then you get to hear them again, a lot. Alfano's orchestration is heavy handed (Puccini was a master at writing for orchestra, the contrast is quite jarring) and the vocal lines are high and mostly loud so it becomes a bit of a shouting contest.
But what is fatal is that it just doesn't work dramatically. Liu's death does not move Turandot or the Prince, so it is completely pointless. Instead we are to believe that within five minutes the Prince charms Turandot into loving him. Yes it is basically a fairy tale; but it does seem likely that Puccini, with his time running out, came to realise that he wouldn't be able to produce a satisfactory ending.
I’m glad you don’t object to Rendering! Berio seems to have had a thing about “repurposing” existing musical material, but to a different end than a mere completion. Perhaps the Turandot ending is an exception, but 1) it’s far far superior to Alfano’s, and 2) it’s more forgivable (I think) to attempt some sort of finish to a dramatic work as opposed to a purely musical one. Berio’s version at least asks the audience to acknowledge the dramatic conundrum that left Puccini unable to to finish the opera.
The real problem with completed Mahler Tenths is the adagio. It's such an utter masterpiece, and itself such a satisfying conclusion to the Mahler body of work, that there's little reason to listen further except for curiosity's sake.
This is one thing that really cheesed me off with the Vanska/Minnesota Mahler cycle. They are recording all 10, which, of course, means symphonies one through nine and Das Lied. But no. No Das Lied, just "his" tenth. When I saw the program, all I could do is scream , "he didn't write that!"
What cheesed me off was the actual sound of the performances--at least most of them.
@moviedave2001 He did write it, he just didn't finish it.
Shame because Vanska's Mahler 10 is my favorite recording of the work
I think completions would be much better if they were done by composers rather than musicologists. They wouldn't be as authentic, maybe, but someone who actively writes music would have a better sense of what certain sections needed. Preferably by a self-effacing composer, because someone with a huge ego would probably co-opt the entire project, and end up bringing it farther from the original conception...
Also, no matter how bad the Mahler 10 completions are, none of them are as bad as the Bruckner 9 completions. Like, I kind of want to buy a copy of the score of the SMPC Bruckner 9 finale so I can just throw it against a wall.
I certainly agree with you there, but again, the problem with the Bruckner is also largely Bruckner's.
@@DavesClassicalGuide True enough. I think most of the material is great, but he didn't get quite enough of a sense of the complete movement before he died.
If I am not mistaken, Shostakovich and Schoenberg were asked to finish it Malher`s 10th, and they said no. My thought is that a composer with the familiarity with Mahler and the talent to finish it, like Shostakovich, wouldn't be caught dead doing such a thing, which is why musicologists... took up the cause, as it were.
@@aaronnichols3162 Actually, I think the material is terrible--the weakest stuff he ever did and the work of a confused mind nearing death.
I have a hard time with the attempts to complete Bruckner 9 with a so-called “finale” assembled from sketches, concepts, whatever.This great music is fine in its three movement incarnation.
I'll still take Mazzetti, it sounds the best to me (Lopez-Cobos). But it's not Mahler! I usually prefer the Adagio alone. I have no interest in any other so-called completions of Elgar, Bruckner etc. If I want to hear third-rate orchestral music, there are plenty of composers who at least present it under their own names. Life is too short.
Just so!
To say it’s not Mahler is dismissive and rude. The music is all his. The orchestration isn’t. It’s not even a completion since he didn’t leave anything open ended
Mr H has great ears and knows the repertoire inside out. Very impressive the small details he picks up on. Long may these reviews continue !