I discovered these recordings about a week ago, and I love them! They’re very well recorded and the performance style is in the sweet spot for me - reasonably quick tempos, rich sound, and not too HIP. Mahler’s contribution is usually subtle and barely apparent. I love the part in the 2nd mvt of the 3rd, just before the end of the main climax, where Mahler inserted timpani rolls that crescendo. It sounds perfect to me and really enhances the drama. What really strikes about it is how Beethoven used the same technique in the climax in the 1st mvt of the 9th.
I’m glad Mahler didn’t retouch the 8th because I love that hilarious moment in the 4th movement when it moves into F# minor and all the brass drop out. Beethoven may not have intended it, but it adds to the humor (to me, at least).
There are scores of Mahler's of Symphonies 4 and 8, but they were not much in need of Mahler's help (as per his thinking, presumably), and while they contain some changes, they don't really amount to "Retuschen". At least according to David Pickett... who adds that much the same could be said about Nos. 2 & 6, which explains, why Weinberger never issued those as scores. The only thing that may not exist is the 1st, because he may never have conducted it (he skipped it in his New York Beethoven Cycle) or if he did, the scores have not been found yet.
Finally, here is something in the oversaturated world of Beethoven recordings that adds something of value. I have the Steinberg/Pittsburgh recording of the 9th, but I've never heard any of the others. If I am going to add yet more performances of Beethoven's music to my hard drive, these seem like they should be high on the priority list. Even though these aren't considered to be definitive versions of Beethoven's symphonies, I think Mahler's insights are worth hearing. I still want arrangements of Beethoven's symphonies for a large ensemble of crumhorns and racketts, but until such a thing magically materializes, Mahler's modified versions will at least add something a little different to these symphonies that have been recorded too many times.
I am a total Mahler devotee, but this is the first time I’ve heard the opinion that he was the greatest orchestrator! I’m trying to remember who I heard say Strauß was superior decades ago … and I felt sad to think that was the prevailing opinion. I’m so glad you said it. Obviously there are plenty of spots in his symphonies that were experimental, and his subsequent retouches could only fix so much. But I’m happy to agree - no one knew the orchestra as an instrument better.
I would certainly agree. To my ear, Mahler had a radically different conception of orchestral sonority, and his pervasive use of rather complex counterpoint seems to have led him to original solutions.
These really are fascinating to listen to; it's the closest we can get to hearing how Mahler conducted Beethoven. I love the 7th in particular: so many new details that are usually inaudible now pop out (the interplay of scales in the coda of the finale for example). And what's even more remarkable is that (at least in the 7th) Mahler didn't change the orchestral forces that much: he just adds two more of each woodwind instrument and two more horns.
Thanks very much for the video, I had no idea that Mahler arranged Beethoven. I cued up the last movement of the 5th symphony to see if I could hear something new that I had not heard before, and no question the answer was yes. The recording brought out all sorts of lines especially in woodwinds and brass that I heard in a new way. Not sure if it was the performance or the new orchestration, probably a combination of both, but certainly a great way to get a new take on these very familiar pieces.
Next request: a complete set of the nine using all of the recommendations written down by Felix Weingartner. Some of Mahler's correspond and many of Weingartner's retouchings were still commonplace in the mid to late 20th c. But a nice, new, complete Mahler-Weingartner set!
Weingartner himself recorded them all, sometimes twice. I think most conductors, like Walter and Toscanini, followed Weingartner's emendations into the 1950s.
Beethoven was my introduction to classical music and remains a must in my life, but I realized just in the last year or so that the Mahler symphonies are the most important to me. The first time I heard Mahler was when Bernstein conducted the Resurrection live on (NBC if I recall correctly) two days after JFK was assassinated. I hated it. A year later I chanced across the Kletzki recording of Das Lied (one of the few with two male voices and only one of two that I know of where you can hear the mandolin) and was absolutely blown away. I revisited the second and it remains one of my favorites some 60 years on.
Just hears the first disc (5th and 3rd). I didn't notice that much difference in the 3rd, but there was so much detail added/more apparent in the 5th, it was quite the experience. I would love for them to do more, but they definitely front-loaded this release if they do: Symphony 6 is popular enough, but Symphonies 1-2-8 are not. I imagine Mahler might have orchestrated some other string quartets/overtures. As for the recording, it is quite good, with good dynamics and great transients (impacts and crashes). It is not as good as Vänskä or Chailly (though the latter I find a bit too compressed for my tastes), but it is a good, modern production.
I think the fact that Mahler took the time to re-orchestrate the Beethoven (and Schumann) symphonies shows how much he really wanted this music to live on...a labor of love for posterity. Do you happen to know why he didn't rearrange Beethoven's 4th, though? Did he find that the original scoring on that particular symphony was fine as is??? Thanks for the musical comparison you made, too!!!
I've had recordings of 3, 7 and 9 for a long time - on the Bridge label. And Leonard Slatkin did all of this years ago when he was at the National Symphony.
I guess the comparison between re-scoring conceived by Mahler and the period instrument interpretations makes the choice clearer than ever... If all you crave is "classicising" Beethoven with the sound of Haydn and / or Sturm und Drang before him - HIP on period instruments, when played well, create and sustain that impression. But if you subscribe to the school of thought that Beethoven was not "just one of the late Viennese Classicist composers", but an epochal genius who almost single-handedly evolved the musical styles and tastes, influenced generations of artists, beginning with his direct contemporaries and built bridges into the Romanticism and the Modernism as we have come to know them - the Mahler versions, big band, but also big on clarity, underscore that better than anything! And - as Dave pointed out - not going "off the rails" or disrespecting the music even once. Not saying you cannot have attachment to BOTH views of Beethoven - but rather that my ears advise (for what it's worth) against going all-in with the HIP worldview. Heck, if we can put up with, and even enjoy, numerous versions of Bruckner's works, that have been pitilessly and senselessly meddled with so many times - the Beethoven "Mahler edition" should have a place on the shelves! To be treasured - and recorded by even bigger name orchestras. :)
What a fascinating video Dave. I love your willingness to call BS for what it is. Question - did Mahler do a reorchestration of Egmont? I like the Corolian, but I adore Egmont.
I was just listening to the 5th symphony from these recordings (particularly enjoying the sound of the 3rd movement) and wondered what your thoughts would be. I agree that Mahler stayed very faithful to Beethoven's intentions but often achieves just a better sound. It's a bit of a shame that these versions are so rarely played. I think most audiences wouldn't object to hearing Beethoven's works from this angle.
On the subject of "retouchments" (as Mengelberg called them): in Szell's Beethoven 9th, in the last Mvmt, he does something with the brass at...well, for anyone who's got the recording, at 13:21, 13:28, et seq...which no one else seems to do, and which I always miss in other conductors' performances. (I can't help it--I imprinted on Szell's recording, back when it wa on Epic Lps.) Is he retouching the score? Is he using Mahler's? Or is he just adjusting the dynamic markings to bring out what's usually buried? I'd love to know...
As Dave mentions, conductors often rearrange works. Are these arrangements, being made by a fellow great composer, more far-reaching, or just better done?
I definitely would prefer the Mahler re-orchestration. It sounds much Bigger!. My question is that is it fairly common for an orchestra’s to play the Mahler version or they stick to the original?
No one plays the Mahler versions, and most orchestras use either their own parts or the conductor's. These will all involve some degree of diddling with the original, as often as not, but it differs in each individual case.
@@donmcc3that tuba added to the 9th is my favorite part of the Mahler re-orchestrations. If Paris is worth a mass, surely Beethoven’s 9th is worth a tuba.
I desperately love Mahler, but to rehash someone else's creation to make it resonate 'better' in one's own taste, or to hypothesise 'improving' it to make it more current, seems to me a perfect illustration of that vein of out-of-tune ego in the Austrian composer's gigantic human parable. Yes, even if your name is Mahler it is not so important that you put your hand to the masterpieces of another genius. Is there anyone who perhaps dares to add notes or alter the substantial parts of Beatles songs or Miles Davis pieces?
But clearly what Mahler has done here is not to "rehash" Beethoven's symphonies, but to allow them, through subtle rebalancing of instrumentation, to fully be in performance what they are in conception; to enable audiences to hear more clearly what Beethoven actually wrote. To realise such an ideal would surely be the rational objective of any top ranking conductor, which of course Mahler was. And his mastery of symphonic orchestration put him in the position of knowing precisely what was needed, and all that was needed, to achieve that objective.
I discovered these recordings about a week ago, and I love them! They’re very well recorded and the performance style is in the sweet spot for me - reasonably quick tempos, rich sound, and not too HIP. Mahler’s contribution is usually subtle and barely apparent. I love the part in the 2nd mvt of the 3rd, just before the end of the main climax, where Mahler inserted timpani rolls that crescendo. It sounds perfect to me and really enhances the drama. What really strikes about it is how Beethoven used the same technique in the climax in the 1st mvt of the 9th.
I’m glad Mahler didn’t retouch the 8th because I love that hilarious moment in the 4th movement when it moves into F# minor and all the brass drop out. Beethoven may not have intended it, but it adds to the humor (to me, at least).
He did retouch the 8th. Not the 4th.
There are scores of Mahler's of Symphonies 4 and 8, but they were not much in need of Mahler's help (as per his thinking, presumably), and while they contain some changes, they don't really amount to "Retuschen". At least according to David Pickett... who adds that much the same could be said about Nos. 2 & 6, which explains, why Weinberger never issued those as scores. The only thing that may not exist is the 1st, because he may never have conducted it (he skipped it in his New York Beethoven Cycle) or if he did, the scores have not been found yet.
Finally, here is something in the oversaturated world of Beethoven recordings that adds something of value. I have the Steinberg/Pittsburgh recording of the 9th, but I've never heard any of the others. If I am going to add yet more performances of Beethoven's music to my hard drive, these seem like they should be high on the priority list. Even though these aren't considered to be definitive versions of Beethoven's symphonies, I think Mahler's insights are worth hearing. I still want arrangements of Beethoven's symphonies for a large ensemble of crumhorns and racketts, but until such a thing magically materializes, Mahler's modified versions will at least add something a little different to these symphonies that have been recorded too many times.
I am a total Mahler devotee, but this is the first time I’ve heard the opinion that he was the greatest orchestrator! I’m trying to remember who I heard say Strauß was superior decades ago … and I felt sad to think that was the prevailing opinion. I’m so glad you said it. Obviously there are plenty of spots in his symphonies that were experimental, and his subsequent retouches could only fix so much. But I’m happy to agree - no one knew the orchestra as an instrument better.
I would certainly agree. To my ear, Mahler had a radically different conception of orchestral sonority, and his pervasive use of rather complex counterpoint seems to have led him to original solutions.
Yes and I think ravel also as a place in this discussion. Just listening to a good interpretation of “La Valse” will show you that much
Wagner, greatest since Beethoven and Berlioz.
These really are fascinating to listen to; it's the closest we can get to hearing how Mahler conducted Beethoven. I love the 7th in particular: so many new details that are usually inaudible now pop out (the interplay of scales in the coda of the finale for example). And what's even more remarkable is that (at least in the 7th) Mahler didn't change the orchestral forces that much: he just adds two more of each woodwind instrument and two more horns.
Thanks very much for the video, I had no idea that Mahler arranged Beethoven. I cued up the last movement of the 5th symphony to see if I could hear something new that I had not heard before, and no question the answer was yes. The recording brought out all sorts of lines especially in woodwinds and brass that I heard in a new way. Not sure if it was the performance or the new orchestration, probably a combination of both, but certainly a great way to get a new take on these very familiar pieces.
I wasn't even aware Mahler did this! I'll have to check it out.
Chailly did a good Mahler orchestrated Schumann cycle too
Next request: a complete set of the nine using all of the recommendations written down by Felix Weingartner. Some of Mahler's correspond and many of Weingartner's retouchings were still commonplace in the mid to late 20th c. But a nice, new, complete Mahler-Weingartner set!
Weingartner himself recorded them all, sometimes twice. I think most conductors, like Walter and Toscanini, followed Weingartner's emendations into the 1950s.
I find Weingartner's Beethoven recordings (on Naxos) excellent and under appreciated. His 9th is one of the best.
Beethoven was my introduction to classical music and remains a must in my life, but I realized just in the last year or so that the Mahler symphonies are the most important to me. The first time I heard Mahler was when Bernstein conducted the Resurrection live on (NBC if I recall correctly) two days after JFK was assassinated. I hated it. A year later I chanced across the Kletzki recording of Das Lied (one of the few with two male voices and only one of two that I know of where you can hear the mandolin) and was absolutely blown away. I revisited the second and it remains one of my favorites some 60 years on.
You can hear the mandolin in lots of recordings.
Thank you for your review! 🙏🏻
Just hears the first disc (5th and 3rd). I didn't notice that much difference in the 3rd, but there was so much detail added/more apparent in the 5th, it was quite the experience. I would love for them to do more, but they definitely front-loaded this release if they do: Symphony 6 is popular enough, but Symphonies 1-2-8 are not. I imagine Mahler might have orchestrated some other string quartets/overtures.
As for the recording, it is quite good, with good dynamics and great transients (impacts and crashes). It is not as good as Vänskä or Chailly (though the latter I find a bit too compressed for my tastes), but it is a good, modern production.
I love the Beethoven 9 (Mahler retuschen) recording with Kristjan Jarvi on the Tonkunstler's own label. I should get this set as well.
I think the fact that Mahler took the time to re-orchestrate the Beethoven (and Schumann) symphonies shows how much he really wanted this music to live on...a labor of love for posterity. Do you happen to know why he didn't rearrange Beethoven's 4th, though? Did he find that the original scoring on that particular symphony was fine as is??? Thanks for the musical comparison you made, too!!!
Why haven't these orchestrations been recorded and performed more often? Mahler re-orchestrating Beethoven? What a great idea!
I've had recordings of 3, 7 and 9 for a long time - on the Bridge label. And Leonard Slatkin did all of this years ago when he was at the National Symphony.
I guess the comparison between re-scoring conceived by Mahler and the period instrument interpretations makes the choice clearer than ever... If all you crave is "classicising" Beethoven with the sound of Haydn and / or Sturm und Drang before him - HIP on period instruments, when played well, create and sustain that impression. But if you subscribe to the school of thought that Beethoven was not "just one of the late Viennese Classicist composers", but an epochal genius who almost single-handedly evolved the musical styles and tastes, influenced generations of artists, beginning with his direct contemporaries and built bridges into the Romanticism and the Modernism as we have come to know them - the Mahler versions, big band, but also big on clarity, underscore that better than anything! And - as Dave pointed out - not going "off the rails" or disrespecting the music even once. Not saying you cannot have attachment to BOTH views of Beethoven - but rather that my ears advise (for what it's worth) against going all-in with the HIP worldview.
Heck, if we can put up with, and even enjoy, numerous versions of Bruckner's works, that have been pitilessly and senselessly meddled with so many times - the Beethoven "Mahler edition" should have a place on the shelves! To be treasured - and recorded by even bigger name orchestras. :)
What a fascinating video Dave. I love your willingness to call BS for what it is.
Question - did Mahler do a reorchestration of Egmont? I like the Corolian, but I adore Egmont.
I was just listening to the 5th symphony from these recordings (particularly enjoying the sound of the 3rd movement) and wondered what your thoughts would be. I agree that Mahler stayed very faithful to Beethoven's intentions but often achieves just a better sound. It's a bit of a shame that these versions are so rarely played. I think most audiences wouldn't object to hearing Beethoven's works from this angle.
Very nice indeed.
On the subject of "retouchments" (as Mengelberg called them): in Szell's Beethoven 9th, in the last Mvmt, he does something with the brass at...well, for anyone who's got the recording, at 13:21, 13:28, et seq...which no one else seems to do, and which I always miss in other conductors' performances. (I can't help it--I imprinted on Szell's recording, back when it wa on Epic Lps.) Is he retouching the score? Is he using Mahler's? Or is he just adjusting the dynamic markings to bring out what's usually buried? I'd love to know...
Anyone have any idea where to get the scores and parts ?
As Dave mentions, conductors often rearrange works. Are these arrangements, being made by a fellow great composer, more far-reaching, or just better done?
Kind of both.
I definitely would prefer the Mahler re-orchestration. It sounds much Bigger!. My question is that is it fairly common for an orchestra’s to play the Mahler version or they stick to the original?
No one plays the Mahler versions, and most orchestras use either their own parts or the conductor's. These will all involve some degree of diddling with the original, as often as not, but it differs in each individual case.
I think the Steinberg/Pittsburgh “The Ninth” uses the Mahler retouchings. I hear a tuba galumphing along in the climax of the first movement.
Thanks so much for the clarifications.
Just heard a bit of the Steinberg Ninth. He really brinhs out Mahler's added trombones at the first movement recap. I love it!
@@donmcc3that tuba added to the 9th is my favorite part of the Mahler re-orchestrations. If Paris is worth a mass, surely Beethoven’s 9th is worth a tuba.
I desperately love Mahler, but to rehash someone else's creation to make it resonate 'better' in one's own taste, or to hypothesise 'improving' it to make it more current, seems to me a perfect illustration of that vein of out-of-tune ego in the Austrian composer's gigantic human parable. Yes, even if your name is Mahler it is not so important that you put your hand to the masterpieces of another genius.
Is there anyone who perhaps dares to add notes or alter the substantial parts of Beatles songs or Miles Davis pieces?
But clearly what Mahler has done here is not to "rehash" Beethoven's symphonies, but to allow them, through subtle rebalancing of instrumentation, to fully be in performance what they are in conception; to enable audiences to hear more clearly what Beethoven actually wrote. To realise such an ideal would surely be the rational objective of any top ranking conductor, which of course Mahler was. And his mastery of symphonic orchestration put him in the position of knowing precisely what was needed, and all that was needed, to achieve that objective.