Mahler 10 Refusniks

[BBMmk2]

Ok, what do boarders think is the best recording of the realisation(as I am going to put it!)

[HighlandDougie]

Ok, what do boarders think is the best recording of the realisation(as I am going to put it!)

I don't think that it's necessarily the best performance/recording but the playing of the Vienna Philharmonic for Daniel Harding (whatever one might otherwise think of him as a conductor) is so seductively beautiful that I keep going back to it. Sanderling is well worth hearing, as others have already mentioned - and the Concertgebouw/Eliahu Inbal on Blu-ray is well worth a look.

[Tevot]

Put simply, I cannot refuse Mahler 10. It makes the world a better place. My eternal thanks to Mahler for composing it and to the conductors and players who have championed it over the years

Best Wishes,

Tevot

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Pleasant to listen to and certainly recognisable as in the style of Mahler, but Mahler himself did not write it as a symphony. He left sketches of some themes and ideas which others assumed were intended for a symphonic work.

Presumably their "assumption" derives from the folder which contains all the surviving material which has "Symphony Number Ten" in Mahler's handwriting written on the cover (and which holds separate files with the materials for each of the separate movements).

Bold letters do not make a false statement true; Mahler did, indeed, "write it as a symphony". Nor are there mere "sketches of some themes and ideas" - the entire thematic and harmonic material is written out in Mahler's handwriting (so no wonder it is "certainly recognisable as in the style of Mahler"!) with no "missing" bars; the orchestration of the First and Purgatorio movements is as finished as are the scores of Das Lied von der Erde and the Ninth Symphony, and 80% of the remaining orchestration is marked in the draft scores. With the last two movements, some deductions about texture and instrumentation had to be made by Cooke and his colleagues (and those others who also provide working copies of the Symphony). All of which demonstrate that, as cannot be repeated often enough, there is more genuine Mahler in the Cooke etc performing materials of the Tenth Symphony than there is genuine Mozart in the "Mozart Requiem" - and what is more, it is "genuine Mahler" at the very height of his astonishing powers.

[ahinton]

Presumably their "assumption" derives from the folder which contains all the surviving material which has "Symphony Number Ten" in Mahler's handwriting written on the cover (and which holds separate files with the materials for each of the separate movements).

Bold letters do not make a false statement true; Mahler did, indeed, "write it as a symphony". Nor are there mere "sketches of some themes and ideas" - the entire thematic and harmonic material is written out in Mahler's handwriting (so no wonder it is "certainly recognisable as in the style of Mahler"!) with no "missing" bars; the orchestration of the First and Purgatorio movements is as finished as are the scores of Das Lied von der Erde and the Ninth Symphony, and 80% of the remaining orchestration is marked in the draft scores. With the last two movements, some deductions about texture and instrumentation had to be made by Cooke and his colleagues (and those others who also provide working copies of the Symphony). All of which demonstrate that, as cannot be repeated often enough, there is more genuine Mahler in the Cooke etc performing materials of the Tenth Symphony than there is genuine Mozart in the "Mozart Requiem" - and what is more, it is "genuine Mahler" at the very height of his astonishing powers.

Yes, thank you very much indeed for your salutary - not to say admonitory - reminders here; I read HS's post as well but was frankly just too shocked by his boldfaced phrase to reply, so I'm glad that you've done it! All that I would add to bolster what you've written is that Mahler intended it to be a symphony before he even committed its first notes to paper, just as Bruckner had intended his Ninth to be ast in four movement right before the outset of his work on it.

All that I can add to Tevot's #94 above is the loudest of loud cheers and an admission that I couldn't have put it better myself!

[gradus]

From Deryck Cooke's programme notes for the first performance of his performing edition.

'The peculiar significance of the Tenth is that it would clearly have complemented The Song of the Earth and the Ninth symphony as the third work in a last-period symphonic trilogy concerned with the terrible questionings of Mahler's last years; and being the composer's final musical testament, it would have been regarded as embodying the eventual resolution of these questionings. As it is , by accepting the second work of the trilogy, the agonized Ninth symphony, as Mahler's final symphonic comment on existence, we have entertained a false impression of his ultimate attitude to life and death, which can only be set right by hearing and understanding what can be salvaged from the manuscript of the transcendent Tenth. This is the human justification for the attempt to make audible Mahler's blueprint for a crowning masterpiece.
The supporting artistic justification for the attempt is that the work - unlike Mozart's Requiem - does not require the free composition of a single bar. As published in facsimile in 1924, Mahler's manuscript 'sketch' is in fact a full-length, bar-by-bar score of a five-movement symphony, as follows:
1 Adagio. Full score 275 bars; sufficiently complete to be played practically as it stands.
2 Scherzo 1. Full score, 522 pages; varies from practically complete texture and orchestration to a single violin line.
3 Purgatorio. 170 bars; the first 28 fully orchestrated, the remainder in short score, with detailed indications of orchestration. The texture is practically complete, except that the moto perpetuo is mainly indicated by shorthand in the form of block chords.
4. Scherzo 2. Short score, 580 bars; varies from practically complete texture to a single upper part. Of the few indictions of instrumentation, the following are the most significant: 'Wind, horns, trombones' against the three motto-chords which open the movement, and 'Timpani....Bass Drum and Cymbal....Completely muffled drum, 'sforzando' at the end, indicating the movement's fade-out on percussion alone. (Title and tempo indications have been supplied; they are lacking in the manuscript.)
5 Finale. Short score, 401 bars; in a similar state to the fourth movement, but with more indications of instrumentation, the most significant being as follows. (1) In the introduction, the heavy muffled drum strokes, the two double-bassoons and the second horn, all in the first four bars; the long flute theme, with the rising horn intervals leading up to it; the subsequent entry of the first violins, ppp; the return of the muffled drum strokes. (2) In the main quick-movement, the calm entry of the trumpet with the flute theme, in the slower central section. (3) The horns and trumpet following the return of the first movement's big climax (which is of course orchestrated as in the first movement). (4) 'All the violins, fortissimo, big tone' for the final climactic statement of the flute-tune just before the coda. (Tempo-markings have been supplied in this movement except for the solitary allegro moderato, which is in the manuscript.)
Thus the whole symphony exists as a total conception, which can in fact be analysed from the manuscript as meaningfully as a completed work.'

[HighlandDougie]

From Deryck Cooke's programme notes for the first performance of his performing edition.

' by accepting the second work of the trilogy, the agonized Ninth symphony, as Mahler's final symphonic comment on existence, we have entertained a false impression of his ultimate attitude to life and death, which can only be set right by hearing and understanding what can be salvaged from the manuscript of the transcendent Tenth. This is the human justification for the attempt to make audible Mahler's blueprint for a crowning masterpiece.

Deeply grateful, Gradus, for reminding us of Deryck Cooke's achievement - one which was recognised by Alma Mahler.

[kea]

I don't think that it's necessarily the best performance/recording but the playing of the Vienna Philharmonic for Daniel Harding (whatever one might otherwise think of him as a conductor) is so seductively beautiful that I keep going back to it.

This is the one I eventually picked. I think it seemed a bit more strongly characterised than the Rattle version (although they both use the same version of the score, I think) but that could also just be the orchestras. I suspect my eventual reaction to the piece will be more positive so it's good to have a recording I think, for when that happens.

(The total of 1,948 bars enumerated by Cooke sounds a bit short for a Mahler symphony, are we sure he didn't plan a sixth movement? )

[P. G. Tipps]

I'm not sure at the moment which you mean, but there is a thing by one Pieter Jan Marthé that goes under his heading of "Bruckner reloaded" (as though the composer was some kind of gun about to be fired); to describe it as merely execrable would be too kind...

That's the one ... quite absurd isn't it?

That's what those people have led themselves to believe and been persuaded to believe as a consequence of decades of performances of only the first three movements; personally, I have always found it difficult to listen to that symphony as it used always to be performed purely because of knowing in advance that I'm going to be left high and dry and short-changed - and with music of that elevated quality, that is a particularly unwelcome experience to have - but never mind me; Bruckner would not have seen it that way because he wanted to complete the work so that people could hear his entire thoughts, not just some of them leading to a false ending!

Sorry, ahinton, but that first bit is pure nonsense, imho ...

In a strange almost eerie way the incomplete Bruckner 9 does sound 'complete' in the sense that it is a curiously "satisfying" conclusion to a personal struggle ultimately lost, whether we wish to accept that or not. Like many others I don't feel in any way 'short-changed', just deeply moved as the composer's battered soul seems to glide majestically (how appropriate!) into the Great Unknown.

However, I'm no dogmatist in the matter. The SPCM completion is a 'must have' for me as well because the music in the intended Finale is truly astonishing in its forward-looking nature and it is all pretty much genuine Bruckner right up to the coda.

Therein lies the rub. Bruckner was a 'coda' composer if ever there were one. That is the frustrating feature of the 'completion' for many, and that is why some prefer the ultimate resignation of the Adagio to a Finale coda which, impressive as it is, lacks the imcomparable quirkiness/genius and authorised Imprimatur of the Coda Master himself!

Each choice, three-movement or 'completion', can be respected as valid given the unfinished state of the symphony, and depending on one's point of view, which, who knows, may well alter through time anyway?

(Apologies for returning to this fascinating thread rather late!)

[Roehre]

From Deryck Cooke's programme notes for the first performance of his performing edition.

'The peculiar significance of the Tenth is that it would clearly have complemented The Song of the Earth and the Ninth symphony as the third work in a last-period symphonic trilogy concerned with the terrible questionings of Mahler's last years; and being the composer's final musical testament, it would have been regarded as embodying the eventual resolution of these questionings. As it is , by accepting the second work of the trilogy, the agonized Ninth symphony, as Mahler's final symphonic comment on existence, we have entertained a false impression of his ultimate attitude to life and death, which can only be set right by hearing and understanding what can be salvaged from the manuscript of the transcendent Tenth. This is the human justification for the attempt to make audible Mahler's blueprint for a crowning masterpiece.
The supporting artistic justification for the attempt is that the work - unlike Mozart's Requiem - does not require the free composition of a single bar. As published in facsimile in 1924, Mahler's manuscript 'sketch' is in fact a full-length, bar-by-bar score of a five-movement symphony, as follows:
1 Adagio. Full score 275 bars; sufficiently complete to be played practically as it stands.
2 Scherzo 1. Full score, 522 pages; varies from practically complete texture and orchestration to a single violin line.
3 Purgatorio. 170 bars; the first 28 fully orchestrated, the remainder in short score, with detailed indications of orchestration. The texture is practically complete, except that the moto perpetuo is mainly indicated by shorthand in the form of block chords.
4. Scherzo 2. Short score, 580 bars; varies from practically complete texture to a single upper part. Of the few indictions of instrumentation, the following are the most significant: 'Wind, horns, trombones' against the three motto-chords which open the movement, and 'Timpani....Bass Drum and Cymbal....Completely muffled drum, 'sforzando' at the end, indicating the movement's fade-out on percussion alone. (Title and tempo indications have been supplied; they are lacking in the manuscript.)
5 Finale. Short score, 401 bars; in a similar state to the fourth movement, but with more indications of instrumentation, the most significant being as follows. (1) In the introduction, the heavy muffled drum strokes, the two double-bassoons and the second horn, all in the first four bars; the long flute theme, with the rising horn intervals leading up to it; the subsequent entry of the first violins, ppp; the return of the muffled drum strokes. (2) In the main quick-movement, the calm entry of the trumpet with the flute theme, in the slower central section. (3) The horns and trumpet following the return of the first movement's big climax (which is of course orchestrated as in the first movement). (4) 'All the violins, fortissimo, big tone' for the final climactic statement of the flute-tune just before the coda. (Tempo-markings have been supplied in this movement except for the solitary allegro moderato, which is in the manuscript.)
Thus the whole symphony exists as a total conception, which can in fact be analysed from the manuscript as meaningfully as a completed work.'

For those who like to check this with their own eyes: the 1976 score (Associated Music Publishers New York & Faber Music Ltd London; AMP-7001) gives Mahler's text completely. The Adagio, Scherzo I and Purgatorio in the scores as written by Mahler (with amendments in smaller, easily identified type notes), from the very bar where Mahler's score of the purgatorio ends, Scherzo II and the finale with Mahler's continuity draft (most four staves) beneath the realisation by Cooke et al.

One can immediately see what is Mahler's and what Cooke et al did with that material.
The symphony is as structure complete and sound.

[ahinton]

Sorry, ahinton, but that first bit is pure nonsense, imho ...

The "first bit" to which you refer runs
"That's what those people have led themselves to believe and been persuaded to believe as a consequence of decades of performances of only the first three movements".
What else could have happened in the three quarters of a century or so in which the only performances were of the first three movements because that's all that there was to be performed? Do also bear in mind that the idea that Bruckner hardly wrote any of the final is now known to be a myth and that he actually wrote a good deal of it (and yet more might possibley turn up).

In a strange almost eerie way the incomplete Bruckner 9 does sound 'complete' in the sense that it is a curiously "satisfying" conclusion to a personal struggle ultimately lost, whether we wish to accept that or not. Like many others I don't feel in any way 'short-changed', just deeply moved as the composer's battered soul seems to glide majestically (how appropriate!) into the Great Unknown.

Well, much as we're both moved by the way in which the third movement progresses and concludes, I cannot listen to it without it leaving me expecting the finale that Brickner had hoped to complete; if you find ending with the third movement "satisfying", you're welcome...

However, I'm no dogmatist in the matter. The SPCM completion is a 'must have' for me as well because the music in the intended Finale is truly astonishing in its forward-looking nature and it is all pretty much genuine Bruckner right up to the coda.

Well, that's good to hear; it is indeed as you say.

Therein lies the rub. Bruckner was a 'coda' composer if ever there were one. That is the frustrating feature of the 'completion' for many, and that is why some prefer the ultimate resignation of the Adagio to a Finale coda which, impressive as it is, lacks the imcomparable quirkiness/genius and authorised Imprimatur of the Coda Master himself!

I'm very much of the same mind on this, but nothing can be done about it! MOst of the finale is now complete and whilst anything further that might turn up is likely not to include any material from the Coda, you never know!

Each choice, three-movement or 'completion', can be respected as valid given the unfinished state of the symphony, and depending on one's point of view, which, who knows, may well alter through time anyway?

It's not so much "validity" as what works, structurally, emotionally, &c. in the light of what we know of the composer's intentions for his listeners.

[Richard Barrett]

I thought there'd been another thread devoted to this work, but this was the one I found, so:

Now that there are so many recordings available, including several different realisations, this afternoon I decided I'd listen to the second movement in as many realisations as I could get my hands on. These were:

Cooke (conducted by Gielen)
Carpenter (Litton)
Wheeler (Olson)
Mazzetti (López-Cobos)
Samale/Mazzuca (Sieghart)
Barshai (Barshai)

I left Barshai until last because I had the sneaking feeling I would like it most, and I did. Has anyone else had this experience (or the opposite one)? I see from glancing through this thread that the departed Roehre has no time at all for Barshai's version, regarding it as the way not to realise this work.

[Bryn]

I thought there'd been another thread devoted to this work, but this was the one I found, so:

Now that there are so many recordings available, including several different realisations, this afternoon I decided I'd listen to the second movement in as many realisations as I could get my hands on. These were:

Cooke (conducted by Gielen)
Carpenter (Litton)
Wheeler (Olson)
Mazzetti (López-Cobos)
Samale/Mazzuca (Sieghart)
Barshai (Barshai)

I left Barshai until last because I had the sneaking feeling I would like it most, and I did. Has anyone else had this experience (or the opposite one)? I see from glancing through this thread that the departed Roehre has no time at all for Barshai's version, regarding it as the way not to realise this work.

By and large, I am just happy there is a range of performing versions. The only one which I have baulked at is Chailly's modifications to Cooke, with particular reference to his turning the single drum strokes of the cusp between the fourth movement and the finale into rolls. The Barshai is my favourite of the more interventionist performing versions though.

[Beef Oven!]

By and large, I am just happy there is a range of performing versions. The only one which I have baulked at is Chailly's modifications to Cooke, with particular reference to his turning the single drum strokes of the cusp between the fourth movement and the finale into rolls. The Barshai is my favourite of the more interventionist performing versions though.

Dausgaard (Cooke), Rattle x2 (Cooke), Sanderling (Cooke), Barshai (Barshai), and Olson (Wheeler).

I think they are all pretty damn good. I don't have much of a feel for the different realisations, I'm just glad that someone has taken the trouble!

[Richard Barrett]

Of course whether the music is convincing is more a question of a committed performance than of one version being "better" than another, especially since they have quite divergent philosophies behind them - Cooke is a "performing version of the sketch", and Wheeler is if anything even less interventionist, while at the other end of the scale Carpenter adds all kinds of extraneous stuff, often rather awkwardly and unnecessarily IMO, while Barshai injects a great deal more colour into the score, adding much percussion and even (though there is a Mahlerian precedent of course) a guitar. What nobody does as far as I know is to alter the structural orderings and proportions of Mahler's sketch so all of the same things, roughly speaking, happen in the same order, whichever version you're listening to. As I've mentioned before, I can imagine a much more interventionist version which sometimes might depart radically from Mahler's stylistic range (into extended instrumental techniques, maybe electronic sounds etc.) while retaining all of his material in some form or another, and in fact one reason why I've been listening to all these different ones is that my nearest and dearest remarked to me the other day that I might like to stop talking about this project and actually get on with it. Maybe she's right. But then I'd have to stop having different ideas every time I thought about it and decide things like this bit will go like this, so maybe it's better as far as I'm concerned to leave it as an imaginary piece.

Has anyone heard the VPO with Daniel Harding? I only had time for part of the first movement today, after my second-movement explorations; it sounds like perfection in instrumental playing but I'm not sure there's very much expressivity in it.