Kubelik Mahler Cycle

[richardfinegold]

Ancerl is a favourite conductor of mine - especially his Brahms 1 and 2 and accompanying Josef Suk and Ida Haendel. I don't have any of his Mahler though - something to be corrected by the sounds of it.

I think his Mahler on records is limited to 1&9, but I would love to be contradicted here. I agree with R.B. that this Ninth is equal if not better to all others I have encountered

[oliver sudden]

I have always much enjoyed the First and more recently the Fourth with Elsie Morison. I was less enamoured of his Fifth that did seem rather cool to me and it was soon replaced by the VPO/Bernstein and the Barbirolli in my affections.

My first 5 was indeed the Kubelík on DG. It seemed rather cool to me too, so I set off looking for something a bit less so. Then I heard the VPO/Bernstein Prom on the radio and promptly bought that recording as soon as it came out because obviously that was a much more gripping account.

Many years later I heard the La Tribune des critiques de disques episode on Mahler 5. That’s a blind comparison programme, neither listener nor panel know what the recording is until the end. In the first round there was a version that was nicely enough played but really a bit stolid. That was eliminated quite early. There was also a stunningly characterful version with gloriously varied wind colours, nice rubato, observed Mahler’s direction to rush the triplet upbeats, really took off in the fast stuff, I was really hanging on to the end of the programme to find out what it was.

It was the Kubelík of course wasn’t it. And the stolid one was VPO/Lenny. An impression confirmed when I heard the Prom recording on Radio 3 a few years back now.

I don’t know what this proves. But I’m jolly glad to have rediscovered the Kubelík.

I haven’t generally been impressed by DG’s mastering of the recordings on CD, especially once my turntable phase started and I could hear the things on vinyl. A lot of the character seems to have got lost on the way. Or is it just me?

[Roger Webb]

My first 5 was indeed the Kubelík on DG. It seemed rather cool to me too, so I set off looking for something a bit less so. Then I heard the VPO/Bernstein Prom on the radio and promptly bought that recording as soon as it came out because obviously that was a much more gripping account.

Many years later I heard the La Tribune des critiques de disques episode on Mahler 5. That’s a blind comparison programme, neither listener nor panel know what the recording is until the end. In the first round there was a version that was nicely enough played but really a bit stolid. That was eliminated quite early. There was also a stunningly characterful version with gloriously varied wind colours, nice rubato, observed Mahler’s direction to rush the triplet upbeats, really took off in the fast stuff, I was really hanging on to the end of the programme to find out what it was.

It was the Kubelík of course wasn’t it. And the stolid one was VPO/Lenny. An impression confirmed when I heard the Prom recording on Radio 3 a few years back now.

I don’t know what this proves. But I’m jolly glad to have rediscovered the Kubelík.

I haven’t generally been impressed by DG’s mastering of the recordings on CD, especially once my turntable phase started and I could hear the things on vinyl. A lot of the character seems to have got lost on the way. Or is it just me?

The Kubelik was my first Mahler 5 too and the LP stands up well against the CD remaster - must look up the Qobuz version tomorrow, many of these now sound better than the CDs. We once went to the Maltanske restaurant in Prague and flipping through the visitors book I chanced upon a musical stave and noticed that it was a beautifully written few bars of the main theme of Vltava signed underneath Kubelik R, the owner was amazed, firstly that I knew the music and then who the conductor was. She immediately ordered a waiter to clear a table in the corner and invited us to sit down telling us that had been his table, and we were treated like royalty all evening!

[Roger Webb]

Just checked Qobuz, Kubelik's Mahler 5 is indeed available...all except the Adagietto which is greyed out! Perhaps we could fill that in with the version used in Visconti's 'Death in Venice', Franco Mannino and l'orchestra dell'Accadamia Santa Cecilia...no I didn't know that either.

[richardfinegold]

I haven’t generally been impressed by DG’s mastering of the recordings on CD, especially once my turntable phase started and I could hear the things on vinyl. A lot of the character seems to have got lost on the way. Or is it just me?

I don't know if it is just you, or me, but I am not really sure why you can hear more on vinyl, given the increased dynamic range of digital and the absence of surface noise with digital, since surface noise obscures low level detail. I also had wound up purchasing the Blu Ray Audio of Kubelik which I think is extremely detailed and warm to boot. It also has a lot more bass than the Kubelik lps (I have only the First on lp). I found most DG recordings from the sixties and early seventies to be pretty bass deficient.

[Roger Webb]

I don't know if it is just you, or me, but I am not really sure why you can hear more on vinyl, given the increased dynamic range of digital and the absence of surface noise with digital, since surface noise obscures low level detail. I also had wound up purchasing the Blu Ray Audio of Kubelik which I think is extremely detailed and warm to boot. It also has a lot more bass than the Kubelik lps (I have only the First on lp). I found most DG recordings from the sixties and early seventies to be pretty bass deficient.

I spent a long time in the early days of CD comparing them to LPs, my general impression was that many DG releases were over bright on CD. Of course since then CD players have improved as have mastering techniques. Also consider how you are comparing: you can't play a CD on you record deck and vice versa! Obvious, but the truth is such comparisons are hard to make unless you are sure your equipment is treating each medium 'fairly'. Compare LP to the original master tape, or CD to the same tape and you might get somewhere.
I'm not a vinyl 'junky' (I used to run a CD shop after all!) but, truth is, the way music is presented just 'sounds better' sometimes on LP. Listening to CD, strings somehow become wearing - also on some streaming platforms, although Qobuz I find has better sound than either Spotify of Tidal (who have trouble with the MQA scandal at the moment). Have you heard any of the new remastered LP releases from the 70s - DG are going back to the original master tapes and recutting using only analogue techniques...they say it's a revelation, having only heard them via YouTube it's impossible to say....and they are enormously expensive! Oh, and BTW you're right about bass-lightness on many 60s and 70s DG LP releases - something the new 'Originals' are said to rectify.

[HighlandDougie]

although Qobuz I find has better sound than either Spotify of Tidal (who have trouble with the MQA scandal at the moment)

As I was asked the question recently of whether I thought Qobuz was superior to Tidal sound-wise (I have subscriptions to both and listen to both using an Aurender streamer), I thought that I would do some admittedly very limited A/B comparisons using the same pieces of music and at the highest quality (24/192 or 24/96). Somewhat to my surprise (as I had thought that Qobuz would be superior), Joyce di Donato's "Wesendonck Lieder" and Martin James Bartlett's "Danses" album both sounded, well, better in Tidal Max - more open, bigger sound stage etc etc (the usual hifi reviewer clichés). Not that there's much wrong with Qobuz Hifi but definitely not quite as good. The search facility of both continues, alas, not to be very classical album friendly (not as good as Apple Classical but balanced out by it having a lot less content).

[Roger Webb]

As I was asked the question recently of whether I thought Qobuz was superior to Tidal sound-wise (I have subscriptions to both and listen to both using an Aurender streamer), I thought that I would do some admittedly very limited A/B comparisons using the same pieces of music and at the highest quality (24/192 or 24/96). Somewhat to my surprise (as I had thought that Qobuz would be superior), Joyce di Donato's "Wesendonck Lieder" and Martin James Bartlett's "Danses" album both sounded, well, better in Tidal Max - more open, bigger sound stage etc etc (the usual hifi reviewer clichés). Not that there's much wrong with Qobuz Hifi but definitely not quite as good. The search facility of both continues, alas, not to be very classical album friendly (not as good as Apple Classical but balanced out by it having a lot less content).

Interesting Highland Dougie. Of course you have Tidal Max, is that MQA? Or has Tidal reverted to flac lossless 24 bit? I only had Tidal on trial at the HiFi level, so 16 bit 44.1k, compared with Qobuz which gives me up to 24/192, depending on the recording of course. But on many recordings that were 16/44.1 (CD quality) a lot sound 'better'. Hard to quantify without resorting to HiFi reviewer clichés, as you say. But the Qobuz seemed more natural, less 'aggresive', on a lot of recordings slightly less loud and up front, slightly more 'space' around the instruments. My loudspeakers (Quad 2812 electrostatics) give a great front to back perspective, and on naturally recorded material - some BIS CDs for example - they were enabling me to 'look into' the recording space. But you're spot on with the problems with both Tidal and Qobuz vis-à-vis track listing - I often find myself walking across the room to my CD rack to get the info I need! Even worse on Playfi app than Qobuz's own, I wish Qobuz would introduce 'connect' like Spotify's. Is your Aurender truly gapless on both Tidal and Qobuz? On Playfi Qobuz is 100% gapless, but Tidal not on one or two of the severest tests: Beethoven Live Kissin 32 Variations on DG for example.

[richardfinegold]

I spent a long time in the early days of CD comparing them to LPs, my general impression was that many DG releases were over bright on CD. Of course since then CD players have improved as have mastering techniques. Also consider how you are comparing: you can't play a CD on you record deck and vice versa! Obvious, but the truth is such comparisons are hard to make unless you are sure your equipment is treating each medium 'fairly'. Compare LP to the original master tape, or CD to the same tape and you might get somewhere.
I'm not a vinyl 'junky' (I used to run a CD shop after all!) but, truth is, the way music is presented just 'sounds better' sometimes on LP. Listening to CD, strings somehow become wearing - also on some streaming platforms, although Qobuz I find has better sound than either Spotify of Tidal (who have trouble with the MQA scandal at the moment). Have you heard any of the new remastered LP releases from the 70s - DG are going back to the original master tapes and recutting using only analogue techniques...they say it's a revelation, having only heard them via YouTube it's impossible to say....and they are enormously expensive! Oh, and BTW you're right about bass-lightness on many 60s and 70s DG LP releases - something the new 'Originals' are said to rectify.

I think you are describing a problem with a digital filter. What are you using for a DAC? Regarding the Kubelik Mahler series, the Blu Ray came with standard CDs, but I gave them away in the interest of saving space. I think there is more bass on the Blu Ray than the lp, but there is more of everything. I don’t know if ‘The Original’ series helps replace deficient bass because I haven’t done comparison with lps. I do have the Mravinsky Tchaikovsky set on CD, and my aural memory of the LPs is that there is no improvement.
I can’t listen to the CD transfers of Kempff in Beethoven, Schubert and Schumann. The treble is uncomfortably bright, no bass to speak of, and the one Kempff lp that I own (Beethoven big 3 sonatas) sounds better even with the extraneous noise. DG really owes it to Kempff to redo these, if they haven’t already. However, your original comment referred to low level detail, and there is more of in the CD (try the slow movement of the Pathetique and the left hand Alberti Ike accompaniment).

[Roger Webb]

I think you are describing a problem with a digital filter. What are you using for a DAC? Regarding the Kubelik Mahler series, the Blu Ray came with standard CDs, but I gave them away in the interest of saving space. I think there is more bass on the Blu Ray than the lp, but there is more of everything. I don’t know if ‘The Original’ series helps replace deficient bass because I haven’t done comparison with lps. I do have the Mravinsky Tchaikovsky set on CD, and my aural memory of the LPs is that there is no improvement.
I can’t listen to the CD transfers of Kempff in Beethoven, Schubert and Schumann. The treble is uncomfortably bright, no bass to speak of, and the one Kempff lp that I own (Beethoven big 3 sonatas) sounds better even with the extraneous noise. DG really owes it to Kempff to redo these, if they haven’t already. However, your original comment referred to low level detail, and there is more of in the CD (try the slow movement of the Pathetique and the left hand Alberti Ike accompaniment).

My DAC is the Sabre 32 ess 9018 that comes with the Quad Vena 2 Play which I use as a preamp feeding QMP Elite monoblocks driving the 2812 electrostatics.

It was well known that DG LPs cut in the 60s and early 70s had a slight (?) bass cut at the mastering stage to allow longer sides

Funny you should mention the Kempf, I played the Op. 31 today from Qobuz and they sound ok...bright yes - they were never the best for technical quality though.

Actually if you look back it wasn't me who mentioned low level detail on LP being superior I think it was richardfinegold (Edit: no I was wrong, it was you quoting Oliver Sudden) above. I don't actually think that's true - I said that often LPs are preferable as they provide a 'warmer' listen with less 'fatigue'.

I've had my Kubelik Mahler 1 and 5 LPs out of retirement and they sound ok still, albeit with the aforementioned lightness in the bass.

BTW his Bartok Concerto for Orch. Is coming in May as an 'Original Source' LP....but sixty odd quid a pop?

[richardfinegold]

My DAC is the Sabre 32 ess 9018 that comes with the Quad Vena 2 Play which I use as a preamp feeding QMP Elite monoblocks driving the 2812 electrostatics.

It was well known that DG LPs cut in the 60s and early 70s had a slight (?) bass cut at the mastering stage to allow longer sides

Funny you should mention the Kempf, I played the Op. 31 today from Qobuz and they sound ok...bright yes - they were never the best for technical quality though.

Actually if you look back it wasn't me who mentioned low level detail on LP being superior I think it was richardfinegold (Edit: no I was wrong, it was you quoting Oliver Sudden) above. I don't actually think that's true - I said that often LPs are preferable as they provide a 'warmer' listen with less 'fatigue'.

I've had my Kubelik Mahler 1 and 5 LPs out of retirement and they sound ok still, albeit with the aforementioned lightness in the bass.

BTW his Bartok Concerto for Orch. Is coming in May as an 'Original Source' LP....but sixty odd quid a pop?

Sorry to have mixed you and Oliver up. You are both newish and very welcome additions here.
The ESS Sabre can be on the bright. I had a DAC, a Metal Manhattan, that used one and it was amazingly detailed but ultimately to bright, especially with those aforementioned Kempff recordings. I prefer the AKM chip in my Bryston DAC, still detailed but more of a mid hall perspective vs the front row of the Mytek.
Some DACs offer a choice of filters that can be particularly useful with treble.
Which Kubelik CfW? I have a Pentatone reissue of a Boston SO that I’ve seen going for $8 at resale and it’s SACD reissue of a Quad recording

[Roger Webb]

Sorry to have mixed you and Oliver up. You are both newish and very welcome additions here.
The ESS Sabre can be on the bright. I had a DAC, a Metal Manhattan, that used one and it was amazingly detailed but ultimately to bright, especially with those aforementioned Kempff recordings. I prefer the AKM chip in my Bryston DAC, still detailed but more of a mid hall perspective vs the front row of the Mytek.
Some DACs offer a choice of filters that can be particularly useful with treble.
Which Kubelik CfW? I have a Pentatone reissue of a Boston SO that I’ve seen going for $8 at resale and it’s SACD reissue of a Quad recording

Actually I have an AKM DAC in my CD player (Marantz CD 6007uk) and it does provide a velvety quality which is lost if I feed the optical output from it to the Vena 2 Sabre DAC - but I can't decide which I prefer - the Sabre is very revealing through its USB B input with a good source. The DG Original Source LP that's coming soon is the Kubelik Boston perf. When you say 'quad' recording, are you aware that all subsequent reissues of DG stuff are remixed from four channel tapes? This is because DG didn't want to be caught out by being wrong-footed by EMI's experiments with SQ quadraphonic, so they made these four channel recordings as an insurance policy.
When on a visit to Berlin recently (I had worked there for a year in 1968/9) I took the train out to Dahlem to visit the Jesus Christus Kirche, to see where many of the DG recordings where made - DG used this venue for recording well into the 70s as the engineers hadn't tamed the sound in the Philharmonic yet. When I went to a concert in 69 we had Karajan in Bruckner 7 and Prok Pc 3 with Lazar Berman ( he was little known then), I noticed that there were microphones in the hall at the time - probably radio - I'd love to hear this concert again!

[Roger Webb]

I perhaps should have noticed this before, but the complete set of Kubelik's DG Mahler cycle has been remastered at 24bit/96k, and is on Qobuz. I've been listening to 1 and 5, the two Syms I have on LP ( I played the 5 this afternoon) and compared to the LPs the new remastering really just shows up the original recording as below par in many respects. Firstly the midrange sound is quite upfront and 'lean' - it's quite closely miked I think (you don't get much of the Herkules-Saal acoustic), the bass deficient, and the treble is a bit screamy. I'm a bit disappointed as I thought at last we'd hear these recordings at their best....well I think we are!

I shall continue tomorrow with 3 I think, but this of all Mahler Syms requires 'spacious' sound, and I don't think this remastering will give that!

Just finishing the last movt. of 1st and it's thin and 'close' like 5.....and BTW the first movt. of 2nd Sym comes in within a second of the 1st Sym finishing!

[oliver sudden]

I thought at last we'd hear these recordings at their best....well I think we are!

Reminds me of a quixotic search I had a few years ago with the Dresden/Abbado Brahms 3. I was convinced I must have had a dodgy pressing and went in search of a good one. Three more LPs later it sank in: it’s just an awfully muddy recording…

…and BTW the first movt. of 2nd Sym comes in within a second of the 1st Sym finishing!

Now there’s a radical reinterpretation of the essentially cyclic nature of Mahler’s symphonic output. (Where did I read that the Totenfeier is the funeral of the first symphony’s hero? Maybe Kennedy?)

The Qobuz files: they’re available at 24/96k or just remastered that way?

I haven’t had a proper chance to listen to LPs for quite a while. My Kubelík LPs are in that Jubilee box, the CDs are in the Collectors Edition (apostrophe placement uncertain) from I think the late 1990s. I must compare again but I’m sure the LPs brought the music over incomparably better. Whether that’s down to hearing details despite the crackle, or to the imponderables of slicing sounds up 44000 times a second I know not.

[oliver sudden]

I wonder by the way if I might have given a false impression upthread: I think I mentioned ‘hearing the things on LP’ but by ‘things’ I just meant the Kubelík Mahlers, not some elusive level of detail which CDs can’t manage…

(I was in the Herkulessaal yesterday, by a strange coincidence. Partner had a couple of pieces played. Very jolly evening.)