Robert M. Stumpf II ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>I have been listening to Zander's recording of Mahler's 9th on Telarc.
>I listened to just the first movement for five nights in a row.  (It's
>practically a symphony in itself) Anyway, I also listened to Bernstein's
>BPO performance.  Then I got to thinking about why I liked Zander so much
>more.  Zander is slow but never slack.

I'm still working on this for a review, but I would have to disagree.
Zander says in the liner notes that people can't agree on the precise
structure of the opening movement (where the devleopment starts, etc) and,
unfortunately, it sounds to me as if he's not sure in his own mind what
*he* thinks.

I found that zander's 1st movement loses its was after the first climax:
there a lot of affectionately phrased playing, but I found no sense of
where the music was going, it was just meandering along.

Actually I find Zander's opening too detached as well:  there is
insufficient sense of the love of life, soon to be terminated.  which
is surely what this movement is all about.

>Bernstein is also slower than Barbirolli and others, but there is
>something about his performance I find too idiosyncratic.  ...  Then I
>realized that I cannot think of a single recording of any of the Mahler
>symphonies done by Bernstein that I would rate #1 or even #3.  In the
>first I prefer Walter and Horenstein.  In the second I prefer Stokowski
>and Rattle.  In the third I prefer Horenstein.  In the fifth ther is
>Barbirolli, Chailly and others.  In the 6th I will listen to almost anyone
>else.  Of late I like Barbirolli.  I have never heard Bernstein's 8th but
>hear no reason to listen to any other than Stokowski and Davis.

Bernstein's LSO (1966) 8th is magnificent, if flawed (mainly by the
recording). But you really should hear Horenstein on BBC Legends. And
chuck Davis away - he thinks he's conducting Berlioz.

>In the 9th there is Zander, Walter, Barbirolli, Kubelik...

And (and?) Horenstein, particularly the 1966 LSO.

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]