"George J. Lindner" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>In my opinion HvK was a very good technician and of course he had the
>best instrument in the world to work with: the Berlin Philharmonic.
>With it, he was able to produce any sound and any effect he chose.

That is true, but as far as I am concerned, Karajan and the Berliner
Philarmoniker worked together under long time and with the time they were
rather to look at as one unit one single organism than one conductor and
one orchestra.  Karajan could have which prazing, which effect, which
nuance he wanted from this orchestra.  But I say any other orchestra
wouldn't have succeded playing under him with the same effect.

Anyone who has seen him conducting the Berliner Philarmoniker in TV should
know what I am talking about.

Tony Duggan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>...  Permit me a small point.  The title "Titan" was dropped by Mahler
>after he submitted his First Symphony to fundamental revision.  Record
>companies and concert promoters love their titles but Mahler's First should
>never be called "Titan" in its usually played version.  The same applies
>to all of Mahler's Symphonies, by the way.  None of them were ever given
>titles by their composer.

None of those which have kept their name, but "Blumine" was Mahlers
labelling, so was "Titan".

Steven Martin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Part of why HVK is disliked has to do with the fact that he was not the
>nicest person in the world.  You will probably hear more about this from
>other people.

Don't listen to it as critic to *Karajan*.  As far as I am concerned
most of conductors were using rather brusque methods to have the musicians
to play as they liked.  I am not only thinking of Wagner and Toscanini.
The "kind" Celibidache for example used to say such things when he was
principal leader for the Stockholm Philarmonics.  Once he opened a window
and with a kick to the trombones he shouted on broken English: "Where are
that fucking ambulance??!" etc Goes for most.

Deryk Barker [[log in to unmask]] wrote:

>Charles L. L. Dalmas ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
>
>>I'm thinking Horenstein.  I have his Titan on Nonesuch LP (mint, as well),
>
>NO YOU DON'T!!!!!!!

DON'T SCREAM!!! DO NEVER SCREAM!!! I GET HEADACHE!! I never scream btw.

>Certainly top 5.  Personally I think Kubelik has the edge in the first...

And I agree.  Personally I think it is Kubelik who is THE Mahler conductor.
He had a rare sence for what a Mahler symphony should be like.  You can't
go wrong with Kubeliks Mahler.

>But I don't think Brucker would have appreciated HvK's homogenisation
>of the textures etc.

Thats what I think Bruckner would have appreciated, although this "Karajan
homogenisation" tend to be overdriven.  Still that also says something
about why Karajan was a better conductor in Bruckner than in Mahler.

Andreas von Doebeln
[log in to unmask]