Mahler: Symphony No. 1 [Hybrid SACD] [Hybrid SACD - DSD, Import]

Gustav Mahler (Composer), Mariss Jansons (Conductor), Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra (Orchestra) | Format: Audio CD

Product Details

• Orchestra: Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra
• Conductor: Mariss Jansons
• Composer: Gustav Mahler
• Audio CD (June 12, 2007)
• Number of Discs: 1
• Format: Hybrid SACD - DSD, Import
• Label: Rco Live Holland
• ASIN: B000P1KTDW
• In-Print Editions: MP3 Download
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #196,338 in Music (See Top 100 in Music)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars fine, straight forward performance caputured in excellent sound, June 18, 2007

By 

B. Guerrero "Mahler nutcase" - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Mahler: Symphony No. 1 [Hybrid SACD] (Audio CD)

Fast on the heels of Zinman's equally fine Mahler first symphony (RCA), we get another top notch SACD/CD hybrid version of it; this time from the Concertgebouw's in-house label. I don't own an SACD player, but I'm guessing that the SACD surround sound layer may sound better on this one, than on Zinman's RCA release. In plain, old two-channel stereo, this Jansons one sounds terrific! This is a bigger boned performance than the Zinman, with Zinman being just slightly better at smelling the flowers along the way (especially during the first movement's "wayfahring" develpment passage). Both are really good. Both conductors begin the scherzo just slow enough to allow a real lilt or "swing" feel to settle in. I like that Zinman plays down some of the bombast and bluster at the start out of the finale, but without also shortchanging the trombones or percussion. However, Jansons is slightly bigger sounding at the symphony's closing coda passage. My one and only complaint - a very minor one - is that I would have liked for Jansons to have pushed the tempo, just a tad more, at that slightly bigger sounding coda just mentioned. Also, unlike Zinman, Jansons does not include "Blumine" as an appendage.

Once again, the Concertgebouw prove that one a day to day basis, they're probably still the best overall Mahler orchestra on the planet. They play fabulously, and all four major sections of the orchestra receive equal weight: strings, woodwinds, brass, and percussion. Just to help lend some credibility to my argument, the Amsterdam audience goes nuts immediately afterwards (and they've heard more than their fair share of ALL the Mahler symphonies).

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Could, and should, have been so much better., May 11, 2010

By 

The truth and nothing but (The High Peak, in the United Kingdom) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Mahler: Symphony No. 1 [Hybrid SACD] (Audio CD)

We are treated to a great orchestra, a fine conductor and SACD sound. What more could we ask for? Answer: a performance and recording to match! Though this was recorded live and retains a telling atmosphere, this does not live up to expectation.

Performance: 4/5
It was a close run thing whether this got three or four marks. There is no real reason to deduct the extra mark but, unfortunately, the event barely warrants a fourth. This is a live performance and the orchestra responds reasonably well to the occasion though it never really catches fire. That little bit of extra commitment and inspiration is absent though the plush textures of the Concertgebouw bring some welcome relief.

Listening to Mahler's wonderful introduction one doubts, at first, whether an orchestra has ever more fully rapped itself in the misty and magical details of the score. Unfortunately, the mystery is broken by some less than magical offstage brass and under committed winds. In fact, the brasses never manage a full, ripe sound in this performance and their weight is somewhat circumspect. Their textures rarely cut through the orchestra with any conviction and they lack that extra biting attack which makes the blood boil. Despite some technical excellence, they never truly excel themselves through this recording.

The lack of weight from the orchestra as a whole is the concern in the second movement. The strings, which had been plush and immersive in the first movement, become a little crude at times. Earthiness can be welcome in a rustic movement such as this but earthiness just doesn't appear to have been the objective.

In the third movement, the only sections of the orchestra which seem to connect with the score are among the lower end. The middle and higher instruments carry along underwhelmingly while the difference in commitment between the violins and, say, the celli, is palpable. Without those low elements, the orchestra never musters an engaging sound. Again, textures are enticingly beautiful while the orchestra never fails to show off its prowess.

The final movement is where the sum of all the problems is realised to negate the satisfaction that may have made this a decent record. The weightlessness of the orchestra, its less than committed attitude, really does tell in those cathedralic moments - reminiscent of the music of Bruckner and Schumann. Fortunately, the opening 'lightening bolt' is gripping though most of the movement is not this exciting.

The margins that are being spoken of here are quite small but its these many small failings that rob the performance of satisfaction.

Sound: 3/5
There is a wonderful audience response to the music - the applause betrays the evidence that there may indeed have been superlative elements of excellence in the performance, which the recorded sound has robbed. This could certainly be the case. The sound is indeed a disappointment and, considering that this is supposedly the best of modern SACD sound recording, the final analysis warrants only three stars. Though the expected clarity of the sound is apparent, it is not always consistent. Spades of inner detail is realised but other engineers have done even better on this front. The feeling is that the orchestra is rather distant and their wonderful sound is never thoroughly delivered on this record. There is a slight reverberation - nothing more or less than pleasant. This isn't a problem. The percussive elements of this music, so crucial to Mahler, are captured rather murkily and at the expense of the rest of the orchestra. The percussion often dominates at big moments which detract much musicality. The recording as a whole is somewhat murky and indistinct. This is not really what you may be expecting from an SACD product.

Actually, this is not necessarily a surprise. Most SACD releases from RCO Live have had sound issues - most notably that commendable recording of Bruckner's 8th under Haitink (the sound there was also somewhat distant and murky).

Interpretation: 3/5
Other reviewers have already noted the caveats regarding Jansons' interpretation of this music. The overall verdict can only be vindicated here. Seeing as there is detail on this matter already on this web page what follows is only a brief summery. Jansons never really engages the audience on this record - a shame seeing as he has proven himself a reputable conductor. He offers less than half of the excitement of Kubelik (Audite or DG), Solti (Decca) or Bernstein (DG).

This record will not be bought for revelatory insights, intensity of commitment or interpretation, nor for its disappointing sound. The only thing going for this record is the sound of a truly wonderful orchestra - even then, there are better alternatives!

2.0 out of 5 stars Nor a great SACD recording., November 24, 2011

By 

Judy Spotheim "SpJ Judy" (Belgium, Europe) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Mahler: Symphony No. 1 [Hybrid SACD] (Audio CD)

To the topic of this and other SACD on the Concertgebouw/Label recording properties:
The local Dutch recording engineers hired by the Concertgebouw to "immortalize" this or other live concert for posterity and market it in the SACD version, in the process they have come up with a faulty product.
Be it as it may, from the stand point of interpretation (reading) which is not the concern here, the end product is disappointing in the Audio sense.

The equipment used by the recording team here might easily be one the most advanced there is; It is capable of capturing the sound in almost all of its clarity, with great wide frequency-range and sometimes great dynamics, but the concept of where to put the microphones and where the sound is captured from is wrong, wrong, wrong.

It is wrong in the sense that they offer us a sit at the back of the Concertgebouw hall balcony, distanced and far away from where the action takes place, when there is so much better prospective over the orchestra and hall acoustics from middle of the hall, or from a sit closer to the orchestra.

We should not dream here of the golden age, the dawn of the stereo era (Reiner/Strauss Also Sprach Zarathustra, a two channel recording technique immortalized by Leslie Chase for RCA, 1954) that would be a bit like comparing oranges with apples.
But instead, we can compare various recordings from this present age - recordings made on location at the same Concertgebouw hall with this SACD recording at hand:
To compare, take the Rachmaninov symphony 1 & 2 (DDD):
It has all of the sonic components to boost: Great tonality, great dynamic range - AND - great outlook on the orchestra, great sound-stage and retrieval of hall ambience - all this if compared to the present SACD (the Concertgebouw own label) - the SACD sound stage will barely expand beyond the two front speakers and will sound like a somewhat stretched mono recording; no true spread, no true soundstage (multi-microphones technique went wrong?)

Note in this regards recordings made by Decca and by Philips on location at the Concertgebouw hall were much more successful in conveying the total sound--picture:
Take the Philips ADD recording of Stravinsky/ Firebird, Petruschka, Rite of Spring / Concertgebouw/Colin Davis;
Take the Rachmaninov Symphonies, (Decca DDD recording) with Ashkenazy.
Take the Philips ADD recording of Ravel with Haitink, take the Grieg/Schumann with Arrau and Haitink, and more, much more - all have this property of conveying a concert-hall "feel".

The decision of the Dutch recording team made for the Concertgebouw label of how and from where to capture the sound - I am sure - will not get down the history pages as great achievements the way Mohr-Layton & Leslie Chase (RCA); Cornall-Moorfoot, Culshaw-Perry, Kenneth Wilkinson (Decca) and other team achievements for Philips too.

Simply put; the Concertgebouw "sound" on their propriety label is too distanced, taken from too far away, has a tunnel-like sound-view - a strange and faulty approach to sound engineering.
As such, the Concertgebouw own label is a disappointment.