Customer Reviews

Mahler: Symphony No. 10 (Prepared by D. Cooke)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

By far, the most outstanding interpretation of Deryck Cooke's realization (his 2nd version) of Mahler's Symphony No. 10. I've listened to both of the Rattle recordings and the ones by Chailly and Slatkin, but this one by Eliahu Inbal is the one that satisfies me the most (and it's also the one I discovered after all those others). Inbal does take it faster than the others, especially in the 5th movement, but I find this works far better than the slow almost still-life efforts of the rest. Rattle in his much praised Berlin recording, tries to wrench from the score all the emotion he can, but it comes off has too affected for me, whereas Inbal's recording (done in 1992) has a singing quality that is just as passionate and emotional. Inbal's way of bringing out the passion of the last Almshi cry near the end of the 5th movement is, for me, the most heart-wrenching of all the interpretations. This should be the first choice for every Mahlerian.

I know that there are other recommendable recordings out there, but comparison of these two makes sense to me for several reasons, practical and aesthetic: one, I own them both; two, they are both excellent; three, they represent contrasting, very diffferent but equally successful interpretative stances.

Rattle's version has attracted far more attention and many more reviews, for obvious reasons, but don't let that, in combination with the fact that his Mahler cycle as a whole might not be up there with the front runners, lead you to dismiss Inbal. For some reason, Inbal and his Frankfurt orchestra really came into their own for this one.

Broadly speaking, Rattle's view of this wonderful symphony, in the equally admirable completion (OK - "performing version") by Deryck Cooke, is typical of his strengths (reflected in his latest Brahms symphony cycle) and weaknesses (an ennervated and static Requiem by the same composer) as a conductor. Occasionally, he relies too heavily on too ponderous an approach which can cause his interpretation to plough into the sand and choke. Here, although he favours much broader tempi and phrasing than Inbal, I think he gets away with it: this is a grand, monumental 10th, far more tragic and reflective than Inbal's nervier, more propulsive and hopeful account. Thus, some find Rattle nerveless and cold, others find a stately beauty in his more reserved approach.

Both versions enjoy superb sound. Rattle's is spliced from two live performances and is slightly rounder and duller - or perhaps less edgy? - than Inbal's brighter studio recording; either way, the ambience provided complements each conductor's artistic choices. Inbal's woodwind is more pungent but there is more sheen on the Berlin strings - which could be the result of both their innate orchestral sound and the engineering. Both orchestras play superbly, although some find an echo of too much smoothness in the BPO's strings - a remnant of the Karajan era, they complain.

Movement by movement, the same generalisations are confirmed in the details: the opening is more resigned and yet more tender, too, under Rattle; more violent and heroic under Inbal, especially in the shattering, climactic, nine-note dissonance and the A-flat minor chorale. Both Scherzos are weightier and more refined under Rattle; more rustic, unbuttoned and even vulgar under Inbal, especially in the Ländler sections. I love the way Inbal's brass screams and howls in the second Scherzo; Rattle is almost too civilised by comparison. In the tiny, central "Purgatorio" movement, Rattle brings darker sonorities and colouring, Inbal is sharper.

The interpretation of the vast final movement could be a clincher for some listeners: the otherwordly beauty of the flute's theme leading into the concluding cantabile section is exquisitely played by Rattle and the BPO; his broader tempo and their singing strings impart a profound melancholy which offers less of a sense of resignation and consolation than Inbal's vibrancy. Both make much of the bitterly ironic quotations from "Das Lied von der Erde". One crucial detail stands out for me: I much prefer the way in which Inbal secures a real swooping, Mahlerian portamento from the Frankfurt strings on that last leaping sixth skywards; Rattle's is almost diffident in its polite timidity.

In the last analysis, I prefer Inbal's heart-wrenching humanity to Rattle's bleaker, more detached stateliness, but make no mistake: both are deeply moving, wholly recommendable recordings.

What is it exactly that makes this rendition of Mahler's Tenth Symphony so wonderful? For me, it must be the feeling that this Mahler 10 really sounds as if springing forth directly from a living, breathing voice, which is the orchestra itself, really 'singing' Mahler's great Song of Despair and Hope. Though with a lot less nervous energy than for excample Sir Simon Rattle in his marvellous, tightly controlled, hypercharged, already 'classic' Mahler 10 with the Berlin Philharmonic on EMI. Rather different, this Rattle, and maybe even greater(?). Rattle's Berlin Mahler 10 does have the most TERRIFYING A-flat minor chorale (just before the famous nine-tone chord-outburst) I have ever experienced, and I find it most unsettling to listen to every time I hear it. I must really brace myself emotionally for its horror every time.
Less so with Inbal. He seems to take a little more distance to the implied emotions, as if softening them a little (with humor? Or because of not wanting to overdo it and take a more 'natural' or 'direct' approach to the score, not reading too much into it?). Or maybe the emotions are present here as forcefully and as deeply felt, but not as 'raw' as with Sir Simon Rattle. Anyhow, a great recording it stays nonetheless!
Inbal also is not afraid to take nice legato lines (Mahler's Tenth maybe never sounded so 'whole' or 'aus einem Guss') and to do the slides that Mahler seems to ask for, especially effective in the epilogue of the Adagio and in the great glissando leap of a minor thirteenth in the Finale. I do not know the score, nor can I read music, but it all does sound 100%, convincingly Mahlerian.
Both of the scherzi here often both sound more jaunty maybe (humor again?), and not so biting as in Rattle, which is totally convincing withing inbal's (very consistent and therefore also very rewarding) take on Mahler. The same with the 'Purgatorio' middle movement. But everywhere Inbal's control sounds tight but free, and therefore very natural. Or maybe this feeling of 'naturalness' comes from the impression that the music is allowed to breath freely everywhere in this recording. Well, whatever ... This remains a rather succesful (understatement!) Mahler 10 in one of the best Mahler cycles available - on all accounts.

Inbal provides a fairly desultory amble through the nine Mahler symphonies, but suddenly -- and quite out of character -- he finds religion in the Tenth. The great Adagio that Mahler left behind as a completed testament is taken with real fire and conviction, not to mention at a fast pace that makes the music seem even more anxious. The Frnakfurt musicians are by no means stellar, but that hardly matters. They follow Inbal with intensity and conviction. I like the stark contrasts in tonal color, beautifully captured by the Denon engineers. Bravo to Inbal for not taming this music but also not wallowing in rhetoric.

The real challenge, of course, is to make the later sketched-in movements sound like full-fledged Mahler. Inbal propels the first Scherzo along with the same nervous energy he applied to the Adagio, and it works very well. He takes the Purgatorio as the name implies, depicting a world of souls half lost and half saved. The reading is spooky beneath the bustling surface -- very successful when most conductors aren't. The second Scherzo ups the ante on the first one by being even more restless and wired, with intermittent spots of joy. This is very alert conducting that makes much of little, in terms of what the surviving sketches reveal. For once the Scherzo doesn't taper off into the famous muffled drumbeats but collapses into schizoid mumbling that makes the drumbeats belong to a unified mood of despair. For what it's worth, the drumbeats aren't muffled here but sound like gunshots.

The finale continues the same mood of disturbed anguish. The opening is powerful in its haunted moods. Inbal plays the fragmented memories of earlier themes as if the composer's mind is being unraveled, either by death or madness. Against tis background the soothing flute solo brings tears -- Inbal perfectly captures one of Mahler's most familiar devices, the descent of blessing after wrenching turmoil. In all, this is a great performance, one that justifies Cooke's performing edition better than Ormandy, Rattle, or Chailly, good as all three are.

A lot of words have been spent about the reconstruction, effected by Deryck Cooke, of the rests of Mahler's tenth symphony, whose original scores are complete only (even if in a non-definitive way) in the andante-adagio (well known and more times recorded) and in the movement denominated "Purgatorio". The reconstruction of the work is based on a revision of the original score, for a total of five movements whose sequence had been pointed out by the author, in more parts at the stage of draft or note, and in others enough finished as regards its melodic and formal plans, even if not yet orchestrated. The great conductors and musicians direct depositaries of Mahler's testament (Walter, Klemperer, Krenek, Webern, Berg) have always rejected the hypothesis of a completion of the symphony, while the majority of the conductors have performed and recorded the andante-adagio only. Really, I think that Cooke's work is worty to be approved because, with great intellectual honesty, Cooke himself called his realization " a performing version of the draft for the tenth symphony" and he was always concerned to stress that it was in no sense a completion, since only Mahler himself could have. D.Cooke wanted so to make sensitive what the symphony was at the moment of Mahler' death, an not a pretentious reconstruction of what doesn't exist. We can so consider the tenth symphony reconstructed by Deryck Cooke like a non-testamentary inheritance, thanks to which we can enjoy of beautiful moments of music (especially in the fifth movement), worty to be known. Eliahu Inbal is a conductor whose authoritativeness in the field of the interpertation of Mahler's works is undisputed. His integral recording of the symphonies is appreciated with justified enthusiasm by public and critics. The tenth is interpreted with great precision and clarity by Inbal, with a preference for an analytical approach than an emotional one. Such extreme precision of this interpretation is testified by the fact that the andante-adagio is here present in a new recording, not having been used the preceding one belonging to the integral edition. As far it concerns alternative versions, I know that by Chailly, that appears more emotional than analytical, while I don't know the version by Rattle, of which I have read favourable rewiews. The technical quality of the recording is excellent.

I think this is the best interpreation of Mahler's X symphony on the market. I haven't listened to Rattle's performance of the X based on Deryck Cooke's preparation, but all my friends keep telling me that I should buy it. It's hard to believe that one can do better than Imbal.

I had the chance to attend several concerts lead by the Isareli maestro, and each one of these events were great, especially when he conducted Mahler. I think that his reading of Mahler's music is essential and clean. You can hear every single note on the score played perfectly. If you read what Mahler wrote about the way his music had to be perofrmed, you will find Imbal very faithful to the Austrian composer's aesthetic concepiton. Imbal conduct the X as much as the I, the V or the IX as if he were almost Mahler himself.

If you like a less spectacular and morbid symphonic sound, typical of Bernstein's rendition of Mahler's symphonies (which I personally adore as well), you must try Imbal!

Don't get me wrong, this performance is wonderful, 5 stars! My gripe is with the sound, 1 star :( In my copy of this recording I can hear people talking, off and on, in all movements. I listen almost exclusively with headphones so I hear every little nuance. This talking is extremely annoying and, for me, destroys the listening experience of a wonderful interpretation of Mahler's 10th.