Customer Reviews

Mahler: Symphony No. 10 [Performing Version by Deryck Cooke]

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I have been listening to the Mahler 10th Symphony for years,
and I still regard the Deryck Cooke/ Eugene Ormandy version as the finest ever performed. Unlike the later performing versions by Carpenter and others, this one features a lean, mysterious
and deeply spiritual Finale. It is my opinion that Mahler
never intended to compose a dirge to himself or a love song to his wife in the 10th Symphony. The 10th Symphony is Mahler looking at earthly life from somewhere beyond the mortal plane, whch is why it has such a strangely haunted and, at times, dissonant sound. In the Finale movememt, Mahler finally achieves a fully realized vision of life after death, a resurrection that is not vicarious or theoretical but deeply personal and existential. The last great crescendo and following denouemnent is an ascension of spirit out of flesh, spirit free at last. In my view, there is nothing else like this music in the entire classical repertory. The problem with many other preforming versions of the Finale is that the tempo is so slow that the sense of passage and letting go is lost, mired down in a sentimental mush that I think Mahler would have hated. Only Deryck Cooke and Ormandy got it completely right, which is why this recording is so very important. Every Mahler fan should have this recording.

I bought the LP set in February 1966, after earlier experiencing the fantastic "premier" performance by Ormandy and the PO. For me no later performance has come close to the vitality and lyricism expressed by Eugene and his band. Plus I find the Cooke I version much better than the rather emaciated, anemic Cooke II version. Given Mahler's predilection for percussion when necessary, Cooke I anticipates this quite well.

The CD is a bit up close in its reproduction, resulting in a few areas of stridency, but in all, it does the LPs justice. Fortunately there's no inner groove distortion of the louder and/or higher pitched sections. In all, an improvement on the original 2-LP set (which I still own 40 years later) and a wonderful realization of the piece.

One wonders what Mahler's final version would have sounded like. There are passages during the initial Adagio that give hints as to what that would have been, kind of a "polytonal" or "simultaneous tone" answer to where Schoenberg was going.

Ormandy allows all this to present itself naturally, and without exaggeration. A great performance. A desert island recording.

It was a delight to see that Ormandy's historic performance has at last been released on cd. It was recorded in 1965, not long after Deryck Cooke completed his first version of Mahler's last work (which existed only in a fully sketched-out but largely unorchestrated version at the time of the composer's death in 1911).

While I was never much of a fan of Ormandy, I always enjoyed his performances of Mahler symphonies -- and have remained a great admirer of this recording. I recently listened to my LP version of this performance for the first time in many years after being less than thrilled with hearings of Simon Rattle's and James Levine's versions. The big problem with both the Rattle performance and the Levine performance (which is no longer in print) is that the opening Adagio movement is conducted at such a meandering pace that much of its intensity is lost. Ormandy's performance of the Adagio, by contrast, is quite masterful, with just the right tempos to maintain the forward movement while lingering over and fully developing the most dramatic moments.

Cooke later revised his score, adding parts for fourth trombone, oboe and bassoon, for example, so that contrapuntal figures could be more fully realized. Those differences show up in the later movements but not in the first, which was the most complete movement in Mahler's original sketch. While there might therefore be reason to prefer other performances of the second, fourth and fifth movements, in particular, the Ormandy performance of those movements has always sounded authentically Mahlerian to me.
If you enjoy Mahler's music, particularly his other late works like the Ninth and Das Lied von der Erde, you will find much to admire in this recording.

All of this begs the question of whether there should even be performances and recordings of completed versions of Mahler's Tenth Symphony. This is a controversial question among conductors, as witness the fact that most conductors who have recorded the complete cycle of Mahler's symphonies have included only the first and third movements of the work, those that were virtually complete at the time of his death. The arguments against completing and performing the work largely hinge on a contention that the final product isn't really Mahler. The argument for such efforts is that there is much that is Mahler in the final results - and the music world would be a poorer place without them. Having followed and thought about this issue for more than 40 years at this point, I weigh in on the side of those who feel the completed versions are worth listening to.

Mahler himself was of two minds on whether even his manuscript score should survive. At one point, he told his wife, the redoubtable Alma, to destroy it if it was incomplete when he died. But he later retracted that instruction. Alma went back and forth on the question of whether a realization of the score should be completed and performed, initially rejecting the idea but later embracing it.

In addition to the largely complete first and third movements, Mahler's manuscript contained four-stave versions of the second, fourth and fifth movements, with occasional notations about orchestration. So completing the score involves orchestrating and in some cases filling in contrapuntal passages in the second, fourth and fifth movements.

At least four versions of completed scores are now available in recordings, including two by Deryck Cooke. Anyone who has listened to much of Mahler's music will recognize Mahler in every measure of any of the performances. Does that mean that the finished products convey what Mahler would have done had he completed the work? Surely not. But there is little question in my mind that every passage in these completions presents us with versions that Mahler might have written.

Some commentators have decried the completions on the grounds that we can be fairly sure that Mahler would have changed at least some of what he left in his manuscript score before he would have deemed the composition complete. They note that during the last summer of his life, when he could have been working on completing the Tenth, he instead devoted his efforts to revising the Ninth. But this argument strikes me as cutting the other way. If Mahler had died before he had completed the revision of his Ninth, would we have been barred from listening to the earlier, completed version? Or would we have been barred from listening to the revised elements combined with the earlier versions of those he hadn't yet revised? If we are to regard everything that Mahler might have changed as being somehow inappropriate for performance, that would implicate perhaps his entire oeuvre.

Another interesting point about this particular argument against completing and performing the score is that these commentators say nothing against the performance of the third movement, which Mahler labeled Purgatorio, and which I feel is the single part of his manuscript that Mahler would most likely have changed. This is a highly unusual movement in the Mahler symphonic canon since it is only four minutes long. It's hard for me to believe that Mahler wouldn't have done something more with it before he would have deemed the symphony complete. Deleting it (as he did with the Blumine movement of his First Symphony) is not an option, however, as it plays a vital structural role. For one thing, it separates two scherzo movements. For another, it introduces thematic materials that appear again in the fourth and fifth movements.

Those two scherzos, by the way, are treasures, each in its own way. The first of them, the second movement of the symphony, is raucous and rambunctious throughout, filled with contrapuntal elements and obbligato parts for seemingly every wind instrument in the orchestra. The second scherzo (fourth movement) has one of those charming landlers that show up in so many of Mahler's symphonies. The fourth movement also contains the culmination of something that Mahler moved toward in a very gradual way as he wrote his symphonies - the use of the timpani as a melodic instrument.

A discussion of the fifth movement requires some discussion of the emotional content of the entire Symphony. That discussion, in turn, requires some reference to the two Mahler works that immediately preceded the Tenth - Das Lied von der Erde and the Ninth Symphony. It is tempting, and in some respects appropriate, to appreciate the Tenth as part of a trilogy with the other two works, all of which were written after Mahler had been informed by his doctors that he had a fatal heart condition. It is both difficult and unnecessary to ignore the emotional elements of these works that relate to Mahler's sense of his impending death. We know from detailed programs that Mahler wrote (and later suppressed) for his earlier symphonies that every passage in his music was intended to convey specific emotions. So analyzing the emotions in his work is fair game in ways that it wouldn't be for, say, the symphonies of Haydn.

Because of these circumstances, I feel free to argue that without Mahler's Tenth, the entire trilogy would in some senses be incomplete - for it seems to me that the Tenth has a different take on life and death matters from Das Lied and the Ninth. Where there is fear of death in the two earlier works, the emotion that stays with us after their conclusions is a sense of resignation and acceptance. (This is an overgeneralization, certainly; I use it merely to lay the groundwork for comparative analysis of emotional elements of the Tenth.) By contrast, the emotions about death in the Tenth seem far more raw and even violent. There is sheer terror in some of the later passages of the first movement, including what can fairly be characterized as a lonely-sounding high note by a solo trumpet that connects two immense, clamorous and discordant shouts by the entire orchestra. The second of these intense chords is punctuated by a shrill shriek by the violins that is both startling and sad. Then, in the last movement, the most prominent element of the first section is an abrupt fortissimo thump on the base drum that begins the movement and then recurs multiple times, repeatedly interrupting the flow of music. This repeated thump startles the listener each time and thereby conveys what seems like intense and inescapable dread and foreboding. But at last the thump is absorbed into a sonorous orchestral chord, after which it never recurs. The closing strains of the symphony are fraught with complex emotions. They build to an assertion that this listener takes as overcoming dread with an affirmation and embrace of life rather than with a resigned farewell to life. Chronologically, at least, this stands as Mahler's final comment on the ultimate human mystery.

Those who reject the completions and performances of Mahler's Tenth are missing a lot!

In 1965 Eugene Ormandy won the prize of getting to premiere on records the Mahler Tenth as completed by Deryck Cooke (a year after the concert premiere in England). The musical world was abuzz when CBS released this excellent-sounding and gorgeously played reading, one of the very best in Ormandy's huge discography. Sony put it in a 2-CD bargain set for a long time, but now we have it sounding great on a single mid-price disc.

Mahler left behind two fleshed-out movements: the soaring Adagio, which took on a life of its own long before Cooke orchestrated the remaining sketches, and the quirky third movement 'Purgatorio,' which was nearly complete in full score. At the time Ormandy had the field to himself (the Welsh condcutor Wyn Morris released a good version considerably later, in 1972), but now we have great modern performances by Chailly, Levine, Daniel Harding, and two from Simon Rattle.

Ormandy shouldn't be discounted, though. These sketches depend heavily on great execution to cover over bare patches, and the Philadelphia Orch. is in top form, with Ormandy acting as an accomplished, alert leader. Cooke was lucky to get such an outstanding exhibition of his work. After four decades, this is an immensely enjoyable recording, notable for its natural musicality rather than its intensity.

Many of my fellow Mahler nutcases feel that the Michael Gielen 10th is the best. I don't. Predictably, Gielen is excellent with the more expressionistic moments. Thus, his entire fourth movement is very good. But I think that the Ormandy simply flows the best from begining to end. It also has the advantage of the incredible Philadelphia string section at its peak. Gielen is nearly too fast with the short and enigmatic "Purgatorio" movement (third movement). Ormandy pegs it just right. In addition, Ormandy's solo bass drum (start of the fifth movement) doesn't blow you out of the room as it does with Gielen and Rattle/Birmingham (adjusted to a more reasonable volume on Rattle's Berlin remake). I also don't find the minor additions and adjustments made by the Mathews brothers to the second and third Cooke versions to be helpful; or an improvement in any way. In conclusion, the Ormandy remains the best of the Deryck Cooke Mahler 10th's. Now we can finally hear it in really good sound.

As a supplement, get the Litton/Dallas (Delos) recording of the wild and wooly Carpenter version - if you can keep an open mind and think of it as Mahler/Carpenter. For me, Carpenter at least addresses the major issues of the piece, while Mazzetti, Barshai, and Wheeler simply add lots of useless filagree to the basic Cooke foundation. But this is greatly a personal issue - a matter of preference.

This recording is at last retuning to the catalogue. I had it first on LP, with a side 4 that had trouble tracking due to the drum whacks that begin the 5th movement. My reel-to-reel tape gave up long ago. So now I can hear it again.
Is the wait worth it? Oh yeah! Ormandy always had an uncanny ability to let the music speak for itself, never getting in the way, as Bernstein and others do. I have almost every recording of this symphony that there is, and none of them come up to this fabulous recording. The plangent opening violas prepare us for a trip that will eventually drain us totally. No other recording quite matches the heartrending way Ormandy has with the last movement. And the 1st Deryck Cooke verseion/orchestration still stands the test compared with his own 2nd version, two by Remo Mazzetti, Wheeler, Carpenter and Barshai. Before this recording gets away, buy it and enjoy it. It would be a bargain at twice the price. At this price, we are really the beneficiaries. Now, RCA/Sony how about the Philadelphia/Ormandy Mahler 2nd, Shostakovich 13 and 14, and some of the other neglected Ormandy recordings?

I purchased this recording years ago as a black vinyl release on Columbia Records. I loved the performance then and I still do today. I have been waiting for 30+ years for this to be released on CD. I found it by sheer accident when browsing through the local closing Tower Record Store. What an exciting find. I do own 6 other recordings of this symphony and they are each impressive performances in their own right, but this one was the first USA performance and recording of the Derek Cook version, which I prefer above the other 3 versions I know of. I will cherish this recording as I have long worn out the black vinyl version. Many many thanks to Sony for releasing this awesome and moving Classic recording.

It's great to see all these enthusiastic reviews, several from familiar & respected reviewers. I wasn't much of a Mahler fan when this recording was originally released on vinyl several thousand years ago, and this (along with Walter's #2 and Kubelik's #1) converted me to the cause. Later recordings of #10 never quite worked and I couldn't figure out why, until hearing this CD. Everyone since Ormandy still sounds, well, cautious, tentative, fussy, self-conscious--almost as if they were still not convinced that #10 is quite legitimate. Ormandy and his amazing orchestra went into the piece as if it had been part of their repertoire for decades. Interestingly, the same can be said of Ormandy's premiere of the Shostakovich #15.

... and such is Ormandy, perhaps the most unjustifiably under-appreciated conductor for some time now. A recent book on Bernstein contained a comment on that highly-regarded conductor's recording legacy: someone at CBS (if I recall this right) noted that despite his fame and critical acclaim, Bernstein had consistently been outsold by the Philadelphia maestro throughout their respective CBS contract times. One exec supposedly asked if anyone could name a single Bernstein recording that was "essential." Critics saw Ormandy's success as a disreputable middle-brow phenomenon, but the fact was that through this part of his career he and the Philadelphia orchestra delivered, and consistently. If I want to wow a classical newcomer with anything from the standard repertoire, a vintage Ormandy recording will always do the trick.

Anyway, it would be good to see his Beethoven and Brahms cycles back in print. His Beethoven Fifth (strongly recommended as a top choice by the editor of American Record Guide) is one of the best around. Equally, I've never heard a better (as in emotionally dead-on) version of the Shostakovich Fifth, and Ormandy's Nielsen First contains important details and nuances every conductor since has glossed over. Have critics wrongly been confusing perfection, effortlessness & naturalness with shallowness and banality? Seems the same mistake was made about Mozart many years ago.

Although I am very happy to see this important first recording REISSUED on CD, I am appalled that Sony actually has a sticker on the front proclaiming "First Time on CD" -- then why am I holding a 1990 CBS Masterwork Portrait CD (45882) in my hand (and, in fact, for sale here on Amazon)? For collectors, the CD has been a gold mine of reissued and remastered recordings of the 50s-70s (arguably the greatest period of of recording and conducting), but for the folks of Sony not to know their own catalog - shame! In any event, if you don't know this recording, buy it, please. It demonstrates what a master Ormandy was, and how great a musical instrument he created in Philadelphia. But more importantly, this recording proved that it was not heresy to release Cooke's performing version of Mahler's last profound, and immeasurably beautiful, utterances.

Maybe it's just first-time sentimentality, but this is my favorite 10th. I prefer the earlier Cooke version because of its spareness, and those Philadelphia strings really can't be beat (I think they used to call them 'lush.') It's a good introduction to Mahler, too, for friends who aren't into classical music. And it's great road music.

This Ormandy 10th did come out about a dozen years ago on CD but it flew past the shelves pretty much overlooked. It's good to have it back-- somebody was thinking here. Thanks.