|
|
21 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
An old chestnut, November 19, 2000
For over a decade, this Ninth was one of the more respected versions. As long-time Mahlerians know, Jascha Horenstein was one of the great early Mahler conductors. Unlike his contemporaries, Walter and Klemperer, Horenstein did not have a distinct approach - he seemed to blend naturally into the spirit of every symphony he conducted. He also knew a thing or two about how to get a true "Mahler sound" out of every orchestra he led (often, he conducted second-rate groups). In short, with Horenstein, you may not always get precision and accuracy, and the production values may not be top-notch, but when all is said and done, you will hear Mahler in a way that some conductors with better forces (i.e. Maazel, Abbado, Mehta, Ozawa, etc.)cannot duplicate.This 1952 performance of the Ninth is a case in point. The sonics are dated and there are bloops and bleeps (particularly from the horns - and check out the way the solo clarinet goes sharp on the last note of I), but this recording is nonetheless a text-book example of how to conduct this symphony. I is awe-inspiring - one cannot argue with the intensity, logic, and power of Horenstein/Mahler's vision. Rarely will you find this movement delivered with as much warmth and richness either (in this aspect, only the out-of-print Levine/Philadelphia is better). But the movement that really tests the mettle of the Mahler conductor is II. Tempo I should be a heavy-footed landler tread, and the other two tempi must be coordinated accordingly. Too many conductors rush through the opening briskly, as if embarassed by the (deliberate!) banality of the theme. There are good performances with less-than-ideal tempi in II (Barbirolli and Lopez-Cobos come to mind). But II really works better if it begins with a true landler. Horenstein manages the tempi better than either Walter or Klemperer. Indeed, only Solti/LSO and Levine compare. Despite ensemble problems, Horenstein manages to combine the banalities and grotesqueries with an appropriately achy world-weariness. III is conducted to the hilt. Horenstein squeezes as much fury out of this music as is possible given the limitations of the orchestra and the recording technology. Notice how he abruptly reestablishes the main tempo in the final bars to keep the orchestra from going too crazy. IV is a wonderful, brooding vision. One senses that, according to Horenstein, Mahler is expressing that in life, nothing can be resolved. The result is a deeply emotive, yet dignified reading, lacking the extreme agony of Levine's long-lined account yet possessing more depth than Walter's fast, sing-songy reading. Note also, Horenstein's decision to have the first violins play their unaccompanied descending line (at the climax) without slurs. Several critics have suggested that Horenstein was attempting to link this passage to the opening of I. If you are willing to ignore the flubs, this performance will provide you with great pleasure as it did for many early Mahlerians who saw the light before the Mahler boom of the mid-to-late 60's. Speaking from experience, you will not need another performance if you don't mind the less-than-great production values. And, of course, note the price. Norman Foster is a little too detached and heavy to do full justice to Kindertotenlieder. However, Horenstein's accompaniment is expert, and the orchestra and sonics are quite good.
|
~ Alfred Orda
~ Ludwig van Beethoven
~ Gustav Mahler
~ Hector Berlioz
- the new music site from IMDb and Amazon.
