Mahler's 3rd Symphony

[Herr_Direktor]

As with most people, the 3rd was the last of the Mahler symphonies for me to "get." I own the entire Bernstein/NY/Vienna box set and I listen to all of the symphonies all the time, but it took me about 2 years to finally understand this one. Of course, it took almost the entire 2 years to finish listening to it...

[Alpha Centauri]

I don't greatly enjoy listening to cds, and prefer live performances where possible.

Two days ago I heard Mahler's 3rd here in Moscow, at the Tchaikovsky Concert Hall. The Moscow State Capella Orchestra were directed by their Chief Conductor and Musical Director, Valery Polyansky.

I had only heard this symphony once or twice before. One thing I find hard to deal with is the endings of the movements - they all seem to "final" to be movement-endings to me, and sound like the end of an entire work.

But the magical effect - where I must, I'm afraid, cock the tiniest of friendly snooks at cd listeners - is the quadrophonic effect of the trumpet located at the back of the auditorium. For those unfamiliar with the Tchaikovsky Concert Hall, it's actually a former circus (!) building, enormous and, err, circular. The many alterations made to convert it to concert use involve the addition of many balconies and loggia, and the trumpet sound came from apparently from the highest heavens (I think he was actually up in the Lighting Grid in the ceiling of the auditorium). The solo was stupendously played by Andrei Ikov.

The female choir were excellent, but sadly the mezzo-soprano was hopelessly awful - let us cast a veil over her identity.

[haydnguy]

The 3rd is my favorite so far. (I'm basically through the 5th, so far).

This is one time your wrong, Herzeleide. The 3rd is much better than the 2nd. (Just don't ask me why!).

Edit: Reiner, I would LOVE to see the 3rd ANYWHERE!!! We don't have much classical music where I live, sadly.

[Alpha Centauri]

Originally Posted by haydnguy

Edit: Reiner, I would LOVE to see the 3rd ANYWHERE!!! We don't have much classical music where I live, sadly.

I'm not sure you would have rejoiced in this Mahler 3, Haydnguy. Mahler is very little-played in Russia, there isn't a tradition of it here. I hope it wouldn't be off-topic to discuss why? I had gone with my dear friend Natalya, who was - in her playing days - one of the top "coaches" (repetiteurs) at the Bolshoi... she worked with "the greats" while she was there, although at 78 she doesn't play any longer (she's busy with her latest interest, computers). Her daughter, incidentally, was on the front desk of the cellos - the reason we got such good seats Anyhow, I asked her why she thought Mahler wasn't popular in Russia, and these are her views (in paraphrase, not direct quotation) rather than mine....

# "There's no tradition of it here. People don't understand what it is about - all this Viennese Angst and soul-searching is alien to Russian audiences, who have a different personality to the Viennese. If Russians have worries or anxieties, they invite their friends round and sit in the kitchen, drinking vodka and talking about the problems... by the end of the evening, the problems have gone. But Austrians seem to have more deep-rooted anxieties which can't be exorcised so easily, they're more complicated, and perhaps more sophisticated people than we are? It's why they have such a rich culture."

# "Our orchestras can't play this so easily. We no longer have the big soviet-era orchestras, the money's evaporated for all that. You can hear that this isn't welded-together in the kind of ensemble you would hear from the VSO, can't you? But they are trying to revive and restore that tradition - somehow they have found the money to bring enough players together, and they aren't bad musicians... but they need to be formed as an orchestra, and that's not the work of a few weeks... it takes years, you know..."

# "The style of this music is different. Compare it to our own symphonists - Shostakovich? He would never write movements which were similar to each other in ambience and style, like this - Mahler strives for homogeneity and balance, Shostakovich instead looks for contrast and interest. Our audiences can't easily cope with this, you can hear them shuffling and restless... they want a change, like Prokofiev... Mahler is more single-minded in his musical ideas than our composers. That's probably a good thing, but we're not used to it."

[haydnguy]

Perhaps, but I think your typical Russian audience is more sophisticated musically than I am. Frankly, just being there would have been a thrill to ME.

But I understand what she's saying about the money drying up. It's a true shame. All countries need their musical orchestras. IMHO. (In My Humble Opinion).

[Chi_town/Philly]

Originally Posted by haydnguy

This is one time you're wrong, Herzeleide. The 3rd is much better than the 2nd. (Just don't ask me why!).

Actually, you're in complete agreement with Herzeleide on this issue, because after all, in his very first sentence in this thread, he said:

Originally Posted by Herzeleide

I much prefer the third to the second

Don't know if you misunderstood his position, or if you 'fingered the wrong bloke.'

I'm the one who's "wrong." However, I do have company, as I'd say that sales of recordings of Symphony 2 outstrip those of Symphony 3, and it wouldn't surprise me if it's by a factor of multiples. [Of course, I make no assertions of artistic merit based on that information...]

[haydnguy]

Nooooo, I thought I had him!!!!

Actually, I did make an error on the quote. Hmmm, don't know what to make of the sales figures. Joshua Bell sells an awful lot!

[maureen]

for the anecdotal snippets reiner
helps me understand the stylistic differences in a humanistic way
gives me access that the more theoretical or conceptual discussions might not
altho
i'm enjoying those as well