|
What a great recording - I have other versions of the second symphony but this version is superb.Highly recommended.Scott
Tchaikovsky, Ravel, and others have orchestrated piano music of Schumann, and that is appropriate, not an insult. It is my firm opinion that Mahler contributed nothing of value in his reorchestration of some of the greats in the history of music, namely Bach, Beethoven, and Schumann. Mahler returned and never wrote another piece of music. Mahler had the hubris to set himself up to be a master orchestrator. At least, that is what is claimed in a medical article that I read a few years ago. What Mahler has done has made the Schumann symphonies suitable for elevator music, if they are not played too loudly. My thoughts are that it would be better for Mahler, and all of us as well, if Mahler had taken that walk before he focused his attention on Schumann, Bach, and Beethoven.
Schumann had studied Bach carefully and learned some orchestration cues from Bach, especially the doubling of instruments in composition, a trait for which he has since been severely criticized. Without Mahler, Lawrence Welk might have been more worthy to listen to, and, certainly, there would have been no Lawrence Welk as we knew him.Sigmund Freud and Gustav Mahler had a long walk in the park when Mahler's marriage was breaking up. Mahler's efforts contributed to the musical development of Lawrence Welk. It was Schumann who had found the St Matthew Passion and brought it to Mendelssohn's attention. Without Bach, there would be no Mahler as we now know him.
He showed some respect to Brahms, and did not reorchestrate his orchestral pieces, but Schumann was fair game. Bach is a towering figure in the history of music and his efforts contributed to Mahler's musical development itself. Chailly has performed the fourth symphony of Schumann on an all Schumann DVD with the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra, so that he has demonstrated convincingly that he can make the original Schumann scores beautiful. But to reorchestrate the Schumann symphonies, his orchestral works, what kind of person would do that. To my ear, when the Schumann symphonies are played correctly, (the orchestras of Leipzig and Dresden do that), in the original scores, they are among the most beautiful symphonies to be heard.
Now there's a man has been known to edit the orchestrations of a few classics in his day). This is an unsuccessful, if curious, experiment IMHO. I would rather recommend Kubelik's performance of the original orchestration with the Berlin or Bernstein's with the Vienna (Heh. I understand Schumann was not a master orchestrator and tended to over-orchestrate his symphonies. My two cents. This music sounds lobotomized: it doesn't sound like Schumann--or even Mahler for that matter--but it sounds much more like 101 Strings or Leroy Anderson. But although Mahler cleared up the texture quite a bit, the overall edit and performance sounds like muzak from the sixties and seventies. And Chailly wasn't able to keep that tendency from occuring in many places.
This is super-polished Schumann, not Mahlerized-versions.Having performed all of these symphonies with various orchestras over the years, it has been a delight for me to discover the Mahler editions, especially in these fine performances by the Gewandhaus and Chailly - ebbing and flowing beautifully, full of nuance and detail - most entertaining and polished.You will enjoy these performances a great deal if you enjoy Schumann. He sorted out some weaknesses and lightly re-scored in places for even better results. Mahler got it right. Many small changes to the orchestration, here and there, make Schumann's Symphonies all the more enjoyable.
Thanks to Decca, I drop a star. original scoring: For many years I have been trying to convince myself Schumann scoring was not that bad, after all.
III, Adagio, with a very inspired Schumann, indeed), the composer seem unable to use effectively the orchestra for that. But I can't -- orchestration is not only about textures, but also about building melody, rhythm, harmony, and so on, and except in a few cases (#2, mov.
Two questions to Decca: why have not been #1 and #3 issued separately, and why has the Genoveva Overture included with #2 and #4 been removed. They are among my favourite versions (with Sawallisch).As to the Mahler arrangements vs.
IMO, Mahler improved the symphonies (and he didn't touch #2/III at all), even if the way Mahler changed the harmony at the end of #2/IV sounds, well, wrong to my ears. Weird.
That said, I own #2/#4 and they are very modern performances, clean, fast, dramatic.
|
