Gustav MAHLER (1860-1911)
Symphony No. 9 in D major (1908-09) [78:12]
Symphony No. 10 in F-sharp major, Adagio (1910, unfinished)* [23:19]
Gürzenich-Orchester Köln/Markus Stenz
rec. January, 2014; *June 2011, Kölner Philharmonie, Germany.
Stereo/multi-channel
OEHMS CLASSICS OC654 SACD [78:12 + 23:21]
Hot on the heels of Markus Stenz’s fine recording of the Sixth Symphony
(review) here is the final instalment, I understand, of his
Cologne Mahler cycle. Unlike the Sixth and the previous release in the
series, the Seventh, which were live recordings these performances are not
specifically badged as live recordings. I presume they were set down under
studio conditions.
Stenz’s account of the Ninth is very good indeed though it’s been
interesting to compare and contrast his reading with Sir Simon Rattle’s live
Berlin recording. The late Tony Duggan thought very highly of Rattle’s
version (review); indeed, it was his enthusiastic appraisal of
the Rattle performance that persuaded me that I needed to add yet another
Mahler Ninth to my collection and I’ve never regretted the decision. Stenz
and Rattle adopt quite different approaches to the Ninth and in making a few
comparisons I must make it clear I’m not seeking to suggest one is ‘better’
than the other: both execute their respective visions of the score very
convincingly indeed.
Stenz is quite relaxed in the opening pages of the first movement; there’s
a noticeable degree of warmth, I find, and that is evident elsewhere in the
movement. Rattle is somewhat slower in his pacing and there’s more tension
in the reading. In fact, overall there’s greater tension and angst
in Rattle’s overall conception as compared with Stenz – not all collectors
will think that’s necessarily a good thing. Between 6:05 and 7:01 in Stenz’s
performance there’s a passage of dark music in which the ‘irregular
heartbeat’ rhythm is very important. Stenz moves the music along here so the
section is not as ominous as I’ve heard some conductors make it. Rattle is
firmly in the ‘ominous’ camp: the comparable passage in his performance
(6:45 – 8:10) is steadier in pace and the music sounds starker. It’s
noticeable too that, as is often his wont, Rattle gets his players to make
the most of accents. In the pages that follow (to 8:40) Stenz gets some
wonderfully quiet playing from his orchestra, which is symptomatic of the
top-class playing that’s to be heard in his performance. Those subdued
dynamics make the vehement outburst that comes shortly after (10:12–11:25)
all the more telling. Rattle’s rendition of that outburst is deeply
disturbing. In some ways the pages that I’ve just described sum up the Stenz
performance: it’s a fine reading of marked contrasts, his conception aided
by the splendid playing of his orchestra and the excellent and detailed
recorded sound.
The second movement is marked Im Tempo eines gemächlichen
Ländlers (‘In the tempo of a leisurely Ländler’). To be
honest, I wouldn’t say Stenz begins the movement in a leisurely fashion: his
tempo is quite nimble and not as rugged as some conductors make it. Rattle,
by contrast, is much more sturdy. The spikier section (at 2:23) is normally
appreciably quicker but with Stenz the difference between the two speeds is
marginal. I have to say I’m not entirely convinced by his treatment of this
movement. It’s played marvellously but I think a touch of earthiness is
missing.
I don’t think his reading of the Rondo-Burleske is as acerbic as
some that I’ve heard. The music sounds brilliant, which is fine up to a
point but this is music that should be right in the listener’s face,
spitting and snarling, and I don’t quite get that here. Rattle is a little
steadier and there’s a definite dark side to the music in his hands. The
slow trumpet-led passage which foreshadows the finale (from 5:43) is radiant
in this Cologne performance, as is the case when we hear the material again.
The final throes of Stenz’s Rondo (from 10:05) are very exciting. Rattle
takes a steadier view, investing the music with rather more weight though
without a loss of fire. He really whips up the pace for the last few pages,
more so than Stenz, making the conclusion seem more driven and brutal than
is the case in Cologne.
Stenz starts the finale beautifully, his strings really singing for him.
Rattle is broader – in fact he’s daringly slow - and, if anything, the
strings of the Berliner Philharmoniker are even richer. The booklet note
refers to this movement as a ‘deeply elegiac song of farewell’. That may be
so but Stenz doesn’t seem to see it in quite that way. There’s passion in
his reading at times and I feel there’s a sense of regret for what might
have been but Stenz keeps the emotions under sensible control and I rather
like that. Those who prefer an objective approach to Mahler will approve.
Rattle is more searching, I feel, and that’s not just a function of his more
expansive speed. At 11:25 Stenz moves the music forward. When Rattle reaches
the same spot (at 12:51) he keeps the speed rock-steady, which I always
prefer. In Stenz’s hands the movement’s great climax is truly heartfelt and
then he starts the long winding down to the end. The closing passage for
strings only (from 19:33) has a chamber-like delicacy and the strings of the
Gürzenich-Orchester play with maximum delicacy and sensitivity, enabling
Stenz to bring the work to a beautiful, hushed conclusion. Rattle, with the
Berliner Philharmoniker at his disposal, is magnificent here but, even more
than Stenz, his ending is about more than sheer refinement and beauty of
tone. Coming at the end of his performance of this great Adagio you
feel with Rattle that you’re getting a glimpse of the Beyond.
As you’ll have gathered my personal preference between these two versions
is for Rattle’s account. However, there’s more than one way to approach
Mahler’s Ninth and there’s a great deal about Markus Stenz’s conception of
the score that I admire very much indeed, especially in the outer movements,
while the execution of the symphony by the Gürzenich-Orchester is as fine as
anything we’ve heard in this cycle. The orchestra certainly give their
departing chief their very best.
Markus Stenz, like several other leading Mahler conductors, has decided
against including one of the performing versions of the Tenth symphony in
his cycle. We must respect his view while registering some disappointment,
on the strength of his performance of the opening Adagio, that he
reached that decision. This is a very convincing – and very well played –
account of the movement and I do hope that one day Stenz may change his
stance and conduct one of the performing editions of the symphony,
preferably the one by Deryck Cooke. I’m even more regretful, however, that
it seems that this Stenz cycle will not include a recording of Das Lied
von der Erde. That’s a great shame.
However, with or without Das Lied this has been a very good Maher
symphony cycle. I would judge that the best of the set have been the Third,
Sixth, Seventh and Eighth. This new recording of the Ninth is impressive and
anyone who has been collecting the series can rest assured that the final
instalment in this Cologne cycle will not disappoint.
John Quinn
Markus Stenz’s Maher cycle on MusicWeb
International:-
Symphony No. 1
Symphony No. 2
Symphony No. 3
Symphony No. 4
Symphony No. 5
Symphony No. 6
Symphony No. 7
Symphony No. 8
Lieder aus Des Knaben Wunderhorn
Masterwork Index: Mahler’s Ninth Symphony
Tony
Duggan’s Survey of recordings of Mahler’s Ninth Symphony
Support us financially by purchasing this disc from |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |