Tennstedt or Chailly for Mahler's 8th?

The choice between Tennstedt and Chailly is really the choice of how you view Mahler (if you ascribe to the view that there is only one way to present this composer). Tennstedt is edge of the seat stuff - full of nervous energy and contrasts where equilibrium is always to be gained through struggle. I was actually present at the concerts and they were marvellous, stiring ocassions. Tennstedt never was interested in smoothness or structure as absolutes - I think (like Bernstein) he saw Mahler as music on the edge. His is a symphonic performance.

Chailly is more thought-through. There is the feeling of an overarching journey, rather than the episodic. It has the Concertgebouw, who play with their usual refinement and amazing colour. I like the peerfromance for its more appollonian qualities, and I cannot help the feeling that Chailly looks at the piece as almost operatic/oratorio. Where I always (personally) feel shortchanged is that it lacks a little in fervour. I suspect heard live it would take flight a little more.

There are other versions worth considering. Alice (bless) recommends Kubelik. It is a long time since I heard that recording so I won't argue with Alice's description, except to say that Mahler smoothed out never works for me. The Boulez recording is interesting in bing the most transparent. It is rather like a Robert Wilson production however - too lean to hold the attention for the full evening. The Gielen recording (Hannsler) is worth considering - he is a very underrated Mahlerian with a fantastic undertsanding of Mahler in the context of his contemporaries - when I listen to Gielen I feel I am being encouraged to listen and say, 'Ah... that is where Berg got that'. People also like the Abbado recrdoing from Berlin. I think the soloists are probably the finest set and Abbado is on great form, but it suffers (for me) from the same failings as the Cahilly - a suit too well tailored. A kinder way I would describe both these performances is 'refined'. There are times when I like Mahler that way but I aso hate to be underwhelmed.

I wonder what the Chailly/Leipzig DVD is like?

For what it's worth, the American Record Guide's latest issue has a Mahler overview. Its reviewers came up with the best being Bernstein (on Sony), Colin Davis (one said this is the best since Mitropoulos, who is not recommended because of the sound), Inbal, Abbado (not as fussy as Bernstein), and Tennstedt on LPO (CD & video).

To quote their comments on Tennstedt: "...full of fire and energy, along with some rhetorical excess. Every department is outstanding. The interpretation is broad and monumental - plenty of grandeur, intensity, and spirituality. He has the best organ sound. His 1991 recording with the LPO (on the LPO label) is magnificent (also issued as a video) and much better than the EMI."

No mention is made of the Chailly recording.

I agree with Parla, this work deserves many recordings. Generally my favourites are Tennstedt (yes), Abbado (wonderful slow pacing in the finale) and maybe Kubelik (some excellent solists) but I have found many less well known recordings to add many facets to the work, including one by Järvi. 

One argument in this monumental piece in my view is sound quality - it makes a lot of difference actually. 

Probably I would vote for the Tennstedt, but don't stop there. The Chailly is fine too.

I have the Wit recording on Naxos. Wit is a very solid and serious conductor. He is always above the average and often quite good and convincing. However, for such a massive work of so many people involved, he himself cannot perform the miracle...However, for the price you pay, it's a considerable deal.

Parla

Bernstein ? Do you want Mahler's 8th or Gustav Bernstein's 8th. Stay clear of Bernstein in Mahler, It's contaminated. Every twist and turn has Bernstein's grubby fingermarks on it. Mahler needs wiping clean, he shines all by himself.

Me neither. I found Bernstein's Mahler quite revealing of the composer's insights rather his own mark. I believe Bernstein's Mahler (both on Sony or DG) have more to offer than to "distract" or to mislead.

The "Night Music" in the Seventh Symphony, for example, never sounded more apocalyptic and idiomatic than in Bernstein's DG recording.

Parla

Far be it for me to speak for Alice - but I will. I would suspect that being the sensible lass she is the aversion to Bernstein stems from a belief that the less overt interpretations of Mahler are closer to the music's true qualities.

For me I have to agree with the other view. For me Bernstein goes all out to present Mahler as he believed him to be. I actually like the Concertgebouw recording of the 9th because for me it presents a thought-through presentation of the music. It's committed to a philosophy/interpretation that is both extreme and deeply felt. Taken on its own terms I think it works tremendously, but it is just one perfromance at the extreme end of Mahler interpretation. I would add his DG Mahler 4 to this - the choice of a boy treble is unique and might be considered peverse, but if you actually listen to the concept of the piece and think about how Bertsein views the text of 'Das himmlische Leben' you can quite see why he would think a boy makes the perfect vessel for the words. It is actually quite difficult to find the right soprano voice I think for this music - I would put the 'character' akin to Sophie from Rosenkavalier.

The scope of Mahler's symphonies is so wide and deep that they can never ever be satisfied by one recording. I have said this before and will not labour the point... for fear Alice gets upset again.