Hi all,
Following up on the Pfitzner thread in the other branch of the forum, I though I might direct you to a page with Willem Mengelberg's complete recordings:
http://willemmengelberg.nl/?q=discografie (http://willemmengelberg.nl/?q=discografie)
There are a few unsung gems there, and the whole thing shows a fascinating insight into early-20th-century repertoire (albeit of the conservative kind). I think the site was set up about a year ago to accompany Frits Zwart's monumental (but, alas, Dutch) biography of Mengelberg.
Coincidence. There's an exhibition in our local city hall about Mengelberg. If someone's interested I can provide a translation http://www.bibliotheekdenhaag.nl/Artikelen/Willem-Mengelberg-een-wereldberoemde-en-omstreden-dirigent.htm
Interesting repertoire. Very much that of a conservative-tending musician of his time, I'd've thought. I'm not sure what I think of Mengelberg as a conductor, though. Wonderful one minute, wilful the next. Again, typical of his time, perhaps? Anyway, the repertoire's the thing...
Mengelberg can be pretty extreme and was something of an exception in his time already because of his use of portamento and rubato. When it came to blows between him and Toscanini in the late 1920s, the New York Phil chose the side of the latter. Zwart attributes this to Toscanini's machinations and the orchestra's wavering, but one can easily see how Mengelberg's approach didn't mix too well with the NY Phil's tradition. His reputation as a disciplinarian didn't help, probably.
In any case, Mengelberg's Brahms Symphonies seem to be the first documents of a tradition - and should be a lesson to many conductors who have no idea :-)
Interesting. But, of course, there are also the conductors that Brahms actually heard, among whom were Levi, Richter, Nikisch, Weingartner and Fritz Steinbach. Of these, we can only hear Weingartner who recorded the symphonies in 1938-9; and Weingartner is very different from Mengelberg, so the question of which is the authentic tradition remains open...
Of course, you are right, Alan
I am totally gaga, since I meant Weingartner instead of Mengelberg - which is a very different case, and perhaps less authentic.
I see, yes: well, we're in agreement, then!
Actually, the question of Brahms interpretation (Weingartner v. Mengelberg; Toscanini v. Furtwängler, etc.) is a fascinating one...
Oh, yes, considering that I have in my collection some 55 versions of complete Brahms Symphonies! I think you know already that Brahms is my favorite composer, also as far as his chamber, choral music and Lieder are concerned 8)
A good choice - I think! (And more of those choral works please, responsible parties. There's something just -- _neat_ about the late double-chorus pieces, and others, etc. ... :D )
Speaking of Mengelberg, I seem to recall having heard a recording by him of some works by Cornelis Dopper...
I have a large Brahms collection, too. All of the so-called classic recordings of Toscanini, Szell, Weingartner, Furtwangler, Walter, Karajan, Wand, Boult, and several dozen more. And having listened to them for close to 50 years, I find it interesting that my favorite recordings are relatively recent: Mackerras on Telarc, and Chailly on Decca. Both totally satisfying, thrilling, and deeply moving. None of that Mengelberg sea-sickness of portamento and rapid, continuous tempo changes. It's really too bad we don't have more Mengelberg doing Mahler. He was apparently approved by Mahler, started early Mahler festivals. To my ears Mengelberg's Brahms is just awful. How badly could he screw up Mahler, and did Mahler really like it? Questions that will never be answered. Mengelberg has his fans, but I'm not one of them. I'll take Chailly any day.
I always come back to Karajan. And Solti too. And Carlos Kleiber in No.4. And, and, and....
Eric, Mengelberg recorded Kees Dopper's 7th symphony as well as his Ciaconna Gotica; both are one the page. The 7th Symphony performance is an interesting case, as it was performed in November of 1940, some time after the German occupation of the Netherlands. Its final movement is a collage of songs from the Dutch Uprising against the Spaniards, so the performance turned into something of a anti-occupation occasion. Something Mengelberg, who remained staunchly pro-German, probably didn't anticipate.
Alan, I am with you! Karajan ist absolutely wonderful (a word not good enough to describe) - and this in all of his 3 "complete" versions. And both versions by Bernstein are so exciting. Strangely, I cannot separate myself from any of all these 55 versions I have collected; I always go back to this and that one to discover new aspects. Last but not least, I always (and still) learn something from these great conductors. I have also become very fond of Schuricht's different live recordings and have tremendous respct in front of the improvisatory-like versions of Furtwängler... and - and...
Getting further off topic - are you familiar with the Walter NYPO recording of the Brahms symphonies? The old mono recordings? Has anyone, ever, made a more thrilling, blistering, hair-raisingly exciting close of the 2nd? Next to Walter even Solti seems tepid. It's a stunner of a performance and should be heard by anyone who loves Brahms.
Ah, but try Kleiber or (especially) Karajan in the finale of No.2...
MartinH, you are right: I prefer the older Brahms recordings by Bruno Walter anyway.
I have the Water set, recommended to me by Alan IIRC. I listen to them more often than any of my more modern recording of the symphonies. Wonderful!
Incidentally, when young Mengelberg was living in Lucerne (around 1890) and was a music director there, it was him who recongnised the talents of a certain young boy named Fritz Brun. He helped him and recommended him to various teachers, whih made him later on continue at the Cologne Conservatory. So far I could not find any concert program of Mengelberg conducting a Brun Symphony...