Print

Print


Problem with inserting Blumine into the 1893 or 1899 version of the 1st symphony is that the rest of the movements have a vastly enlarged instrumentation. Unless the conductor boosts the string sound in Blumine it can sound out of place. it fits much better with the original 1888/89 version with its smaller orchestra. If you listen to the New England Conservatory performance it's noticeable.

Eric Nagamine


> On Feb 25, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Gene Baron <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> I know that Mahler himself removed the "Blumine" movement from his first
> symphony but I always appreciate when someone includes it -- it has some
> thematic material that is developed in later movements and is a lovely
> melody -- there are just a couple of recordings that include it (Ormandy
> and Win Morris come to mind).
> 
> Gene
> 
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Karl Miller <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> 
>> Szell made a cut in the last movement of the Bartók.  I have never read
>> any explanation as to why he did so. As to the "alternative ending," I have
>> read that it was done at the request of Koussevitzky. There is at least one
>> commercial recording which offers both endings. The Koussevitzky broadcast
>> features the original ending.
>> Regarding the Szell cut...Bartók was very precise in his sense of
>> proportion. He often used the fibonacci series for his works. To make a cut
>> in a work of his, seems to me, to be highly inappropriate.
>> 
>> Karl
>> 
>> 
>>    On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 4:30 PM, John Haley <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> When I click the reply, Karl, it gives me your personal email instead of
>> the list.
>> Interesting thoughts about the availability of the score affecting
>> performing decisions.  There are probably lots of reasons that go into the
>> decisions whether or not to make cuts or do repeats, but that surely has to
>> be one of them.