Think back to all the great conductors of Mahler’s music
in the past who, even in the prime of their experience, never
had the opportunity to record his music for any of the major
record companies. Men like William Steinberg and Berthold Goldschmidt,
for example. Then there were those whose commercial Mahler
recordings were so few that their existence might just as well
have been the result of luck. Men like Dimitri Mitropoulos,
Rudolf Schwarz, Charles Adler, Jascha Horenstein and Hermann
Scherchen. Most of their Mahler interpretations we know largely
from the chance of broadcasts being preserved by radio stations
or just enthusiasts at home. Released subsequently in inferior
sound, often on pirate labels, they stand as monuments to missed
opportunities. Even John Barbirolli never got to record commercially
some Mahler works that were central to his repertoire. So it
is ironic that now, when the once huge classical recording industry
has downsized almost to extinction, that one of the last surviving
great labels should here release at full price a near-debut
studio recording containing Mahler’s Fifth conducted by a man
half the age and more of those scandalously ignored until their
deaths and played by a Youth Orchestra from Venezuela. It would
be interesting to know, when there are comparatively so few
opportunities to release anything classical these days, just
what the reasoning behind this release was inside DG.
Let me say straight away that it is certainly not without
merit. Indeed, as you will see, there are some aspects to this
recording which, in my opinion, place it the equal of some recordings
conducted by men of greater experience than Gustavo Dudamel.
However, let me simply record that my eyebrows remain in raised
position because, released like this at full price and with
a big advertising budget, the prospective buyer has no choice
but to consider it alongside all of the recordings that are
currently available and ask if it should be preferred ahead
of some of the greatest conductors and orchestras ever to record
Mahler that did make it into big label marketing. DG
and Dudamel are taking a very big chance which cannot seriously
come off.
The fact that this is a youth orchestra need not in itself
be an impediment. My own prime recommendation for this work
has for years been a recording by another youth orchestra, the
Junge Deutsche Philharmonie conducted by Rudolf Barshai (Brilliant
Classics 92205). The best youth orchestras can sometimes
make up for what they lack in experience and idiomatic sound
with a crisp technical command, a sense of discovery in unfamiliar
music and the willingness to do precisely what their conductors
tell them to do. This is some, though by no means all, of what
makes the Barshai recording so successful. But the difference
between the Barshai recording and this one by Dudamel lies in
the fact that in Barshai you have a man nearly three times Dudamel’s
age with a lifetime’s experience of Mahler’s music that really
tells, as well as the fact of being a first class orchestral
trainer. Also the Venezuelan orchestra, though good, is not
quite as flexible, accomplished or possessed of crucial weight
of tone as the one from Germany. The Barshai recording also
has the advantage of never having been released at full price
and is now available as a super-bargain. My use of it here
as main reference recording lies principally in the fact of
it being, for me, still the best recorded performance available.
But it should also show you that in no way am I necessarily
prejudiced against youth orchestras in main repertoire.
Under Dudamel the first movement has a measured tread
in the great funeral march, accentuated in weight just a little,
after a tidy fanfare. Straight away the textures are very polished
and clean, even in the trumpet’s muted snarls as the march winds
down for the first time. This polish is a trait that you can
hear right through the recording and it puts me in mind of the
refinement of a Karajan or an Abaddo. Mahler’s sound palette
is not well-served by such an approach and I hope it is not
a bad habit that Dudamel has got into. The great outburst and
surge forward at bar 155 has thrust but ideally it could do
with more than this. The impression is of a sense of proportion
being kept which is not what is appropriate here. At the return
of the march I would have liked even more of the feeling of
a nineteenth century procession, especially from the percussion
who are melded into the texture here a little too tidily. The
solo trumpet work is very impressive, though, with every note
clear and the weird harmonies exposed well. You can hear the
counterpoint in this recording which is not something you can
say every time. In the lead up to the final collapse into the
coda at the marking “Klagend” the violin dabs are well
marked and edgy and the moment itself is well delivered, but
it begins its retreat just a little too soon so the effect is
deadened somewhat. Again the impression is of a sense of proportion
being kept. As if Dudamel has a “this far but no further” valve
in his head, added to by the now familiar smooth beauty of tone.
The burst of anger that starts the second movement is
excellent, tempo and dynamics perfect for the contrast with
the first movement needing to be made. The more subdued second
subject is kept moving along but is held back just enough to
tell as contrast again. There is also considerable care over
the dynamics with the pizzicato and high woodwind nattering
all well placed. When the tempo increases again it is with
bite and attack and the “monody of cellos” isolated and remote
again finds excellent choice of tempo and lyric expression
to fit the whole complex structure. The second subject material
return has an ominous feel that is impressive and appropriate.
Each thread gathered together with impressive effect. When
the storm returns the fury is unleashed with splendid verve
and attack though care is taken for every bar and every note
to tell. Barshai is even more abandoned, however. The heavy
brass prior to the arrival of the chorale climax are every bit
as meaty as any great orchestra, but the chorale itself does
not overwhelm us, which is as it should be. Only at the end
of the symphony should this chorale do that and we will see
if Dudamel and his orchestra are up to it when we get there.
The descent to the end of the movement is convincing and notice
the superb ensemble of the playing, the strings especially,
prior to the final smash. Though it would be hard for anyone
to match the cataclysm that Barshai delivers here. The lower
strings dabbing over the strange fragments of the close are
superbly placed and made to tell. The delivery of this movement,
so often the graveyard of performances, is very impressive.
I would have liked a little more abandon in the fast sections
to put it up in the Barshai class, but this is a fine performance
all the same.
Up to now Dudamel has shown that he does grasp the basics
of this symphony. How it is ruled by the contrasts of light
and dark, tragedy and elation, energy and repose. So can he
convince even further by marking the biggest contrast of all
represented by the huge Scherzo with its jocund exuberance and
episodes of dance? There is great bounce shown at the start,
“jocose” as the marking has it. Busy strings and a nice iambic
stress on the first note of the four note figure too. At the
first change of tempo Dudamel scales down beautifully for an
affectionate slow dance. The tempo then resumes faster and
the orchestra are certainly up to the string runs and the perky
contributions from solo winds. There is also a feeling of flexibility
to the rhythms that is not self-indulgent but entirely natural.
The first solo horn entry shows a player of real character too.
The pizzicato section is the intimate night dance passage that
it should be and notice the slight hesitancy of the solo clarinet,
almost not wanting to break the spell, a lovely touch. Also
again notice how the counterpoint is well balanced to hear every
strand. Flexibility of the sprung rhythms is evident again
in the passage that starts the lead up to the dashing passage
that contains the wood block - a real smile moment. In fact
Dudamel has something to say in every bar of this extraordinary
movement and everything speaks for Mahler’s celebration of life. The final entry of
the solo horn is dreamy and romantic with the scurrying strings
like so many reflections of the moon through the branches and
leaves of a forest cover and hear the pungent quacking of the
bassoon as the nocturnal episode comes to a close before the
final rush to the end. A life-enhancing performance of this
movement that has charm and beauty, guile and wonderment in
every bar and, most important of all, a superb contrast to the
storms and stresses and tragedies of the first two, just as
Mahler surely intended.
Dudamel takes a slower, dreamier view of the Adagietto
than I prefer. Effectively he takes what I believe we can call
the old-fashioned, traditional “Death In Venice” route
that Mahler did not really mean going by the timings we have
of his own performances and those of Walter and Mengelberg who
heard him conduct it. I must admit to being very disappointed
at this since Dudamel had shown such awareness of Mahler’s inspiration in this symphony up to now.
He cannot quite resist the temptation to emote and linger in
the Adagietto. The strings of the Bolivar Orchestra do not
yet have the depth of utterance that one of the great metropolitan
orchestras would have had to deliver this kind of performance
either. The slides seem manufactured and, if this is to be
the approach adopted, then there needs to be a lot more life
experience into the shaping of the great melody. In short I
think this kind of approach to the Adagietto is beyond these
young players and the feeling conveyed is more one of stasis
when actually it need not have been. The recording by Frank
Shipway is even slower, even dreamier, but the Royal Philharmonic
pull if off.
The woodwind solos at the start of the last movement
are ripe and the string runs as the movement gets underway are
well drilled. But when the first quote from the Adagietto arrives,
knitting the structure together, Dudamel underlines it by reverting
to a slower tempo, presumably in keeping with how he performed
it in the movement itself. For me this has the effect of breaking
concentration. A faster tempo for the Adagietto would have
knitted the structure together. For Dudamel does also take
the faster sections of the movement a quite a lick. The orchestra
is up to it but the music is not. There is a lot more to this
movement than a colourful dash and the effect here is of a showpiece
for orchestra with much of the earthy quality Mahler imbues,
and which other performances manage with a slightly slower tempo
choice, missing. Again Barshai’s more measured tread (a whole
two minutes slower) allows for the cheeky rhythms and the fragments
of theme and melody to tell greater as also with Schwarz and
also Barbirolli at a very slow tempo. Just prior to the final
Adagietto “reference-back” Dudamel slows down considerably more
which means he has to then accelerate over a very short time
to get back to his fast speed and this really is jarring. When
the great chorale climax arrives it fails to crown the symphony
with the heaven storming knockout blaze that can be achieved
and which Barshai and his youth orchestra manage with space
and range. Maybe it’s the orchestra’s youth
or Dudamel’s overall speed, or a bit of both, but there is a
feeling of being slightly short-changed at this key moment.
As if the performance that has many good and promising things
about it ran out of power and puff at the last.
The recorded sound delivers a wide dynamic range from
the perspective of a seat well back in the hall. It is, however,
very much a studio sound with a generous acoustic that seems
to add to the conductor’s concern for beauty of sound and smoothness
of texture.
There is much to admire in this recording, not least
the reading of the all-important Scherzo which I found satisfying.
The second movement also receives a performance that more eminent
and experienced men have failed to pull off. Dudamel also grasps
the importance of the tripartite structure and the necessity
for contrast. On the downside, however, there are the too smooth
and cultured edges of the first movement, a refinement that
seems to be an end in itself right through. Then there is the
slow tempo choice of the Adagietto which the players anyway
cannot quite rise to. Finally there is the need for Dudamel
to submit his approach to the last movement to more study and
work to prevent the stop-go effect which gets more irritating
on repeated hearings. It is a greater movement than it appears
here. In ten years from now, perhaps with one of the great
professional orchestras, Dudamel may stun the world with a Mahler
Fifth. Here we have work in progress of a high order but in
competition with the best of the past and at full price that
is not enough to earn general recommendation from me. As always
with Mahler recordings, the collector is spoiled for choice
even between the excellent and any newcomer in the catalogue
has a lot to do.
Tony Duggan
