Double double.(comparing two recordings of Mahler's Symphony No. 1)

Long-time readers should be well aware that Tom Lyle and I are big-time fans of the music of Gustav Mahler. When Telarc recently released a recording of that composer's Symphony No. 1 in audiophile-grade DSD sound (Telarc CD-80545, featuring the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra conducted by Yoel Levi), we thought a natural comparison would be to the audiophile-oriented Harmonia Mundi release that garnered high praise for its sonic virtues when it was released back in 1994 (Harmonia Mundi HMU 907118, featuring the Florida Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by James Judd). Not only do these two recordings boast of audiophile sound, but they also include the "Blumine" movement that Mahler included in his early drafts of the symphony but later deleted.

As always, Tom and I have refrained from discussing these two recordings other than deciding that these were the two we would compare for this issue. Because this is an odd-numbered issue, I will lead off with my observations and then Tom will present things from his point of view.

KWN: When we first decided to compare these two recordings, I thought that choosing between them would be a daunting task. I had always enjoyed the sound and performance of the Judd recording, and kept that CD in my permanent collection; when I heard the new Levi recording, I was also quite impressed with both the sound and the performance. Deep in my heart I knew it was inevitable that I would be comparing these two CDs as part of a Double Double, and I figured that it was going to be a lot of work to pick a winner. Not so, however.

When you listen to the Judd recording, it sounds warm and natural, and there is a nice sense of sonic perspective. But when you actually sit down and compare it to the Levi, the Judd begins to sound dark, distant, and diffuse. In the opening movement, for example, the lower strings in the Levi provide a solid foundation for the structure of the music, while in the Judd, the lower strings seem a bit muffled and homogenized in sound. As the movement goes on, you become aware that not only does the engineering of the Telarc proved a richer sound than the HM, but that the Atlanta forces, particularly the strings, simply have the Florida forces outgunned.

In the "Blumine" movement, Judd's interpretation seems more dreamlike, while Levi seems to bring more ardor to his interpretation. I should point out here that the HM disc places this movement last, the idea being that because Mahler removed it from the work, they have provided it as a supplement that you can program in if you would like, the "default" program being to hear the four-movement final product. The Telarc disc takes the opposite tack, placing "Blumine" second among the movements, thus making the "default" option to hear the work as a five-movement composition. There are advantages to both approaches. (Personally, I much prefer the work without "Blumine," and will have a bit to say about that later.)

In the third, dance-oriented, movement, Judd's performance comes across as just too smooth. Levi brings more energy to his performance, and once again the superior sound of the lower strings really drive this recording, augmented by the stronger sound of the Atlanta brass.

And so it goes in the final two movements, where the superior bass sound of the Telarc recording and the more powerful Atlanta orchestra give the edge to the Telarc release. Make no mistake, the Harmonia Mundi recording and performance are excellent, but in both respects the Telarc is even better, ...