That sounds very plausible to me, actually! The only thing that's been making me hesitate over offering a TIN interpretation of the comment is the phrase 'die ganze Stelle': I don't see why he should have chosen that phrase, or how it would help support either the Ollie reading or the Barrett reading, but maybe I'm missing something obvious.

So which clarinet would you play it on, or alternatively, if you were on the podium, which clarinet would you respectfully suggest that the clarinettist in question play it on? 

Lol! In the latter case it may not be a house translator's fault (although an editor should certainly have picked it up), since most Ligeti scores were originally published in manuscript facsimile and in that form already tend to carry occasionally idiosyncratic English translations of their performing instructions, in Ligeti's own hand.

PS What's the name of Lachenmann's publisher, again?

Ah yes - I meant to lose the passive form, but then the whole subject/object relationship is untenable. Der D-Klarinette wird die ganze Stelle ausführen, I think (ausführen doesn't take a dative object, does it)?

Hmm - does this work: 'Bis ich wieder klicke, wird dieses vollständige Gewinde vorlängert worden sein'? (future perfect in the passive voice is a tricky one)

About the un/measured tremolos near the beginning of the 7th: Richard mentioned being interested in how 'first-generation' Mahler conductors did it. Don't know if Klemperer counts but on his recording they're unmeasured.

On the other hand since even if they weren't I'd still think they should be, it's really neither here nor there...

Whilst recognising that Gramophone has taken several knocks re falling quality, this month's (November 2007) edition contains an interesting article by conductor James Conlon on Mahler 6 and the issue of whether to go Scherzo/Andante or Andante/Scherzo which I thought posters would like to be alerted to. Conlon used to be in the S/A camp, but has since changed his mind and now conducts the piece A/S.  I went to the RFH this evening, where Jukka-Pekka Saraste conducted the Philharmonia in the 6th - this was the first time I'd heard the symphony in a concert. He chose to go Scherzo/Andante (and he also reinstated the third hammer blow) both decisions of which felt absolutely right. I wonder what others feel or, indeed, whether it matters; Conlon does conclude by writing that the Finale is so cataclysmic, it doesn't.

That's odd, I don't think I've come across that before - I think I may need to have a listen to this.


I've had a rather heavy week for Mahler. On Monday it was Harding's VPO 10th, which I enjoyed more than I expect. I'm not really a fan of the work which never feels quite like Mahler to me, and yet he makes as compelling a case for it as I've heard.

Yesterday it was the turn of Haitink and the Chicago Symphony in Mahler 6. I enjoyed their 3rd quite a lot, even if it wasn't so fine as his Concergebouw attempt, and the use of a trumpet in the 3rd movement was a mistake. However this was quite desperately dull.

I also listened to Mackerras and Philharmonia in the 4th (sadly download only) which I enjoyed very much, the first movement was particularly compelling.

I'm just now listening to a Testament issue which doesn't seem to have been noticed anywhere of Mahler's 3rd. From Boult and the BBC Symphony it's notable for the presence of Kathleen Ferrier whom I've long wanted to hear in this work. Sadly the recording quality (from a private recording on to acetate of the radio performance) is absolutely dire - which given its age, and consequently the lack of copyright, makes the high price of the issue quite shocking. Boult gives quite a straight laced reading, but faily compelling (though the horn in the third movement is far too prominent). Ferrier is wonderfully haunting. Sadly though, not, I think, one for repeated listening.

regards, Tam