Talk:Symphony No. 7 (Mahler)

Cornet? and Euphonium?

Is there a cornet used in this symphony? The Gustav Mahler page had a mention of one, but I took it away, since there is no cornet mentioned in this article. A. Wang ^{(talk/contrb.)} 22:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The euphonium page listed that this symphony uses a euphonium. There is no mention is this article. A Wang ^{(talk/contrb.)} 13:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

It's quite possible that a euphonium is sometimes used in place of the tenor horn, but that's just an educated guess. --Camembert 17:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

A Cornet is listed in the instrumentation of the Dover reprint of the 1909 Bote and Bock scoreDelahays (talk) 16:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Key

We state that the symphony is in E minor, without any mention that this key signature is not universally accepted. I've also seen references to it being in B minor. JackofOz 02:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

E minor is considered part of the name itself. That is why it was there. Justin Tokke 12:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Saying that this symphony belongs to any single key is highly problematic. For starters, it begins on a B minor chord with a major sixth and ends on C major. I personally think that Mahler was trying to move beyond the idea of entire works in single keys, and instead evolving tonality to a new level beyond those of his predecessors.Takingiteasy17 03:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

A Good example of this is Mahler's 5th Symphony where the C# minor in the begining acts as a leading tone to the finale in D major. Deleting the key would be fine but the most accepted key anotation is E minor for this symphony. As I recall, the majority of it is also in E minor. Justin Tokke 19:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

It would appear that the original Bote and Bock score title made no reference to any key, referring to the work simply as Mahler's Symphony no 7 - the pmslp online score (described as Eulenberg 1909) also describes it as Symphonie No VII, without any key reference. Though revised editions (1960(Erwin Ratz), 2007) have appeared, this would seem to have been Mahler's original opinion. Delahays (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Very poor musical descriptions

The entire section dealing specifically with the different movements and describing them reads more like a CD review in Rolling Stone magizine than an encyclopedic entry. They should be removed completely and if they must be rewritten it should be an objective description of events, rather than all these loaded words. Takingiteasy17takingiteasy17 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 03:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I have just finished reworking the descriptions you mention (a few years too late, in my opinion), and I believe they are up to your standards as well as to Wikipedia's. I agree that they sounded far too subjective, and that they did not impart any actual information about the movements (coming from no previous experience with this symphony, someone would have found themselves confused trying to match the descriptions to the music). I have tried to clarify the summaries so that the page can be used as an immediate reference for a reader who wants to understand the structure of the piece. GustavMahler74 (talk) 18:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Epithet: translation

"It is sometimes referred to by the title The Song of the Night (German: Lied der Nacht), ..."

I know bugger all German, and I don't know the exact original German epithet, but shouldn't it be either:

• Song of the Night = Lied der Nacht, or
• The Song of the Night = Der Lied der Nacht? -- JackofOz (talk) 12:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Note the French word for "night music": serenade, and Italian serenata. In a section below I suggest that the Seventh Symphony is modeled after some of the longer works for orchestra by Mozart. Pbrower2a (talk) 17:30, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Mahler specifically indicates that II and Iv are "Nachtmusik" - i.e. serenades. Delahays (talk) 16:44, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Is it really a symphony?

This isn't at all to disparage the work. Structurally it resembles some fine works on the fringe the orchestral repertory -- some of the serenades, multi-movement works of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, works generally better than all Mozart symphonies but the latest. Almost any non-operatic long work written around 1900 for full orchestra that wasn't a concerto, variations on a theme, ballet score, suite of dances, or a liturgical work was usually called a symphony. To be sure there were serenades for string orchestra (Dvořák, Tchaikovsky; Grieg's Holberg Suite) not generally understood as symphonies; Tchaikovsky wrote some stand-alone suites. The symphony had overpowering prestige, and it was generally wise to call a work a symphony even if it violated some of the norms of structure. Pbrower2a (talk) 18:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Mahler enjoying "great international success?" Not hardly!

"In 1904, Mahler was enjoying great international success as a conductor, but he was also, at last, beginning to enjoy international success as a composer."

Not so. The German speaking critics, particularly the Viennese, were nearly universal in their dislike - indeed, hatred - of Mahler's works. The only symphony which was considered a masterpiece on its initial giving was the 8th. Between the prevailing musical conservatism and the not-so-latent anti-semitism among the press in Vienna, Mahler was never accepted as a composer, even after the success of the 8th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flylooper (talk • contribs) 14:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC) Flylooper (talk) 14:51, 30 March 2012 (UTC)3/10/12

Much of this disrespect for Gustav Mahler resulted from musicians disliking him as a person, particularly in Germany and Austria, for his despotic behavior as a conductor. Writing practically no music that can be done without direction from a conductor -- no mature works for solo piano and no mature chamber work, and no concerto-like works or ballets in which anyone gets more attention than a conductor, Mahler lacked one of the ways of creating future audiences for his orchestral works and Lieder. Unlike such composers as Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms, and Debussy he wrote no short keyboard works that might introduce people who never hear an orchestral concert to his personality. He wrote no operas (for which he would have probably been as competent as any composer) which might have gotten him recognition for his lyrical qualities.

Add to that, of course, the pervasive antisemitism in Germany and Austria that cut into his reputation in the German-speaking world.... and that his symphonies were considered "too German" in much of the rest of the world. He died just three years before the First World War and the war put recognition of him in Britain and America as a composer on hold. Even during World War II, he was "too German" for Allied audiences. Banned in Nazi-occupied Europe except to Jewish performers and audiences while they were still living, and too German for Allied tastes, he got little play in the early 1940s... anywhere. Pbrower2a (talk) 20:26, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Tempo descriptions

The 1909 Bote und Bock score describes the First movement tempo as Langsam - Allegro con fuoco. By the time Klemperer recorded it in the late 1960s ( and he was present at the rehearsals for the Prague premiere) this had become Langsam ...Allegro risoluto ma non troppo, the description given here. This may be from Ratz. When was it fist adopted, and on what grounds? The description for the opening of II -here and in Bote und Bock 1909 - is Allegro moderato, which soon mutates into an andante. I don't think Bote und Bock is usually observed here. Is the Allegro moderato instruction a publisher's error or is it confirmed in the 2007 edition? Delahays (talk) 16:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Delahays (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Good article?

@JackofOz: and others, do you think we could submit this article for consideration as a Good Article? If not, why not? Leptictidium (mt) 12:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

It does not contain enough inline references. See WP:GA? for a list of the conditions that an article must meet to qualify as a GA. (And if you're interested, have a look at Symphony No. 8 (Mahler), to see an outstanding article on a symphony by Mahler.) Toccata quarta (talk) 13:39, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

"... a banal descending broken scale motif"

"Banal" is a rather pejorative term to describe the motif from the Rondo-Finale. Is this what the author really intended or is the word being misapplied? If intended, then it's a POV that few would share. Mahler can make the playing of a scale sound thrilling. Raaronson (talk) 14:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)