|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.103.110.43
Forty-plus years of listening to classical music, and I have yet to get to Bruckner. While some casual listening has given me the impression that he out-wrote his material, I fully confess that I have not given the poor old guy even the hint of a fair shot. But I'm going to hear his Sixth in concert next week, and I was wondering whether any of you would like to weigh in on him. Any comments, short or long, would be great: What do you like about him? How should I approach him? What should I listen for? Basically, anything you've got to say, if you're inclined to say anything. THANKS.
-Bob
Follow Ups:
He's great, this one is my favourite album. You have some pretty good info and several options on the primephonic platform :)
https://www.primephonic.com/album/588
https://www.primephonic.com/anton-bruckner
When I just want to sample without buying, in a relaxed atmosphere (i.e. my own home) I borrow from the library. They even have SACD's! Interesting that some discs are wrecked, nearly unplayable, and others are pristine, nearly unplayed. Our local system has invested in a disc resurfacing machine, and some really need it.
This method has allowed me to discover a lot of music by a lot of composers I never would have tried otherwise. Just today, it was Onslow chamber music. Kind of boring, but I'll give it more tries. Best recent discovery: Chaminade Piano Trios.
As to Bruckner, I enjoy Symphony 4, 7, 9. Can't recall hearing 6. Time to try the library!
Peace,
Tom E
berate is 8 and benign is 9
now that we have streaming.
Used to check out about a dozen CDs and a time an rip them all!
Is that illegal?
I hope not.
Anyway, the computer I ripped them to died, the backup disk won't load to my Apple Laptop for some reason and I ain't buying another Windows machine so I guess the record labels came out ok this time. :-)
Been going to the library for almost 60 years, so it's a tough habit. Have not gotten into streaming at all, and I might be too old to start. I know it's the future, even for movies.
Guess I just like to hold a CD in my hand the same way I used to lovingly unsleeve LP's. I am running out of room for my collection, though.
Peace,
Tom E
berate is 8 and benign is 9
I still buy lots of CDs, because the are near-free on Amazon (used and new from Amazon sellers).
But in Classical Music world, there is still a TON of stuff I am yet to hear (or forgot I have head due to age). ;-)
I started streaming from a laptop to cheap portable DAC/Headphone amp and found that as I moved up in hardware quality, sound improved to near-CD quality.
Been doing it for decades at our very well-stocked library. Do you know about Hoopla Digital? If your library is a member, you can "borrow" digital media online (recordings, books, movies, etc.). I don't know what the music resolution is, but it sounds amazing compared to what I expected. I'm currently borrowing Eschenbach's Bruckner 6 with the Houston SO. Sounds darn good. Hoopla is a great resource for exploring new music and performances without spending a dime. The metadata is truly awful, but with classical, it's not usually much of an issue.
-Bob
That ought to get some attention. I mean that he gets more airtime than the rest of the composers combined, but possibly not merited based on his actual stature as a composer. He didn't actually compose THAT much, and unlike Mahler, where every symphony is an important work, the case for all of Bruckner's symphonies is not so clear. It is just interesting to see just how many long threads are about Bruckner, and gosh, I have started a few of them myself!
I would like to hear as many of his key works live as I can - thus far just symphonies 3, 4, 5 and 9.
Sure, you may think, would'nt that be true of every composer. Well, maybe. Maybe not. In the 19th cent, lots of low rank Russian composers churned out pieces that they called symphonies which, at least technically, were hardly more than tone poems to a greater or lesser degree, and certainly less than symphonic according to standards practiced at the same time elsewhere. You may take Ippolitov-Ivanov or Arensky as examples.
In the 20th cent, when you'd have thought that the form would've disappeared under the assault of every stripe of 20th cent "modernism" [now very old fashioned], tons and tons of symphonies were produced. I had acquired many of the American ones on Louisville Records and CRI Records back in the vinyl days. Almost all were mediocre efforts by now long forgotten "talents", and some were created in a deliberately off-hand, or even contemptuous, manner.
Bruckner, OTOH, devoted all of his energies to each and every single symphony he created. For him, each one was an effort of his whole being. Of course, he got better at the form as he went on. Just as with Mahler, every work counted.
Also, you're completely incorrect that Bruckner didn't compose much. He composed quite many motets and other church works. Sure, he didn't churn out 110 symphonies, 230 string quartets, and 553 piano sonatas as was typical for some powdered-wig era Haydnesque machine composer, but that's because of the intellectual/emotional cost required of a Romantic era symphony in general, and a Bruckner symphony in particular.
On another note, one of my bucket lists is to hear all of the Bruckner symphonies in concert performance [excepting the Study Symphony, but not excepting the underappreciated Nulte]. So far, I've heard:
#2 - Muti
#4 - Dohnanyi
#5 - Asahina [wow]
#7 - Barenboim
#9 - Asahina [wow]
#9 - Haitink
Severius! Supremus Invictus
Well, of course they were important to him.... and sure he labored hard. But the Marx labor theory of value was disproved a long time ago. Just because someone labors hard and long on something doesn't give it value to others, which is what this is all about. And yes, he wrote some other works, but besides the third Mass, which has a marginal hold in the repertory, not much else is played. My point still stands that mostly those who wax on about Bruckner are looking to the symphonies 4-9, primarily. You seem to be offended by that reality, but that's reality. It is OK to adore all of the symphonies and his other works, but most don't. And I still wonder why a composer who many find heavenly but just as many find repetitious and at times a bit boring gets so much ink here.
But don't get me wrong - after all, I was the one who started the "What is your least favorite Bruckner Symphony" thread a couple of months ago ;-)
In any case, I think you're being just a bit narrow in your view of what works by Bruckner maintain their place in the repertoire. For starters, I count 79 recordings of the First Symphony on abruckner.com (lumping together all the various incarnations and editions). I would also say that the E-minor Mass has about the same kind of popularity as the F-minor Mass. And when it comes to choral music, the Bruckner Motets are absolute staples of the repertoire.
Nt
t
Severius! Supremus Invictus
Muti conducting the 9th and Te Deum in June?
I've been waiting to hear this in concert - the 9th with Te Deum - most of my life.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
And Record it off the air.
Broadcasts usually are the next week.
g
Severius! Supremus Invictus
N
The Bruckner First is unique in his cannon. It's different from all of the rest to a very large degree. All you need to do is listen. It's his first actual effort [after the "Study Symphony", which was just that - a composition exercise, not an actual creative effort], and the better you know it, the more amazing it sounds. Just listen to that 3rd theme group - so bold [3 theme groups in his 1st movement expositions being one of the stylistic innovations he'd keep in all of his future symphonies].
The Sym #2 is overall a weaker work, and not one that I'd expect to appeal to none Bruckner dedicated listeners. Indeed, I'd expect it to have very low appeal all around to the general listener. Still, for the dedicated Bruckner listener it has many beauties in it, especially in the *optimal* 1877 edition.
But, the Sym #1 is a special, and quite strong work.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
too hard. No "dedicated" listening skills needed, but perhaps that's why some dedicated Brucknerians consider it weak. : )Regarding the first, it's a great example of why high-mindedness and innovation alone (think Babbit) don't guarantee success outside the laboratory.
But back to the 2nd: for the "general" listener (at least one who doesn't pretend to love Beethoven's Grosse Fugue) , what's not to like about the the 2nd's slow mov't?
Edits: 04/14/16
And if it's the Linz, was it Linz/Haas or Linz/Nowak. I guess there's even a "Ur-Linz" version (edited by Carragan) available now. I guess if you were listening to Jochum, it must have been Linz/Nowak?I haven't heard the Carragan version, but of the other Linz versions, I like them both, and I like my Chailly recording of the Vienna version too. But for the Linz version, I've always enjoyed the 1965 Neumann/LGO Teldec recording (Linz/Haas) for its freshness and discipline. Some reviewers at the time noted that Neumann imposed a noticeable degree of discipline on the LGO, although his personality seemed more that of a kindly, Bruno-Walter-type figure. He was very prolific as a recording artist, and not all of his recorded performances are successful - but I think he shows his best sides often enough on his recordings to be worthwhile investigating, no matter what the repertoire. I understand there's a pirate recording floating around somewhere of the Brahms Fourth with Neumann and the VPO - I'd love to hear it, assuming it was decently captured.
The second album cover is for you vinyl junkies - and you know who you are!BTW, note to the OP: www.abruckner.com is your friend (live link below).
Edits: 04/14/16 04/14/16
One of the reasons that vinyl guys think analog vinyl sounds superior to digital recording is due to compression in the analog rhelm. It's unavoidable. The end result of compression is that it makes piannisimo sounds louder, therefore more evident. That's how all of those trailing echos become more evident in analog recordings. Digital recording doesn't require that kind of compression. It only requires that peak sounds don't exceed a limit. Therefore, it lacks the ppp compensation by way of compression.
In other words, it's a analog distortion; one of many, many, many analog distortions - all of which I can hear and which grate on my nerves.
Paul McGowan of PS Audio explains it much better than I, in the link.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
or could change your Moniker to Know-It-All.
Unless it's already taken.
He's had a few, over the years.
Some humorless types objected.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
.
N
at least once and for the whole series.
All versions (ok, not all versions).
Oh that was Buckner.
NET
Blame Boston's pitchers, who let the Mets tie the game before Buckner's fateful misplay. And even with that final play, the fault is at least as much with Boston's manager John McNamara for letting Buckner stay in the game so he could have the honor of being on the field when the Sox won the series rather than putting in a defensive replacement.
You would call it the Tragic Overture when it was actually the Dance of the Comedians. ;-)
. . . may be found in a "movie" of Celibidache rehearsing the Berlin Philharmonic in Bruckner 7 (subtitled in English). Very personal, very subjective, and without a score. This is a subscription service but free 48 hour passes are available if you look around. If you admire Bruckner or Celibidache you will find this a very fascinating film. The actual performance is on Youtube as well as the site.
Edits: 04/13/16
Thanks so much for all the great replies. They will help me "find a way in" to Bruckner. I love Mahler, so I ain't a-scared of no long works! I've borrowed the Eschenbach/Houston recording of the Sixth from Hoopla Digital and will be listening to it in prep for the concert. THANKS again! Very helpful.
-Bob
If you are going to listen to Bruckner's music, you need to relax and unwind. His music is not hurried or frantic. Those with ADD listening habits will have challenges. He sometimes takes many minutes to carry you to an impact point, but once you arrive there, it is often very satisfying. This is not background easy listening music. To "get it", you need to actively listen and allow it to carry you away.
Bruckner's symphonies are all about tone & texture. Listen to the way he uses groups of instruments to achieve tonal colors, much the same way an Organist uses stops. Rhythmic interest is not a focus. There are pretty melodies, but he doesn't spin them out the way Mozart did. Brass textures are particularly sonorous and often have a "chorale-like" nature. As a Trombone player, I always enjoyed performing Bruckner works.
I agree with others that the 5th, 8th, & 9th symphonies are highlights. I also listen to the 7th a lot.
Just my $.02. YMMV
Thom T.
Rational Insanity and Controlled Chaos!
Music is life, and life is music.
He referred to Bruckner's "symphonies of miscarriages", calling attention to Bruckner's habit of building up to a climax, only to have the climax disappear before it's realized! So the build-up was for nothing - some listeners don't like this aspect of Bruckner's symphonic writing. But these unrealized climaxes are part of a larger structure wherein the actual climaxes have all the more fulfillment and power because of the temporary frustration of the earlier, unrealized climaxes.Kind of sounds like I'm talking about sex, doesn't it? ;-)
When I'm playing a recording of just about any Bruckner symphony, my wife (who doesn't like Bruckner's "blaring brass" in his symphonies - although she loves his choral music) will be in another room, and at certain points in the music, she'll comment, "Uh-oh - there goes Bruckner gearing up!" ;-)
Edits: 04/13/16
But the Sixth, although not nearly as often recorded, can itself be a good intro too. The Sixth is also a rare instance in the Bruckner canon of a symphony with few if any textual problems. (And if you're going to be a good Brucknerian, you have to embrace the differing versions of almost all of his other symponies!) The very opening theme of the Sixth is a rare instance of the use of a mode (Phrygian - minor scale with a flat second step) in Bruckner's symphonic themes. For some crazy reason, it always reminds me of the movie theme, "Born Free" - although it bears only a very distant, trivial relationship to that movie theme. ;-)
I like all the Bruckner symphonies, with the possible exception of the Third. The really towering achievements IMHO are probably the Fifth, Eighth and Ninth.
My new surround recording of the 6th is coming out on a Gramola SACD in early spring. Recorded in public concert in the Basilika Church of St Florian, Austria, in August 2016. It is very special IMO...but of course I'm prejudiced....
(this release follows by earlier 8th and 9th, from 2014 and 2015 Brucknertage Music Festivals, respectively)
John Proffitt
The 9th, conducted by Bruno Walter. It's a great performance.
Allow me to take a moment or two of your time with an illustration, which I hope proves helpful.
Back in the summer of 2002 I wandered into a Tower Records store and happened upon one of their irresistable sale tables. They were blowing out Blue Note CD's for some absurdly low price.
Well, I thought I knew something about jazz. It'd been one of the types of music that my musician father made sure that I'd be brought up on, along with classical music, real folk music from around the world, Broadway music, and so on - almost everything except garbage [e.g., rock and roll].
But, I didn't get to hear a lot of it. There were just a couple of albums in the house.
Later in life, I of course listened to a bit more of it, but not with any depth of interest or dedication.
Then, I bought 2 Blue Note CD's at Tower - and just like that - I plunged in. Jazz took over my life. Whereas I'd watched all of Ken Burns documentary "Jazz" religiously when it first aired in 2001, seeing it after my Jazz immersion demonstrated with force just how much I'd missed when watching it the first time, since I really didn't know that much of, and about, the music. [That's not to say that I'm any sort of expert today - indeed, I now know just how little I know].
The point is that, if you're musically inclined - when you're ready for a certain manifistation of music, it'll come to you - just like that. Suddenly, out of the blue it'll make sense to you - and possibly take over your life [at least for a time].
You should listen to Bruckner just as you would any other composer. Sit back, listen, and don't force it. It'll either happen to and for you - or it won't. The only qualification to that is a rule I have. Listen to a piece of music 3 times - preferably on 3 different days, before passing judgement on it.
I'd recommend that you do that with the Sixth before attending the concert. That way, you'll know the music and appreciate it infinitely more than if you were to go to hear it cold.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
Took me 50 years. The music is big, powerful but can also be quite beautiful. I like 4, 7, 8 and 9 so far. I srarted out by just listening to the adagio movements. It is all right to do that
Alan
The 9th has some bad-ass chord progressions for brass at the end of the 1st mov't.
Turn out the lights, pour a glass of wine and listen to just the 3rd mov't of the 8th. Only Wand gets the harps right. My preference is his Lubeck live but his earlier recording on DHM is pretty close.
I mean, I've got that Wand recording, and I have no idea what you mean.
upon your system.)
They're absurdly spot-lit! But on my cheap college system, it was easy to imagine a winged Liberace descending from the Heavens. I loved it and unfortunately imprinted on their larger than life presence.
This particular 8th has a special "glow" because it was recorded in the barely domesticated acoustic of the Lubeck cathedral. The strings and those quiet brass chorales are gorgeous but some of the climaxes are congested. That said, it's still my favorite.
knowledge like to joke around a bit.Wand's shaping of the string/harp cadences in the 3rd mov't is exquisite IMHO and uniquely-so, that was my point.
Other conductors tend to treat the moment as if it's not that special. Considering the Wagnerian allusions to the Tristan love scene and Siegfried, and considering that Bruckner--for once-- allowed a little "immorality" to taint his Art ... I humbly believe a little TLC is appropriate!
Edits: 04/12/16
I like that Wand you linked, but wouldn't say the TLC he displays is unique in that spot (Boulez as a comparison for Bruckner?).
Check out Jochum at 5:00.
Edits: 04/13/16
I'm loving his Bartok with NYPO. I don't recall Jochum being as seraphic as Wand, (DGG) but will listen again. Have not heard his EMI. What I like about wand is that you can root of arpeggios.
That was a good combination, as was Boulez/Debussy/NYPO and Boulez/Ravel/NYPO. At least for the chosen few composers he felt were worthy, he could be a very enlightening conductor. And his distinctive approach can be sensed regardless of which orchestra he is leading.
.
nt
So when you said "only Wand gets the harps right", you were just joking around?
Hey - I (and other conductors besides Wand) like TLC too! ;-)
...use of canons. : )
Listen to the way he allows the music to breath. Exquisite.
still beautiful, but a bit too glossed-over for my tastes.
Can only have been played correctly by certain approved recordings, because arpeggios are so hard to play correctly.
Of course, they should be played without a hint of vibrato.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
In a post in the near future.
Severius! Supremus Invictus
Symphony. Neilsen felt the same way. (My apologies to fellow music lovers who have used their superior, rarified listening skills to discover--and/or already know-- that no other Bruckner symphony uses harps.)You shall "release?" Stop the presses!!!!!!!
Edits: 04/12/16
So - you got that from some liner notes. That's what I've always suspected about you. Most of your music "knowledge" comes from liner notes, rather than actual research - or an actual music education.
Did your liner notes tell you about how Bruckner arrived at scoring harps in the adagio of the 8th, or what he himself said about it?
Severius! Supremus Invictus
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but such putative knowledge is not "revelation."It comes across as condescending.
Edits: 04/12/16
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: