|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
104.58.212.112
In Reply to: RE: Bruckner is the Donald Trump of this board posted by TGR on April 13, 2016 at 17:42:27
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
Follow Ups:
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
.
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: