# Why aint' Bruckner bigger than he is?



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

I find his music immediately accessible.

So what's wrong with all those other people?


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2014)

They don't want to work for the "high art" bro


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

I think he's pretty big. 
I love him myself.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Short attention spans?


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

How short exactly? Is "immediate" too long for them?


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Darn it, I nearly killed my own joke!


----------



## Oskaar (Mar 17, 2011)

Itullian said:


> I think he's pretty big.
> I love him myself.


Yes, isnt he quite big? Mahler - Beethoven - Bruckner.. Not a day withoutthem well represented in here.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

oskaar said:


> Yes, isnt he quite big? Mahler - Beethoven - Bruckner.. Not a day withoutthem well represented in here.


Not if you listen to the radio. Which is kind of representative...


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

we-e-ll i-i-i-i a-als-o-o l-l-l-l-i-i-k-e br-u-ck-n-n-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-r.....


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

I believe his music is plain on the outside. It's well thought out but that's not its most noticeable quality. If Mahler is a computer programmer, Tchaikovsky is a skilled pottery maker, Dvorak is a shrewd trader, Bruckner is only a priest. His qualities are esoteric and elusive - but his greatest strength is faith, and holding onto that faith. Priests are not popular people - they are not the ones whose posters go on city walls. Bruckner's music describes the lull, not the war - it is about waiting and pondering, paying close attention and not making a strong impression.


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2014)

Not to go all serious on you or anything, but time is a matter of perception as much as anything else. And no matter that we can make clocks that all divide the day into the same number of hours and the all go pretty much the same speed. We don't perceive time that way. We perceive it differently depending on whether we're doing something we enjoy or something we don't. Time seems to drag in waiting rooms of doctors, for instance. And whip right by when we're partying with friends.

A 20 or 30 minute symphony by Howard Hanson seems to me to be interminable. A 60+ symphony by Bruckner seems to be over, well, almost immediately, to borrow a word from Serge.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Serge said:


> Not if you listen to the radio. Which is kind of representative...


Probably length?
My station doesn't program full Mahler symphonies either, until late evening.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Oh, please! I am always blown away by Bruckner!


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Itullian said:


> Probably length?
> My station doesn't program full Mahler symphonies either, until late evening.


That could be, but still, not an excuse. They could play just a movement if they wanted.


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2014)

Itullian said:


> Probably length?


Hahaha, hilarious, especially following the post it follows.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

shangoyal said:


> I believe his music is plain on the outside. It's well thought out but that's not its most noticeable quality. If Mahler is a computer programmer, Tchaikovsky is a skilled pottery maker, Dvorak is a shrewd trader, Bruckner is only a priest. His qualities are esoteric and elusive - but his greatest strength is faith, and holding onto that faith. Priests are not popular people - they are not the ones whose posters go on city walls. Bruckner's music describes the lull, not the war - it is about waiting and pondering, paying close attention and not making a strong impression.


It's subtle in its own way too. Not really the BIG tunes.


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

Itullian said:


> It's subtle in its own way too. Not really the BIG tunes.


The reason could be anything - but I believe Bruckner just made good music - and not experiment too much. I could be wrong though. Call the experts!


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Serge said:


> That could be, but still, not an excuse. They could play just a movement if they wanted.


Even those can be long. Above, you mentioned radio as being representative, and I think that's wrong. From what I've heard, radio likes short pieces (under 10 minutes), and skews towards pleasant sounding. Thus, all that sewing machine baroque. Heavy, deep romantic stuff is under-represented.


----------



## FleshRobot (Jan 27, 2014)

shangoyal said:


> I believe his music is plain on the outside. It's well thought out but that's not its most noticeable quality. If Mahler is a computer programmer, Tchaikovsky is a skilled pottery maker, Dvorak is a shrewd trader, Bruckner is only a priest. His qualities are esoteric and elusive - but his greatest strength is faith, and holding onto that faith. Priests are not popular people - they are not the ones whose posters go on city walls. Bruckner's music describes the lull, not the war - it is about waiting and pondering, paying close attention and not making a strong impression.


It's funny how is say that priests are not popular anymore. Here in Brazil many of them got famous singing pop songs about faith, jesus, love etc...
Here's an example: 



I can see the similarity with Bruckner right away.



Serge said:


> That could be, but still, not an excuse. They could play just a movement if they wanted.


My local radio station played the second movement of his 6th symphony, so I can't complain about it.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

GreenMamba said:


> Even those can be long. Above, you mentioned radio as being representative, and I think that's wrong. From what I've heard, radio likes short pieces (under 10 minutes), and skews towards pleasant sounding. Thus, all that sewing machine baroque. Heavy, deep romantic stuff is under-represented.


That sounds like a Catch-22. The question is, can anyone hear the sound of the Catch-22?


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

FleshRobot said:


> It's funny how is say that priests are not popular anymore. Here in Brazil many of them got famous singing pop songs about faith, jesus, love etc...
> Here's an example:
> 
> 
> ...


Extend your horizons with There Will Be Blood as soon as you can!


----------



## FleshRobot (Jan 27, 2014)

Serge said:


> Extend your horizons with There Will Be Blood as soon as you can!


The movie? How? Also, this one, of another priest, have subtitles in english: 



You're all welcome.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

No, the music. It's ground-breaking!


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2014)

Serge said:


> I find his music immediately accessible.
> So what's wrong with all those other people?


Search me, Serge.


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2014)

Serge said:


> Not if you listen to the radio. Which is kind of representative...


Not sure about that, hon. Well, not the radio, but yesterday in my city we had live Bruckner VIII (I couldn't go for work reasons, merde!) and this Sunday they have Bruckner III (also live, but different orchestra). I'm trying to catch the Sunday concert.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Serge said:


> Not if you listen to the radio. Which is kind of representative...


No it is not! Radio has sponsors, if not, it must do required station breaks.... hour and a half long pieces, any era, any style, get little air time because "they do not fit."

Simples.

I don't care for it, but you are right, it is wholly accessible, just as walking into some vast and seriously over-engineered building with far too much unnecessary overkill use of materials is easy to walk into. But over-engineered and heavily overbuilt structures are not my favorite kind of architecture, musical or actual edifices.

So there ya go, once guy's taste -- who can listen to very long works by Messiaen, Morton Feldman, Mahler, without a moments hesitation or thought about the 'time spent,' but who would not care to spend any more moments with Bruckner than I already have (and yeah, I checked out the symphonies pretty thoroughly -- not my cuppa.)


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Serge said:


> No, the music. It's ground-breaking!


That is because it is so heavy with too many building materials, it sinks into the ground, lol.

Okay, leaving the thread now to those who just love the guy's music, there are plenty of 'em, and they're not wrong


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

I'd say he's big already. In addition to his symphonies, his important works are confined to three mass settings, a string quintet, and a few motets. Given such a small output that anyone performs or records, he's made it quite securely into the repertoire.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PetrB said:


> No it is not! Radio has sponsors, if not, it must do required station breaks.... hour and a half long pieces, any era, any style, get little air time because "they do not fit."


There must be an exception for classical stations then. Every one where I lived has routinely played Beethoven's 9th without station breaks. It's over an hour long so by definition it crosses over at least one hour mark. Where I live now, the longer symphonies of Bruckner and Mahler are occasionally played on the public station (KUSC), and always without break.


----------



## HaydnBearstheClock (Jul 6, 2013)

Serge said:


> Extend your horizons with There Will Be Blood as soon as you can!


that's a good movie.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

KenOC said:


> There must be an exception for classical stations then. Every one where I lived has routinely played Beethoven's 9th without station breaks. It's over an hour long so by definition it crosses over at least one hour mark. Where I live now,* the longer symphonies of Bruckner and Mahler are occasionally played on the public station (KUSC), and always without break.*




True, but I've only heard them on the evening show. And there are no breaks because its a publically funded station. no commercials.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

He's big enough.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

shangoyal said:


> I believe his music is plain on the outside. It's well thought out but that's not its most noticeable quality. If Mahler is a computer programmer, Tchaikovsky is a skilled pottery maker, Dvorak is a shrewd trader, Bruckner is only a priest. His qualities are esoteric and elusive - but his greatest strength is faith, and holding onto that faith. Priests are not popular people - they are not the ones whose posters go on city walls. Bruckner's music describes the lull, not the war - it is about waiting and pondering, paying close attention and not making a strong impression.


This is a great post, I love it.

Bruckner's solo piano works are some of the most toe-curlingly awful classical I have ever heard. His masses and symphonies are great though, I love the meditative quality Celibidache brings to them. I expect he would be annoying if he got any bigger though, he wasn't a man to flaunt.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

In the few cases where Bruckner actually wrote programmes to works, the ongoings seem to depict pretty outward, literal scenes (quotes from Wikipedia):

Finale, 8th:"_A cossack ride Finale: At the time our Emperor received the visit of the Czars at Olmütz;[37] thus, strings: the Cossacks; brass: military music; trumpets: fanfares, as the Majesties meet. In closing, all themes ... thus as deutscher Michel arrives home from his journey, everything is already gloriously brilliant. In the Finale there is also the death march and then (brass) transfiguration."

_4th Symphony:"_In the first movement of the "Romantic" Fourth Symphony the intention is to depict the horn that proclaims the day from the town hall! Then life goes on; in the Gesangsperiode [the second subject] the theme is the song of the great tit [a bird] Zizipe. 2nd movement: song, prayer, serenade. 3rd: hunt and in the Trio how a barrel-organ plays during the midday meal in the forest _.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Itullian said:


> It's subtle in its own way too. Not really the BIG tunes.


The 7th, the slow movement of the 6th, the 8th and the 9th all contain big, meandering tunes, for example.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Personally, I think he is, to say the very least, not smaller than he deserves to be. ;-)


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

His music simply takes a bit too long is all. I don't have all day.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hpowders said:


> His music simply takes a bit too long is all. I don't have all day.


"Come, my good man, don't dawdle!"


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> His music simply takes a bit too long is all. I don't have all day.


The Creation is pretty long, no?
Bruckner's not that long.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

hpowders said:


> His music simply takes a bit too long is all. I don't have all day.


Why? In a hurry somewhere?

But what is that whole "listening to music" thing about then?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Why write something for 85 minutes that could easily have been said in 45-50?

My favorite Bruckner is the heavily abridged Nowak version of the Bruckner Third Symphony, especially with Karajan leading the BPO.

This abridgment reduces the 77 minute original (think Tintner) to a more palatable (for me) 57 minutes.

That way I still have time to finish my chores.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

hpowders said:


> Why write something for 85 minutes that could easily have been said in 38?


But it can't. That's the point.


----------



## FleshRobot (Jan 27, 2014)

PetrB said:


> That is because it is so heavy with too many building materials, it sinks into the ground, lol.
> 
> Okay, leaving the thread now to those who just love the guys music, there are plenty of 'em, and they're not wrong


Don't do it PertB!!!! We need at least 10 more pages of debate about this issue!! Oh well, I guess we will see each other on the "What Audiences Want" thread. Also, I belive that in the post you replied Serge was talking about the soundtrack of _There Will Be Blood_, not Bruckner's music.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> But it can't. That's the point.


Okay. 50-55 minutes. Nowak said "it can'!!!


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Most of his symphonies are about an hour long. That's not long at all
for a symphony. It goes by pretty fast to me.
Wand's Buckner 8 comes in at 65 minutes.
That's not to long.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

He must be big. I have 3 complete sets of all his symphonies....before my epiphany to pithany.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

hpowders said:


> 50-55 minutes. Nowak said "it can'!!!


The revised Bruckner Third doesn't say the same things as the original. It's simplified considerably and made incoherent in the process.

Plus, Tintner's is an unusually slow performance. Others have recorded the same version in 65 minutes or so.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Length isn't the issue.
Time flies when you like a work.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> The revised Bruckner Third doesn't say the same things as the original. It's simplified considerably and made incoherent in the process.
> 
> Plus, Tintner's is an unusually slow performance. Others have recorded the same version in 65 minutes or so.


Maybe so, but I'm used to the Nowak version of the Third. If it's good enough for Karajan and Skrowaczewski (thank the Lord I wasn't born with that name!), 2 conductors I greatly respect as Bruckner specialists, especially Mr. S, then it's good enough for me.
I'm not into Bruckner's music sufficiently to attempt to be a purist as I am with Mozart, Bach and Beethoven.
So for me, it will have to be Bruckner "lite".

The only other Bruckner I admire at the moment is Pierre Boulez' performance of the 8th Symphony with the Vienna Philharmonic in the Haas version. This one I could listen to after chores.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

FleshRobot said:


> ..I belive that in the post you replied Serge was talking about the soundtrack of _There Will Be Blood_, not Bruckner's music.


Yes I did, but I was trying to make a joke because somebody went into that "priest" thing which I don't really care about. I was also drunk over my head so I might even addressed the wrong person. Sorry!

I see now that it was *shangoyal* who believes that the music of Bruckner is all about faith. So it is him who perhaps should see that movie. Also The Master.

The "ground-breaking" was also attempt at an inside joke, because the Jonny Greenwood music in the film was so avant-garde, and because the movie is kind of about oil-producing. With oil wells and explosions, you know...

Sorry again for that and for dragging it on.


----------



## Guest (Mar 15, 2014)

I'm not convinced that chores are an appropriate topic for a classical music board.

Yeah, I know it's a joke. (Or a "joke.")

But the priorities seem backwards, eh? Chores are what interfere with listening to Bruckner. At least on a classical music board, eh?


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

I prefer fast moving Symphonies. Bruckner and Mahler take too long to develop.


----------



## FleshRobot (Jan 27, 2014)

Serge said:


> Yes I did, but I was trying to make a joke because somebody went into that "priest" thing which I don't really care about. I was also drunk over my head so I might even addressed the wrong person. Sorry!
> 
> I see now that it was *shangoyal* who believes that the music of Bruckner is all about faith. So it is him who perhaps should see that movie. Also The Master.
> 
> ...


No apology necessary, as a matter of fact, that was myself. I'm sorry for not taking you thread more seriously, but the idea that Bruckner should be more popular sounds weird to me. He is always listed as one of the great symphonists of the 19th century and among one of the most important composers of his time. I don't know whether his music is played in radios and concerts many times or not, so I cannot argue about this. As for my own opinion of his works, the few I've listened didn't impress me, but I might give them another chance soon.


----------



## Avey (Mar 5, 2013)

I didn't see an answer yet, so I'll ask: What did the OP mean by "big"? Are we speaking about sales, performances, THREADS ON A FORUM -- just curious.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

some guy said:


> But the priorities seem backwards, eh? Chores are what interfere with listening to Bruckner.


And if somebody finds listening to Bruckner a chore? I sense a paradox coming on...


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Duplicate post.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

"Bigger" as in having more supporters on the forum I imagine, but I could be wrong. It's happened before.

Bruckner's no different from any other composer discussed on TC. He has his passionate supporters, occasional listeners and fervent detractors.

I am not a supporter because I have no emotional attachment to his music.
I hear the notes but very little else.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

I think he is big enough. He is very popular here in TC and there is no lack of records/performances of his music, specially his symphonies. I personally love his music and he is easily on my top 10 composers, even with an output much smaller than most of them.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Avey said:


> I didn't see an answer yet, so I'll ask: What did the OP mean by "big"? Are we speaking about sales, performances, THREADS ON A FORUM -- just curious.


Public awareness and appreciation perhaps.

I spoke to a woman once who insisted how she loved classical music - Beethoven and Bach and such, but for the life of me I couldn't get through to her explaining who the heck Brahms was... I mean if that is how things are, forget Bruckner, right?


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

julianoq said:


> I think he is big enough. He is very popular here in TC and there is no lack of records/performances of his music, specially his symphonies. I personally love his music and he is easily on my top 10 composers, even with an output much smaller than most of them.


Well, to me he appears to have more of a cult following rather than popular appreciation. That's my point perhaps.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Serge said:


> Public awareness and appreciation perhaps. I spoke to a woman once who insisted how she loved classical music - Beethoven and Bach and such, but for the life of me I couldn't get through to her explaining who the heck Brahms was... I mean if that is how things are, forget Bruckner, right?


Then there are the people who say that they "love classical music." When you ask them what their favorite pieces are, they say, "Well, I couldn't really name any..."


----------



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

I first stating listening to Bruckner in my teens and that was only the 1st and 4th symphonies. I then abandoned him until about 18 months ago with the help of spotify rediscovered him. I'm an atheist but if I did go to heaven (if it existed) I'd like to watch Anton improvise on a big cloud organ with Ignaz Moscheles serving tea at four o'clock.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Serge said:


> I find his music immediately accessible.
> 
> So what's wrong with all those other people?


Because he's repetitive and boring.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

moody said:


> Because he's repetitive and boring.


I feel the same way. Doesn't make me a bad person. I give to charities.


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

moody said:


> Because he's repetitive and boring.


I don't know how you see that, quite honestly. Well, consider this: to me Bruckner is an incredibly visual composer, painting an immensely great - mind-blowing, really - soundscapes. I think that what might be wrong with your vision of him is that rather than seeing the awe-inspiring picture that he creates you only see the individual strokes that he uses to create that picture. Something like that.


----------



## WienerKonzerthaus (Mar 11, 2014)

Well, I suppose this is a matter of questioning your assumption ... or asking what exactly you mean. Why is he not STILL bigger? Not AS big as Mahler or Beethoven? (The answer there: Less an "event" than Mahler --- less suitable for our times in terms of attitude... less Angst, less neurosis, more plainness, less individuality, more prayer... --- and less accessible than LvB.) Case solved? In a way I find it amazing that he is as big as he is... and that's despite absolutely loving Bruckner. ("Mahler is an addiction, Bruckner is a love" as I like to say, when I try to sound smart around people who know more about music than I do.)

Just looking at the Bruckner discography... even just all the complete Symphony Cycles ...means getting a glimpse of just how big he seems to be, after all:


A Survey of Bruckner Cycles


http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-survey-of-bruckner-cycles.html


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

wienerkonzerthaus said:


> well, i suppose this is a matter of questioning your assumption ... Or asking what exactly you mean. Why is he not still bigger? Not as big as mahler or beethoven? (the answer there: Less an "event" than mahler --- less suitable for our times in terms of attitude*... Less angst, less neurosis, more plainness, less individuality, more prayer... --*- and less accessible than lvb.) case solved? In a way i find it amazing that he is as big as he is... And that's despite absolutely loving bruckner. *("mahler is an addiction, bruckner is a love" *as i like to say, when i try to sound smart around people who know more about music than i do.)
> 
> just looking at the bruckner discography... Even just all the complete symphony cycles ...means getting a glimpse of just how big he seems to be, after all:
> 
> ...


love it. ..........................


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I feel the same way. Doesn't make me a bad person. I give to charities.


Nah, not bad. But apparently malnourished as a child.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

You want to go where Bruckner is really big, go to Linz. They have a big Bruckner festival there every September. Doesn't get any bigger than that!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Serge said:


> I don't know how you see that, quite honestly. Well, consider this: to me Bruckner is an incredibly visual composer, painting an immensely great - mind-blowing, really - soundscapes. I think that what might be wrong with your vision of him is that rather than seeing the awe-inspiring picture that he creates you only see the individual strokes that he uses to create that picture. Something like that.


No doubt you are right-I'll go away and look for the bigger picture.-


----------



## Guest (Mar 16, 2014)

"Why aint' Bruckner bigger than he is?"

For the same reason that he is not smaller than he is: popular opinion

He normally comes in the 20-30 category. 

If a quick poll was to be conducted on whether Bruckner is correctly rated, underrated or underrated, the same number of people would be expected to fall into the under and overrated categories, hence no change. 

By "expected", I mean that if repeated polls (assuming all were fair) were taken, the long run average result would be as described.

In such a poll, I would vote for the "correctly rated" category.


----------



## mikey (Nov 26, 2013)

Aside from the fact that your opinion is yours and not shared by everyone, I think it's to do with his looooong stretches of slow development. Boring is generally the term I hear applied to him (While it did take me a while, I have gradually come to like him).
I found this quite funny from a funny email I got about Composers letter home.

Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww - arrrrrre - yoooooouuuu?
> How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you?
> How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you?
> Howwwww - arrrrrre - yoooooouuuu?
> HOW ARE YOU?
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I am fine.
> I AM FINE!!!!!
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww - arrrrrre - yoooooouuuu?
> How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you?
> How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you?
> Howwwww - arrrrrre - yoooooouuuu?
> HOW ARE YOU?
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I am fine.
> I AM FINE!!!!!
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> Howwwww - arrrrrre - yoooooouuuu?
> How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you?
> How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you? How are you?
> Howwwww - arrrrrre - yoooooouuuu?
> HOW ARE YOU?
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I-i-i-i ammmmmm fiiiiiine.
> I am fine.
> I AM FINE!!!!! Fine! Fine! Fine!
> FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE!
> FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE! FINE!
>
> (Double counterpoint)
>
> How I are am you fine.
> I how am are fine you.
>
> love,
>
> Anton


----------



## Serge (Mar 25, 2010)

Haha, that makes sense! 

Correction: Haha, that makes *a lot of* sense!


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I feel the same way. Doesn't make me a bad person. I give to charities.


That comment was repetitive and boring.....


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

mikey said:


> Aside from the fact that your opinion is yours and not shared by everyone, I think it's to do with his looooong stretches of slow development. Boring is generally the term I hear applied to him (While it did take me a while, I have gradually come to like him).
> I found this quite funny from a funny email I got about Composers letter home.
> 
> Howwwww arrrrrre yoooooouuuu?
> ...


 Never mind, I just read your comment again.


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

*Bruckner is very big*

For me, he is my very favorite composer. He is anything but boring and repetitive. He is inspired and unlimited.


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

Serge said:


> That could be, but still, not an excuse. They could play just a movement if they wanted.


Maybe just his style? Most people who don't like him think the music is just boring. I love Bruckner, but when I first listened to him, I thought he was kind of dull, but the more I listened, the sooner I changed my opinion for the better

Real answer: It's just personal opinion. While Bruckner fans can't see why anyone wouldn't like him, non-Brucknarians can't see why people do like him. Another example, I love Mahler and don't understand why people wouldn't like him, but at the same time, I don't really like Mozart nor Haydn, and their fans probably can't see why people like me wouldn't like them.

It's all just clashing personal tastes


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

In fact I do that with Bruckner; play isolated movements, like the first movement of Bruckner's 7th and 8th, 4th movement of Bruckner's 3rd, adagios of Bruckner's 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th; 4th movement of Bruckner's 6th.

It's not like Bruckner is outlawed in my house!!


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> I'd say he's big already. In addition to his symphonies, his important works are confined to three mass settings, a string quintet, and a few motets. Given such a small output that anyone performs or records, he's made it quite securely into the repertoire.


I quite agree. I would like to see American orchestras perform Bruckner more often, but yes, Bruckner is big.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

shangoyal said:


> I believe his music is plain on the outside. It's well thought out but that's not its most noticeable quality. If Mahler is a computer programmer, Tchaikovsky is a skilled pottery maker, Dvorak is a shrewd trader, Bruckner is only a priest. His qualities are esoteric and elusive - but his greatest strength is faith, and holding onto that faith. Priests are not popular people - they are not the ones whose posters go on city walls. Bruckner's music describes the lull, not the war - it is about waiting and pondering, paying close attention and not making a strong impression.


I think *shangoyal* is on the right track here.* Bruckner *was of the *Wagnerian* camp (not *Brahms*) and his music is harmonically complex and leads into chromaticism.* Bruckner,* as a man, was much less egotistical than *Wagner,* hence the priest comparison.

I like the length, dramatic gesture, and expanse of his music; like great edifices, icons, monuments to the peak of Western classical music. Perhaps it's because we have Wagner and Mahler that Bruckner is overlooked.

Bruckner, with Celibidache at the helm, is truly a zen-like transporter trip. I like watching slow-motion football clips while listening to him.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Bruckner over-looked? Since when? Tell it to the masses that show up in Linz every September.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

When you see Bruckner performed live by an elite orchestra
it's an awesome experience.
I sat in row 10 orchestra when the Concertgebouw came to town years ago for the 8th.
Wow


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

hpowders said:


> Bruckner over-looked? Since when? Tell it to the masses that show up in Linz every September.


Where's Linz? 
Is that near Jersey?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Itullian said:


> Where's Linz?
> Is that near Jersey?


Nah. The beer and the hats aren't nearly as nice as in Linz.
But Jersey has better landfills.
Pros and cons.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Not only was *Bruckner* humble and priest-like, he had low self-esteem. Unlike *Wagner,* with his flamboyant lifestyle and magnetic personality, or* Mahler,* with his serpent-like, Luciferian wariness of Men and driven by relentless ambition to belong and succeed, Bruckner was sort of a naïve loser.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

millionrainbows said:


> Not only was *Bruckner* humble and priest-like, he had low self-esteem. Unlike *Wagner,* with his flamboyant lifestyle and magnetic personality, or* Mahler,* with his serpent-like, Luciferian wariness of Men and driven by relentless ambition to belong and succeed, Bruckner was sort of a naïve* loser*.


Loser?


----------



## Alydon (May 16, 2012)

They don't come bigger than Bruckner - I first of all found him the titan of symphonic form and then the subtlest of composers, one who could draw you into his sound-world like a magician. Of course, we know Bruckner didn't write any catchy tunes or was ever going to be a show -stopper, only to whose dedicated to searching for the ultimate beauty would realise this composer's gifts. It might be hard work and sometimes a collection of many recordings and hours of listening, but with symphonies and choral work alike Bruckner burnt his image on the creative field like few others, before or since.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Alydon said:


> They don't come bigger than Bruckner - I first of all found him the titan of symphonic form and then the subtlest of composers, one who could draw you into his sound-world like a magician. Of course, we know Bruckner didn't write any catchy tunes or was ever going to be a show -stopper, only to whose dedicated to searching for the ultimate beauty would realise this composer's gifts. It might be hard work and sometimes a collection of many recordings and hours of listening, but with symphonies and choral work alike Bruckner burnt his image on the creative field like few others, before or since.


Great post ...................


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Itullian said:


> Loser?


Yes, a loser on the playing field, because to 'make it' as a big-time composer, one has to relentlessly promote oneself. Isn't that the way the game is played? Philip Glass didn't get where he is without promoting himself. For all his grandiose music, as a personality, Bruckner was in his own little world. He modeled himself after Wagner, and one of his teachers had to expose him to that, as he was stuck in the past of Bach & Beethoven, and was unaware of current trends in music of his own era. Somebody needed to pour a bucket of cold water on him, and wake him up.

Yes, the guy was talented, and yes, he wrote some great music, but it takes more than talent, doesn't it?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

millionrainbows said:


> Yes, the guy [Bruckneer] was talented, and yes, he wrote some great music, but it takes more than talent, doesn't it?


As a famous man once said, "There should be a single Art Exchange in the world, to which the artist would simply send his works and be given in return as much as he needs. As it is, one has to be half a merchant on top of everything else, and how badly one goes about it." -- Beethoven


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

KenOC said:


> As a famous man once said, "There should be a single Art Exchange in the world, to which the artist would simply send his works and be given in return as much as he needs. As it is, one has to be half a merchant on top of everything else, and how badly one goes about it." -- Beethoven


Yeah, Beethoven knew all about it, didn't he? I wonder if history should, or will eventually be that 'art exchange'? If so, it seems an imperfect system, if it is working that way at all, because there is still a certain 'spin' which endures in people's attitudes. Brands become established, and before long, Coca-Cola becomes a "coke," and Band-aid brand becomes 'band-aids.' The Fifth Symphony becomes an archetype, and Wagner's music is used in cartoons, to be whistled by schoolchildren, like Webern's melodies were once supposed to be.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

joen_cph said:


> In the few cases where Bruckner actually wrote programmes to works, the ongoings seem to depict pretty outward, literal scenes (quotes from Wikipedia):
> 
> Finale, 8th:"_A cossack ride Finale: At the time our Emperor received the visit of the Czars at Olmütz;[37] thus, strings: the Cossacks; brass: military music; trumpets: fanfares, as the Majesties meet. In closing, all themes ... thus as deutscher Michel arrives home from his journey, everything is already gloriously brilliant. In the Finale there is also the death march and then (brass) transfiguration."
> 
> _4th Symphony:"_In the first movement of the "Romantic" Fourth Symphony the intention is to depict the horn that proclaims the day from the town hall! Then life goes on; in the Gesangsperiode [the second subject] the theme is the song of the great tit [a bird] Zizipe. 2nd movement: song, prayer, serenade. 3rd: hunt and in the Trio how a barrel-organ plays during the midday meal in the forest _.


The last person you want to ask about the meaning of a work of art is the artist. It could ruin the whole thing for you forever.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hpowders said:


> He must be big. I have 3 complete sets of all his symphonies....before my epiphany to pithany.


That'th lotth of lithening.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Serge said:


> Not if you listen to the radio. Which is kind of representative...


Radio is not in any way representative when it comes to works much over 20 minutes in length!

They have to make station identifications every hour, and if more commercial than less, the advertisers are going to kibosh any programming which does not allow more frequent insertions of advertising spots. If it is commercial enough, it is about the same ratio as American commercial television: I hour programming had 40 minutes and a little plus of actual program, _the remainder is advertising_ -- i.e. every hour, near 1/3rd the time is devoted to adverts!

There is not room for the over one hour-long one movement Piano and String quartet of Morton Feldman, let alone even longer for an entire Bruckner (or Mahler) symphony, opera, etc.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

PetrB said:


> Radio is not in any way representative when it comes to works much over 20 minutes in length!
> 
> They have to make station identifications every hour, and if more commercial than less... There is not room for the over one hour-long one movement Piano and String quartet of Morton Feldman, let alone even longer for an entire Bruckner (or Mahler) symphony, opera, etc.


The station here regularly plays works of more than an hour in duration (not terribly often, but regularly). I suspect that exceptions are written into the one-hour rule. As for Feldman, there may be other reasons that his longer works are seldom programmed. :tiphat:


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> That'th lotth of lithening.


There was a time when I collected sets of Bruckner Symphonies.

I'm a smidgeon older and a lot wiser now.

I prefer the pithier music of Haydn or Webern's Variations for piano, for example.

I'm a 21st century listener. I don't have a 19th century attention span.


----------



## shangoyal (Sep 22, 2013)

hpowders said:


> There was a time when I collected sets of Bruckner Symphonies.
> 
> I'm a smidgeon older and a lot wiser now.
> 
> ...


Or a Baroque listener - I think the longest single movement written in the Baroque era was the 10-12 minute Bach chaconne.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

shangoyal said:


> Or a Baroque listener - I think the longest single movement written in the Baroque era was the 10-12 minute Bach chaconne.


The Handel Concerto Grossi are nice, among other baroque works.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Glad to hear commercial radio is still on its pithiness campaign; just the way I like it.

After all, I pride myself in having a 21st century attention span, not a 19th century one, when one could simply sit around all day and listen.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hpowders said:


> There was a time when I collected sets of Bruckner Symphonies.
> 
> I'm a smidgeon older and a lot wiser now.
> 
> ...


Keeping up with the times is admirable.

Now you can work toward the attention span you'll have in the 22nd century.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Keeping up with the times is admirable.
> 
> Now you can work toward the attention span you'll have in the 22nd century.


All I know is by the time you can say Anton Bruckner, the second movement of the Webern Variations for piano is over.
I wish I could be there, but I won't, sadly.
Of course, I will license out the tag "hpowders" through the generations to people who can prove pertinent pithiness, so in the 22nd century I will "still" be posting.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Meanwhile Bruckner has a very big following. All the great conductors have had a go at symphonies 7,8 and 9.

I don't understand "Why isn't he bigger than he is?" He's bigger than a large number of composers.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hpowders said:


> Of course, I will license out the tag "hpowders" through the generations to people who can prove pertinent pithiness, so in the 22nd century I will "still" be posting.


And I look forward to taking the keenest pleasure in your "corpus" of posts! (They will be truly refreshing after listening to Havergal Brian at my funeral).


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

hpowders said:


> Meanwhile Bruckner has a very big following. All the great conductors have had a go at symphonies 7,8 and 9.


Even Boulez has conducted the latter two, which a lot of people found surprising.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> Even Boulez has conducted the latter two, which a lot of people found surprising.


I never heard his 9th (there is a record?) but the record of the 8th with the VPO is quite good.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

julianoq said:


> I never heard his 9th (there is a record?) but the record of the 8th with the VPO is quite good.


There's no commercial recording of his 9th, no, but I've heard a recording of a performance, and it made me wish there was.


----------

