# Beethoven's Symphonies



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I believe these are the greatest run of Symphonies by any composer. All of them are unique and meaningful in their own way. Some may be weaker than others, and other composers may have symphonies that are greater than a single one of Beethoven's, but as a complete set, I believe Beethoven takes the cake as the most consistent in terms of quality. Mahler is a very close second! 

What do you all think?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Agreed. And you hit the nail on the head in terms of uniqueness. Aside perhaps from the first two symphonies, the rest are each revolutionary on their own terms. Certainly they all still sound like Beethoven, but they each have a unique character and sound world all their own. Surely that is one the signs of a great artist, the ability to create something entirely fresh and distinct from what he has done before. I would agree that Mahler is second, though not that close a second, followed by Brahms.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Agreed. And you hit the nail on the head in terms of uniqueness. Aside perhaps from the first two symphonies, the rest are each revolutionary on their own terms. Certainly they all still sound like Beethoven, but they each have a unique character and sound world all their own. Surely that is one the signs of a great artist, the ability to create something entirely fresh and distinct from what he has done before. I would agree that Mahler is second, though not that close a second, followed by Brahms.


I'll listen to more Brahms then!


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Yes, the mighty nine are unique - even the more "classical" first two are quite different from what came before from Haydn and Mozart. The Beethoven symphonies are worthy of their status - warts and all. In the 19th c there were whole orchestras set up for the sole purpose of performing them, and many a composer after him struggled to match his work - no one succeeded. In terms of consistency and quality goes, I do not think Mahler is a close 2nd, or even 3rd. Mahler's idea of a symphony was not Beethoven's. Mahler tried to send messages, Beethoven was pure music driven by his own inner logic and musical development. The Beethoven line of composition fell into the Dahlhaus period of 50 years where there was little (almost nothing) written to compare. It wasn't until Brahms wrote his first that the Beethoven line was re-established. Bruckner was also an acolyte. I believe that Franz Schmidt was the final stamp on the Beethoven meaning of a symphony. 

As a listener, the Beethoven 9 are tremendous, although some are not as immediately appealing - 2, 4, 8. But every time I play one of them as an orchestra member I still marvel at the ingenuity and brilliance of the man. How could one human brain conceive of such incredible music? This year I've played 5, 7, and 9 - miracles all!


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

mbhaub said:


> Yes, the mighty nine are unique - even the more "classical" first two are quite different from what came before from Haydn and Mozart. The Beethoven symphonies are worthy of their status - warts and all. In the 19th c there were whole orchestras set up for the sole purpose of performing them, and many a composer after him struggled to match his work - no one succeeded. In terms of consistency and quality goes, I do not think Mahler is a close 2nd, or even 3rd. Mahler's idea of a symphony was not Beethoven's. Mahler tried to send messages, Beethoven was pure music driven by his own inner logic and musical development. The Beethoven line of composition fell into the Dahlhaus period of 50 years where there was little (almost nothing) written to compare. It wasn't until Brahms wrote his first that the Beethoven line was re-established. Bruckner was also an acolyte. I believe that Franz Schmidt was the final stamp on the Beethoven meaning of a symphony.
> 
> As a listener, the Beethoven 9 are tremendous, although some are not as immediately appealing - 2, 4, 8. But every time I play one of them as an orchestra member I still marvel at the ingenuity and brilliance of the man. How could one human brain conceive of such incredible music? This year I've played 5, 7, and 9 - miracles all!


I don't think to be as great as Beethoven you have to follow in his footsteps, in fact I would think it's the opposite. I at least love Mahler's symphonies and think they are all fantastic!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Well, and then you get to the piano sonatas & string quartets of which the same can be said, not to mention the concertos and other chamber works.

This is why I rate Beethoven as the greatest composer of all, even above Bach and Mozart. There was an individual, inspired uniqueness to his creations to which no other composer can compare.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Don't get me wrong, I agree about Mahler. I've loved his 11 symphonies for 50 years. I've collected far more Mahler than Beethoven. I like the drama, the story-telling, the "program" if you will behind Mahler's work. Mahler was a great composer - despite what Aaron Copland wrote. His music is loved and valued everywhere, but that doesn't blind me to his weaknesses. If it came to quality of composition over the span of a lifetime of writing symphonies, and not writing any duds, Beethoven, Mahler, Brahms, and few others got there. Maybe Sibelius.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Well, and then you get to the piano sonatas & string quartets of which the same can be said, not to mention the concertos and other chamber works.
> 
> This is why I rate Beethoven as the greatest composer of all, even above Bach and Mozart. There was an individual, inspired uniqueness to his creations to which no other composer can compare.


I could possibly agree with the piano sonatas, but his early SQs are not as grand as his middle and late ones imo.


----------



## Room2201974 (Jan 23, 2018)

The first 8 measures of the 1st announced his presence and in a way, foretold what was going to happen in the rest of the symphonies. "Yo, Amadeus! Yo, Joseph! You want expanded tonal regions? I'll give you expanded tonal regions."

Fans of the 3rd should treat themselves to Opus 35 if they haven't already.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I'm happy there is a lot of agreement with my sentiments, his symphonies are grand!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Double post deleted..........


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Disagreed. There are some very good* ones, some average* ones, and some below average*. 

Overall, I prefer the symphony cycles by Mahler, Sibelius, Brahms, Shostakovich, Bruckner, Bax, Vaughan Williams and Dvorak over Beethoven, and except for Dvorak, it's not even close.

* as always, these qualifications are purely subjective.

EDITED PS: the prize for most consistent in quality would got to Sibelius or Brahms for me.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

"Below average" Beethoven symphonies. Now _there's _a concept to be reckoned with! :lol:


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Interesting that the idea of a great symphonist has to include the principle of "no duds", although admittedly it is a concept I do agree with. Unfortunately it means Mozart needs canning, serves him right for composing juvenilia. And for 20% of his symphonies, Shostakovich. Likewise Dvorak for his weaker first two, Bruckner for his earlier works and 0 and 00, it becomes tough to find a survivor! Schubert anyone? Or are those earlier works just that bit too bland?

And while I cannot think of a towering towering Himalayan example of an individual Haydn symphony, which of the hundred and whatever are duds?

For me, yes, Beethoven, then Mahler, then tied Brahms and Schumann (am I seriously the first to mention him here on this thread??). And in the 20th Century-ish, Sibelius, Nielsen, Martinu, and despite the fact I just don't like the Sea Symphony, Vaughan Williams.

Don't forget Beethoven also completed a tenth symphony - Wellington's Victory! Just think, Napoleon gets the Eroica, Wellington this. Thanks....? And disqualification for Ludwig!!!


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

KenOC said:


> "Below average" Beethoven symphonies. Now _there's _a concept to be reckoned with! :lol:


Perhaps, as with many great composers, their greatest achievements naturally only highlight the weaknesses of their lesser works.

For me, his 5th and 6th symphonies do this.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I believe these are the greatest run of Symphonies by any composer. All of them are unique and meaningful in their own way. Some may be weaker than others, and other composers may have symphonies that are greater than a single one of Beethoven's, but as a complete set, I believe Beethoven takes the cake as the most consistent in terms of quality. Mahler is a very close second!
> 
> What do you all think?


I would put Sibelius on a par with Beethoven even though I'm not keen on the earlier Symphonies.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

I dislike these comparisons because it seems to me like comparing different fruits and trying to find out which one tastes best. But if I should rate the symphonists by greatness (based purely subjectively of how great their music feels to me), I would, at this moment, rate them 
Mahler > Beethoven > Sibelius > Schubert > Shostakovich > Schumann > Brahms > Prokofiev > Tchaikovski > Dvořák
I cannot rate Mozart or Haydn because I have not heard all their symphonies. I was also very impressed with Franz Schmidt but have not listened enough to make a definitive rating.


----------



## Guest (Mar 10, 2018)

Listening to this today; absolutely marvellous!!


----------



## Boston Charlie (Dec 6, 2017)

As far as symphonies go, Beethoven dominates. The New York Yankees, New England Patriots, Muhammad Ali, Bobby Fischer...none can compare with Beethoven's immortal nine and as someone here mentioned, not a dud in the whole bunch. 

My favorite is the 6th because it reveals a gentler side of LvB. In much of Beethoven's music a sense of struggle is prominent, as if the composer is fighting a secret war with himself. Except for the brief thunderstorm, the 6th is simply calm, beautiful, and as the critics would say, "sublime". Once when my youngest son was about 8 years old I was playing Beethoven's 6th in the car, and during the first movement, my son said, "It sounds like birds waking up in the morning."

What could be more beautiful than that?

I have many Beethoven box sets (probably TOO many): one by Karajan, Szell, Toscanini, Hogwood, Yehudi Menuhin and two by Bernstein; plus assorted singles by Walter (6, 7, 8) Ormandy (9), Barenboim (9), Furtwangler (1,3, 9), Bohm (6, 7, 8) and Ozawa (3, 9).

While Furtwangler is very good, with a very spontaneous and natural sound; Toscanini's lean and brisk approach is especially nice on the less Titanic and more Classical-sounding 2nd and 8th. Bernstein's earlier set that he made with the NYPO and for Columbia records is full of energy and enthusiasm, and while the later set that Bernstein made with Vienna for DG is less energized, Bernstein gets beautiful sounds from the Vienna Phil. While Karajan and Szell are on-point, I found both to be lacking in passion; and Hogwood's HIP versions I think are too fast. Surprisingly, Yehudi Menuhin and the Warsaw Sinfonia, for a relatively less renowned conductor and orchestra, are very good, very solid and well-balanced. As for the singles, Walter's 6th, is perhaps, the finest of all 6ths, with a slight Viennese lilt; and Ormandy's lyrical approach to his 9th is surprisingly good for a conductor who wasn't known as a leading champion of Beethoven.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I agree with all except with the idea that some are better than others. I think all are perfect examples of what they are or what Beethoven set out to achieve with them. Some perhaps require stronger advocacy from performers than others.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Beethoven’s series never has been equaled in its efficiency in development, drive, and sense of purpose. But I find them difficult for repeated listening, from overfamiliarity, and also because I feel they are more abstract.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

If I had to take a nine (or ten) I would take Mahler over Beethoven. In fact I would take RVW over Beethoven. 

Beethoven's 3,5,6,7,9 - 5 truly great symphonies.

4 and 8 are good but not quite the same level

as for 1 and 2 - I hope I never have to hear either again. I would rather hear Mozart's first two.


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

'Comparisons are odorous'.


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Haydn also had a pretty good run as far as quality and originality.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Beethoven has a tenth symphony? Is it performed? Can I hear it anywhere?


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Richard8655 said:


> Haydn also had a pretty good run as far as quality and originality.


I tend to prefer his piano sonatas.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Beethoven has a tenth symphony? Is it performed? Can I hear it anywhere?


There is no tenth.


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

I would contend that the main reason for Beethoven's elevation to "greatest" symphony cycle is his transformation of the very purpose of music.

Beethoven's music after writing the Heiligenstadt testament in 1802 completely altered the trajectory of music from a source of entertainment (secular) or spiritual fulfillment (sacred) to become first and foremost a vehicle for the self-expression of the composer. Works such as the Eroica Symphony and the Razumovsky Quartets broke free from he convention that form was more important than self-expression. With each successive symphony Beethoven altered the rules of classicism when they interfered with his creative needs. Whether its the developmental vastness of the 3rd, the story arc of the 5th, the number of movements and programatic content of the 6th, or even the blurring of genres in the 9th, Beethoven changed the very function of music to no longer being about pleasing a patron or audience. Its also interesting that Beethoven's revolutionary musical tendencies were mirrored and influenced by Europe's Age of Revolution.

So instead of "greatest" I would say definitely the "most influential" symphony cycle in terms of its impact on the purpose and function of music. I also happen to think it is the "greatest" but that is just my opinion.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Captain - the "Tenth Symphony" I was referring to is the famous-in-its-day piece Wellington's Victory, also known as the Battle Symphony. Shall we politely call it one of Ludwig's weaker works? True, it made him a lot of money, and can be great fun live (I assume!), but even so.....

If you're really interested, try and hear Antal Dorati's recording, with an equally spectacular and OTT 1812 there too. If you like cannons, great. If you value your loudspeakers, perhaps ill-advised.

I reckon the piece is now more famous for the quote from Beethoven in response to acrid criticism: "What I s*** (scheisse) is better than anything you could ever think up!"

Oh, and there's a remarkably dubious reconstruction of a movement from a projected Tenth, personally I don't think much of it. Walter Weller and Wyn Morris recorded it.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I'm beginning to hate the word, "greatest". I'll stick with favorite, since it's all subjective anyway. 1) Brahms, 2) Sibelius


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Haydn67 said:


> I'm beginning to hate the word, "greatest". I'll stick with favorite, since it's all subjective anyway. 1) Brahms, 2) Sibelius


It just makes us feel better about ourselves when we use words like greatest to define our favorites...


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Olias said:


> I would contend that the main reason for Beethoven's elevation to "greatest" symphony cycle is his transformation of the very purpose of music.
> 
> Beethoven's music after writing the Heiligenstadt testament in 1802 completely altered the trajectory of music from a source of entertainment (secular) or spiritual fulfillment (sacred) to become first and foremost a vehicle for the self-expression of the composer. Works such as the Eroica Symphony and the Razumovsky Quartets broke free from he convention that form was more important than self-expression. With each successive symphony Beethoven altered the rules of classicism when they interfered with his creative needs. Whether its the developmental vastness of the 3rd, the story arc of the 5th, the number of movements and programatic content of the 6th, or even the blurring of genres in the 9th, Beethoven changed the very function of music to no longer being about pleasing a patron or audience. Its also interesting that Beethoven's revolutionary musical tendencies were mirrored and influenced by Europe's Age of Revolution.
> 
> So instead of "greatest" I would say definitely the "most influential" symphony cycle in terms of its impact on the purpose and function of music. I also happen to think it is the "greatest" but that is just my opinion.


Oh no, I don't think influence and greatness are even close for works of art (but they may be if applied to artists).I do, of course, agree with all that you say about Beethoven's revolution although I do feel that he was reflecting as much as forming the spirit of his time. But in the end the achievements of works of art are to me about our subjective experience of those works - the pleasure, excitement and other emotions that we experience - and it is in reference to these that I feel confident that we have got it right in thinking that Beethoven's symphonies (and indeed his quartets and piano sonatas and much else) are among the greatest pieces of music composed at any time. I suspect my view may be an old fashioned one?


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

Beethoven 6th symphony will always be my favorite piece of music. I do agree it is a great run of symphonies. The second is not up to the greatness of the others in my view. The homage paid to Beethoven by other great symphonists is testament enough in itself.


----------



## Aurelian (Sep 9, 2011)

Years ago I saw a survey of listeners' favorite Beethoven symphonies. The aggregate results, from least to most, were:

2,1,4,8,6,7,9,3,5


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

All symphonies are unique to the composer who composed them. All have their own individual styles related to them.


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

You know today I was thinking about what to listen to and finally chose a symphony. Any symphony because I think only symphony tells a story like no other genre. well, I do understand that such genres as opera or songs tell their own stories, but it's very immanent to a genre itself. But symphony isn't actually based on a story made of words, yet it tells a story without using words but even better than them. It's perhaps more abstract, but it gives more freedom to imagination.

Well, I chose *5th and 6th symphony of Beethoven* to listen to


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

helenora said:


> Well, I chose *5th and 6th symphony of Beethoven* to listen to


That is a great paring!


----------



## manyene (Feb 7, 2015)

'Greatest' - using what criteria?


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

manyene said:


> 'Greatest' - using what criteria?


Overall quality of the Symphonies as a whole.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Aurelian said:


> Years ago I saw a survey of listeners' favorite Beethoven symphonies. The aggregate results, from least to most, were:
> 
> 2,1,4,8,6,7,9,3,5


Not surprised by any of those except the 9th. You'd expect 9 to be the top choice.

My personal ranking, from most to least:

953768421

I know this isn't a recordings list, but I'll offer my choices anyway.

Good sound:

1 & 2 - Jochum DG
3 - Klemperer stereo
4 & 8 - Karajan '62
5 - Bernstein '76 Amnesty concert
6 - Walter stereo
7 - Bohm
9 - Furtwangler '54 (Audite transfer)

Old sound:

ALL Furtwangler
1 - live '52
2 - '48
3 - '44 (followed closely by 12/8/52)
4 - '43
5 - 5/25/47
6 - 5/23/54 followed closely by 5/25/47
7 & 8 - 4/53
9 - 3/22/54


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I believe these are the greatest run of Symphonies by any composer. All of them are unique and meaningful in their own way. Some may be weaker than others, and other composers may have symphonies that are greater than a single one of Beethoven's, but as a complete set, I believe Beethoven takes the cake as the most consistent in terms of quality. Mahler is a very close second!
> 
> What do you all think?


Beethoven's name shall remain synonymous with the symphony, among both the general public and those who follow "classical" music with a greater interest and/or passion. Yes, those nine are unique. Individual like children. Each with its own personality and style, some looking more closely like another sibling than others, but all cut from the same basic cloth.

And that's one of the features of symphony cycles that I admire.

Sure, I'm a fan of Bruckner, but his family of nine (or eleven) seem more alike than individual at times, and I'll admit I may even get confused by one movement or another, not being able to place it. Is that melody from the Fifth or the Sixth? Or the Eighth?

I remain a great fan of Shostakovich. But even his middle many symphonies seem to share the Brucknerian family resemblance. Yes, that first stands out against all the others. So does the Ninth and the Fifteenth. I might struggle to distinguish a short section of the 13th and 14th -- which is it? And I will struggle with brief passages pulled from, say, the 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 11th, or 12th symphonies. They share the same tonal universe. But that's Shostakovich, and it's not a bad thing.

But I find a special variation from one to the other in the Beethoven Nine that is special. Passages of the 1st, 2nd, and 4th may certainly confuse, but can passages from any of the others be anything but from one specific symphony?

Bax wrote several wonderful symphonies, but after years of listening to them I won't allow to being able to distinguish one number from another with any great definitiveness. Vaughan Williams and Sibelius, mentioned several times on this thread, do seem to have more distinguishable works in their symphony oeuvres, and that, I think, is a plus for them. I have long admired Holmboe's symphonies (15 or so) but not a one sticks in my mind with any proper individualism. I do distinguish the Brahms symphonies well, but alas he composed only four; had he continued I believe we would have a bevy of distinguishable works from him.

There is, of course, more to it than that. Something about Beethoven's music remains so elemental that it strikes a deep human chord in ways that most other composers simply cannot. Why? Who knows. But perhaps that is simply Beethoven's genius. And genius remains inexplicable.

So, I've been pondering this idea of uniqueness from one work to another in bodies of symphonies of around nine or so, and it seems that Beethoven comes on top of the list. Had Mendelssohn written nine we might be able to say the same of him, and to some degree Schubert fits the bill: his Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Ninth, though Schubert, are quite distinguishable from one another. Alas, Schumann wrote too few. But I struggle distinguishing among William Schuman's several symphonies. I frequently listen to Glazunov's symphonies, but I will never stake a claim to telling which is which. Nor with Maxwell-Davies or Malcolm Arnold or Hartmann or ... so many others.

But we do have Mahler. He remains problematical, perhaps because the works are so vast. Each is certainly Mahlerian in sound, but in that vastness is also an individual distinctness, too. Sort of contradictory in a sense. Yet, no other Mahler symphony sounds quite like the First, or the Second, or the Third, or the Fourth ... Yes, they share similar fabric, but they are also individual, sort of like nations of the world share the Earth yet manage to carve out distinct portraits of themselves among the others.

Much to ponder here. No real conclusions in sight.

Yet none of this speculation can change the fact that many of us enjoy Beethoven's symphonies, and the symphonies of others, and will continue to do so. And that is really the important, the meaningful thing.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> 9 - 3/22/54


Mean to say *3/22/42*! Maybe my favorite recording all time of anything


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

I prefer Bruckner's symphonies to every other composer's by a large degree, but I will concede that Beethoven's symphonies are more important, "greater" even


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

SONNET CLV said:


> Beethoven's name shall remain synonymous with the symphony, among both the general public and those who follow "classical" music with a greater interest and/or passion. Yes, those nine are unique. Individual like children. Each with its own personality and style, some looking more closely like another sibling than others, but all cut from the same basic cloth.
> 
> And that's one of the features of symphony cycles that I admire.
> 
> ...


 Part of this is because there's just so much more content (the 8th symphonies is at least three times as long as Beethoven's 8th). Having heard them so many times I dont have this problem. The 3rd is totally unique, as is the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th. Ironically, besides the first two, the 4th is the only Bruckner symphony I dont think is perfect.


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

Aurelian said:


> Years ago I saw a survey of listeners' favorite Beethoven symphonies. The aggregate results, from least to most, were:
> 
> 2,1,4,8,6,7,9,3,5


The 3rd seems to be a bit more niche than 9 or 6. The same for #7. This poll must have been of serious classical fans.


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

Beethoven

1 - 7/10

2 - 7/10

3 - 9/10

4 - 8/10

5 - 8/10

6 - 8/10

7 - 9/10

8 - 9/10

9 - 10/10
Bruckner

1 - 7/10

2 - 8/10

3 - 9/10

4 - 8/10

5 - 9/10

6 - 9/10

7 - 9/10

8 - 10/10

9 - 10/10


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

Judith said:


> All symphonies are unique to the composer who composed them. All have their own individual styles related to them.


But not really. There are many derivative composers, and all composers are more or less derivative, more or less great...


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^^ just for fun, my own ranking would be 
Beethoven 3: 7.5/10; 5, 9: 9.5/10
Bruckner 8: 5/10; 9: 6/10 (for sonics 10/10)
Mozart 41: 9/10
Brahms 1: 8/10; 2: 5/10
Henze 7: 8/10
Shostakovich 10: 9/10
Stravinsky Symphony in 3 movements: 9.5/10
Messiaen Turangilila : 6/10 (for sound 10/10)
Nielsen 4: 7.5/10
Martinu 4: 8.5/10
Vaughan Williams 3: 8.5/10
Mahler 7: 7/10
Gorecki 3: 3/10
Prokofiev 5: 9/10
Berlioz fantastique: 9.5/10

Still looking for the 10/10 for symphonies.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

mathisdermaler said:


> ... the 4th is the only Bruckner symphony I dont think is perfect.


Except for the 7th (which has ranked very high on my list of greatest symphonies by anyone anywhere anytime) which is definitely my favorite of the Bruckner symphonies (of which I remain a fan of all), I cherish the 4th second most importantly. In fact, it is the 7th and 4th that I actually collect recordings of, having dozens of both of these, aside from the several complete Bruckner cycles in my collection. The 4th may well be the Bruckner symphony to which I've listened most; though that honor may well go to the 7th -- both remain frequent friends found spinning round on my turntable or in one of my CD decks. To my ears, the 4th is about as perfect as a symphony gets -- no matter which version of the several available you choose.

But then, I'm a Romantic at heart.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

SONNET CLV said:


> Except for the 7th (which has ranked very high on my list of greatest symphonies by anyone anywhere anytime) which is definitely my favorite of the Bruckner symphonies (of which I remain a fan of all), I cherish the 4th second most importantly. In fact, it is the 7th and 4th that I actually collect recordings of, having dozens of both of these, aside from the several complete Bruckner cycles in my collection. The 4th may well be the Bruckner symphony to which I've listened most; though that honor may well go to the 7th -- both remain frequent friends found spinning round on my turntable or in one of my CD decks. To my ears, the 4th is about as perfect as a symphony gets -- no matter which version of the several available you choose.
> 
> *But then, I'm a Romantic at heart.*


Me too! My favorite era.


----------



## Beet131 (Mar 24, 2018)

I definitely agree that Beethoven had the greatest run of top notch symphonies. Brahms follows as a close second with Mahler and Dvorak close behind. Beethoven's 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and 9th are almost unmatched, but the 4th, 8th and 2nd are really very very good. Brahms condensed so much into just four outstanding symphonies, with his 4th crystallizing his symphonic journey. Mahler was amazing for the universe of sound he created; one could listen to them over and over and not fully realize what he gave us. Dvorak made me a believer with his 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Beethoven's 7th is going to be performed near me in May. I think I'll have to go!


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Beethoven's 7th is going to be performed near me in May. I think I'll have to go!


Don't hesitate. Grab those tickets!


----------

