# SS 10.11.18 - Bruckner #00



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

A continuation of the Saturday Symphonies Tradition:

Welcome to another weekend of symphonic listening! 
_*
*_For your listening pleasure this weekend:*

Anton Bruckner** (1824 - 1896)*

Symphony No. 00 in F minor, WAB 99

1. Allegro molto vivace
2. Andante molto
3. Scherzo, Schnell
4. Allegro
---------------------

Post what recording you are going to listen to giving details of Orchestra / Conductor / Chorus / Soloists etc - Enjoy!


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

Apparently I missed posting again last week when I was sure I did . 
Thanks to cougarjuno for stepping in during my absence.

Well, I won't miss this week! This weekend it's Anton Bruckner's Study Symphony in F minor also often referred to as #00. While not as grand as his mature symphonies I still enjoy this one. I hope others can give it a listen this weekend.

I'll be listening to this one on CD but I'll post a YouTube link as well as there are only a couple of recordings of this one:




Stanislaw Skrowaczewski/Saarbrucken Radio Symphony Orchestra


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

realdealblues said:


> Apparently I missed posting again last week when I was sure I did .
> Thanks to cougarjuno for stepping in during my absence.
> 
> Well, I won't miss this week! This weekend it's Anton Bruckner's Study Symphony in F minor also often referred to as #00. While not as grand as his mature symphonies I still enjoy this one. I hope others can give it a listen this weekend.
> ...


Same on for me. I like 00 and this is a decent account.


----------



## Templeton (Dec 20, 2014)

Good one. I haven't listened to this in a while and will be going with this version. Can't go wrong with Bruckner.


----------



## D Smith (Sep 13, 2014)

I just recently listened to the Skrowaczeski so I'll relisten to Young's excellent recording.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I was thinking of a Bruckner session before too long - may as well start in advance. I'll go with Eliahu Inbal's recording, the one out of the three I don't seem to turn to as much (Tintner and Skrowaczewski are heavy competition). As regards the work itself, it's interesting to hear where it all began but there's little of that muscular Brucknerian specific gravity here. Brings to mind Mendelssohn if anything.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

D Smith said:


> I just recently listened to the Skrowaczeski so I'll relisten to Young's excellent recording.


I will join you with this version


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

I'll do the opposite. Listened to Simone Young recently, time to reacquaint with Skrowaczewski!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Don't think I've ever listened to this. I'll go with Tintner.


----------



## Alfacharger (Dec 6, 2013)

Templeton said:


> Good one. I haven't listened to this in a while and will be going with this version. Can't go wrong with Bruckner.
> 
> View attachment 109740


I'll go with Tintner too!


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

This one for me too.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

A question: In the last few cycles, I’ve taken to posting “mini reviews” of the Saturday Symphonies. Most symphonies I’ve not been familiar with and have been very interested to hear, and wanted to share my impressions.

But most people don’t do this. Is it a welcome thing? Or is it just pretentious and unwelcome? Please let me know!


----------



## Mika (Jul 24, 2009)

I will go with Simone also.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

KenOC said:


> A question: In the last few cycles, I've taken to posting "mini reviews" of the Saturday Symphonies. Most symphonies I've not been familiar with and have been very interested to hear, and wanted to share my impressions.
> 
> But most people don't do this. Is it a welcome thing? Or is it just pretentious and unwelcome? Please let me know!


I say share the mini reviews. Personally I can't think of anything more dull and pointless than a thread full of nothing but comments stating what version a person is listening to. Some thoughts and discussion is preferable in my opinion.

I just listened to the symphony for the first time, (the Scrowaczewski shown in post 2) it was better than I thought. I think the designation '00' made me disregard the symphony as likely something insubstantial and unimportant. I wonder how many others generally ignore this symphony for the same reason. Perhaps Bruckner should have called it something else...


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Ken, I reckon if you actually were being pretentious and unwelcome, somebody would have told you by now, in no uncertain terms!

Oh, wait, we're not in Amazon anymore!!!:tiphat:


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Please be pretentious, for a change, Ken. Or be argumentative or enthusiastic or anything....... Just don't ever be dull (I doubt that's possible for you) . However, don't mention Wagner and Hitler again in the same sentence. Crap, I just did.


----------



## Jeff W (Jan 20, 2014)

D Smith said:


> I just recently listened to the Skrowaczeski so I'll relisten to Young's excellent recording.


I'm going to try to get back into the swing of thing so I'll go with this one as well.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

tdc said:


> . Perhaps Bruckner should have called it something else...


Well, technically, he did call it Symphony No. 1, then he withdrew the number. Personally, I think Double-Aught is a pretty compelling title, at least as far as drawing my curiousity. (I remember before I got into Bruckner wondering how he ended up with a 0 and 00 in his output).

Anyway, I'm listening to Simone Young; I think her recording has the best sound.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I listened to Tintner’s performance twice.

A bit of background: “Anton Bruckner's Symphony in F minor, WAB 99, was written in 1863, at the end of his study period in form and orchestration by Otto Kitzler.” It was not performed in his lifetime but received a premiere performance in 1924. It was published only in 1973 in an edition by Leopold Nowak.

Kitzler called the work "not particularly inspired" which seems a fair judgment. But standards for works of that period are very high indeed. I’d place it about on a level with Dvorak’s earlier symphonies, perhaps not as melodic but also “tighter” in formal design and less diffuse.

There’s not a lot of “Bruckner” to be heard here, though it doesn’t really sound very derivative of other composers either. But Bruckner’s voice can be clearly heard in the somewhat rub-a-dub scherzo. That’s the standout movement. 

The first movement is interesting enough to hold the attention of the listener alert for the usual road markers of the sonata form. The second (slow) movement is pleasant but unmemorable, though it improved for me on the second listen. The finale is probably the least effective movement. The orchestration sounds good and there are no obvious signs of amateurishness. This seems the work of somebody both talented and proficient, if “not particularly inspired,” as Kitzler has it.

Overall, I enjoyed this but am unlikely to reach for it again soon. Most of the Bruckner cycles I have don’t include it, which must mean something…


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

KenOC said:


> A question: In the last few cycles, I've taken to posting "mini reviews" of the Saturday Symphonies. Most symphonies I've not been familiar with and have been very interested to hear, and wanted to share my impressions.
> 
> But most people don't do this. Is it a welcome thing? Or is it just pretentious and unwelcome? Please let me know!


Impressions, discussions have always been welcome. I use to write some years ago before I took over the SS duty. I was considering doing it again more recently but I barely have enough time to get online and make the post itself these days


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Interesting that you should say that, Ken, but I ended up listening to the "pre-Bruckner" Symphonies in chronological order, this one, 1, 0, 2, Inbal's recordings btw. I found the progression quite surprising, in that there was very little stylistic chasm between this and No.1. Sure, it's not a towering masterpiece, but it's more Brucknerian than people - myself included - give it credit. I'd say especially in the opening movement as much as the Scherzo.

Yeah, it's not included in a lot of older cycles, but in recent years, with the interest/obsession with completeness we now have, it is becoming more commonplace. Inbal, Tintner, Skrowaczewski, Young And Schaller all included it, and in addition there are quite a few earlier cycles which put Die Nullte in without apology. Perhaps, as with Dvořák in the 1950s, it's time for a Bruckner renumbering exercise??? 

That suggestion will go down like the proverbial tonne of bricks........ especially as for me the "real" Bruckner starts with No.3!!!!! And no mention of versions and editions.......


----------



## AClockworkOrange (May 24, 2012)

realdealblues said:


> Apparently I missed posting again last week when I was sure I did .
> Thanks to cougarjuno for stepping in during my absence.
> 
> Well, I won't miss this week! This weekend it's Anton Bruckner's Study Symphony in F minor also often referred to as #00. While not as grand as his mature symphonies I still enjoy this one. I hope others can give it a listen this weekend.
> ...


I'm late to the party but I'll also go with this recording too. I've had this version for a while but I have not listened to it yet. Time to remedy it.

The mature Symphonies get the most praise but I've always enjoyed the first three too. I haven't heard this work as frequently but I do remember enjoying it. Time to don the headphones and listen.


----------



## cougarjuno (Jul 1, 2012)

I'll listen to the Skrowaczewski version on You Tube


----------

