# New to Bruckner



## Elliott Carter (Dec 23, 2020)

Hi im a Bruckner virgin. Where should I start?


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Symphony No. 7.

Trust me. If you don't "get" that, you likely won't "get" Bruckner.

I remain an avid Brucknerian with multiple copies of all the symphonies, both singly and in boxed sets. The first Bruckner piece I ever heard was the 7th Symphony, on a DECCA vinyl LP, with Max Rudolf and the Cincinnati Symphony. I fell immediately in love with the music and sought out more. The 4th Symphony was my second introduction to Bruckner, and it is my second favorite Bruckner Symphony, after the Seventh. After that I was totally sold.

Give the man a try. Go with the Seventh Symphony first. Every movement is a gem. (Don't worry if you can't find the Rudolf release. Every Bruckner Seventh I've ever heard was stunning!)


----------



## Guest (Dec 29, 2020)

Elliott Carter said:


> Hi im a Bruckner virgin. Where should I start?


SONNET CLV's suggestion re Bruckner VII is perfectly valid; I propose my own entry into the Brucknerian world via his 4th as a starting point.


----------



## Ekim the Insubordinate (May 24, 2015)

I agree about the 4th as a great starting point. I heard the Wand recording as my very first introduction to Bruckner and was converted. The Georg Tintner are very serviceable recordings of all the symphonies on Naxos - lower priced but still very good.

And if you are daring, go look for Celibidache's recording of the 4th!


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Symphony nos. 3, 4, and 7


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

4th with Karl Bohm and the Vienna Philharmonic


----------



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

4th or 7th - if either or both appeal to you then all else should hopefully fall into place. I started with the 5th which I've since learned wasn't exactly the ideal springboard but thankfully I loved it from the outset and I never looked back. The early symphonies may seem 'not quite there' in comparison to the 4th onwards but none should be ignored, not even the Double Zero.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

No 7 with Karajan - all three worth hearing


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

It was the Sixth and Eighth that got me hooked. Four at the time I thought a bit overblown (silly youngster me), and I struggled to dislodge the Seventh's association with Hitler... 

All better now.


----------



## Guest (Dec 29, 2020)

Ekim the Insubordinate said:


> I agree about the 4th as a great starting point. I heard the Wand recording as my very first introduction to Bruckner and was converted. *The Georg Tintner are very serviceable recordings of all the symphonies on Naxos - lower priced but still very good*.
> 
> *And if you are daring, go look for Celibidache's recording of the 4th*!


Yes, those *Tintner* recordings are fine. As a historical sidenote you probably know that Tintner was a chorister in the Vienna Boys' Choir under *Franz Schalk* (a student of Bruckner).
As to Celibidache's recording of the 4th, I wouldn't say daring but certainly one of the broadest! Composer and musicologist *Robert Simpson* (see _The Essence of Bruckner _[https://www.jstor.org/stable/731341?seq=1]) disparaged the finale of the IVth until he had heard Celi's version.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

Symphony 4 and 7 to start with, I suggest.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Elliott Carter said:


> Hi im a Bruckner virgin. Where should I start?


Sym #4 or 7.....


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

Karajan’s 8th last recording was as for me.


----------



## Elliott Carter (Dec 23, 2020)

Ok cool I think I will try No. 7 first. Thank you all for the suggestions. I would like to watch a performance of it on Medici TV. My choices are Celibidache, Abbado, Tennstedt, Jarvi, and Haitink. Which would you recommend?


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

My favorites of Bruckner are 8 and 9. Generally, I think Bruckner's best symphonies are back loaded while Mahler's are front-loaded (1,2,3,4, and lately I'm starting to think 5, as well).

Bruckner's Eighth is a monster-symphony, but I think it really captures Bruckner's vision better than the others. It's grand, over-the-top, and built on massive arches, like the cathedrals of Europe. The 9th is an anomaly among Bruckner symphonies as it is only three movements. Whether or not it's supposed to be "unfinished" I don't know because I always thought it sounded just fine as is; almost prophetic like Shostakovich's final _Symphony #15_ where it fades out.

For performance you can't go wrong with Karajan, unless you dare try Sergiu Celibidace for a more meditative Zen-like experience,

The advice you're receiving is closing in itself like a black hole recommendations. You might just have to spin the wheel on this one.


----------



## Elliott Carter (Dec 23, 2020)

Alright I have decided I am going to hear Celibidache perform No. 7 with the Berlin Phil. I will let you know what my impression is.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

I would go Karajan on No 7. Celi plays everything slow.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Coach G said:


> My favorites of Bruckner are 8 and 9. Generally, I think Bruckner's best symphonies are back loaded while Mahler's are front-loaded (1,2,3,4, and lately I'm starting to think 5, as well).
> 
> Bruckner's Eighth is a monster-symphony, but I think it really captures Bruckner's vision better than the others. It's grand, over-the-top, and built on massive arches, like the cathedrals of Europe. The 9th is an anomaly among Bruckner symphonies as it is only three movements. Whether or not it's supposed to be "unfinished" I don't know because I always thought it sounded just fine as is; almost prophetic like Shostakovich's final _Symphony #15_ where it fades out.
> 
> ...


It took me a while to get the Eigth Symphony even though it is now my overall Bruckner Symphony.

As for Mahler, I think his best symphonies are 2 and 9.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Elliott Carter said:


> Alright I have decided I am going to hear Celibidache perform No. 7 with the Berlin Phil. I will let you know what my impression is.


Celibidache is slow. I think he does best on the 4th and the 9th.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Celibidache's Bruckner is not necessarily Bruckner's Bruckner, in the same sense that nearly anything by Celibidache must always be talked of in terms of being Celibidache's rather than the composer's work of art. Celibidache remains unique, and likely not the greatest starting point to appreciate the art of any individual composer. But ... when one is well-versed with a work and then takes on Celibidache's "take" on the work, wondrous things may occur.

Perhaps Celibidache does not perform Bruckner's Bruckner, but had Bruckner the opportunity to hear Celibidache perform his work, he may well become convinced that maybe it _should_ sound exactly like that!

I've collected dozens of Celibidache discs over the years, and each presents a startling work of aural art, generally forcing me to reconsider the very essences of the piece performed. Celibidache certainly changes expectations.

_________________

As a post-script .... I was rather pleased to see how many responders here recommend the Bruckner 7th and/or 4th as starting points for this master composer. These are two of the greatest Romantic symphonies, long my two favorite Bruckner symphonies, though I would be hard pressed to suggest that they are in essence _greater_ works than a couple of the others. Bruckner is one of those composers who created his own sound-universe shared by no one else, and even the harshest critic, he who maintains that Bruckner wrote the same symphony ten, or eleven, or twelve times over, has to admit that even if such were true, that "same symphony" (whichever number it is) remains totally Brucknerian in sound, unlike anything else by anyone else. Art from a true unique sound-universe.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

Coach G said:


> *For performance you can't go wrong with Karajan*, unless you dare try Sergiu Celibidace for a more meditative Zen-like experience,





Brahmsianhorn said:


> *I would go Karajan* on No 7. Celi plays everything slow.


The rule of thumb for me has always been, if I hear something for the first time, I go with Karajan's interpretation first till I decide my favourite conductor/orchestra once I am familiar with the piece..
Karajan is for me always the best starting point.

But on Bruckner's 7th, my favourite combo is Solti/CSO. In fact its one of my favourite recordings overall.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Elliott Carter said:


> Ok cool I think I will try No. 7 first. Thank you all for the suggestions. I would like to watch a performance of it on Medici TV. My choices are Celibidache, Abbado, Tennstedt, Jarvi, and Haitink. Which would you recommend?


My favorite is definitely Karajan/Berlin. Among those you list, Abbado.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Knorf said:


> My favorite is definitely Karajan/Berlin. Among those you list, Abbado.


Karajan made three recordings of the seventh, all quite distinctive, which makes nonsense of those who say he always conducted everything exactly the same. The middle EMI glows with a golden glow and the last with the VPO is the most earthy. All three are superb performances


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Axter said:


> But on Bruckner's 7th, my favourite combo is Solti/CSO. In fact its one of my favourite recordings overall.


Agreed, great recording..I heard them perform it @ Carnegie Hall....amazing...very powerful...


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I usually pop in to point out the differences between Celibidache's EMI and DG Bruckner, the latter mostly having more flexible and quicker tempi.

For 'modernist' Bruckner, the 9th is probably the most 20th-century sounding.

The 8th is truly monumental, called _The Symphony of Symphonies _by some.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> Agreed, great recording..I heard them perform it @ Carnegie Hall....amazing...very powerful...


CSO & Solti were a match made in heaven... I like the whole Bruckner cycle they did actually.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Axter said:


> CSO & Solti were a match made in heaven... I like the whole Bruckner cycle they did actually.


yes great complete set...some really special ones - #3,6,7,8,9....
the #8 is cosmic-live from Leningrad when the CSO was on tour....the brass sonority is incredible...I find it hard to listen to lesser versions....CSO and ViennaPO always sound great in Bruckner...


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

joen_cph said:


> I usually pop in to point out the differences between Celibidache's EMI and DG Bruckner, the latter mostly having more flexible and quicker tempi.
> 
> For 'modernist' Bruckner, the 9th is probably the most 20th-century sounding.
> 
> The 8th is truly monumental, called The Symphony of Symphonies by some.


I listened to both 5ths yesterday. The DG bored me, so I didn't expect much of the EMI. To my surprise, the EMI blew me away. One of the most powerful 5ths I have heard.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I listened to both 5ths yesterday. The DG bored me, so I didn't expect much of the EMI. To my surprise, the EMI blew me away. One of the most powerful 5ths I have heard.


The DG 3rd, 4th and 8th are among the more interesting ones, IMO. Orchestral playing isn't always extremely integrated. I don't remember about the 9th, could be good.


----------



## Skakner (Oct 8, 2020)

Symphonies *4* and *7* is a good start point.
For the beginning get to know the composer's work(s). Forget about recordings. 
If Bruckner isn't for you, even the best recordings will not change your mind. Anyway, *Wand* and *Barenboim* (with Chicago SO) are a very good introduction to the Brucknerian universe.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

My Bruckner starter kit consists of:


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

and:


----------



## Guest (Dec 30, 2020)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> and:


Great choices! As others have said, you can't go wrong with Karajan--any from No.3 through 9 would be excellent. The first 2 Symphonies (or 3 if you count No. 0!) are certainly good, but he didn't really get his wings until the 3rd.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I came to this late, but I have a suggestion that runs counter to the prevailing winds: start with Symphony No. 1 and go through them in order numerically. I think it's a better intro to ease you in to Bruckner's sound world and style. It's still thoroughly Brucknerian, but has a bit more influence from the mid-century German romantics.

My go-to set is this one:
https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Herbert-Karajan-Berliner-Philharmoniker/dp/B07NTXC6T9/









It contains HVK/BPO's Bruckner recordings from the mid 70s to the early 80s, all in splendid sound (and on one hi-res disc if you can do Blu-Ray). OF course there are other estimable Bruckners, but this one is high quality throughout.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

MatthewWeflen said:


> I came to this late, but I have a suggestion that runs counter to the prevailing winds: start with Symphony No. 1 and go through them in order numerically. I think it's a better intro to ease you in to Bruckner's sound world and style. It's still thoroughly Brucknerian, but has a bit more influence from the mid-century German romantics.
> 
> My go-to set is this one:
> https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Herbert-Karajan-Berliner-Philharmoniker/dp/B07NTXC6T9/
> ...


I prefer 7 & 8 from this set to the later Vienna versions, but they are harder to acquire individually. It might make sense then to get this whole set. My only issue is I find Karajan a bit hard driven in the earlier symphonies. For example, Bohm finds more charm in Nos. 3 & 4.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Don't forget the choral music. I'm just now coming to an appreciation of Bruckner's choral works. I think they truly are great and I regret not getting acquainted with them earlier.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I personally wouldn't go with Karajan, except from the 4th /EMI, whose majestic slowness needs supplementary recordings though. Such as Barenboim/Teldec-Warner, and maybe a historical, creative alternative like Abendroth, plus an original version, like Young or Inbal.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> yes great complete set...some really special ones - #3,6,7,8,9....
> the #8 is cosmic-live from Leningrad when the CSO was on tour....the brass sonority is incredible...I find it hard to listen to lesser versions....CSO and ViennaPO always sound great in Bruckner...


Agree. CSO's brass section took these symphonies to a different level. I also agree with your comment on VPO, specially their string section has a unique sound, very much suited for Bruckner, Schumann and Tchaikovsky I find...

Bruckner's 4th CSO/Solti is also a great recording.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

I know Karajan has many admirers on this forum, and that is fine - Karajan recordings are generally "safe" - well recorded, decently played, reasonably well-conducted - 
but - for me it is rather like being introduced to the world of _ice cream_ - and starting off with "plain vanilla with no sprinkles" and sticking resolutely to that choice....nothing against plain vanilla - it tastes good, it's very basic, tough to go far wrong with it....it's just that there are so many other flavors, options and selections available that may be much more ----interesting....tasty...more imaginative...more stimulating...

if one really enjoys ice cream, one owes it to oneself to branch out and try some other alternatives that may prove more rewarding than "plain vanilla with no sprinkles". same with music....For Bruckner, esp -
there are some fine alternatives - Bruno Walter was a great conductor of Bruckner, and I find the non-Teutonic conductors generally much more successful with the Austrian master - Solti, von Matacic, Barenboim, Giulini to name a few..._to each his own, of course...._

I see Wand often held up as a preferred version....I've not heard too many of his offerings - but one in particular stuck in my mind - I can't remember which orchestra - a German regional, iirc - 
A not very positive yet salient feature of this recording was the dreadful balance in the brass section....proper balance and ensemble are of particular importance in Bruckner, since the brass ensemble is featured so often....
in this case - it was the 2nd trombone, which constantly overblew the section, stuck out like a bellowing bathtub baritone - constantly covering the principal, and protruding from the brass choir at every passage with a blatty, edgy sound that drew attention to itself....not only does it cover the top line, but it skews the balance of the entire chorale....it quickly becomes distracting and even annoying...this one inner voice blasting out of balance with the rest of the ensemble...
You don't hear this with the greatest orchestras - for brass in Bruckner - two orchestras really lead the pack for me - Chicago and ViennaPO... There is always great ensemble - unity of dynamics. articulation, tone quality, phrasing...you don't hear inner voices protruding out of balance - you can hear all the voices, but the melody line always comes thru....The two orchestras have a very different concept of sound - Chicago is much bigger, fuller, but Vienna is very coherent and the musicians are all completely dedicated to the Viennese concept....the results are first-rate, consistently.
Orchestras of lesser stature shoot for the top, of course - but CSO and VPO set a very high bar that is only rarely matched.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

joen_cph said:


> I personally wouldn't go with Karajan, except from the 4th /EMI, whose majestic slowness needs supplementary recordings though. Such as Barenboim/Teldec-Warner, and maybe a historical, creative alternative like Abendroth, plus an original version, like Young or Inbal.


Well, someone typed the word "historical" so I am obliged to mention this integral set by the greatest Bruckner interpreter on record. His was the version that made the 8th one of my favorite all time symphonies, especially for the Adagio.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I like Furt's 1940s 8+9 Bruckner, it's extremely temperamental.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> I know Karajan has many admirers on this forum, and that is fine - Karajan recordings are generally "safe" - well recorded, decently played, reasonably well-conducted -
> but - for me it is rather like being introduced to the world of _ice cream_ - and starting off with "plain vanilla with no sprinkles" and sticking resolutely to that choice....nothing against plain vanilla - it tastes good, it's very basic, tough to go far wrong with it....it's just that there are so many other flavors, options and selections available that may be much more ----interesting....tasty...more imaginative...more stimulating...


I generally agree with you about Karajan's work, but I find his Bruckner an ideal match for the demands of the music. I don't just want to hear a bunch of brass players blowing their lungs out every three minutes with meandering stretches in between. So many conductors try to make Bruckner's symphonies into orchestral showpieces. That's not what they are. The best Bruckner conductors IMO see the gargantuan movements as integrated wholes and patiently build the structure. Tempi need to be moderate and not rushed. In the case of HvK I find that he balances the dreamy lyricism, terrifying power, and cheeky playfulness of the music so that I feel like I am getting a complete product rather than just the "exciting parts." All of the pacing and phrasing sounds amazingly idiomatic. Giulini is also incredible in Bruckner for this reason and I also love Furtwängler, Böhm, and, to a lesser extent, Wand and Tintner in this repertoire. These are the conductors I would personally recommend to the OP.

But I find that Solti, Barenboim, and Jochum (even though I will occasionally listen to them because I enjoy the sound of their orchestras for its own sake) aim so much for the "high points" in their efforts to make the music exciting that they miss out on all the poetry and nuance, resulting in disjointed and disinterested interpretations. If I'm going to listen to such massive works as these, I want every second to be interesting. Sheer virtuosity isn't going to cut it. So many times I feel like certain conductors are analogous to a theater director rushing through all the more introspective, slower-moving parts of _Hamlet_ or _King Lear_ just to get to the gripping murder scenes. But how can you appreciate those scenes if what came before wasn't memorable? But, just my perceptions, of course.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Don't forget Haitink. I think he is a very underrated Bruckner conductor. His 2010 5th is fantastic. He knows exactly how to pace it. Also his Vienna recordings are some of the best, particularly the 3rd and 8th.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Don't forget Haitink. I think he is a very underrated Bruckner conductor. His 2010 5th is fantastic. He knows exactly how to pace it. Also his Vienna recordings are some of the best, particularly the 3rd and 8th.


yes, Haitink is quite good...I heard him conduct a fine Bruckner 9 live in Chicago....he somehow got the whole closing section of mvt III to sound like an epilogue...a final statement, winding down....really quite magical...I've never heard that before or since.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> in the case of HvK I find that he balances the dreamy lyricism, terrifying power, and cheeky playfulness of the music so that I feel like I am getting a complete product rather than just the "exciting parts....


interesting. I never associate those features with HvK.


> But I find that Solti, Barenboim, and Jochum (even though I will occasionally listen to them because I enjoy the sound of their orchestras for its own sake) aim so much for the "high points" in their efforts to make the music exciting that they miss out on all the poetry and nuance, resulting in disjointed and disinterested interpretations.


I find that Solti esp, keeps things flowing, builds the tension and release drama most effectively...Wagner and Bruckner just thrive on this...also he keeps it from being too "choppy" - short sections, all separate from one another, which for me really kills Bruckner....you gotta keep the momentum going....
also - Solti got a huge dynamic range from Chicago...really pushed the frontiers....I remember the live Bruckner 7 @ Carnegie Hall - the opening tremolo in the strings was inaudible....the sound just "appeared"...no attack, it just sort of floated in....the orchestral tutti was really big, and it's only mezzo, forte....of course, the fortissimos were proportionally louder! and positively roof-raising...then it would get very soft again....remarkable dynamic range.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> interesting. I never associate those features with HvK.


I am not normally a huge fan of him either, but in the right repertoire he could be outstanding and Bruckner was right in his sweet spot. Maybe it's just that the grand, opulent, patient approach he adopted for everything works especially well in this music to my ears. Sometimes I think the approach is just wrong for the music (like in Mahler and Sibelius) and othertimes it's pitch perfect. He wasn't the kind of conductor who would adjust his conception according to the music; he had a style and he stuck with it.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> He wasn't the kind of conductor who would adjust his conception according to the music; he had a style and he stuck with it.


you're right...good point.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

SONNET CLV said:


> Symphony No. 7.
> 
> Trust me. If you don't "get" that, you likely won't "get" Bruckner.


I strongly disagree. I think Bruckner is a composer who requires multiple listens and a lot of patience to really get him if one doesn't instantly click on the first listen. In a way, you (one) needs to put in the effort on their end and the payoff is very rewarding. I'm just speaking from my experience though, I had a hard time wrapping my head around him for the longest time and now he's one of my favorite composers.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Heck148 said:


> I know Karajan has many admirers on this forum, and that is fine - Karajan recordings are generally "safe" - well recorded, decently played, reasonably well-conducted -
> but - for me it is rather like being introduced to the world of _ice cream_ - and starting off with "plain vanilla with no sprinkles" and sticking resolutely to that choice....nothing against plain vanilla - it tastes good, it's very basic, tough to go far wrong with it....it's just that there are so many other flavors, options and selections available that may be much more ----interesting....tasty...more imaginative...more stimulating...
> 
> if one really enjoys ice cream, one owes it to oneself to branch out and try some other alternatives that may prove more rewarding than "plain vanilla with no sprinkles". same with music....For Bruckner, esp -
> there are some fine alternatives - Bruno Walter was a great conductor of Bruckner, and I find the non-Teutonic conductors generally much more successful with the Austrian master - Solti, von Matacic, Barenboim, Giulini to name a few..._to each his own, of course...._


I reject the comparison of Karajan to Vanilla. I would compare him to something like Rocky Road. Something decadent and high calorie.

Rattle is vanilla.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

SONNET CLV said:


> Symphony No. 7.
> 
> Trust me. If you don't "get" that, you likely won't "get" Bruckner.





GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> I strongly disagree. I think Bruckner is a composer who requires multiple listens and a lot of patience to really get him if one doesn't instantly click on the first listen. In a way, you (one) needs to put in the effort on their end and the payoff is very rewarding. I'm just speaking from my experience though, I had a hard time wrapping my head around him for the longest time and now he's one of my favorite composers.


I don't see anything in my comment for you to disagree with, unless you can suggest that one can appreciate Bruckner without an appreciation of the Seventh Symphony. To me, that is quintessential Bruckner, the stellar work of the oeuvre, the one that incorporates all the best of the composer in a single statement. It doesn't matter how long it takes one to "warm up" to the composer's music, if you don't "get" the Seventh, you won't "get" Bruckner. I can't imagine anyone loving Bruckner's music but hating the Seventh, or finding the Seventh unBrucknerian in style and sound. Equally, I can't imagine anyone loving all of Bruckner's music except the Seventh.

But opinions vary, and variation is good.

Thanks for considering something I said to be worthy of thought and further comment.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Heck148 said:


> yes, Haitink is quite good...I heard him conduct a fine Bruckner 9 live in Chicago....he somehow got the whole closing section of mvt III to sound like an epilogue...a final statement, winding down....really quite magical...I've never heard that before or since.


Only time I have seen the CSO live was with Haitink, the Brahms 1st around 2010. The interpretation was a little dull for my taste, but getting to see Dale Clevenger for the horn theme in movement 4 was itself a treat.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

SONNET CLV said:


> ... an appreciation of the Seventh Symphony. To me, that is quintessential Bruckner, the stellar work of the oeuvre, the one that incorporates all the best of the composer in a single statement........ I can't imagine anyone loving Bruckner's music but hating the Seventh, or finding the Seventh unBrucknerian in style and sound. Equally, I can't imagine anyone loving all of Bruckner's music except the Seventh.


yes, good point, well said...I agree that #7 is the quintessential Bruckner symphony.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

SONNET CLV said:


> I don't see anything in my comment for you to disagree with, unless you can suggest that one can appreciate Bruckner without an appreciation of the Seventh Symphony. To me, that is quintessential Bruckner, the stellar work of the oeuvre, the one that incorporates all the best of the composer in a single statement. It doesn't matter how long it takes one to "warm up" to the composer's music, if you don't "get" the Seventh, you won't "get" Bruckner. I can't imagine anyone loving Bruckner's music but hating the Seventh, or finding the Seventh unBrucknerian in style and sound. Equally, I can't imagine anyone loving all of Bruckner's music except the Seventh.
> 
> But opinions vary, and variation is good.
> 
> Thanks for considering something I said to be worthy of thought and further comment.


The 7th definitely is the quintessential Bruckner, I see what you mean by if you don't like that it's hard to see you liking anything else. In contrast, I can see one not liking the 5th, which took me a while to come around to but is still easily my least favorite out of the mature symphonies. Regardless of anyone's personal feelings about it though, it's certainly a very unique symphony with a remarkable interconnectedness between thematic material across the movements


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

MatthewWeflen said:


> I reject the comparison of Karajan to Vanilla.


As do I. It's ridiculous and flatly _wrong_. It also is highly insulting to say the least, and I'm quite angry about it. So I'm going to avoid responding for now.


----------



## Shaughnessy (Dec 31, 2020)

Why Bruckner Matters: A Listener's Guide With Daniel Barenboim

"To this day, indifference toward Bruckner, even among classical music enthusiasts and symphony musicians, isn't hard to find.

None of this has deterred Barenboim. He says that while Bruckner's musical language is of the late 19th century, the form is Classical, almost Baroque. He also feels the spirit of medievalism in the music. "Therefore, at the end of a performance," Barenboim says, "I feel like I have lived through an experience that has taken me over four or five centuries: the Middle Ages, the Classical and the so-called Romantic musical idiom."

"Bruckner is a very, how shall I say, special, specific world in the world of music. The musical idiom, the musical language, is post-Wagner, late 19th-century. The form however, is Classical, almost Baroque. And that already gives you the feeling that you are dealing with two or three centuries of music at the same time."


----------



## mparta (Sep 29, 2020)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Only time I have seen the CSO live was with Haitink, the Brahms 1st around 2010. The interpretation was a little dull for my taste, but getting to see Dale Clevenger for the horn theme in movement 4 was itself a treat.


I was going to respond first to the note that suggested that Bruckner requires some effort on the part of the listener. I had that experience but it seemed like it would be worthwhile and it has been. He's firmly ensconced in my pantheon.

But... on the note in this comment about Haitink-- I listened to his Bruckner 5 with the BRSO last night, in the box called Portrait. Magnificent, reminded me of the Vienna/Phil/Schuricht that I've always found thrilling. Haitink is personally self-effacing but his music making cannot be bettered. I've been fortunate to hear him in Bruckner 7 with the BPO (his 90th year "farewell") and 8 with the VPO in Salzburg. Nothing better, not turgid, depth with clarity.

And by the way, that Bavarian orchestra is spectacular, world-beating playing, clearly a match for Vienna or Berlin. As good as anything I have ever heard. So put that with one of my favorite symphonies, Bruckner 5, and Haitink and what more could a person want?


----------



## julide (Jul 24, 2020)

Does anyone think the grandeur of bruckner doesn't come across on recordings.... in a live performance the fortissimo is spritiual and ecstatic and never annoying the way it blasts in my loudspeakers.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

MatthewWeflen said:


> I reject the comparison of Karajan to Vanilla. .


Just laughable. Especially in Bruckner


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Knorf said:


> As do I. It's ridiculous and flatly _wrong_. It also is highly insulting to say the least, and I'm quite angry about it. So I'm going to avoid responding for now.


The point is though it's not worth responding to as it's obviously the result of prejudice not reason.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

I purchased a download of Bruckner's 8th by Takashi Asahina, a Japanese conductor that I otherwise know nothing about. I think the recording was made with the Osaka Philharmonic Orchestra. I remember that was it was really solid and on-point. It generated some interest in buying some Asahina CDs on Amazon. He seems to be a champion of Bruckner and Mahler. But the the last time I looked his CDs were selling at very high prices for my budget. 

I used to listen to Rafeal Kubelik's recording of Bruckner's 3rd with the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra quite a bit. When I was in mt 20s it was my favorite Bruckner symphony; but now I find it just noisy and overly bombastic. 

With Bruckner, I've pretty much settled on the apocalyptic 8th and the mysterious 9th as almost the only ones I ever listen to anymore.

Karajan's recording of the 8th with the Vienna Philharmonic which is outstandingly sharp and crisp. HvK made the recording when he was elderly and unlike a lot of famous conductors who seemed to slow down as they got older, K just seemed to get better, even if he already looks like he's already got one foot in the grave on the album cover. Then there's Celibidace, who was completely unaware of until some years after he died, as he didn't like studio recordings or whatever live recordings of his were not readily available here in the USA until the internet age. But Celibidace is also a great champion of Bruckner with an approach that is very spacious and reverent; and I find myself so caught up in Celibidace's musical vision that I hardly notice that Celibidace is taking an already monster-length symphony and making it even longer.

As aside, there's Leonard Bernstein who made two recordings of Bruckner's 9th, one with the NYPO in the 1960s and the other with the Vienna Philharmonic in the 1980s, and as far as I know it's the only time Lenny ever ventured into Bruckner-land. While Bernstein can hardly be cited as a Bruckner champion these recordings are interesting because of Bernstein's obsession with Bruckner's counterpart, Mahler; and I see Bernstein's recordings of Bruckner's 9th as sort of an intersection between Bruckner and Mahler where Bernstein is neither all waxed and polished like Karajan, or meditative like Celibidace. Bernstein's recording of the 9th with the Vienna Phil is more self-indulgent with roller-coaster dynamics in the outer movements, but the middle movement is the most intense and earth-shattering that I've ever heard from anyone.


----------



## Janspe (Nov 10, 2012)

julide said:


> Does anyone think the grandeur of bruckner doesn't come across on recordings.... in a live performance the fortissimo is spritiual and ecstatic and never annoying the way it blasts in my loudspeakers.


I think I agree with this statement. I have heard quite a lot of Bruckner live already (I think symphonies 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9) and those experiences have been truly remarkable. This is of course true for a lot of music, but I only really learned to appreciate Bruckner once I started hearing his symphonies in live concerts. I particularly remember the first time I heard the 6th; I left the hall as a different person than I was when entering.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

julide said:


> Does anyone think the grandeur of bruckner doesn't come across on recordings.... in a live performance the fortissimo is spritiual and ecstatic and never annoying the way it blasts in my loudspeakers.


This moment (second movement of the ninth) sounds good on my speakers and this movement made me take his music seriously.


----------



## julide (Jul 24, 2020)

Janspe said:


> I think I agree with this statement. I have heard quite a lot of Bruckner live already (I think symphonies 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9) and those experiences have been truly remarkable. This is of course true for a lot of music, but I only really learned to appreciate Bruckner once I started hearing his symphonies in live concerts. I particularly remember the first time I heard the 6th; I left the hall as a different person than I was when entering.


I think it's because the climaxes in bruckner are long and shattering. It's not just a big bombastic blast. It's an orgasm that endures. And the orchestration makes it such that it's not recording friendly. But i listen for the lovely quiter passages nonetheless...


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

julide said:


> ... the orchestration makes it such that it's not recording friendly....


That's one big issue, certainly. Bruckner's brass music, especially in those climactic moments, is notably resonant in the concert hall where the "brassiness" showers forth with full force. Even the best recording engineer cannot capture every overtone nuance from such a passage. Microphones limit access, of course. And then there is the issue of your own playback equipment. Is it good enough to reveal exactly what was put on the original tape/disc/master/whatever? So you lose something there, too. In the concert hall, if you have a hearing defect, you're likely to miss something, too. But you'll have that hearing defect even at home listening to your stereo system.

I've tried over the years to hear my favorite pieces, especially the big orchestral pieces like Bruckner's Seventh, live in concert, and I must say the experience is worth the cost of tickets (though one often can purchase an album or even a full box set for way less). But, since I've also invested a modest sum in playback equipment, I can actually enjoy Bruckner at home, especially when the rest of the neighborhood is out at the local high school football game or town picnic and I can crank up the volume and attempt to achieve concert hall dynamics.

There seems to be a different technique to engineering a large orchestral work from that utilized for an intimate chamber piece, such as a string quartet. Likewise, one's playback equipment tends to favor one side of the spectrum or the other. A lot of things come into play from the initial live performance, through the recording process, the mastering process, and the eventual playback. My advice remains: if you are serious about hearing this music, be prepared to invest a few bucks; the payback, like the playback, is ultimately rewarding and well-worth the cost.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

SONNET CLV said:


> That's one big issue, certainly. *Bruckner's brass music, especially in those climactic moments, is notably resonant in the concert hall where the "brassiness" showers forth with full force.* Even the best recording engineer cannot capture every overtone nuance from such a passage. Microphones limit access, of course. And then there is the issue of your own playback equipment. Is it good enough to reveal exactly what was put on the original tape/disc/master/whatever? So you lose something there, too. In the concert hall, if you have a hearing defect, you're likely to miss something, too. But you'll have that hearing defect even at home listening to your stereo system.
> 
> I've tried over the years to hear my favorite pieces, especially the big orchestral pieces like Bruckner's Seventh, live in concert, and I must say the experience is worth the cost of tickets (though one often can purchase an album or even a full box set for way less). But, since I've also invested a modest sum in playback equipment, I can actually enjoy Bruckner at home, especially when the rest of the neighborhood is out at the local high school football game or town picnic and I can crank up the volume and attempt to achieve concert hall dynamics.
> 
> There seems to be a different technique to engineering a large orchestral work from that utilized for an intimate chamber piece, such as a string quartet. Likewise, one's playback equipment tends to favor one side of the spectrum or the other. A lot of things come into play from the initial live performance, through the recording process, the mastering process, and the eventual playback. My advice remains: if you are serious about hearing this music, be prepared to invest a few bucks; the payback, like the playback, is ultimately rewarding and well-worth the cost.


My favorite musical instrument is the slide trombone. I even tried my hand at it; took some lessons, was able to play a few songs, but never learned to sight-read very well, and eventually got tired of just practicing and playing in front of a mirror. Anyway, one of the things I love about Bruckner is the trombone action.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Coach G said:


> My favorite musical instrument is the slide trombone. I even tried my hand at it; took some lessons, was able to play a few songs, but never learned to sight-read very well, and eventually got tired of just practicing and playing in front of a mirror. Anyway, one of the things I love about Bruckner is the trombone action.


I recall working with the trombone in my early years. It was my father's instrument. I think I got up to about the sixth position when I hit my younger brother in the back of the head with the slide and my parents took away the instrument and gave me a harmonica instead, thinking it would be less lethal in my hands. I still blow the harmonica on occasion, but haven't really touched a trombone for years. Still ... I wonder what mysteries that seventh position may hold.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

mparta said:


> I was going to respond first to the note that suggested that Bruckner requires some effort on the part of the listener. I had that experience but it seemed like it would be worthwhile and it has been. He's firmly ensconced in my pantheon.
> 
> But... on the note in this comment about Haitink-- I listened to his Bruckner 5 with the BRSO last night, in the box called Portrait. Magnificent, reminded me of the Vienna/Phil/Schuricht that I've always found thrilling. Haitink is personally self-effacing but his music making cannot be bettered. I've been fortunate to hear him in Bruckner 7 with the BPO (his 90th year "farewell") and 8 with the VPO in Salzburg. Nothing better, not turgid, depth with clarity.
> 
> ...


I only first heard that recording a couple of weeks ago and thought it was fantastic. It replaced my previous favorite of Jochum/RCO, which is why I listed it on page 3 as part of my Bruckner starter kit.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

I'm going to come somewhere in the middle on this "vanilla" debate regarding Karajan. 

If you are more a nuts and bolts type person, you're going to miss the nuance with HvK. It's not boring. It's sensual, beautiful, and above all he knows how to create a sense of mystery. He's at his best in tone poems. His Tod und Verklarung is unmatched. Also, in Bruckner his style works very well. I often think of Bruckner as music in the clouds, and this is precisely what Karajan does best. The 7th works best of all, starting with that atmospheric opening. 

However...there are some works which are more, shall we say, structural rather than sensuous. Bach is the obvious example, but I would lump Beethoven more in this category. In this repertoire, Karajan sounds gooey. The lack of sharp edges and clear structure becomes a detriment.

I have been sampling Bruckner 5ths the past few weeks, and this of all his symphonies is the most structural and Bach-like, with returning motives and counterpoint. I listened to Karajan and Klemperer back to back last night. Klemperer's approach of straight forward clarity works perfect. HvK's did not IMO. He turns it into Karajan soup, and this symphony needs a different approach, which is why more literal conducters like Haitink and Wand do better in this work.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I'm going to come somewhere in the middle on this "vanilla" debate regarding Karajan.
> 
> If you are more a nuts and bolts type person, you're going to miss the nuance with HvK. It's not boring. It's sensual, beautiful, and above all he knows how to create a sense of mystery. He's at his best in tone poems. His Tod und Verklarung is unmatched. Also, in Bruckner his style works very well. I often think of Bruckner as music in the clouds, and this is precisely what Karajan does best. The 7th works best of all, starting with that atmospheric opening.
> 
> ...


We are of course talking about Bruckner not Bach. Klemperer makes a mess of Bach anyway with his leaden tempi - also some of his Beethoven - so not a good comparison. You must be hearing a different Karajan Bruckner 5th from the one I have. Else check your equipment.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Handelian said:


> We are of course talking about Bruckner not Bach. Klemperer makes a mess of Bach anyway with his leaden tempi - also some of his Beethoven - so not a good comparison. You must be hearing a different Karajan Bruckner 5th from the one I have. Else check your equipment.


I was talking about the basic approach. Klemp's Bruckner 5th is ultimately too slow, IMO. But I will stand by my statement that his approach to the symphony works better than HvK, who is also quite slow in this work. And I also stand by my statement that Bruckner's 5th is very different from his other symphonies and it requires a more intellectual, less sensuous approach.

Regarding Klemp's Bach, his St Matthew Passion is too slow for me, but his Mass in B minor is my favorite of all interpretations. I could easily live with it as my one and only version.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Janspe said:


> I think I agree with this statement. I have heard quite a lot of Bruckner live already (I think symphonies 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9) and those experiences have been truly remarkable. This is of course true for a lot of music, but I only really learned to appreciate Bruckner once I started hearing his symphonies in live concerts. I particularly remember the first time I heard the 6th; I left the hall as a different person than I was when entering.


I've yet to hear his music performed live and I hope to correct that post-COVID, pending my city's local symphony doesn't hit Chapter 11 cause of COVID  Reading posts like this just want me to experience that more haha.

I find it depressing to think about how Bruckner hadn't even heard some of his own symphonies performed live. The 3rd's premiere was a fiasco where the audience and even members of the orchestra started to skedaddle one by one, and he didn't even get to hear the 5th, 6th, or 9th ever even get played at all.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I was talking about the basic approach. Klemp's Bruckner 5th is ultimately too slow, IMO. But I will stand by my statement that his approach to the symphony works better than HvK, who is also quite slow in this work. And I also stand by my statement that Bruckner's 5th is very different from his other symphonies and it requires a more intellectual, less sensuous approach.
> 
> Regarding Klemp's Bach, his St Matthew Passion is too slow for me, but his Mass in B minor is my favorite of all interpretations. I could easily live with it as my one and only version.


You could do worse than try Dohnanyi in the 5th if you like it more driven. His interpretation will certainly clear your ears out! It's terrific.

Klemperer's Bach is far too leaden all round. Bach as JSB would not have recognised. The Karajan B min Mass he made in the 1950s works a lot better. It was considered quite radical and fleet of foot in its day.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Handelian said:


> You could do worse than try Dohnanyi in the 5th if you like it more driven. His interpretation will certainly clear your ears out! It's terrific.
> 
> Klemperer's Bach is far too leaden all round. Bach as JSB would not have recognised. The Karajan B min Mass he made in the 1950s works a lot better. It was considered quite radical and fleet of foot in its day.


Actually, I am a big fan of Karajan's 1950 Mass in B minor. One of the best. He always did well with choral work. His 1947 Brahms Requiem is also a great one. Of course he was all told a bit less soupy in those years.

And it does bear mentioning at this juncture, we should all try to be a little less generalizing in our comments. No one fits cleanly into any category, and everyone is capable of a "good day." I certainly was surprised to hear Haitink, a conductor I always found a little dull, to be so good in the Bruckner 5th that I even liked it better than my dear old Furt!


----------



## julide (Jul 24, 2020)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> I've yet to hear his music performed live and I hope to correct that post-COVID, pending my city's local symphony doesn't hit Chapter 11 cause of COVID  Reading posts like this just want me to experience that more haha.
> 
> I find it depressing to think about how Bruckner hadn't even heard some of his own symphonies performed live. The 3rd's premiere was a fiasco where the audience and even members of the orchestra started to skedaddle one by one, and he didn't even get to hear the 5th, 6th, or 9th ever even get played at all.


I think we all feel the lack of live music but we know that bruckner will never stop being performed. Recordings are great and the interpretations on record will be mostly better than the live ones.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Handelian said:


> Just laughable. Especially in Bruckner


Hardly...."Especially in Bruckner"


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Handelian said:


> The point is though it's not worth responding to as it's obviously the result of prejudice not reason.


!!!??? whoa, that's way out of line, dude....I've got reasons, tons of them....


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2020)

I wish all you fellow Bruckner fans a Happy New Year!
Here's that magnificent "chorale" passage from Bruckner's IVth symphony, may it express our solidarity in the face of the Covid crisis:


----------



## GrosseFugue (Nov 30, 2011)

His works don't have the immediacy of Beethoven or the "easy listening" quality of Mozart. You need patience. And as someone else said -- it builds up in blocks of sounds to produce a sonic "cathedral." His climaxes are among the most overpowering ever. But it can be an acquired taste (like Mahler) for some. It depends where you are mood-wise. I don't often reach for Bruckner (or Mahler) vs. LvB or Bach. But if I do I always know it's going to be a gargantuan experience.  

His music has extremes in dynamics (again similar to Mahler). I've always envisioned him best listened to in some mountain redoubt with a great view (no urban-living nonsense to get in the way). Boy, I really need to get out of the city!

I second Karajan's Bruckner 8th as something special. Perhaps that'll be the one to do it for you.

PS -- Oh, I should add that Bruckner sounds nothing like Mahler! Just in the sense they both use enormous forces to create these tidal waves of sound.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2020)

Anybody have a comment about Bruckner VIII with Boulez and the VPO in St Florian's?


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Heck148 said:


> !!!??? whoa, that's way out of line, dude....I've got reasons, tons of them....


I didn't mean to start a whole thing. I just think the flavor choice is not the most analogous to the conductor. Vanilla usually connotes "bland, simplistic, expected, usual." I think HVK generally has a reputation of "opulent, over the top, beautiful, plush, too much" (which I don't necessarily agree with, but it is what it is as far as expressed public perceptions). So vanilla doesn't seem apt.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

Heck148 said:


> I know Karajan has many admirers on this forum, and that is fine - Karajan recordings are generally "safe" - well recorded, decently played, reasonably well-conducted -
> but - for me it is rather like being introduced to the world of _ice cream_ - and starting off with "plain vanilla with no sprinkles" and sticking resolutely to that choice....nothing against plain vanilla - it tastes good, it's very basic, tough to go far wrong with it....it's just that there are so many other flavors, options and selections available that may be much more ----interesting....tasty...more imaginative...more stimulating...
> 
> if one really enjoys ice cream, one owes it to oneself to branch out and try some other alternatives that may prove more rewarding than "plain vanilla with no sprinkles". same with music....For Bruckner, esp -
> ...


You are Billy W.anker and I claim my £5


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

MatthewWeflen said:


> I didn't mean to start a whole thing. I just think the flavor choice is not the most analogous to the conductor..... So vanilla doesn't seem apt.


ok, I hear what you're saying....the point is that it seems people buy into the HvK sets, because they are so numerous, and readily available.....but then they stop there...instead if exploring further....let me make clear, I'm delighted that people are buying into classical/concert music, by any and all avenues available... but as we know, there is so much to explore and enjoy....


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

HenryPenfold said:


> You are Billy W.anker and I claim my £5


.....????............


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

GrosseFugue said:


> ...
> PS -- Oh, I should add that Bruckner sounds nothing like Mahler! Just in the sense they both use enormous forces to create these tidal waves of sound.


I wouldn't say Bruckner sounds *nothing* like Mahler. They are of course different, but their use of the brass section seems similar to me. Bruckner seems to use repetitive patterns more than Mahler does though.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Handelian said:


> You could do worse than try Dohnanyi in the 5th if you like it more driven. His interpretation will certainly clear your ears out! It's terrific.


I'm on a listening binge of 5th recordings right now and heard the Dohnanyi a few days ago. I'll confess while exciting in spots I didn't find it as profoundly moving as some others.

My 10 favorites so far, in order, are:

Haitink/Bavarian RSO 2010
Jochum/RCO 1964
Jochum/RCO 1986
Furtwängler/BPO 1942
Furtwängler/VPO 1951
Horenstein/BBC 1971
Barenboim/BPO 1991
Wand/BPO 1996
Klemperer/New PO 1967
Celibidache/MPO 1993


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

By the way I saw on my twitter app that VPO and Thielemann are recording the full cycle of Bruckner’s symphonies in the coming months.
Not sure when the album(s) are expected to come out (due to covid delays etc...).


Curious how that collaboration going to work out...


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Heck148 said:


> ok, I hear what you're saying....the point is that it seems people buy into the HvK sets, because they are so numerous, and readily available.....but then they stop there...instead if exploring further....let me make clear, I'm delighted that people are buying into classical/concert music, by any and all avenues available... but as we know, there is so much to explore and enjoy....


But do people do that with ice cream? The analogy just doesn't work for me.

I think a better analogy would be something like "Karajan is like the iPhone." It's pretty good quality wise, better at some things than others, it's ubiquitous and very popular, but it rubs some people the wrong way for various reasons, and there are a lot more phones out there in the world, so people should really try branching out.

(I say this in an attempt to make your analogy work better, not because I agree with it. I like Karajan, he's my personal favorite, and his recordings are what I try out first because I've had 95% good experiences. But he's not the end all, in part because he doesn't cover all repertoire, and in part because he is better suited to some parts of the repertoire than others.)


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

consuono said:


> I wouldn't say Bruckner sounds *nothing* like Mahler. They are of course different, but their use of the brass section seems similar to me. Bruckner seems to use repetitive patterns more than Mahler does though.


To me, Bruckner and Mahler sound completely different:

Bruckner adhered to an extended sonata form. Mahler did not always and his use of sonata form is looser.

Mahler was a more creative orchestrator. In contrast, Bruckner made a brass-heavy majestic orchestral sound.

Mahler's music has a searching quality. It's not content with itself. Bruckner's is more sturdy, like a cathedral.

It seems like Bruckner took his cues from Schubert's Great Symphony in C and G Major String Quartet. It is very repetitive, especially in the scherzos. I love the scherzos yet they are quite formulaic.

I hear Bruckner in the second movement of Mahler's first symphony, but not anywhere else in Mahler.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> To me, Bruckner and Mahler sound completely different:


"Completely different" is going overboard. Vivaldi and Mahler sound completely different. There is a strong family resemblance among the Wagnerians, though nobody's saying they're identical.


----------



## Axter (Jan 15, 2020)

MatthewWeflen said:


> I like Karajan, he's my personal favorite, and his recordings are what *I try out first because I've had 95% good experiences. *But he's not the end all, in part because he doesn't cover all repertoire, and in part because he is better suited to some parts of the repertoire than others.)


I do the same. New pieces I am not familiar with, I try out Karajan's version(s) first, before I decide my fav. conductor/orchestra combo for that piece. Karajan is for me always a safe ground to explore (to me) unknown works. And to me this is what makes him outstanding.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> ok, I hear what you're saying....the point is that it seems people buy into the HvK sets, because they are so numerous, and readily available.....but then they stop there...instead if exploring further....let me make clear, I'm delighted that people are buying into classical/concert music, by any and all avenues available... but as we know, there is so much to explore and enjoy....


You seem to have the endearing habit of assuming you know what other people did. You also assume you know why people buy stuff. You would be better to stop making the assumptions and actually read what people put. Some of us have got quite a few recordings of the fifth.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

ORigel said:


> To me, Bruckner and Mahler sound completely different:
> 
> Bruckner adhered to an extended sonata form. Mahler did not always and his use of sonata form is looser.
> 
> ...


They were once lumped together because they wrote long symphonies but Bruckner and Mahler are completely different


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Handelian said:


> They were once lumped together because they wrote long symphonies but Bruckner and Mahler are completely different


I think it's more because Bruckner was a friend of and influence on Mahler. Just as Mahler is sometimes lumped with Strauss, who is likewise similar but very different.
http://www.classical.net/music/comp.lst/articles/bruckner/brucknerandmahler.php
Two big differences *to me* are that I'm finding that Bruckner was a better composer for voice. Another is a quote I came across attributed to Günther Wand, I think (haven't verified it): "Mahler was searching for God, but Bruckner had found Him."


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

MatthewWeflen said:


> I think a better analogy would be something like "Karajan is like the iPhone." It's pretty good quality wise, better at some things than others, it's ubiquitous and very popular, but it rubs some people the wrong way for various reasons, and there are a lot more phones out there in the world, so people should really try branching out.


whatever....that's the basic idea....there is so much music out there..


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Handelian said:


> You seem to have the endearing habit of assuming you know what other people did.


I go by what they post on the forum...aside from that, I have no idea what they buy, or for what reason


> You would be better to stop making the assumptions and actually read what people put.....


you would be better off not claiming that those who hold a different from yours are "prejudiced"..those different opinions may be based on long experience, and reasoning arrived at thru thorough critical assessment...prejudice is a preconceived notion not based upon reason or actual experience.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Hi im a Bruckner virgin. Where should I start?_

I started with the 4th symphony and would recommend that.


----------



## Handelian (Nov 18, 2020)

Heck148 said:


> I go by what they post on the forum...aside from that, I have no idea what they buy, or for what reason
> 
> you would be better off not claiming that those who hold a different from yours are "prejudiced"..those different opinions may be based on long experience, and reasoning arrived at thru thorough critical assessment...prejudice is a preconceived notion not based upon reason or actual experience.


You don't go I've got people say you go by your own prejudices it is quite obvious, Anyway it is not worth arguing with you as what you claim is just not what happens in the reality of sound


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Handelian said:


> You don't go I've got people say you go by your own prejudices it is quite obvious,


nonsense...I base my opinion and preferences on experience and analysis as a performer and listener.
I always have "sound" reasons, and basis for my views...you should try it sometime, instead of
just blindly following the herd.


----------



## mparta (Sep 29, 2020)

larold said:


> _Hi im a Bruckner virgin. Where should I start?_
> 
> I started with the 4th symphony and would recommend that.


Hard to not be caught up by those horn choirs in the first movement, but is that ever a sticky wicket, so much more to come!!!


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

The last movement of the fifth symphony is awe-inspiring.


ORigel said:


> I hear Bruckner in the second movement of Mahler's first symphony, but not anywhere else in Mahler.


I hear hints of the last movement of Mahler's third here:


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

consuono said:


> The last movement of the fifth symphony is awe-inspiring.


While I like it more now than I did the first time I heard it, I still wouldn't say I genuinely like it. The contrapuntal clarity is just not there to my ears and it sounds like a jumbled mess. I watched this video which does a near-full analysis of every bar (_amazing _channel by the way, I totally recommend it to anyone who hasn't already watched his stuff) and there's so much I see on the score that is totally inaudible! You can see the direct inspiration he draws from the Große Fugue (the bouncy dotted quarter rhythms are even reminiscent of it) and no one can deny he did a genius job of translating that to the orchestra on paper, but the sonic end result just doesn't add up for me. I know tons of people such as yourself love the finale to bits and wish I could hear what they're hearing that I can't.


----------



## Alfacharger (Dec 6, 2013)

ORigel said:


> I hear Bruckner in the second movement of Mahler's first symphony, but not anywhere else in Mahler.


I hear Rott who was a pupil of Bruckner and friend of Mahler.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Alfacharger said:


> I hear Rott who was a pupil of Bruckner and friend of Mahler.


:lol: Wow! ....


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)




----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> Bruckner seems to use repetitive patterns more than Mahler does though.


this was inspired by Bruckner


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

So many recommendations are for Bruckner's later symphonies, but there are some real gems in his earlier symphonies. Anybody know which symphony this is from (could easily be mistaken for Brahms):

View attachment Sound 1.mp3


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

It's the beginning of Andante from Symphony No. 0 (Die Nullte)


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Azol said:


> It's the beginning of Andante from Symphony No. 0 (Die Nullte)


Excellent! Someone knows their Bruckner.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

I find Die Nullte (really more like Symphony 1.5) incredibly underrated - I love it from start to finish. I think Bruckner 2 is pretty underrated too, though you can tell he's not fully developed as a composer yet and the leap from 2 to 3 is pretty damn dramatic. I never quite gave #1 a fair shake to be honest.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

I've been listening to a lot of Bruckner lately, various conductors and orchestras. I think the Haitink-Concertgebouw recordings are the best I've heard. I'm ordering the set to go along with the Karajan/BPO. (Music is becoming my money pit.)


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I'm on a listening binge of 5th recordings right now and heard the Dohnanyi a few days ago. I'll confess while exciting in spots I didn't find it as profoundly moving as some others.
> 
> My 10 favorites so far, in order, are:
> 
> ...


Try *Giuseppe Sinopoli* directing the Staatskapelle Dresden on Deutsche Grammophon. One of my favourites.


----------

