# ...............................................



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

...................................................


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> This "critique" on Bruckner by john aschenbrenner (Film Music Is Bad Bruckner) may not be entirely true, but I can see what he's saying:
> "If you are forced to listen to a Bruckner symphony you'll be subjected to the trumpets going "Ta Da Da Da Da Da" every ten seconds. Bombastic and vastly grandiose, his works are a tempest in a teapot, all signifying nothing."


I think Aschenbrenner heard a few bars of Bruckner once, didn't like it, and condemned the whole lot. Granted I do the same with some modern composers whose work I just don't like. Anyway here's a counter-argument:


> Whenever I read criticism of Bruckner's symphonies, usually something about their length and lack of structure, I am always surprised. To the contrary, from the very first time I heard these works, I was right there, going along for the ride, following his every turn of musical thought. I am far from being a scholar of Bruckner, but have tried without success to discover if he was familiar with Schubert's last piano sonatas or inspired by them. When listening to any of his symphonies, the final Schubert sonatas always come to mind, as I hear the Bruckner works as taking the next step in a progression that Schubert first contemplated in these final works. Unlike Beethoven, who in his later works experimented with formal structures in a variety of ways, Schubert did not. Instead, he consistently followed classical structures (sonata form, scherzo/trio, rondo) but stretched them out to greater lengths. His pattern of a first movement in sonata form, a second extended song form in slow tempo, a scherzo/trio and a final rondo, can be heard emulated in the Bruckner symphonies. To my mind, they closely follow the model of the Schubert late sonatas, only Bruckner goes well beyond Schubert, taking the concept to new extraordinary lengths.
> 
> In doing so, Bruckner achieves, at least to my ears, a music that is "oceanic" in feeling. As his music moves from theme to theme, shifting dramatically from tidal waves of sound to gentle landler, slowly pacing itself, letting the music gradually unfold over long periods of time, for me, more so than any other music I can think of, it opens the door to an unlimited interior expanse. ...


https://www.stangrillcomposer.com/bruckner-and-schubert/


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

A poster on here (can't remember for the life of me who) made one my favorite insights/comments I've read at TC, namely that Bruckners use of repetition is like counting the beads of a rosary, where you enter a solemn meditative state and it grows more intense with each time. That captures the exact listening experience I have in regards to the repetitions, a particularly fitting example being the Adagio of the 8th. Some may find the half hour length excessive, I think each repetition is important.

I've never thought of Bruckners use of repetition as tautologus, rather integral to the flow and structure of the movement. I can totally get why someone would find it grating though, it's not all hard to imagine. Leonard Bernstein was an accomplished conductor and musician who understood the music intimately yet still hated it.


----------



## haziz (Sep 15, 2017)

One is one of the greatest composers of all time, if not the greatest. I don't understand the other one, and frankly I am coming to the conclusion that I have no interest or desire in understanding him.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

haziz said:


> One is one of the greatest composers of all time, if not the greatest. I don't understand the other one, and frankly I am coming to the conclusion that I have no interest or desire in understanding him.


If you don't have any interest in Bruckner, that's fine. If you find yourself curious once again I'd suggest giving Bruckner's choral music a shot. That's what ultimately led me from being apathetic to being a big fan.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

hammeredklavier said:


> So what is it about Beethoven's music that makes it "chattier", or more "bombastic" than Bruckner's? I don't understand.


Neither do I.

Of course Beethoven can be bombastic. One can accuse many composers of that.

I have the opportunity to perform his Fifth through Ninth Symphony. The first movement of his Sixth has what some members would call very tuneful music.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

It was the beginning of Romanticism in large scale orchestral music, that it has to "say a lot". Beethoven's _Eroica_ for example, clearly departed from the Haydn-esque first and second symphonies to something grander. The _Pastoral_ is a delightful exception. It is long, yet mellifluous almost Classical like. But it all works well because Beethoven was a great composer at doing that. Lesser composers would make a mess of it.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

I've never quite understood why Bruckner gets the 'bombastic' label by some. Sure, the loud brass is one of his trademarks but I don't think 'bombast' fits the character of his music whatsoever. I don't think it's a fitting description of Beethoven at his loudest, most ferocious moments.

Everyone's personal definition of the word varies, but I usually associate 'bombast' with the likes of Mahler, Wagner, or Nielsen, to name a few.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

ArtMusic said:


> It was the beginning of Romanticism in large scale orchestral music, that it has to "say a lot". Beethoven's _Eroica_ for example, clearly departed from the Haydn-esque first and second symphonies to something grander. _The Pastoral is a delightful exception._ It is long, yet mellifluous almost Classical like. But it all works well because Beethoven was a great composer at doing that. Lesser composers would make a mess of it.


But another exception is the eighth symphony. Beethoven biographer Jan Swafford has described the Eighth as "a beautiful, brief, ironic look backward to Haydn and Mozart."

I don't agree with 'ironic' but it certainly is "Haydn-Mozart-esque". And certainly nowhere near as grand as the third, fifth and seventh.


----------



## david johnson (Jun 25, 2007)

I shall continue listening to and enjoying the music of Beethoven and Bruckner, regardless of what the wayward and mistaken mutter


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Haydn70 said:


> But another exception is the eighth symphony. Beethoven biographer Jan Swafford has described the Eighth as "a beautiful, brief, ironic look backward to Haydn and Mozart."
> 
> I don't agree with 'ironic' but it certainly is "Haydn-Mozart-esque". And certainly nowhere near as grand as the third, fifth and seventh.


Beethoven himself thought of the 8th as being a better symphony than the 7th in a lot of ways. That aligns with my personal tastes as well, though I'm in no position to say it's 'better'


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

The 8th first movement recapitulation is the most thrilling climax in any Beethoven symphony which counts for a lot. (it's also *extremely* difficult to conduct because the recaputulation is in the low strings- i've heard conductors "cheat" by doing things like adding a diminuendo to the phrase the orchestra plays so the basses can actually be heard playing the theme recapitulation, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few just rescore it) 


And it sneakily has the best finale movement.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> Beethoven himself thought of the 8th as being a better symphony than the 7th in a lot of ways. That aligns with my personal tastes as well, though I'm in no position to say it's 'better'


The 8th is my favorite Beethoven symphony and the first movement my favorite movement from any Beethoven symphony. That said I think the 7th is the best of the nine.

Yes, I can and do differentiate between 'favorite' and 'best'. Sometimes they coincide, sometimes they don't.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

fbjim said:


> The 8th first movement recapitulation is the most thrilling climax in any Beethoven symphony which counts for a lot. (it's also *extremely* difficult to conduct because the recaputulation is in the low strings- i've heard conductors "cheat" by doing things like adding a diminuendo to the phrase the orchestra plays so the basses can actually be heard playing the theme recapitulation, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few just rescore it)
> 
> And it sneakily has the best finale movement.


The 8th first movement...my favorite of the 37! And what a finale! As stated above, my favorite Beethoven symphony.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

i don't know if Bruckner would have thought it that way, but in some of his repetition, i see some of the aesthetic realizations that repetition can be an exceptionally powerful musical tool when done well. in art music this would be more relevant to say, the minimalists, but it has obvious implications to popular music as well, both period and contemporary. i don't think this way of Beethoven (as the OP quote seems to imply) but in some fussier symphonic movements, you do sometimes get the feeling that the composer keeps varying phrases because they fear repeating themselves too much.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

Haydn70 said:


> The 8th first movement...my favorite of the 37! And what a finale! As stated above, my favorite Beethoven symphony.


it's such a great movement, though i'm more of a 9th scherzo movement guy myself


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

fbjim said:


> it's such a great movement, though i'm more of a *9th scherzo movement* guy myself


Another one of my very favorite movements.

Others are the third movement of the 9th, first and second movements of the 7th, third movement of the 3rd, first movement of the 6th and the finale of the 8th.

I love so many aspects/features of the 8th first movement but one of the best is the ending...the final 4 measures pianissimo...especially the last 2...gives me chills and a smile at the same time!


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

hammeredklavier said:


> So what is it about Beethoven's music that makes it "chattier", or more "bombastic" than Bruckner's? I don't understand.


Beethovens music is chattier, Bruckners music is more bombastic.

Beethovens music tells a story by repeating motifes with slight changes. This kind of verbous storytelling could be described as chatty.

Bruckners music expresses static circumstances, which are shown from changing perspectives and in changing recombinations. He illuminates thing alternating. First bombastic, then lovely, then happy than sad for example. But the thing itself doesn't really change at all. This makes his music calm. There is no chatty excitement like in Beethovens music.

I like both composers, but the styles are different.


----------



## cheregi (Jul 16, 2020)

I'm not very familiar with Beethoven's symphonies or anything of Bruckner's, but I recently read a really enlightening breakdown of Beethoven's use of irony in his quartets. I got an impression almost of a kind of caustic sarcasm permeating his music, a kind of ****-eating grin or a deliberately crass sort of dare levelled at his audience - like, see if you can follow me even here, even into all this over-the-top bombast. And somehow this is also tied to his interest in Eastern mysticism, in paradoxes that don't resolve but which, in their irresolvable state, contain truth... As someone who is often put off by bombast and compositional 'verboseness' (both ultimately nebulous terms, I agree), listening for irony in Beethoven really opened up my appreciation for him. I wonder about Bruckner's relationship to all that, if there is one.

Here's the article for those interested: https://online.ucpress.edu/jams/article/70/2/285/92328/Irony-and-Incomprehensibility-Beethoven-s-Serioso


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

cheregi said:


> I'm not very familiar with Beethoven's symphonies or anything of Bruckner's, but I recently read a really enlightening breakdown of Beethoven's use of irony in his quartets. I got an impression almost of a kind of caustic sarcasm permeating his music, a kind of ****-eating grin or a deliberately crass sort of dare levelled at his audience - like, see if you can follow me even here, even into all this over-the-top bombast. And somehow this is also tied to his interest in Eastern mysticism, in paradoxes that don't resolve but which, in their irresolvable state, contain truth... As someone who is often put off by bombast and compositional 'verboseness' (both ultimately nebulous terms, I agree), listening for irony in Beethoven really opened up my appreciation for him. I wonder about Bruckner's relationship to all that, if there is one.
> 
> Here's the article for those interested: https://online.ucpress.edu/jams/article/70/2/285/92328/Irony-and-Incomprehensibility-Beethoven-s-Serioso


like many great artists, Beethoven was one of those guys who loved to play with the limits of forms. blowing up the symphony with the Eroica, blowing it up again with the finale of No. 9 (the first movement of which seems to stretch classical sonata form to its breaking point), seeing how far he could take fugue structure in Sonata no. 29/Grosse Fuge, everything involving Op.111, etc. there's absolutely a rebelliousness (or "irony") in there - I love his late works because this irony, despite the collapse of his personal life, seemed to turn into some kind of a searching wonder.

like - Op.111 - astonishing emotion, but it's not because of the common interpretation* that this is a "Beethoven's mortality" thing - when he stretches the piano theme/variation to its breaking point and the music seems to just fracture into little bits and that trill starts, it's the most emotional affect i've ever had with music. personal interpretations are personal interpretations but where a lot of his great work was very much "impressive" and rebellious - there's something different about 111. it's like - "look at this. listen to this. listen to what _music_ can do. can't you _see?_". and it's astonishingly beautiful and so lonely, because it sounds like someone who, all his life, just understood music on a completely different level from his peers desperate to share that understanding with the world.

can you tell I love 111? I get the same feeling from his late quartets as well (though not the Grosse Fuge, which is great for different reasons)

*the funniest thing i've read recently was an article in a contemporary German music journal that interpreted Op.111 as the common "Death of Beethoven" narrative - except that Beethoven was _alive_ when the article was written!

aaaaanyway, as for Bruckner, I despise his "holy fool" image where he like, accidentally composed great works by channeling some holy spirit or something, and I think he's another type of innovative artist - the one who had a totally idiosyncratic way of composition that gives his music a wonderful strangeness - Hector Berlioz (who did so because of his proud lack of formal training) but without the rebellious streak.


----------



## EmperorOfIceCream (Jan 3, 2020)

A lot of stereotypes build up about composers over time, but the only way to come to a more nuanced picture is by careful listening. We all know Beethoven as the "mystical adagio" composer, but I think these sections have a certain bareness, even austerity, that you don't find in the slow movements from earlier pieces. Besides just being more polyphonic, late Beethoven seems to have longer lines and to break free from the obsessive motivic development that, to me, hampers the development sections of the 5th and 6th symphonies (they're still amazing symphonies btw-I just prefer the sense of continuity rather than atomized build-up).

The more understated Beethoven:


----------

