# If you have run out of Bruckner...



## marshanp (Jun 6, 2017)

Hallo, everybody - occasional lurker, but new poster, here...

Bruckner is my favourite composer. Long as most of his works are, there aren't all that many of them. He would keep revising when he might have been creating. Hearing yet another recording of a Bruckner symphony (I already have *lots!*) is losing its appeal. It risks becoming a process of listening to the performance much more than the music, and if repeated too often, of "wearing out" the music itself. I ration my Bruckner intake to prevent that from happening.

So... if you love Bruckner's music, but don't want to wear it out, what do you listen to next?

The difficulty is Bruckner's uniqueness. Imitators, lacking his genius, produce only *pale* imitations. Composers who know and respond to Bruckner's music, though, occasionally write works with which Bruckner-lovers feel immediately at home. I've heard a few of those, but for now will leave it to other forum members to make suggestions. Bring 'em on!


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

You're right - there's really no one whose music sounds remotely like Bruckner's. A lot of people pair him with Mahler, but to my ears, there's very, very little in common, other than length.

You might like Alberic Magnard's symphonies, and there are always the great early 20th century symphonists like Sibelius, Nielsen, and Vaughan Williams, not to mention some of Bruckner's predecessors, like Brahms and Schumann.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

How about stepping away from Bruckner entirely for a while, and cultivating a relationship with a completely different sort of composer--perhaps even an anti-Bruckner? Surely there is an individual piece that you like by some other composer, but you have never really explored that other composer's body of work. Not knowing your tastes, I'll throw the name of Prokofiev out there-here is an incredibly prolific composer who wrote masterpieces in every sort of genre and form, many of them wildly different from each other. One can immerse oneself in exploring all his facets, and you might emerge from the process full of new enthusiasms. And if Prokofiev will not serve, we all know there are innumerable other possibilities.


----------



## marshanp (Jun 6, 2017)

I don't play Bruckner recordings all that often now; I do listen to live radio relays, and go to concerts at Birmingham's Symphony Hall whenever Bruckner is programmed. The symphonies are there in my head already, and I only need an occasional reminder!

I have been an inveterate explorer of "big" music for quite a few years now, and do search far and wide for musical rewards. Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Scriabin have all been fairly well trawled! One does get a bit jaded. It becomes harder and harder to find a new musical rush - just like other kinds of addicts, I suspect... Magnard, though, is a very good suggestion. I know and very much like his Chant Funebre, so will probably find something to respond to in his symphonies. Thanks!

And it occurs to me that listening to smaller-scale (but still ambitious) music - say, Faure's chamber music? - could be time well spent


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

Don't forget Bruckner's non-symphonic works, such the the three masses, the Te Deum, 150th Psalm, 
Helgoland , the motets , the string quintet , for example . There's so much gorgeous , magnificent music here .


----------



## marshanp (Jun 6, 2017)

superhorn said:


> Don't forget Bruckner's non-symphonic works, such the the three masses, the Te Deum...


Oh, yes - the Te Deum in particular is a favourite.

The 3rd symphony by Marcel Tyberg is a pretty good substitute for Bruckner (with a bit of Mahler for good measure!). Finely played on its only recording by the Buffalo Philharmonic under Joanne Falletta.

I also hear something Brucknerish in Rautavaara's 3rd symphony (but nowhere else in his music, so far at least).

Furtwangler's Second symphony has a lot going for it, particularly in his own performance from 1953 with the VPO. I find it remarkable - it is as though he is speaking to you directly.

Another Second symphony, by Martin Scherber, is also well worth hearing. If Bruckner had been a 20th century composer, he might have written something like this long, concentrated single span.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

I read somewhere that Robert Simpson's music was considered Bruckner-influenced to some degree, although I've never heard it.
He certainly wrote a terrific book on Bruckner.
But perhaps he's one of the pale imitators you refer to...
Graeme


----------



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

GraemeG said:


> I read somewhere that Robert Simpson's music was considered Bruckner-influenced to some degree, although I've never heard it.
> He certainly wrote a terrific book on Bruckner.
> But perhaps he's one of the pale imitators you refer to...
> Graeme


If Robert Simpson was influenced by anyone with regards to his symphonic thinking then it was Sibelius and Nielsen. Many of Simpson's symphonies have substantial depth to them and occasionally sound 'cosmic' but I find that there is little connective tissue with Bruckner. One thing's for certain - Robert Simpson wasn't a pale imitation of anybody, as was the case with another great 20th century symphonist, Karl Amadeus Hartmann.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Rott's first, Wetz's third and Schmidt's fourth symphony.


----------



## Guest (Nov 1, 2017)

You might look into Marcel Tyberg--his Symphony No.2 shows a strong Bruckner influence.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

marshanp said:


> Hallo, everybody - occasional lurker, but new poster, here...
> 
> Bruckner is my favourite composer. Long as most of his works are, there aren't all that many of them. He would keep revising when he might have been creating. Hearing yet another recording of a Bruckner symphony (I already have *lots!*) is losing its appeal. It risks becoming a process of listening to the performance much more than the music, and if repeated too often, of "wearing out" the music itself. I ration my Bruckner intake to prevent that from happening.
> 
> ...


Now this is actually an interesting question. I have no idea what the answer would be but it is still an interesting question. Since I am also a fan of Bruckner this is a thread I will monitor.


----------



## SmokeyBarnable (Sep 11, 2017)

lots of Mahler just sounds like marches to me. but the adagios are very brucknerian (5th and 9th).

Sibelius is a good choice, even though bruckner seems more, dunno, universal and thematically bigger than a lot of Sibelius (I don't like nationalist-romantic music like smetana generally; music that evokes snow-colored trees and lakes makes my teeth ache). the second, fourth and fifth symphonies are glorious though.

maybe Franck and Shostakovich? and the 'best of' Wagner?


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

The great thing about Bruckner ... well, at least _one_ of the great things! ... is that there are so many recordings of his music (in all its various editions!) that you will never run out of interpretative delights if all you ever do is listen to Bruckner 24 hours a day.

Get yourself over to the American Bruckner Society page -- https://www.abruckner.com/thebrucknersociety/ -- and click on the Discography link. There you will see exactly what I mean. There is so much Bruckner to hear that the Bruckner fan has Heaven on Earth! And that's what Bruckner's music is really all about -- bringing Heaven down to Earth.

All the best to you, Bruckner fan!


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

As already mentioned, Richard Wetz was heavily influenced by Bruckner. His 2nd symphony is highly recommended.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

For me Bruckner is the musical translation of the Biblical 'Tower of Babel' story (Genesis 11). Layer by layer he quietly builds up his musical architecture towards the heavens, and lo! he even protrudes into heavenly unearthliness. Compared with that I notice in Mahler's music a complete absence of architectural composition. Instead of that Mahler immerses deeper & deeper into human emotions. So I never switch from Bruckner towards Mahler, just because both happen to have lengthy slow movements. After a heavy dose of Bruckner I mostly bridge into 'light' Baroque music (Vivaldi) because Bruckner's Catholic heaven resembles Vivaldí's Catholic heaven. 

A good progressing onward into Brucknerish explorations I find into late romantic organ music of Franck & Widor. After all Bruckner remains an organ player in all his symphonic magnificence. I also often bridge from Bruckner into Shostakovich's Preludes and Fugues, after which Johann Sebastian's Lutheran heaven is opening up.


----------



## marshanp (Jun 6, 2017)

Ah, yes - Bruckner the organist. Another mystery, that he left so little organ music. He seems to have regarded his own instrument as one upon which improvisation was the natural means of expression. Oh, to have been present when he created some ephemeral masterpiece!

I have collected most of the available transcriptions of Bruckner symphonic movements for organ in the belief that he may well have first imagined those works that way - perhaps thinking initially in organ stops, rather than in orchestral sounds. Some (not all) transcriptions work very well. The version of the whole 8th symphony by Lionel Rogg I find particularly rewarding; the slow movement of the 6th as transcribed by Erwin Horn is also rather fine.

PS the transcription for organ of Rachmaninov's symphonic poem The Isle of the Dead by A Langmann is *wonderful* - it sounds to me as though that is how it should have been heard all along...


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

If not mentioned before, I would turn to Wagner, as a very natural alternative, who can be just as absorbing as Bruckner if one takes to him. He greatly inspired Bruckner but of course wasn't Bruckner. Both liked composing works on a grand scale. The Wagner Overtures done by Furtwangler with the Berlin Philharmonic are outstanding. Then there are of course the operas themselves, which are amazing but usually take some time to absorb.

https://www.discogs.com/Wagner-Wilhelm-Furtwängler-Wiener-Philharmoniker-Berliner-Philharmoniker-Kirsten-Flagstad-Philharmo/release/5756458

http://www.wagneroperas.com/indexwagneroperas.html


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

I can only agree that there's nobody quite like Bruckner! And what's this concept of "running out of..." with him?

I discovered the symphonies of Richard Wetz a few years back, and they made quite an impact at the time. I feel he is probably one of those pale imitations referred to above, enjoyable stuff, but if his are Bruckner 10, 11 and 12, then they are not on the same level. Ditto the three very fine symphonies by Alfredo Casella, more hints of Mahler, a bit on the derivative side, but thoroughly enjoyable and a great orchestrator!

For me definitely on the same level are the final two symphonies by Alberic Magnard, sometimes referred to as "the French Bruckner" Other than the nickname, and I suppose a long and elegant slow movement in his 3rd Symphony, the connection to AB is highly tentative, if anything he's closer in spirit to that one-symphony wonder Cesar Franck; and besides Magnard is very much his own man, a uniquely noble and quietly powerful composer.
If you want more Bruckner, I'd suggest looking at errr.. Bruckner! Not just the non-symphonic pieces (especially the choral works!) but I am sure there is enough variation not only in the multitude of recordings of his major works, but also in the bewildering multitude of versions, editions. Try that weird original version of the second movement of No.4 (Inbal plays it) or the Folk Festival finale (Tintner). Or the extra 15 minutes of the 3rd in the original version.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Yes, I would agree about organ music, and also wonder if Baroque works like the Monteverdi Vespers or 17th century masses written for Rome e.g. by Orazio Benvenoli might be of interest.


----------

