# Bruckner Symphony Cycles



## SalieriIsInnocent

I've heard different performances on some of his works on Spotify, and I'd really like to hear more. I'm looking for a set with great sound, nothing plagued with pops and cracks or 80's digital sound. 

I've seen Karajan's set, I'm just never 100% sure with HVK. He was an amazing conductor, but he did a lot of things his own way, and not necessarily the composers way.


----------



## realdealblues

My favorites will always be Eugen Jochum's Dresden Cycle on EMI (Now Warner).

ClassicsToday gave the Jochum/Dresden set a 10 for Performance and 8 for Sound saying "You just can’t go wrong here. Through it all, the Staatskapelle Dresden plays with its customary warmth and beauty of tone, but also with a transparency of texture that never weighs the music down unnecessarily. The sonics are good, sometimes perhaps a touch bright, but never unpleasantly so."

Jochum never disappoints and he is still tops on a few of the symphonies in my book. He also had an earlier cycle with DG which often gets recommended but the sonics aren't as good as the later EMI set and other than Symphony 4, performance wise, everything else on EMI is as good if not better that it's DG counterpart. For me one of the biggest selling points is that Dresden brass! When I think of Bruckner I think of horns and the Dresden brass is just some of the best!

Karajan is Karajan. His Bruckner is still a safe bet for most folks.

Gunter Wand and the Cologne Radio Symphony Orchestra can also be had cheaply these days. While the Cologne Orchestra isn't Berlin or Dresden overall the performances are good and Gunter Wand was always a great Brucknerian.

Georg Tintner on Naxos is also recommended by many. Tintner was also a great Brucknerian, however he uses some different score editions and he's a little idiosyncratic and the orchestras used aren't really traditional "Bruckner" orchestras, never the less the set still got a 10/10 from ClassicsToday.

I haven't heard Skrowaczewski's cycle on Oehms with the Saarbrücken Radio Symphony but I've heard good things about it and ClassicToday just recently gave it a 10/10 for both performance and sound so that might be one to look at as well.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

Sounds like a winner to me. I have a Beethoven set with the Staatskapelle Dresden under Barenboim that sounds amazing, so I under Jochum, it shouldn't dissapoint. 

I agree, Karajan is Karajan, and that's why I love him, but in the end, I don't think every recording I have should be HVK with the Vienna or Berlin.


----------



## realdealblues

SalieriIsInnocent said:


> Sounds like a winner to me. I have a Beethoven set with the Staatskapelle Dresden under Barenboim that sounds amazing, so I under Jochum, it shouldn't dissapoint.
> 
> I agree, Karajan is Karajan, and that's why I love him, but in the end, I don't think every recording I have should be HVK with the Vienna or Berlin.


Barenboim's Beethoven Cycle was actually the Staatskapelle Berlin, not Dresden. But the Staatskapelle Dresden is one of the oldest and finest Symphonies in the world going back to the year 1548. They were every bit as good as the Berlin Philharmonic in my opinion, especially back in the 70's and 80's. Rudolf Kempe made his legendary Richard Strauss recordings with the Dresden Orchestra and Herbert Blomstedt made his popular Beethoven & Schubert Symphony Cycles with them as well. You definitely will not be disappointed with them, especially once you hear that brass section cranking out good and loud.

There's nothing wrong with Karajan in my opinion either. I understand his constant push for "beauty" from the orchestra, especially the strings, and I can understand why some folks may not care much for that approach. To each his own. But if you're a Karajan fan, you may want to pickup Karajan's Bruckner Cycle at some point as well, just for another flavor.

I constantly supplement my favorites. I still think Otto Klemperer's Bruckner 6 is my top pick for that particular symphony. Klemperer's 4 & 7 are also great. I have lots of recordings of Symphony 7 with Symphony 4 close behind because they are my two favorites, but for a starting out set I can't recommend the Jochum Dresden set enough, especially since you can get it from an Amazon Seller these days for like $20+3.99 shipping.


----------



## Vaneyes

I think Jochum (DG) edges out Jochum (EMI/Brilliant Classics/Warner). No matter, Jochum's the Bruckner King.:tiphat:


----------



## Vaneyes

This '66 HvK is the bomb, though sound could be better.


----------



## bigshot

I like the 70s Karajan a little better. The Bohm ones are good too. Not hard to find good Bruckner. Just avoid Solti (same with Mahler for the same reasons.)


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

I like Solti's Mahler. To each his own, I guess.


----------



## nightscape

I have the Skrowaczewski and Karajan sets. As a complete package I would highly recommend either, but I prefer Skrowaczewski.

Jochum cycle on EMI is certainly good. The sound on his DG set is the deal breaker. Brass sounds terrible, overall quality doesn't come close to the EMI recordings.


----------



## jtbell

I bought several of Karajan's Bruckner symphonies on DG cassettes in the 70s and 80s, but they just didn't "click" with me. Then I bought the Jochum EMI set when it became available in a budget CD box, and I liked it a lot. Maybe at least part of the difference was due to (cassettes + my cassette deck) versus CDs. At any rate, I no longer have the Karajans because I got rid of all my cassettes long ago. Maybe I should give him another chance?


----------



## GraemeG

I own the Jochum DG set, but for me Jochum is the emperor with no clothes when it comes to Bruckner. Rush, rush, rush. "I can't make this bit work, so I'll rush through it."
I'd take Karajan over Jochum any day of the week.
And I take Celibidache over everyone. Transfigurative performances in every sense.
cheers,
GG


----------



## bigshot

I would recommend getting Karajan. This stuff sits right in the middle of his sweet spot sylistically. Gunther Wand (any of them) and Bohm are my other two favorites, along with Jochum and Karajan. The 60s Karajan seems to have better sound than the 70s ones and I like the clarity better myself, but the 70s ones are the ones people seem to prefer. To me the strings in the 70s ones seem to be blended together like mashed potatoes. Not much definition, just one big mass.

For me, the important thing in Bruckner isn't the speed, faster- slower- it's all OK to me. The thing I am picky about is the control of dynamics and the rhythmic flow. The transitions need to be smooth and natural sounding, not massive contrasts butted right up against each other (Solti). I've found the conductors with a bit of Viennese lilt do best. The Vienna Philharmonic helps with this. (I'd like to hear Bruckner with the Czech Philharmonic. I bet that would be good.)


----------



## CyrilWashbrook

I really like Wand. I haven't listened to every performance from every set, but all of them can safely be commended. A specific comment on his recordings with the Kölner RSO: while the orchestra's name may not come with the same prestige as, say, the Berliner Philharmoniker, I do not believe that those recordings are inferior in terms of either interpretation or playing quality.


----------



## Vesteralen

realdealblues said:


> My favorites will always be Eugen Jochum's Dresden Cycle on EMI (Now Warner).
> 
> ClassicsToday gave the Jochum/Dresden set a 10 for Performance and 8 for Sound saying "You just can't go wrong here. Through it all, the Staatskapelle Dresden plays with its customary warmth and beauty of tone, but also with a transparency of texture that never weighs the music down unnecessarily. The sonics are good, sometimes perhaps a touch bright, but never unpleasantly so."
> 
> Jochum never disappoints and he is still tops on a few of the symphonies in my book. He also had an earlier cycle with DG which often gets recommended but the sonics aren't as good as the later EMI set and other than Symphony 4, performance wise, everything else on EMI is as good if not better that it's DG counterpart. For me one of the biggest selling points is that Dresden brass! When I think of Bruckner I think of horns and the Dresden brass is just some of the best!


Thanks for the recommendation. This has always been my favorite orchestra. Years ago I had a copy of Bruckner's 6th by Jochum on DG. I liked it, but it wasn't my favorite Bruckner symphony so I pretty much ignored it after a couple of listens through. I will definitely seek out the set you recommended, if not for Jochum, at least for the Staatskapelle Dresden.


----------



## Guest

Overall, Karajan is my favorite, but for far better sound, especially if one has a multi-channel SACD system, Blomstedt's new cycle is excellent, too.


----------



## JACE

I'm thinking about getting this set:









_*Icon: Eugen Jochum*_

It includes Jochum's Bruckner cycle with the Dresden Staatskapelle, his Brahms cycle with the LPO, and his Beethoven cycle with the LSO -- plus Bach's Mass in B minor & Mozart's Requiem.

20 CDs. Ridiculously inexpensive.

Any thoughts?


----------



## amfortas

JACE said:


> 20 CDs. Ridiculously inexpensive.
> 
> Any thoughts?


Ridiculously inexpensive always sounds good.

Go for it. I won't tell.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

JACE said:


> I'm thinking about getting this set:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Icon: Eugen Jochum*_
> 
> It includes Jochum's Bruckner cycle with the Dresden Staatskapelle, his Brahms cycle with the LPO, and his Beethoven cycle with the LSO -- plus Bach's Mass in B minor & Mozart's Requiem.
> 
> 20 CDs. Ridiculously inexpensive.
> 
> Any thoughts?


Ridiculously '_inapposite_.'

Despite the barn-burner price, I'd go for the more-poised, more-epic, more-heroic readings and performances of the Haitink/Concertgebouw and the Karajan/BPO.

-- Well, you_ asked_. _;D_


----------



## Itullian

Get it. It's a great set.


----------



## amfortas

Itullian said:


> Get it. It's a great set.


And how many of us have great sets anymore?


----------



## JACE

Marschallin Blair said:


> Ridiculously '_inapposite_.'
> 
> Despite the barn-burner price, I'd go for the more-poised, more-epic, more-heroic readings and performances of the Haitink/Concertgebouw and the Karajan/BPO.
> 
> -- Well, you_ asked_. _;D_


Haitink's Bruckner leaves me cold. I've heard a couple of his Bruckner recordings, and they didn't do anything for me.

HvK's Bruckner, on the other hand, has impressed me. But I've not heard that much of it.

Maybe I'll get Herbie's set down the line... _after_ Jochum. 

EDIT:
Plus I want to hear Jochum's Beethoven & Brahms. I've read good things about them too.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

amfortas said:


> And how many of us have great sets anymore?


I'm not a 'set' person, myself.

I go by individual performances; or even movements within performances.

I never understood the fixation on 'sets.'

Quality I can understand.


----------



## Itullian

JACE said:


> Haitink's Bruckner leaves me cold. I've heard a couple of his Bruckner recordings, and they didn't do anything for me.
> 
> HvK's Bruckner, on the other hand, has impressed me. But I've not heard that much of it.
> 
> Maybe I'll get Herbie's set down the line... _after_ Jochum.
> 
> EDIT:
> Plus I want to hear Jochum's Beethoven & Brahms. I've read good things about them too.


His Beethoven and Brahms are excellent.


----------



## JACE

Marschallin Blair said:


> I'm not a 'set' person, myself.
> 
> I go by individual performances; or even movements within performances.
> 
> I never understood the fixation on 'sets.'
> 
> Quality I can understand.


O.K. Fair enough.

In that case, which of von Karajan's Bruckner recordings appeal to you the most? Forced to pick just _one recording_, what would it be?


----------



## realdealblues

JACE said:


> I'm thinking about getting this set:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Icon: Eugen Jochum*_
> 
> It includes Jochum's Bruckner cycle with the Dresden Staatskapelle, his Brahms cycle with the LPO, and his Beethoven cycle with the LSO -- plus Bach's Mass in B minor & Mozart's Requiem.
> 
> 20 CDs. Ridiculously inexpensive.
> 
> Any thoughts?


Everything in that set is top notch. I'm serious. Everything is exceptional. You won't regret it.

ClassicsToday even gave it a 10 for performance and a 9 for sound and said several recordings in that set are Reference Edition quality.


----------



## JACE

amfortas said:


> Ridiculously inexpensive always sounds good.
> 
> Go for it.  I won't tell.





Itullian said:


> Get it. It's a great set.





realdealblues said:


> Everything in that set is top notch. I'm serious. Everything is exceptional. You won't regret it.
> 
> ClassicsToday even gave it a 10 for performance and a 9 for sound and said several recordings in that set are Reference Edition quality.


O.K. Under the influence of all your "arm-twisting" (which is wonderful, by the way), I just pulled the trigger. It's pay-day and the money was burning hole in my pocket. 

I'll report back after I've had a chance to dig in.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

JACE said:


> O.K. Fair enough.
> 
> In that case, which of von Karajan's Bruckner recordings appeal to you the most? Forced to pick just _one recording_, what would it be?


If forced to choose only_ one_, I could do no better than to choose _three_.

All three would 'sahshay, they stay':

the caressingly-elegant touch of the Karajan DG Fourth; his bigger-than-life sounding DG Eighth with the unmatched brass flourishes in the last movement; and his_ nearly_-titanic, digital-not-analogue DG Ninth (the Furtwangler/BPO is my all-time favorite).

They're all just so different.


----------



## Itullian

Marschallin Blair said:


> I'm not a 'set' person, myself.
> 
> I go by individual performances; or even movements within performances.
> 
> I never understood the fixation on 'sets.'
> 
> Quality I can understand.


Sets can be excellent.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Itullian said:


> Sets can be excellent.


I tend to find so many of them uneven in either inspiration or performance.

Haitink's late-sixties Concertgebouw Bruckner's eighth blows doors; but his Bruckner's Fourth in the same set is solidly-respectable, but hardly in the same league.

Same 'set' though.


----------



## Itullian

Marschallin Blair said:


> I tend to find so many of them uneven in either inspiration or performance.
> 
> Haitink's late-sixties Concertgebouw Bruckner's eighth blows doors; but his Bruckner's Fourth in the same set is solidly-respectable, but hardly in the same league.
> 
> Same 'set' though.


Agree. Many are uneven. But with my favorite artists, I enjoy hearing their takes on things.


----------



## JACE

Marschallin Blair said:


> All three would 'sahshay, they stay':


Funny. I like that. 

And thank you for the recommendations. I will seek out HvK's 4th, 8th, and 9th!


----------



## Marschallin Blair

Itullian said:


> Agree. Many are uneven. But with my favorite artists, I enjoy hearing their takes on things.


Oh, absolutely.

Especially with singers.


----------



## bigshot

JACE said:


> Haitink's Bruckner leaves me cold.


Me too. They accuse Karajan of having homogenized sound. Haitink has homogenized ideas. Jochum or Wand are better than either of them.


----------



## bigshot

Marschallin Blair said:


> Haitink's late-sixties Concertgebouw Bruckner's eighth blows doors; but his Bruckner's Fourth in the same set is solidly-respectable, but hardly in the same league. Same 'set' though.


I find all of Haitink's Bruckner to be solidly respectable. He's very consistently respectable and proper. But I like a little bit of flair.


----------



## Hudon

Daniel Barenboim and the Berlin Philharmonic was the set I finally went with. It's rough and rugged and beautiful and powerful. There are better individual recordings of this symphony or that, but for 9 symphonies, Barenboim was the set I opted for. All digital. The recorded sound isn't too close or too distant and is nicely balanced.


----------



## Granate

Well, there is a *2016 thread* for this but it's on the general discussion section. I think there are plenty of new members here and they could share their thoughts on *full symphony cycles* of my favourite composer.

After browsing a lot of discography, I finally understood how important was to choose a range of sets, depending on the versions they use for Bruckner, like:

1st versions
Pre-Nowak Edition
Predominantly Haas
Predominantly Nowak
Mixed Editions
Mario Venzago
Sergiu Celibidache​
(2nd versions in Haas and Nowak editions have more distinct scores in No.4, No.7 & No.8)

*How do you like your Bruckner, senior and junior members?*

I'm soon going to do a challenge of my favourite Bruckner cycles, even if they belong to different categories. I've changed my mind about lots of things for the past year and I think I'm ready to take another look.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Granate said:


> 1st versions
> Pre-Nowak Edition
> Predominantly Haas
> Predominantly Nowak
> Mixed Editions
> Mario Venzago
> Sergiu Celibidache​
> (2nd versions in Haas and Nowak editions have more distinct scores in No.4, No.7 & No.8)


And if you weren't driven crazy enough by all the variations, there are two Celibidache cycles, pre-Zen and Zen.


----------



## Jeffrey Smith

I think Davies relatively new set with the Bruckner Orchester Linz is well worth a listen.

Established favorites are Karajan and Skrowazeski, as well as Wand.

Special mention to Celibadache.


----------



## Josquin13

Manxfeeder writes, "And if you weren't driven crazy enough by all the variations, there are two Celibidache cycles, pre-Zen and Zen."

Ha! That's a good description, and accurate. Personally, I like Celi's 'pre-Zen' Stuttgart recordings on DG--as the slow tempo complaints don't especially apply there. He's even occasionally faster than Giulini, for instance. However, Celi's 'a la carte' offerings are his best Bruckner for the 7th & 8th, IMO (& come in close to audiophile sound quality, for a welcome change)--indeed those two recordings go with me to my desert island (along with Celi's 4th on Sony):

https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...rd_wg=XxHJx&psc=1&refRID=5C5D114RYXP5HZ1AJ6Z8

https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...rd_wg=XxHJx&psc=1&refRID=5C5D114RYXP5HZ1AJ6Z8

https://www.amazon.com/BRUCKNER-SYM...1526325830&sr=1-1&keywords=celibidache+4+sony

https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...rd_wg=yunlF&psc=1&refRID=0VR9HNTW68R95E9S2J5X

Karajan's 'a la carte' Bruckner also represents his best, IMO, as his EMI Bruckner 4th & 7th are superior to the 4th & 7th recordings in the DG cycle. I'd even say Karajan's EMI Bruckner are among the finest recordings he made in his career, and among the best Bruckner in the catalogue (& I'm not a Karajan fan). (His late digital DG Bruckner 8th with the Vienna Philharmonic is also preferable to the analogue DG 8th, IMO.) Karajan's ('homogenized') thick, velvety smooth Berlin string sound works well in Bruckner's music, even though I still hear a lot more of Bruckner's score when it is played by the Staatskapelle Dresden.

https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...328093&sr=1-2&keywords=karajan+bruckner+4+emi
https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...328093&sr=1-1&keywords=karajan+bruckner+4+emi

Which is not to say that I don't like Karajan's DG Bruckner cycle. I do, as it's one of the better ones. But I would prefer Jochum's, if forced to choose between them.

Haitink's Bruckner is also preferable 'a la carte'. I'd take his later Bruckner 8ths (a Haitink specialty) from Vienna (on Philips) and the Concertgebouw (on hybrid SACD) to the 8th from his early Philips cycle, any day. The Vienna 4th is also superior, IMO.

https://www.amazon.com/Symphonies-3...1526328190&sr=1-2&keywords=haitink+bruckner+8
https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...1526328190&sr=1-1&keywords=haitink+bruckner+8
https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...r0&keywords=haitink+vienna+bruckner+4+philips

I prefer Wand's Bruckner 'a la carte' too:

https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...id=1526328249&sr=1-1&keywords=wand+bruckner+8
https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Sym...26328315&sr=1-5&keywords=wand+bruckner+berlin


----------



## Manxfeeder

Josquin13 said:


> Karajan's ('homogenized') thick, velvety smooth Berlin string sound works well in Bruckner's music, even though I still hear a lot more of Bruckner's score when it is played by the Staatskapelle Dresden.


My first hearing of Karajan's EMI recording of Bruckner's 4th is the closest I've ever come to synesthesia. When I heard the strings, I felt like I was tasting melted chocolate.


----------



## Jeffrey Smith

I just want to add my endorsement to Karajan's EMI Fourth, one of the best Bruckner recordings ever made.
What makes his DG cycle recommendable in my eyes would be the performances of the first three symphonies, which some conductors fall flat in. The later symphonies are good but don't stand out in the crowd.


----------



## DarkAngel

The exciting thing in Bruckner for me is the recent emergence of a very strong new live set of performances by Thielemann, excellent sound quality and performances of enduring stature (so far).....the music takes flight and soars to the heavens while the inherent spiritual reverence shines brightly, very impressive indeed!


----------



## THUaudiophile

The Skrowaczewksi recordings got mentioned here earlier already. It is too bad Denon did not record all the symphonies, just the 0th, 7th, 8th and 9th. I have recently made extensive comparisons of Bruckner recordings and I can asure you, the Denon Skrowaczewksi records are about the best recordings of grand orchestral work you will ever hear. But make sure you have the proper reproduction equipment, ideally using high resolution audio files. Read my detailed analysis here Bruckner audiophile classical recordings


----------



## THUaudiophile

@DarkAngel die Thielemann Aufnahmen interessieren mich, ich sehe aber nicht wo ich die herkriegen oder rein hören kann. Besteht eine Möglichkeit dass Du mir kurze Ausschnitte zustellen könntest? (Unkomprimiert) Ich habe ja bereits viele Aufnahmen verglichen für mein Magazin.


----------



## THUaudiophile

@DarkAngel sorry, I got into my "German mode" while looking through the mdr website. Should I translate my request?


----------



## Granate

Welcome to TalkClassical Thomas! Your Blog is beautiful!

I had reviewed the last Bruckner recordings by Skrowaczewski for Denon and I was quite satisfied. I'm no audiophile and I prefer other styles in Bruckner than his. Please, have a great time among us and share the content you want. You can also put a permanent link of your blog in your posts.

However, I would like to remind people that my inquiry is about *complete cycles* and not recordings, because there's another long thread for that. Thank you!

I should have guessed you were a Graphic Designer


----------



## Heck148

Solti/CSO - excellent throughout, with some really outstanding ones - 3,6,7,8,9...also Solti is one of the few that, for me, can get #5 to hang together...

Barenboim/CSO - his first cycle - splendidly recorded by DG... all are excellent, great # 3,4,6,7 [III/scherzo, the best!!]


----------



## Granate

Heck148 said:


> Solti/CSO - excellent throughout, with some really outstanding ones - 3,6,7,8,9...also Solti is one of the few that, for me, can get #5 to hang together...
> 
> Barenboim/CSO - his first cycle - splendidly recorded by DG... all are excellent, great # 3,4,6,7 [III/scherzo, the best!!]


I like both, but I've lately fallen in love with the Barenboim first cycle. Do you own on CD any of those? Which Release?


----------



## Heck148

Granate said:


> I like both, but I've lately fallen in love with the Barenboim first cycle. Do you own on CD any of those? Which Release?


I own the one pictured...DG released 4/7, and 9 previously as 2-disc set, singles...I have those, but the sound on the complete set is much better....the full set is sonically really outstanding.


----------



## gardibolt

I'm quite fond of Tintner's set. If you can track down a copy of one of Takashi Asahina's cycles with the Osaka Philharmonic, those are well worth listening to as well, though the recordings are beginning to sound a bit dated. They are hard to come by in the USA though.


----------



## wkasimer

Lately, I've been listening to, and enjoying the set by the late Stanislaw Skrowaczewski:









Consistently excellent performances and sonics.


----------



## Merl

gardibolt said:


> I'm quite fond of Tintner's set. If you can track down a copy of one of Takashi Asahina's cycles with the Osaka Philharmonic, those are well worth listening to as well, though the recordings are beginning to sound a bit dated. They are hard to come by in the USA though.


Agreed. Asahina has a lovely way with Bruckner. It's on the slower side but he keeps the pulse of the music. His Beethovens are good too (he did 7 cycles of those). Think Klemperer and that's kind of what you get with Asahina. I've got 3 (I think - ill have to check) Asahina Bruckner cycles (JVC , Jean-Jean and Canyon Classics). I definitely have the first two anyway. Avoid his Brahms cycle like the plague, though. Its very pedestrian.


----------



## Granate

wkasimer said:


> Lately, I've been listening to, and enjoying the set by the late Stanislaw Skrowaczewski:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Consistently excellent performances and sonics.


I don't quite agree on that (the sound quality is mostly very good), but his style is so particular and the box is so inexpensive that maybe in the future I could purchase it. No.6 is my favourite from the set.


----------



## Granate

Call me jinxed. The Jochum Dresden cycle in the 2000 remasters is on sale at 27€ in Amazon Spain plus delivery (free over 29€) but I my final Bruckner challenge may happen in a month. I still don't know how good the 2017 Japanese remasters have been and I already own 3 complete Bruckner cycles.










Don't even mention the green box. It maybe cheaper but I have said multiple times that I don't like the 90s remasters.


----------



## Konsgaard

Granate said:


> Don't even mention the green box. It maybe cheaper but I have said multiple times that I don't like the 90s remasters.


Could you clarify on the different remasterings of the boxes? Which one is the green? Which has the best remasteing, could you provide a link?


----------



## Granate

*Bruckner Jochum in Dresden - Remasters Part I*



Konsgaard said:


> Could you clarify on the different remasterings of the boxes? Which one is the green? Which has the best remasteing, could you provide a link?


_The pleasure is mine_

B000002S0M - 1990 first CD remaster










B00D56ADAS - Budget 2013 Release (a reincarnation of the 1990 Remaster?)


















B00004YA0T - 2000 Release with new ART remasters (you may remember the double-forte series)


----------



## Granate

*Bruckner Jochum in Dresden - Remasters Part II*

B008I157AQ - 2012 Icon box, with confirmed 2000 Remasters of the Bruckner symphonies et al.










2017 Tower Records Japanese remaster by Warner Classics in SACD



Granate said:


> Open the images to zoom in
> 
> I just found out that there is a limited SACD edition of the Jochum Dresden Bruckner cycle, remastered in 2017. It was released in Tower Records Japan and the price is from $188:
> 
> Bruckner: Symphonies 1～9
> Sächsische Staatskapelle Dresden
> Eugen Jochum
> 
> Limited to 1000 copies (with serial number)
> JAPAN Box Set - 9 SACD Hybrid
> Release Date: December 22, 2017
> TOWER RECORDS DEFINITION SERIES
> TDSA-60
> SACD: 2017, Newly 96kHz/24bit Remastering from the original master
> CD: 2017, Newly 96kHz/24bit Remastering from the original master
> 
> Let's see if you can click here.


I've been thinking now that nowhere on Amazon or this forum have I found a proof that shows that the Green box uses new remasters, but if the ornamental box in 2000 also states copyright in 1990, the only difference in packaging between those two boxes is that one says 2000 and the other says 2013, but both have the 1990 copyright. *Can anyone who owns the Green box figure out if the booklet states explicitly the year of the remaster?* I think I can trust the back of the 2000 box, but now I'm not so sure about the 2013 green one.


----------



## Granate

The quest for the EMI remasters is also a funny journey in the three different editions of the Tennstedt Mahler cycle. The first CD edition in 1998 just remastered the Analogue recordings, left the digital recordings untouched and had all the studio accounts.










In 2011, EMI released a complete Mahler black box of 16 CDs with live recordings and DLVDE that I proudly own. All analogue recordings, plus the digital No.2, had been remastered again in the early 2000s with ART.










In 2013, Warner released again what seemed to be a faithful incarnation of the first orange box: the 1998 remasters and only the studio accounts 1-9+10Ad. Now I'm not that sure because no one ever replied to my questions about the purple box remasters with booklet information.










I'll just say that the 2000s remasters sound richer than the old ones in this case. I don't know why they would go back to the old ones.


----------



## Konsgaard

Granate, thanks for all this remastering information!


----------



## Merl

Granate, what do you wanna know about this box. I've got it sat in front of me right now. It's the one I ordered from the US for the massive price of £2.72. Gotta be bargain of the century (even if it did take 6 weeks to arrive).


----------



## Granate

Merl said:


> Granate, what do you wanna know about this box. I've got it sat in front of me right now. It's the one I ordered from the US for the massive price of £2.72. Gotta be bargain of the century (even if it did take 6 weeks to arrive).
> 
> View attachment 104984


If you could please hand in the data the booklet has about remasters it would be very helpful. If you have the Bruckner green box, if you do the same, I would be very happy.

Yesterday I was checking out the remastering information of the EMI Don Giovanni by Wilhelm Furtwängler in Salzburg 1954, and I found out the same issue. It's like I cannot understand EMI's information in their back covers:










1991 Remaster/Release










2005 ART remaster










Back to 1986/1991?


----------



## Merl

Granate said:


> If you could please hand in the data the booklet has about remasters it would be very helpful. If you have the Bruckner green box, if you do the same, I would be very happy.


OK, Granate, there's nothing in the booklet about remastering but on the back of some CDs (not all) it highlights those that have have remastered (see pic below). It seems that the remastered discs are;

Symphonies 1 & 2 (digitally remastered 2000) 
Symphonies 3, 4 & 5 (digitally remastered 2001)
Symphonies 9 & 10 (digitally remastered 2002)

Symphonies 6, 7 & 8 do not have any remastering info on them so I assume they weren't messed with.


----------



## Granate

Merl said:


> OK, Granate, there's nothing in the booklet about remastering but on the back of some CDs (not all) it highlights those that have have remastered (see pic below). It seems that the remastered discs are;
> 
> Symphonies 1 & 2 (digitally remastered 2000)
> Symphonies 3, 4 & 5 (digitally remastered 2001)
> Symphonies 9 & 10 (digitally remastered 2002)
> 
> Symphonies 6, 7 & 8 do not have any remastering info on them so I assume they weren't messed with.





Granate said:


> *2011 Release - EMI (Booklet information)*
> 
> *Studio Cycle*
> No.1 - (P) 1978/2000*
> No.2 - (P) 1982/2000*
> No.3 - (P) 1980/2001*
> No.4 - (P) 1983
> No.5 - (P) 1979/2001*
> No.6 - (P) 1981
> No.7 - (P) 1983
> No.8 - (P) 1987
> DLVDE - (P) 1992
> No.9&10 - (P) 1980/2002*
> 
> *Live cycle*
> No.5 - (P) 1989
> No.6 - (P) 1995
> No.7 - (P) 1995
> 
> Digital remastering by EMI records Ltd. This compilation (P) 2011 by EMI records Ltd. (C) EMI records Ltd.


Then we can call it a victory! Indeed, Warner used the ART transfers in the symphonies exaclty as EMI did in 2011. We can relax. If the back cover info by Warner wasn't so confusing...

Now it's more likely that the Warner Green box for Bruckner certainly uses the 2000 remasters. I didn't trust it because a lot of Amazon reviewers had been complaining (like me) about the brass sound in the green box, or they were much more vocal than the 2000 ornamental one. Can anyone be so nice to check out the booklet too?


----------



## Rach Man

Does anyone own or has listened to the following cycle? It's quite pricey, but some of the reviews were outstanding.

If anyone is familiar with this cycle, would you tell me how you feel about the music and the sound quality?
Thanks.

Bruckner: Complete Symphonies (Box Set) [Hybrid SACD]
Herbert Blomstedt , Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra


----------



## wkasimer

Rach Man said:


> Does anyone own or has listened to the following cycle? It's quite pricey, but some of the reviews were outstanding.
> 
> If anyone is familiar with this cycle, would you tell me how you feel about the music and the sound quality?
> Thanks.
> 
> Bruckner: Complete Symphonies (Box Set) [Hybrid SACD]
> Herbert Blomstedt , Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra
> 
> View attachment 112298


I have a couple of the individual discs. The performances are excellent without breaking any new ground, and the sound is fabulous. The only reason I haven't bought the set is the price.


----------



## Granate

I copy wkasimer's comment. It's certainly most impressive SACD Bruckner set. It's a deluxe set, but without deluxe performance quality unfortunately, unless you are an audiophile. But I think the label has the right to price the set this way because today there's no need to be competitive against labels but to earn enough profit.

I wish Eurodisc had signed another conductor rather than the in-house Masur to do their Bruckner set. The Leipzig Gewandhaus is not the same orchestra today as in the 1960s and 1970s. Nor is the BPO or the Staatskapelle Dresden. At least to my ears


----------



## RockyIII

View attachment 112319


I like Barenboim's third complete set. Symphonies 1-3 were recorded live Vienna in 2012, and 4-9 were recorded live in Berlin in 2010.


----------



## DarkAngel

The great HVK Bruckner set in remastered CD and 24/96 blu ray formats, price very cheap at Presto UK, coming soon it will be mine!


----------



## Itullian

DarkAngel said:


> The great HVK Bruckner set in remastered CD and 24/96 blu ray formats, price very cheap at Presto UK, coming soon it will be mine!


Are the cds remastered ? or just the blu ray?


----------



## DarkAngel

Itullian said:


> Are the cds remastered ? or just the blu ray?


^^^^ Sorry very hard to find info, we need to see back cover info.......

*You are right we should not "assume" that CDs are remastered*


----------



## Itullian

DarkAngel said:


> ^^^^ Sorry very hard to find info, we need to see back cover info.......
> 
> *You are right we should not "assume" that CDs are remastered*


I bet they're not. Like the Bernstein set wasn't.


----------



## Granate

That would be quite dishonest, but it's like they would save one job to put everything glossy and remastered in a Blu-Ray audio and just put the same old CDs (with Symphony No.5 split) from the old transfers but in the most attractive sleeves.


----------



## NLAdriaan

I sent an email to DG to enquire about the format of the soundfiles on the complete Kleiber DG set. They didn't answer that one and nowhere on the documentation you could find anything. So I suspect they just issue the same CD bits and bites on a blu-ray, which makes this set the emperor's clothes.


----------



## millionrainbows

I'm happy with this 20-CD set. I got it for $15.99. The sound & mastering sound excellent.

Later edit: I'm sorry, it was $29.99


----------



## flamencosketches

millionrainbows said:


> I'm happy with this 20-CD set. I got it for $15.99. The sound & mastering sound excellent.
> 
> View attachment 120373


What a steal. I'm not too into Bruckner but I do like getting a lot of music for cheap...


----------



## wkasimer

millionrainbows said:


> I'm happy with this 20-CD set. I got it for $15.99. The sound & mastering sound excellent.
> 
> View attachment 120373


Nice set. I note that Amazon sells the CD set for US$41.73 - but you can buy it in MP3 format for...US$197.49. That makes a lot of sense.


----------



## flamencosketches

wkasimer said:


> Nice set. I note that Amazon sells the CD set for US$41.73 - but you can buy it in MP3 format for...US$197.49. That makes a lot of sense.


I've been noticing that lately... where the mp3 on Amazon is far more expensive than the CD


----------



## millionrainbows

I got this box at Berkshire.


----------



## NLAdriaan

I keep repeating myself, but I very much like this incomplete Bruckner set You also hear the BPO always has a great Bruckner up its sleeves. It just depends on the conductor. Funny detail: Gunter Wand was not welcome during HvK's era. Abbado invited him back and Rattle visited Wand's rehearsals to study (not very effective, as Rattle never became a Bruckner-conductor).


----------



## Granate

millionrainbows said:


> I'm happy with this 20-CD set. I got it for $15.99. The sound & mastering sound excellent.
> 
> Later edit: I'm sorry, it was $29.99












You did really well to get that black box for 30 dollars, although the Schaller contributions in the recent Orange update make it more worthy than the first one.


----------



## Itullian

i enjoy the Chailly set very much.


----------



## flamencosketches

All right, boys and girls. I'm finally starting to get into Bruckner's music, I think. I've been enjoying the 4th, 7th, 8th, and 9th symphonies a good bit. I'm listening to single movements at a time, because I still can't stomach a full hour of Bruckner at any given time... :lol:

To me, the very best moment in all of his music that I have thus far encountered, is the coda of the 4th symphony finale. It is seriously heavy stuff, but it's beautiful. I still don't quite understand what he is trying to say with his music, but whatever that might be, he has created a beautiful monolith of works.

... anyway... I am debating whether it is time to get a full cycle, or if I should keep on collecting individual recordings. My small collection includes the Wand/NDR 4th, the Böhm/Vienna 4th, and the Tintner/Royal Scottish National 9th. Of these, the 4th is my favorite. I plan on getting the Karajan/Vienna 7th as I listened and enjoyed it very much the other day. But I have been looking at cycles too.

So it seems like Günter Wand is "the" Bruckner guy. He has recorded a few cycles; I'm looking at these:









... with the Kölner Rundfunk-Sinfonie-Orchester... and then:










... with the Berlin Philharmonic. It's significantly more expensive, and does not include symphonies 1 through 3. But from what I can gather, it is better. Am I wrong on this?

The other big Bruckner guy is Eugen Jochum. I have been looking at two cycles of his:









... with the Staatskapelle Dresden, perhaps my favorite orchestra. And then:









... with the Berlin Philharmonic and the Bavarian Radio Symphony. Two great orchestras.

I have not heard much of Jochum's Bruckner. If anyone can point me to a really good recording from each set to listen for reference, that would be helpful.

What are some that I'm missing? I know Chailly and Haitink have both recorded cycles with the Royal Concertgebouw. Celibidache is another very famous Bruckner guy, but I don't know if I can stomach those extremely slow tempi at this early stage in my Bruckner appreciation.

Maybe looking to get a full cycle is a wrong-headed approach? Many people told me similarly about Mahler when I was in the market for a Mahler cycle, but I am seriously satisfied with the set that I ended up getting.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Guest

My taste is none of the above. Haitink/Concertgebouw or Chailly/Concertgebouw


----------



## flamencosketches

^Noted. I like both conductors, and I like that orchestra. I'll try and check out each. For some reason, throughout this search I have been in the mindset of "German conductor or bust".

Is there any love for Klemperer here? Not a full cycle, but 4-9 on Warner/EMI. I liked his 9th a lot when I listened to it recently.


----------



## bigshot

flamencosketches said:


> All right, boys and girls. I'm finally starting to get into Bruckner's music, I think. I've been enjoying the 4th, 7th, 8th, and 9th symphonies a good bit. I'm listening to single movements at a time, because I still can't stomach a full hour of Bruckner at any given time... :lol:


I can totally understand where you're coming from. Bruckner can seem tedious if it's conducted without some sort of spark. Wand is great. He understood the stuff inside and out and could keep the monumentalness of the architecture from being too drawn out. There is a set of Bohm late symphonies that is really enjoyable too. The only ones I would get a full cycle from are Wand and Bohm. Maybe if you are going to go for singles, look to Bruno Walter. I'm personally not fond of Chailly or Haitink. Some people like them but I need a little bit of spark to keep the lumbering stuff from turning into loudsoftloudsoftloudsoft.


----------



## Manxfeeder

flamencosketches said:


> I have not heard much of Jochum's Bruckner. If anyone can point me to a really good recording from each set to listen for reference, that would be helpful.


Jochum did a wonderful version of the 5th. I have it as a download, so I'm not sure which one it is. Is it the 1964 recording with the Concertgebouw?


----------



## Guest

flamencosketches said:


> ^Noted. I like both conductors, and I like that orchestra. I'll try and check out each. For some reason, throughout this search I have been in the mindset of "German conductor or bust".
> 
> Is there any love for Klemperer here? Not a full cycle, but 4-9 on Warner/EMI. I liked his 9th a lot when I listened to it recently.


If I had to say what I like about Haitink it is balance. He balances the different voices of the orchestra so everything can be heard. In Bruckner I like to wallow in the complex brass voicing of harmony, and Haitink is great for that. I like Chailly because he has a similar ability to maintain balance, and adding some expressiveness.

For on-off recordings I'd recommend the Blomstedt/San Francisco recordings on Decca.


----------



## Merl

Wand is great, Skrowaczewski's set is top quality (like his Beethoven and Brahms), Jochum and Dresden is a banker, Karajan"s Bruckner is excellent (he was a perfect fit for Bruckner) and if you can afford it then get Blomstedt's Leipzig set. It's as good (and better in places) than all the above. As a Bruckner dark horse ive always rated Barenboim's Chicago cycle which can be picked up very cheaply. His 2nd and 3rd cycles arent as good in comparison for me (although they have their moments).

Edit: I forgot Schaller's excellent cycle. Impressive.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Haitink (like Blomstedt and Wand) gets better with age, so you are better off with his Haitink's later separate Bruckner recordings instead of the earlier full cycle with the RCO. To me, Jochum's Bruckner recordings didn't age well, they sound dull and outdated to my ears.


----------



## Merl

NLAdriaan said:


> Haitink (like Blomstedt and Wand) gets better with age, so you are better off with his Haitink's later separate Bruckner recordings instead of the earlier full cycle with the RCO. To me,


Agreed. Haitink's newer Mahler and Bruckner are better than his older recordings (more adventurous), for me.


----------



## Merl

NLAdriaan said:


> I keep repeating myself, but I very much like this incomplete Bruckner set You also hear the BPO always has a great Bruckner up its sleeves. It just depends on the conductor. Funny detail:* Gunter Wand was not welcome during HvK's era.* Abbado invited him back and Rattle visited Wand's rehearsals to study (not very effective, as Rattle never became a Bruckner-conductor).
> 
> View attachment 120385


It's not that simple, tbh and that sounds like Karajan blocked Wand from working with the BPO, when that wasnt the case. Wand's career was complicated and his recording career was marred by one particular terrible decision. In the mid 50s, Walter Legge asked him to join a group of conductors at EMI and make a few recordings with a view to joining the roster of big EMI conductors. However he decided against that, supposedly to record 'extensively' with the French subscription music club, Club Francaise du Disque. Wand did record for Club Francais but not 'extensively' (some of his recordings were not used or lay dormant for years and have now been lost) and, even worse, was tied to a 25 year contract that put him off limits for recording for anyone else until the early 80s. Even worse, Club Francais had almost wound up their recording commitments to concentrate on their more lucrative book service by the end of the 60s. Wand wanted to get out of the contract but he was told he'd have to buy the rest of his contract off. In hindsight he should have as no big orchestra would look at him to take over knowing that he couldnt record in an era when major labels were releasing new classical music. That one decision meant he missed the big boom of the 70s in music and by the time he was out of contract he was too old for the big jobs but had a good reputation and was much admired as a guest conductor. Such a shame. It basically crippled his career at what should have been the peak of it. Add to this his insistence on extensive rehearsals (he was a perfectionist, I believe) which really annoyed promoters (and some of the orchestras). A great conductor certainly but a poor businessman.


----------



## padraic

flamencosketches said:


> I have not heard much of Jochum's Bruckner. If anyone can point me to a really good recording from each set to listen for reference, that would be helpful.
> 
> What are some that I'm missing? I know Chailly and Haitink have both recorded cycles with the Royal Concertgebouw. Celibidache is another very famous Bruckner guy, but I don't know if I can stomach those extremely slow tempi at this early stage in my Bruckner appreciation.
> 
> Maybe looking to get a full cycle is a wrong-headed approach? Many people told me similarly about Mahler when I was in the market for a Mahler cycle, but I am seriously satisfied with the set that I ended up getting.
> 
> Thanks in advance


File under just another random guy's opinion:

1. I never could understand the love for Wand.
2. Don't love Jochum for symphonies but he is _the_ reference for sacred music - Masses + Te Deum. Can't miss.
3. If I had to pick a starter set, it would be Karajan. His Bruckner cycle with Berlin on DG was just re-mastered (at least, sym. 4-9 were). Don't overpay, though - Amazon is selling it for $72, which is absurd. Presto classical is selling hi-res downloads for a much more reasonable price. Sound improvement is considerable, but they can't fix the fact that it was recorded in the Phiharmonie, and the acoustics suffer.
4. Celibidache - you will either love or hate his approach. I love it for three symphonies in particular - the 4th, the 6th, and the 8th. I feel like there's consensus that he has one of, it not the best, 6th symphonies. I understand your trepidation as being new to Bruckner - but you simply must check him out at some point so you can form your own opinion. You may be richly rewarded, as I was.
5. Even if you get a cycle, there is one absolutely MUST BUY: the 9th by Giulini/Vienna. In my opinion this is the gold standard for this work. I have not ever heard anything that surpasses it.
6. I do think Karajan is supreme in the 7th, but I would go with his EMI recording with Berlin. His EMI 4th is also outstanding.

And finally the bottom line: I don't care whose interpretation you prefer, I'm just thrilled that you are starting on this amazing voyage and I really hope you will come to love and revere this music as much as I.

Happy listening!


----------



## padraic

DarkAngel said:


> ^^^^ Sorry very hard to find info, we need to see back cover info.......
> 
> *You are right we should not "assume" that CDs are remastered*


Possible you all have discovered the answer by now, but just in case...

Symphonies 1-3 of this set were digitally recorded in the 1980s. They cannot be remastered, they are merely upsampled. You'll get no added sonic improvement here.

Symphonies 4-9 were recorded in analog in the 1970s, so they were remastered, and while there is considerable sonic improvement (I'm listening to the 5th right now and it sounds crystal clear), the problems with recording in the Philharmonie are still evident, as there's really nothing a remastering can do about that.

This is still a good starter set, but unless you're a massive HvK fanboy/girl, you can probably skip it. Or go to Presto Classical and pick out your favorites for download.


----------



## Itullian

I own the Jochum EMI, the Wand RCA the Celi and the Chailly.

The one I listen to most is the Chailly because:
The performances are very good, each symphony is on their own disc (no interruptions), the sound is just amazing (Decca DDD at its best. )


----------



## flamencosketches

I think I've narrowed it down to Jochum/Dresden on Warner/EMI, and Wand/Kölner RSO on RCA/Sony... also kind of considering Klemperer/Philharmonia on Warner, which is only 4-9. But I think Wand is going to be the one... he just has a way with understanding and elucidating "the line" of the music, I think, which I hear in Jochum too, but he really does tend to play fast and loose with the tempi at times which is a little irritating, I think. Wand is a little more restrained, which I think might be a good thing in this huge music. The main thing that the Jochum has going for it is the Staatskapelle Dresden, an excellent band. 

I've decided against Karajan as I do like the thick Berlin PO string sound, but don't know if I want 9 hours worth of it in this new (to me) repertoire. Chailly and Haitink I still need to give a fair shot... if anyone wants to share a Youtube link in attempt to sway me, they can be my guest


----------



## CnC Bartok

^^^Go for Jochum! And if you get the EMI Icon box, you get his supreme Beethoven and Brahms too. And no, I kid you not! They ARE supreme!


----------



## Guest

Itullian said:


> Are the cds remastered ? or just the blu ray?


In every other instance of CD+Bluray from DG the CDs have not been remastered, but whatever was produced for previous releases. However in this case there is an added ambiguity since some of the Bruckner was remastered for the Karajan 70 box, and it is not clear if they have included from the previous Karajan/Bruckner box (masters dating to the 80s) or whether the Karajan 70 masters were used. I have the Karajan 70 box and the newly remastered 8th doesn't really sound any better.


----------



## flamencosketches

CnC Bartok said:


> ^^^Go for Jochum! And if you get the EMI Icon box, you get his supreme Beethoven and Brahms too. And no, I kid you not! They ARE supreme!
> 
> View attachment 121479


Hmm... that box looks great. I think you just made my decision for Wand... :lol: ... because I'm not going to shell out 45 bucks (great deal though that is) on a conductor that I'm not very familiar with just yet, and I also don't want to get just the Bruckner cycle now that I know it's available as a much better package deal.

Anyway, I just picked up Jochum's recordings of the Masses with the Bavarian Radio Symphony for a buck, on the strength of Padraic's recommendation.


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> ^^^Go for Jochum! And if you get the EMI Icon box, you get his supreme Beethoven and Brahms too. And no, I kid you not! They ARE supreme!
> 
> View attachment 121479


I agree. Go for this set....its great value. You get a superb Brahms cycle (its a top tier one), a good solid Beethoven set and plenty more to go with your Bruckner.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Merl said:


> It's not that simple, tbh and that sounds like Karajan blocked Wand from working with the BPO, when that wasnt the case. Wand's career was complicated and his recording career was marred by one particular terrible decision. In the mid 50s, Walter Legge asked him to join a group of conductors at EMI and make a few recordings with a view to joining the roster of big EMI conductors. However he decided against that, supposedly to record 'extensively' with the French subscription music club, Club Francaise du Disque. Wand did record for Club Francais but not 'extensively' (some of his recordings were not used or lay dormant for years and have now been lost) and, even worse, was tied to a 25 year contract that put him off limits for recording for anyone else until the early 80s. Even worse, Club Francais had almost wound up their recording commitments to concentrate on their more lucrative book service by the end of the 60s. Wand wanted to get out of the contract but he was told he'd have to buy the rest of his contract off. In hindsight he should have as no big orchestra would look at him to take over knowing that he couldnt record in an era when major labels were releasing new classical music. That one decision meant he missed the big boom of the 70s in music and by the time he was out of contract he was too old for the big jobs but had a good reputation and was much admired as a guest conductor. Such a shame. It basically crippled his career at what should have been the peak of it. Add to this his insistence on extensive rehearsals (he was a perfectionist, I believe) which really annoyed promoters (and some of the orchestras). A great conductor certainly but a poor businessman.


Interesting facts, I didn't know this. But this terrible contract released Wand back on the recording market around 1980, when the digital era just started off and every major label started to record everything all over again. Wand indeed preferred a radio orchestra as it allowed him to more rehearsals. This likely made the unknown Wand unattractive for the major labels who were producing on a tight schedule. 
In this period Karajan however was recording his BPO Bruckner cycle (late seventies to early eighties). And it seems also HvK was rehearsing a lot. But when it comes down to business, HvK was even a better businessman than he was a conductor. It wasn't until HvK died (1989) that Wand (1993) and Celibidache (1992) came back to the BPO to conduct Bruckner. I can't believe this was just a coincidence.


----------



## Granate

Hello flamenco. Why did you all have to talk for the whole day about this while I was moving out!

After 3 years extensively listening to Bruckner, being my favourite composer, I've stayed away from most of the cycles you have proposed, especially never, never giving any love to Günter Wand, whose all performaces sound as simplistic that they seem a parody of Skrowaczewski's lightweight but mostly-brilliant cycle. I never got either in the Dutch world of Bruckner as Haitink and Chailly produce much better performances today than 40 or 20 years ago.

With time, I've learnt to love the qualities of the *Jochum Dresden cycle* even if I still believe EMI/Jochum made fatal engineering/playing decisions. Since its all AAD, it should be soon remastered for the Bruckner 200 anniversary. I consider it posibly the best conducting found in a studio cycle. Also, that growing appreciation for the second Jochum has also implied rejecting the second Bruckner cycle I ever got: the DG one from the 60s. Apart from a sublime No.1, No.4 and No.9, it barely tells anything to me since the sound quality is quite dated.

Although Karajan BPO would be my favourite cycle for its style, I've learnt to live without it. Also, now I have so many Bruckner recordings I have no plans to buy the long awaited Remastered cycle. The Vienna No.8 is a sublime piece of conducting that complements the studio recording, but I never found anything extraordinary in the Vienna No.7.

Sergiu Celibidache is, not only in Bruckner, a fascinating figure to dive in. I would love to get on CD his EMI cycle (in excellent sound from the massive Munich hall) but he's quite overwhelming in the late symphonies. I prefer to go to one of my latest purchases: the expansive No.7 played in Suntory Hall. Pretty much better than his EMI recording. My experience with Bruckner has showed me that Celi's vision of the _ouvre_ is really one-sided and a bit narrow-minded. You would miss many nuances of Bruckner's music if you stuck to it.










The Three Barenboim cycles are quite misterious. I went from a hate to a love relationship with the Chicago cycle once I listened to it for an University coursework and especially since I got the CD set, which has a sheer sound you would never find streaming. The Berliner Philharmoniker cycle is a fantastic beginner cycle with arguably two favourite recordings of mine for symphonies No.5 and No.9, but the rest are quite ok. I reccomend them. And the Staatskapelle Berlin cycle is so badly recorded I stopped considering it. I don't know what happened in the first year of digital recording, but transfers from Video recordings to Audio is really disastrous here, shame on Accentus.

2024 will be see the 200 Anniversary of Bruckner's birth and the publication of the fourt first "Cathedral" cycles in discography. The projects are ongoing. Gerd Schaller has gone through a long Journey with the Philharmonia Festiva and has developed a sharp and very useful performance style to fit into the cavernous Ebrach Abbey. He is currently recording all versions and editions of all his works, inside and outside Ebrach Music Festival. His performances so far satisfy me much more in late than early symphonies, but he's consistent and really well-recorded by BR. Remy Ballot AKA Celibidache's allumni, is currently working in a yearly project for recording all Bruckner symphonies inside the Composer's cathedral, St. Florian. I'm not precisely a fan, but No.7 is one of his best yet. In the same place, Valery Gergiev has been quickly recording Bruckner symphonies under the Munchner Philharmoniker and you better not get me started on his pointless insistence on being a top Germanic conductor. And Finally, Christian Thielemann or my most hyped German conductor has started recording and filming a Cathedral cycle with the Wiener Philharmoniker in a time when the orchestra is has no longer the glorious sound of the past in Decca and DG. Lets see. They are recording the cycle one European Cathedral per symphony. This year: No.2 and No.3.

There are several cycles that count with the first versions of the symphonies, which are a great curiousity. Inbal, Tintner, mentioned Schaller, and my personal favourite: Simone Young. I own her cycle but she doesn't have many plays since I no longer care for which version the symphony has or if it is authentic, but the performance quality.

I'm not going to ask you to dive in the world of mono Bruckner recordings but slowly, the Knappertsbusch recordings plus a Furtwangler No.8 has became my reference for Bruckner conducting over all of the others. The experience has been overwordly.


----------



## Merl

NLAdriaan said:


> Interesting facts, I didn't know this. But this terrible contract released Wand back on the recording market around 1980, when the digital era just started off and every major label started to record everything all over again. Wand indeed preferred a radio orchestra as it allowed him to more rehearsals. This likely made the unknown Wand unattractive for the major labels who were producing on a tight schedule.
> In this period Karajan however was recording his BPO Bruckner cycle (late seventies to early eighties). And it seems also HvK was rehearsing a lot. But when it comes down to business, HvK was even a better businessman than he was a conductor. It wasn't until HvK died (1989) that Wand (1993) and Celibidache (1992) came back to the BPO to conduct Bruckner. I can't believe this was just a coincidence.


Many (in fact nearly all) of the guest conductors with the BPO during the 80s also recorded with them (Maazel, Levine, Abbado, Mehta, Ozawa, Kubelik, etc). The fact that Wand and Celi were openly against recording probably had more to do with them not being invited back (remember this was a time of mass releases from DG). From what is written about guest conductors in Berlin it seems that HvK was mostly complimentary towards his fellow podiumsters. I doubt he blocked Wand from coming back (Celi is different as he had history with the BPO and constantly bad-mouthed other conductors). Remember too that Celi and Wand were much older conductors. If Karajan was in charge of sorting guest conductors hed have wanted newer, younger talent. The only person i can think of Karajan 'banning' from working was Harnoncourt, whom he hated. Saltzburg did eventually admit to barring Harnoncourt from playing citing Karajan as saying "not in my lifetime".


----------



## Granate

Now to yout point, flamencosketches. I don't know if you have purchased any cycle yet, but digging in Bruckner in my first year was really different than it is now. Back then I was so into the bloomy Berliner Philharmoniker style that I purchased both the Young and first Jochum cycle and considered almost everyone else mistaken. I changed my mind several times and learnt lots of things. If you enjoy the Vienna Böhm for the No.4, try to find out about the WPO Bruckner recordings, even if they are in mono.For a full cycle, the *Staatskapelle Dresden string sound* is the one that resembles the most to the WPO, so I would go for it and try to enjoy or ignore the excessive Brass sound.

For spare WPO recordings, try to sample:

Giulini No.2 (Wiener Symphoniker)
Stein No.6
Böhm No.3 (Decca) No.7 and No.8 for DG
Karajan No.7 and No.8
Giulini No.9 (unmissable), plus No.7 and No.8 if you want to try (DG)
Knappertsbusch No.7 (Orfeo) 1949
Furtwängler No.8 1944


----------



## DarkAngel

padraic said:


> 3. If I had to pick a starter set, it would be Karajan. *His Bruckner cycle with Berlin on DG was just re-mastered* (at least, sym. 4-9 were). Don't overpay, though - Amazon is selling it for $72, which is absurd. Presto classical is selling hi-res downloads for a much more reasonable price. Sound improvement is considerable, but they can't fix the fact that it was recorded in the Phiharmonie, and the acoustics suffer.
> .
> And finally the bottom line: I don't care whose interpretation you prefer, I'm just thrilled that you are starting on this amazing voyage and I really hope you will come to love and revere this music as much as I.


Love HVK for Bruckner, the Presto UK 24/192 FLAC downloads of symphonies 4-9 is only $18.50.....amazing bargain! (so cheap I'm thinking it must be a mistake, get them now!)










The newest CD boxset with blu-ray disc features same CDs as older set (not remastered ) but the blu ray disc is new 24/96 remastered tracks, much cheaper at Presto vs Amazon USA......


----------



## Merl

Another reason for Celi probably not being invited back for so many years is that many of the members of the BPO from the late 50s disliked him. Celi was the front-runner to take the BPO post permanently when Furtwangler died but, a few days before the appointment was announced, he had a blazing row with the orchestra in rehearsal and insulted many influential members, resulting in half of the orchestra walking out on him. The post went instead to Karajan. Celi once said of HvK, "Karajan? Terrible. Either he is a great businessman, or he is deaf".


----------



## Granate

Have these


----------



## Manxfeeder

DarkAngel said:


> Love HVK for Bruckner, the Presto UK 24/192 FLAC downloads of symphonies 4-9 is only $18.50.....amazing bargain! (so cheap I'm thinking it might be a mistake, get them now!)


If you like Karajan, the DG Karajan Symphony Edition is around $50 (I've seen it as low as 40 on Ebay) and has the complete Bruckner cycle plus his '70s Beethoven cycle, and the cycles of Brahms, Mendelssohn, Tchaikovsky, and some Mozart and Haydn, 38 disks in all.


----------



## CnC Bartok

The trouble I have with the Karajan set is that he did better recordings elsewhere - his EMI 4 and 7, his old EMI 8, and his later DGG 7 and 8 are all preferable. Oh, and I really don't like his 6!

I've been really enjoying two new (to me) cycles recently: The all-singing all-dancing Gerd Schaller set, and the Michael Gielen Edition set. Neither reaches the "communion" heights some performances manage, hut both are immensely musical, reverent and actually quite powerful at times. Gielen not on his natural turf? Don't believe it! Everything sounds naturally paced, and with a delicacy others either miss or eschew.

Schaller is even better. His orchestra are very good, not very string-heavy, but each piece has a sense of real occasion, and he's really quite exciting and lively in the faster moments. It's also of academic interest in including two different completed Ninths, a smattering of extra pieces (eg Mass No.3) and two different versions of No.4, Volksfest too!


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> The trouble I have with the Karajan set is that he did better recordings elsewhere - his EMI 4 and 7, his old EMI 8, and his later DGG 7 and 8 are all preferable. Oh, and I really don't like his 6!
> 
> I've been really enjoying two new (to me) cycles recently: The all-singing all-dancing Gerd Schaller set, and the Michael Gielen Edition set. Neither reaches the "communion" heights some performances manage, hut both are immensely musical, reverent and actually quite powerful at times. Gielen not on his natural turf? Don't believe it! Everything sounds naturally paced, and with a delicacy others either miss or eschew.


I like most of what Gielen does 'symphonically'. His Beethoven set is excellent, his Brahms impressive, his Schumann very fine and his Mahler consistently very good.


----------



## flamencosketches

Damn, Granate. You must really want me to think hard about this one. :lol: 

You seem critical of every cycle that you've mentioned, as well as all those that I've mentioned. So which cycles do you think are worthwhile? Karajan/Berlin, it seems, any others? Or do you think individual recordings are the way to go?


----------



## Guest

flamencosketches said:


> Damn, Granate. You must really want me to think hard about this one. :lol:
> 
> You seem critical of every cycle that you've mentioned, as well as all those that I've mentioned. So which cycles do you think are worthwhile? Karajan/Berlin, it seems, any others? Or do you think individual recordings are the way to go?


The answer seems obvious to me. Haitink/RCO. Those performance are a perfectly balanced, non-idiosyncratic baseline in splendid Philips sound. Then you will be set to explore more individual recordings of symphonies that interest you.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Merl said:


> I like most of what Gielen does 'symphonically'. His Beethoven set is excellent, his Brahms impressive, his Schumann very fine and his Mahler consistently very good.


I'm working my way through Gielen in Brahms at the moment, and appreciate his absence of histrionics so far (I'm rapidly going off the vicious edge in Brahms, hence my love of Jochum and Belohlavek there) As far as his Schumann is concerned, there's a Spring, some overtures and a wonderful Faustszenen, in the Edition, and I've seen 2&3 on a separate CD, is there a 4th anywhere???

Bruckner is "symphonic", I assume Gielen emphasizing this isn't an issue?

Btw, his Mahler has rapidly become my benchmark, shockingly replacing Kubelik! So, for me, your "consistently very good" is a bit of an understatement!


----------



## Andy Foster

I think searching for the best Bruckner cycle is a bit like looking for the pot of gold at the rainbow's end. The Bruckner performances which move me deeply and are still wonderful after many listenings are individual ones: Bruno Walter's 9, the late Karajan (VPO) and late Wand (BPO) 8, the early Jochum (DG) 5, and so on. If I were forced to name a cycle it might be the earlier Wand on EMI. A very good general standard, not a duff one in the box. But not all inspirational. The Celibidache wasn't meant to be a cycle, or indeed to be on CD, and 8 is just too slow for me.


----------



## CnC Bartok

^^^ That "Wand on EMI" you mention is the same Cologne set most readily available on Sony/RCA, I believe. Good choice, but I'd still go for Jochum first!


----------



## Andy Foster

Yes, the Cologne set. I confess I found the later Jochum EMI set very disappointing. Almost perfunctory. I can take things like American brass when the performance is marvellous, like the Walter 9 (where the tension starts to ratchet up as soon as the repeated notes appear about 12 minutes in, and never stop until the great climax). 

Is there a performance there which you think is particularly good? Perhaps I ought to give it another try. I have the cycle in the big EMI box and it only gets brought out for his wonderful Mass in B Minor.


----------



## D Smith

CnC Bartok said:


> I've been really enjoying two new (to me) cycles recently: The all-singing all-dancing Gerd Schaller set, and the Michael Gielen Edition set. Neither reaches the "communion" heights some performances manage, hut both are immensely musical, reverent and actually quite powerful at times. Gielen not on his natural turf? Don't believe it! Everything sounds naturally paced, and with a delicacy others either miss or eschew.


I have the Gielen set and it's really excellent, especially the ninth. One of the things I like most is that he uses a variety of editions, some not performed very often. His performance of the sixth was the only one I didn't care for.


----------



## flamencosketches

Baron Scarpia said:


> The answer seems obvious to me. Haitink/RCO. Those performance are a perfectly balanced, non-idiosyncratic baseline in splendid Philips sound. Then you will be set to explore more individual recordings of symphonies that interest you.


Maybe it is obvious, but one thing I may not have explicitly mentioned is that price is a factor here. Money is tight right now, and the recent remaster of the Haitink cycle is near three times as much as the Wand/Köln, for instance. The older pressing is not terribly much cheaper either. So I'd have to do some mental gymnastics to convince myself that it's three times better or something silly like that before I'd feel OK with spending the money on it. :lol: I do love Haitink, though. I think his Mahler is great. This makes me skeptical about his Bruckner; how many conductors can do both? Not many, I say.

The Chailly/RCO, on the other hand, is more in the price range I was looking at. Need to sample that as well as the Haitink.


----------



## bigshot

Price usually has nothing to do with the quality of the performance. More expensive sets can also be worse performances. The ones that sell well get packaged and repackaged, a little cheaper each time. The Karjan symphonies set mentioned above is a drop dead bargain, and Karajan is very good in most of this kind of music. Honestly, I don't know why people buy full price CDs any more when there are such good bargain alternatives.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Merl said:


> Another reason for Celi probably not being invited back for so many years is that many of the members of the BPO from the late 50s disliked him. Celi was the front-runner to take the BPO post permanently when Furtwangler died but, a few days before the appointment was announced, he had a blazing row with the orchestra in rehearsal and insulted many influential members, resulting in half of the orchestra walking out on him. The post went instead to Karajan. Celi once said of HvK, "Karajan? Terrible. Either he is a great businessman, or he is deaf".


I agree with the statement that Karajan was a great businessman



> The ice was finally broken in 1990, thanks to the then German President Richard von Weizsäcker who wrote a letter on 9 November 1990 to Celi congratulating him on the success of his recent Japanese tour with the Munich Philharmonic, and sincerely asking him to consider a reunion with BPO. He added that, "It would be a real feast for me, for the Orchestra, for Berlin and the whole musical world". What a compliment!
> 
> Celi replied on 22 November 1990 and in the letter he wrote: "Thank you very much for the invitation to conduct the Berlin Philharmonic after a long time. It is my great honour to accept the invitation."
> 
> The time and venue were then fixed to be on 31 March and 1 April 1992 at the Grosser Konzertsaal, Schauspielhaus Berlin. As Philharmonie Berlin started its renovation in April 1992, the concerts could not be performed there. This would be a benefit concert for children in Romania. That time slot was originally allocated to a benefit concert by Leonard Bernstein, but as he died on 14 October 1990, the German President was quick in thinking of the perfect replacement.
> 
> Celi asked for 6 rehearsal sessions for the single work in these two concerts, Bruckner's Seventh Symphony. So much rehearsal time was unusual for a work the BPO was so familiar with, but they were ready to oblige him this time. In fact Barenboim had just recorded this symphony with the BPO in the preceding month. The result was fruitful to both however, with final mutual understanding evolving from the initial skeptical exchanges.
> 
> The rehearsal scene was depicted in some detail by Klaus Umbach in his book Celibidache -- der andere Maestro (pp. 83-86). During the first rehearsal on 27 March 1992, orchestral members described it as " a marathon". To get an idea of why they said so, Celi spent half an hour to rehearse the G#-G-F# tremolo of the first violins in the first 11 bars. He would not take any "Nebula" or wishy-washy tremolo, and he wanted very clear, very precise and very quiet ones. Umbach remarked that Celi rehearsed not only Bruckner, but also his infamous art of cold shower. One example was, on their first notes, Celibidache told the double basses they were like "a women's orchestra in Florida" and "Thin, so thin".
> 
> On the second day, he said, "You are wonderful, but not symphonic". Things became a little better in the third rehearsal when Celi said, "This time it is symphonic. But merely a false drama. Transparency is the ultimate aim. You should listen to each other." Then he wanted the Berliners to know what his Munich Philharmonic players' "deutsches Vibrato".
> 
> On the fourth rehearsal day, there was "trust" and Celi would mutter "thank you". During the break, he said, "I'm very reassured that there is spontaneity. See how they react, a direct translation of what I tell them. Much is indeed unusual of them, but even if not everything works out, it will be a wonderful concert."
> 
> The concert did turn out very well. And the rest, as they say, is history.


This quote is from an interesting blogspot on Bruckner, might as well be related to someone here, but I don't know:
https://multivariate-life.blogspot.com/

From the same blogspot, an interesting comparison of Haitinks recordings of Bruckner 8:
https://multivariate-life.blogspot.com/2010/01/bruckner-eighth-with-haitink.html

@ Flamenco: I would strongly recommend to never compromise on interpretation when allocating a budget for Music. Better to buy less and only have the interpretations to die for, than buying huge boxes filled with uninteresting music. Quality over Quantity:tiphat: And having said so, there is an online market for used classical CD's, where you can find individual recordings at ridiculous low prices. Big fun too


----------



## Granate

flamencosketches said:


> Damn, Granate. You must really want me to think hard about this one. :lol:
> 
> You seem critical of every cycle that you've mentioned, as well as all those that I've mentioned. So which cycles do you think are worthwhile? Karajan/Berlin, it seems, any others? Or do you think individual recordings are the way to go?


Hmm, you seem to be in trouble for getting into Bruckner right now: money constraint and performance style. Reading your posts in other threads tell me you have been more keen on listening to Günter Wand than I ever did. Then maybe you could wait or discard the Jochum Dresden cycle both in the cheap Green box or the full icon set for 35pounds in Amazon UK.

Ok. I have never tried the Köln Wand set on CD quality and I was not even impressed on a second listen, neither was I with the NDR recordings even if his Beethoven cycle is one of my favourites.

There is one only recording of Gunter Wand that I own and treasure: the Lübeck Cathedral recordings of Symphonies No.8 and No.9. ASIN is B00SRVC3RM and you can find it on Amazon for 15 pounds, although I bought it for 10 a year ago.



*You could buy both of these: the Koln cycle and the Lübeck recordings.* There are many more Wand recordings made with the Münchner Philharmoniker or the Deutches-Symphonie-Orchester Berlin apart from the Symphonieorchester des Norddeutchen Rundfunks, all of them released by Profil. They are harder to collect. RCA has both the Lübeck and the rest of NDR recordings in Hamburg in the Wand Live set B06XPYVS8P (you'll need to wait for a re-release). But that's for advanced Brucknerites or collectors. I just streamed them and you know already I don't particularly enjoy his vision.

And if I'm critical of every Cycle that I've listened about Bruckner its because experience has told me there's no definitive way of reading Bruckner's music, and even less unconsidering historical recordings with unauthentic scores.



Forgot to mention two things: the Barenboim Berliner Philharmoniker cycle (B00076YOQ8) is one of those I call "beginner cycles" and it's as cheap as the Wand cycle. Second is that the Michael Gielen cycle is maybe my second favourite "1st versions cycle".

Karajan Berliner Philharmoniker is as polished as you'll ever get in Bruckner, but it's probably too expensive and too risky for the tastes you have so far in the composer.


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> I agree with the statement that Karajan was a great businessman


I think he died worth $750,000,000. The problem is we still have people (usually of miniscule talent) who think you cannot be a great conductor and a great businessman at the same time.


----------



## flamencosketches

DavidA said:


> I think he died worth $750,000,000. The problem is we still have people (usually of miniscule talent) who think you cannot be a great conductor and a great businessman at the same time.


750 mil...  you think any one person could ever make that much money off of classical music in this day and age? The market ain't what it used to be, I think...

@Granate, thank you for alerting me to the Barenboim cycle. I did not know it was available for cheap. I really like that guy, he clearly REALLY knows his music if you've ever seen one of his youtube videos where he discusses famous pieces, etc. Though I can't say I'm terribly familiar with any of his interpretations.


----------



## D Smith

Granate;1673479
Forgot to mention two things: the Barenboim Berliner Philharmoniker cycle (B00076YOQ8) is one of those I call "beginner cycles" and it's as cheap as the Wand cycle. Second is that the Michael Gielen cycle is maybe my second favourite "1st versions cycle".
[/QUOTE said:


> Granate. Just curious as to what constitutes a 'beginner' cycle for you. I have both the Barenboim and Gielen and find them quite satisfying. They don't seem especially simplistic in approach or dumbed down. They compare well with the Jochum (Berlin/Bavarian), Karajan 70s, Wand, and Klemperer (partial) that I have, though there are standouts to be sure. I've always felt Klemperer's performance of the 6th was one of the best available.


----------



## flamencosketches

^I don't think Granate meant that it was "simplistic" or "dumbed down", I think he just meant that it is an accessible cycle; ie. without Celibidachesque glacial tempi, raw 1940s mono sound, etc. Ideal for a Bruckner beginner, like myself. I'm certainly not looking for anything to be "dumbed down".


----------



## bigshot

NLAdriaan said:


> I would strongly recommend to never compromise on interpretation when allocating a budget for Music. Better to buy less and only have the interpretations to die for, than buying huge boxes filled with uninteresting music.


I would recommend buying big budget boxes full of great performances and recordings. There are an awful lot of those out there. More than I can afford to buy. CDs are a buyer's market right now and it isn't going to last. If you like physical media, you're a fool not to scoop up bargain boxes. I suppose there's no point if you don't have a lot of time to listen to music and a handful of CDs will last you the rest of your life... but I listen to music every day.


----------



## Granate

flamencosketches said:


> ^I don't think Granate meant that it was "simplistic" or "dumbed down", I think he just meant that it is an accessible cycle; ie. without Celibidachesque glacial tempi, raw 1940s mono sound, etc. Ideal for a Bruckner beginner, like myself. I'm certainly not looking for anything to be "dumbed down".


You almost nailed my definition of "beginner cycle"! Yeah, it's because we often reccomend beginners like the fan-favourite specific interpretations of a particular work when we mostly cannot read what is inside the other person's head or heart. Maybe what we are proposing is uneventful or just too overwhelming to appreciate. By other people standards, both Haitink Bruckner and Mahler cycles would be quite good for "beginners". Because the offer a coherent and very effective vision of a particular composer. In Haitink early recordings, I really appreciate the Bruckner 7 and the Mahler 3. I'm also listening on Spotify to the remastered cycle and I think it is also perfect for beginners, with ok conducting but sharp and clean playing. Analogue SQ is one of his advantage over other contenders. And the remasters have certainly done wonders.

However, accesibility for me has also a lot to do with the cost of the products. Karajan was the first Bruckner cycle I ever listened to and has stayed as almost my favourite interpretation, but it has never been on budget for me to buy, and now it's too late.

I'm a strong reccomender of streaming before purchasing, and it's true that I approved NLAdrian text about not buying boxes we wouldn't listen to and try to invest in something we die for. If I defend the honour of first-listening (not precisely purchasing) beginner cycles, is because sticking to one of the fan-favourites will often narrow our minds about other interpretations. Why not Gielen's Mahler in SWR, why not Skrowaczewski Bruckner in Saarbrucken? I don't consider them my go to cycle as it could be Barenboim CSO despite its shortages, but I really appreciate knowing their styles to appreciate more what I own.



D Smith said:


> I have both the Barenboim and Gielen and find them quite satisfying. They don't seem especially simplistic in approach or dumbed down. They compare well with the Jochum (Berlin/Bavarian), Karajan 70s, Wand, and Klemperer (partial) that I have, though there are standouts to be sure. I've always felt Klemperer's performance of the 6th was one of the best available.


After challenging almost all Bruckner cycles and recordings ever made, the Barenboim first two cycles entered in the ten contenders of the final for the most successful Bruckner cycle (in my own taste). Gielen has really good interpretations but I don't think he holds a big challenge for the 1st versions of Simone Young. So he was discarded. I don't even disagree in anything you have mentioned here excepting Günter Wand.


----------



## bigshot

When I started out three or four decades ago, my goal was to find a "perfect" performance in modern sound. Later on, I found out that there was no such thing as "perfect" performances, and often the more adventurous interpretations were the most interesting. I also learned that if I was listening to sound quality, I was listening to the wrong thing.

I'm glad I cut my teeth on performances that are generally accepted to be proper. It helped me familiarize myself with the composer and the composition. But now I have moved beyond just one level, and I am listening on two ideas at once... the composer's, and the interpreters'. When both are geniuses firing on all cylinders, that makes magic. And magic is better than proper.

Another thing I've learned over the years is that something that may not be what I'm looking for today, may drop like a depth charge in the future. I have ripped my entire CD colllection... thousands and thousands of classical CDs.. and I have them in a media server playing on random shuffle. This has taught me amazing things. There are conductors I can instantly identify from the first few bars. I've found performances that I never would have considered, that have become favorites. I've found that my generally accepted "proper" purchases sometimes turned me off to a composition because the performance was too conservative, not because of any fault with the composition.

I believe in exposing myself to the whole world... the good, the bad and the ugly. I sort it out for myself. I read reviews to discover things that I should be listening for, but I never make a buying decision based on rosettes or stars. If a recording is affordable and it is likely different than what I've heard in the past, I'll pick it up and listen to it and decide for myself. If it's outright bad, I remove it from rotation. I've only had to do that a couple of times (super bland Abbado). By remaining open to the serendipity of random chance, I've found treasures that way that I never would have found by following the general consensus.

Music is a universe. In one lifetime, it's impossible to take it all in. I'm not going to park myself on one small achievable thing and drill downward to know everything there is to know about that one tiny sliver of reality That would be like choosing one moon of Saturn and spending your whole life learning everything there is to know about it. No thanks. I would rather know a little about the whole universe than a lot about a tiny fragment.

It's impossible to have too much music. That would be like having too much life to experience.


----------



## bigshot

Streaming could conceivably fill the purpose of allowing random chance to expose you to something exciting you wouldn't otherwise consider. But I find that the algorithms that choose "suggestions" fall right back on the "regular suspects" and don't broaden my horizons at all. That might be because I'm further down the road than most people. Streaming is probably very good for someone with just a decade or two of study of classical music under their belt.

We used to have a fella here named Moody. He was as opinionated as hell. He despised Karajan with a passion and considered Schehehrezade to be a crime perpetrated on humanity. But he had clearly listened to a lot of music to get to the place where he was. He could speak intelligently on music he didn't even like. He was a crusty old fart and one day he just disappeared. I miss him. I learned a lot from him. I wish him well wherever in the universe he is today.


----------



## flamencosketches

Granate said:


> You almost nailed my definition of "beginner cycle"! Yeah, it's because we often reccomend beginners like the fan-favourite specific interpretations of a particular work when we mostly cannot read what is inside the other person's head or heart. Maybe what we are proposing is uneventful or just too overwhelming to appreciate. By other people standards, both Haitink Bruckner and Mahler cycles would be quite good for "beginners". Because the offer a coherent and very effective vision of a particular composer. In Haitink early recordings, I really appreciate the Bruckner 7 and the Mahler 3. I'm also listening on Spotify to the remastered cycle and I think it is also perfect for beginners, with ok conducting but sharp and clean playing. Analogue SQ is one of his advantage over other contenders. And the remasters have certainly done wonders.
> 
> However, accesibility for me has also a lot to do with the cost of the products. Karajan was the first Bruckner cycle I ever listened to and has stayed as almost my favourite interpretation, but it has never been on budget for me to buy, and now it's too late.
> 
> I'm a strong reccomender of streaming before purchasing, and it's true that I approved NLAdrian text about not buying boxes we wouldn't listen to and try to invest in something we die for. If I defend the honour of first-listening (not precisely purchasing) beginner cycles, is because sticking to one of the fan-favourites will often narrow our minds about other interpretations. Why not Gielen's Mahler in SWR, why not Skrowaczewski Bruckner in Saarbrucken? I don't consider them my go to cycle as it could be Barenboim CSO despite its shortages, but I really appreciate knowing their styles to appreciate more what I own.
> 
> After challenging almost all Bruckner cycles and recordings ever made, the Barenboim first two cycles entered in the ten contenders of the final for the most successful Bruckner cycle (in my own taste). Gielen has really good interpretations but I don't think he holds a big challenge for the 1st versions of Simone Young. So he was discarded. I don't even disagree in anything you have mentioned here excepting Günter Wand.


Barenboim/Berlin PO might be the one man... really liking what I'm hearing.

Could you or someone else possibly give me the basic rundown on versions, Haas, Nowak, etc...? And which version does Barenboim tend to use on this cycle? What of Wand? I understand Tintner generally uses the first editions, no...? I appreciate everyone's help... surely my vacillation is getting annoying by now.


----------



## NLAdriaan

bigshot said:


> I would recommend *buying big budget boxes full of great performances and recordings*. There are an awful lot of those out there. More than I can afford to buy. *CDs are a buyer's market right now and it isn't going to last*. If you like physical media, you're a fool not to scoop up bargain boxes. I suppose there's no point if you don't have a lot of time to listen to music and a handful of CDs will last you the rest of your life... but I listen to music every day.


Big budget boxes full of great performances generally don't exist. Big budget boxes are in most cases a compromise, as the record companies are not crazy. So, in today's buyers market, you are better off looking for secondhand diamonds instead of buying new XXXL burgers of average taste. In the used market, I can buy exactly what I want for ridiculous budget prices, as many collectors (or their heirs:angel sell off disc collections. Of course, there are exceptions, but I still find that there's no substitute for a thrilling recording. There is a lot of mediocre stuff out there, record companies will do everything to recycle them, as they are 'written off'. I think 80% (if not more) of all recorded classical music is superfluous and won't give you the thrill of an outstanding recording. But obviously there is a free market for everything, so we can all do as we like:tiphat:


----------



## NLAdriaan

DavidA said:


> I think he died worth $750,000,000. The problem is we still have people (usually of miniscule talent) who think you cannot be a great conductor and a great businessman at the same time.


I agree, also crooks have talents.

The only 'minor' thing is that HvK used publicly funded orchestra's to grab his outrageous fortune, which makes HvK an oligarch avant-la-lettre.

And I also think we all agree that HvK not very effective (understatement), as only a very small percentage of his overwhelming production is of truly outstanding quality. Or do these critical remarks unmask me as someone with 'miniscule talent'ut:


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> I'm working my way through Gielen in Brahms at the moment, and appreciate his absence of histrionics so far (I'm rapidly going off the vicious edge in Brahms, hence my love of Jochum and Belohlavek there) As far as his Schumann is concerned, there's a Spring, some overtures and a wonderful Faustszenen, in the Edition, and I've seen 2&3 on a separate CD, is there a 4th anywhere???
> 
> Bruckner is "symphonic", I assume Gielen emphasizing this isn't an issue?
> 
> Btw, his Mahler has rapidly become my benchmark, shockingly replacing Kubelik! So, for me, your "consistently very good" is a bit of an understatement!


AFAIK there's no Schumann 4th but that disc of symphonies, 2&3 is so good that it would be hard to better. And yes I was understating Gielen's recordings as I didn't want to come across as a fan boy but yes his Mahler is excellent and I totally agree about his "Brahms without histrionics".


----------



## Granate

flamencosketches said:


> Barenboim/Berlin PO might be the one man... really liking what I'm hearing.
> 
> Could you or someone else possibly give me the basic rundown on versions, Haas, Nowak, etc...? And which version does Barenboim tend to use on this cycle? What of Wand? I understand Tintner generally uses the first editions, no...? I appreciate everyone's help... surely my vacillation is getting annoying by now.


*Barenboim Bruckner recordings*
*BPO Cycle*
No.1 Nowak 1877 Version (Linz)
No.2 Carragan 1877 Version
No.3 Oeser 1878 Version (based on 1880 Stichvorlage and no Scherzo coda)
No.4 Haas 1881 Version
No.5 Nowak 1878 Version
No.6 Nowak 1881 Version
No.7 Nowak 1885 Version
No.8 Haas Mixed 1887-1890 Version
No.9 Nowak 1894 Version

*Wand Bruckner recordings*
*KRSO Cycle*
No.1 Brosche 1891 Version (Vienna)
No.2 Haas Mixed Version (1872-1877)
No.3 Nowak 1889 Version
No.4 Haas 1881 Version
No.5 Haas 1878 Version
No.6 Nowak 1881 Version
No.7 Haas 1885 Version
No.8 Haas Mixed 1887-1890 Version
No.9 Nowak 1894 Version


----------



## Kiki

flamencosketches said:


> Barenboim/Berlin PO might be the one man... really liking what I'm hearing.
> 
> Could you or someone else possibly give me the basic rundown on versions, Haas, Nowak, etc...? And which version does Barenboim tend to use on this cycle? What of Wand? I understand Tintner generally uses the first editions, no...? I appreciate everyone's help... surely my vacillation is getting annoying by now.


In general, try "Search Discography Database" on abruickner.com. Just enter the conductor's name. They are quite up-to date on the listing of editions used in recordings. 

abruckner.com also includes a short summary of editions in each symphony's page. For a slightly more detailed description of the editions' history, wikipedia is our friend.


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> I agree, also crooks have talents.
> 
> The only 'minor' thing is that HvK used publicly funded orchestra's to grab his outrageous fortune, which makes HvK an oligarch avant-la-lettre.
> 
> And I also think we all agree that HvK not very effective (understatement), as only a very small percentage of his overwhelming production is of truly outstanding quality. Or do these critical remarks unmask me as someone with 'miniscule talent'ut:


Depends what you mean by 'outstanding'. You can also say that of just about every other conductor. Karajan used the system he had and worked within it quite legally in the same way as a film star might use the system they have. When Bernstein conducted opera in Vienna his agent demanded an outrageous sum (from a publicly funded opera house) and got it. Is that a crime?

Yes you are a person of minuscule talent by the side of Karajan - then, aren't we all! :lol:


----------



## NLAdriaan

DavidA said:


> Yes you are a person of minuscule talent by the side of Karajan - then, aren't we all! :lol:


By the side of Carlos Kleiber, HvK was a person of small talent, then aren't we all:cheers:


----------



## Bourdon

NLAdriaan said:


> By the side of Carlos Kleiber, HvK was a person of small talent, then aren't we all:cheers:


After drinking many glasses of Belgian beer I might agree with you.Kleiber had great respect for the skills and talent of mr Karajan as we all know.:cheers:


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> By the side of Carlos Kleiber, HvK was a person of small talent, then aren't we all:cheers:


Not at all. In fact Kleiber himself recognised Karajan's talent. He appeared at Karajan's grave saying, "He was the one I admired most." They had a mutual admiration society going. If Karajan had produced as small a number of recordings as Kleiber we'd haven doubt viewed him with the same bated breath. The fact is Karajan capitalised on his talent - Kleiber woefully underused his. It's the old thing that along with talent you need temperament and hard work.


----------



## bigshot

Karajan was a very individualistic conductor. He is one of the conductors I can recognize from the first few bars when one of his recordings comes up in random shuffle. I was once pitch correcting an historical recording of the first act of Die Walkure, so I lined up a section of the overture with Karajan's recording. The whole tonality was different. It was the same music, but he had woven the sound of the orchestra together in a way that it was impossible for me to pitch the older recording. The melodies and harmonies were balanced so they flickered back and forth. Hard to describe, but the sound was gorgeous. If I hadn't compared side by side, I might not have noticed what he was doing. He was playing the notes on the page, but he was balancing them in a totally unique way. I really like that.

I think the whole anti-Karajan thing is just internet "common knowledge". Some people on internet forums cobble their opinions together from cherry picking other opinionated posts they read. They become an opinion magpie, building a hodgepodge nest of opinions that don't hold together cohesively and certainly aren't based on actually listening to the music.


----------



## bigshot

NLAdriaan said:


> Big budget boxes full of great performances generally don't exist.


You aren't paying attention. Big boxes generally consist of the back catalog material that has survived as top recommendations for decades. The Living Stereo boxes are jam packed with top picks. And you can focus on great instrumentalists and conductors like Heifetz, Horowitz, Bernstein or Szell and pick up their entire output for a dollar a disk. Even the super budget labels like Brilliant Classics have top recordings, particularly in lesser heard Baroque music, and they keep updating their Mozart, Bach and Beethoven boxes to improve them even more.

The one drawback of the big boxes is that they require a sizable initial investment, usually between $50 and $100. If you only have five or ten bucks in your pocket, they aren't for you. But if you want to explore music you might not have otherwise considered, big boxes are a great way to do it.

The idea that most recorded classical music is mediocre is hogwash. The standards of interpretation and performance from the past half century or so of recording are insanely high. Large volume does not necessarily mean poor quality. We just lived though a golden age of recorded music. It's all there for the picking. And there are smaller orchestras today producing excellent recordings. Just because they don't have the brand name of a BPO or a NY Phil, it doesn't mean that they can't produce great recordings, particularly of niche repertoire like you see on Brilliant Classics.

The CD format is dying. Normal people don't buy CDs any more. If you prefer to stream music from a community library like that, I'm sure it's fine with you. But I prefer to be able to directly compare performances and analyze performance styles. Big boxes give me the opportunity to widen my scope and hear alternative versions of specific works, and to dig down into the work of a specific performer and figure out what makes him tick.

There is a lot more to be learned from listening to ten different versions of a symphony or string quartet or concerto than there is listening to the same rosette bedecked one over and over. A composition is a jewel with many different facets. You can't truly appreciate it looking at it from just one angle. Different interpretations reveal different things in a work. That took me a couple of decades to learn myself, but it is the truth.

The world of great music is an ocean. There's more than any one person can take in in a lifetime. If you limit yourself to just the things you're familiar with, you are limiting yourself. There's too much you don't know about, but you should.


----------



## flamencosketches

Apparently, this week is the 30-year anniversary of Karajan's death. I just got that CD he did of Bruckner's 7th symphony with the Vienna Philharmonic, his final recording. I'm going to listen to it sometime soon in his honor.


----------



## NLAdriaan

You obviously don't understand a word I am saying. No problem, as the Ocean of recordings is big enough for all of us to swim our way. I just won't drown in the endless streams of mediocrity, but prefer to surf on the outstanding waves


----------



## DarkAngel

DarkAngel said:


> Love HVK for Bruckner, the Presto UK 24/192 FLAC downloads of symphonies 4-9 is only $18.50.....amazing bargain! (so cheap I'm thinking it must be a mistake, get them now!)


*Tidal now has this available in MASTER series 24/96 streaming......listening now*

Someone posted above that these are step above the current CD masters, I also agree, the glassy thin soundscape and sharp brass crescendos are now full bodied natural tones with improved bass response while still keeping excellent detail level......more reasons to love this even more


----------



## bigshot

NLAdriaan said:


> I just won't drown in the endless streams of mediocrity, but prefer to surf on the outstanding waves


Or wade in a tide pool at the shore.


----------



## NLAdriaan

DavidA said:


> Not at all. In fact Kleiber himself recognised Karajan's talent. He appeared at Karajan's grave saying, "He was the one I admired most." They had a mutual admiration society going. If Karajan had produced as small a number of recordings as Kleiber we'd haven doubt viewed him with the same bated breath. The fact is Karajan capitalised on his talent - Kleiber woefully underused his. It's the old thing that along with talent you need temperament and hard work.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/bbcworldwide/worldwidestories/pressreleases/2011/03_march/carlos_kleiber.shtml

This is what the professionals say, to which our 'miniscule opinions' are irrelevant.


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/bbcworldwide/worldwidestories/pressreleases/2011/03_march/carlos_kleiber.shtml
> 
> This is what the professionals say, to which our 'miniscule opinions' are irrelevant.


Yes I had read it. Interesting then Kleiber jibbed at taking up a major conducting post. As I said, talent is not enough. Greatness requires application. If you only conduct when your fridge is empty then you limit your greatness. As I have said, if he had recorded as much as Karajan, I am certain people would be more critical of his output, fine though much of it is. As it is, rarity breeds a mystical appreciation. In any case your post in no ways contradicts what I said. They were both great conductors and both admitted each others greatness. Kleiber himself would have been the first to put down your opinion of Karajan because he recognised great conducting. Same with all these guys. They might have been tremendously egotistical themselves but they weren't so stupid as not to recognise genius.


----------



## NLAdriaan

DavidA said:


> Yes I had read it. Interesting then Kleiber jibbed at taking up a major conducting post. As I said, talent is not enough. Greatness requires application. If you only conduct when your fridge is empty then you limit your greatness. As I have said, if he had recorded as much as Karajan, I am certain people would be more critical of his output, fine though much of it is. As it is, rarity breeds a mystical appreciation. In any case your post in no ways contradicts what I said. They were both great conductors and both admitted each others greatness. Kleiber himself would have been the first to put down your opinion of Karajan because he recognised great conducting. Same with all these guys. They might have been tremendously egotistical themselves but they weren't so stupid as not to recognise genius.


I just don't follow your requirement that only endless uncritical output and hard labour justifies talent. I think that self critical output is an essential part of genius. Did not all major composers rework their compositions many times? A bit more self critic and a bit less focus on $$$ would have improved the output of HvK. And a bit less insecurity would likely have increased Kleiber's output.


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> I just don't follow your requirement that *only endless uncritical output and hard labour justifies talent*. I think that self critical output is an essential part of genius. Did not all major composers rework their compositions many times? A bit more self critic and a bit less focus on $$$ would have improved the output of HvK. And a bit less insecurity would likely have increased Kleiber's output.


I didn't say that. I said that talent is only fully realised with hard work. You take someone like Solti who probably (by his own admission) had a fraction of the talent of people like Karajan or Kleiber, but made up for it somewhat with tremendous hard work. Kleiber actually sometimes appears more critical of others than he was of himself! Like when storming out when a orchestral player questioned one of his decisions.


----------



## flamencosketches

DavidA said:


> I didn't say that. I said that talent is only fully realised with hard work. You take someone like Solti who probably (by his own admission) had a fraction of the talent of people like Karajan or Kleiber, but made up for it somewhat with tremendous hard work. Kleiber actually sometimes appears more critical of others than he was of himself! Like when storming out when a orchestral player questioned one of his decisions.


Can you offer me a source on that...? (Solti's "admission" that Karajan and/or Kleiber were an order of magnitude more "talented" than himself). I find it hard to believe he would say something like that.


----------



## DavidA

flamencosketches said:


> Can you offer me a source on that...? (Solti's "admission" that Karajan and/or Kleiber were an order of magnitude more "talented" than himself). I find it hard to believe he would say something like that.


"In my case, the entire learning process is slow because I have no visual memory. I cannot look at the score and absorb it, as Toscanini and Karajan were able to do...........[so] they have a tremendous advantage over those of us who are forced to spend so much time studying every note of every score." (Solti on Solti p. 214)

"He [Karajan] was, obviously, a man of genius, capable of absorbing musical scores like a sponge; his repertoire was enormous." (Solti on Solti p. 193)

It's interesting that John Culshaw implies the same in his memoirs that no one has worked harder than Solti even if some were more talented


----------



## NLAdriaan

DavidA said:


> I didn't say that. I said that talent is only fully realised with hard work. You take someone like Solti who probably (by his own admission) had a fraction of the talent of people like Karajan or Kleiber, but made up for it somewhat with tremendous hard work. Kleiber actually sometimes appears more critical of others than he was of himself! Like when storming out when a orchestral player questioned one of his decisions.


Comparing Kleiber with dictator HvK or with screaming skull Solti, is a laugh, when it comes to personality. And what this has to do with comparing talents, is beyond me


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> Comparing Kleiber with dictator HvK or with screaming skull Solti, is a laugh, when it comes to personality. And what this has to do with comparing talents, is beyond me


What your posts are saying is beyond me. You're the one who seems to be insisting on making comparisons not me. What are you trying to prove? This thread is about Bruckner. Did Kleiber record any?

I don't usually agree with Lebrecht but take a look at this:
http://www.scena.org/columns/lebrecht/040730-NL-kleiber.html


----------



## bigshot

Internet forums attract people who have trouble modulating their dialogue like moths to a porch light.


----------



## flamencosketches

Pulled the trigger on Barenboim/Berlin Philharmonic. I appreciate everyone's perspective in this thread. I hadn't even considered this one as a choice until a few here wrote of their appreciation for his cycle. Everything I heard sounded great (5th, 9th, 8th). I'll write back with my thoughts whenever I get it (shipping from UK, it'll be a few weeks... meanwhile I have individual recordings by Karajan, Böhm, Tintner, and now Celibidache to explore).


----------



## Guest

flamencosketches said:


> Pulled the trigger on Barenboim/Berlin Philharmonic. I appreciate everyone's perspective in this thread. I hadn't even considered this one as a choice until a few here wrote of their appreciation for his cycle. Everything I heard sounded great (5th, 9th, 8th). I'll write back with my thoughts whenever I get it (shipping from UK, it'll be a few weeks... meanwhile I have individual recordings by Karajan, Böhm, Tintner, and now Celibidache to explore).


Shows how everyone's experience is different. I have that set but never could warm up to it.

On another note, I noticed you don't have to buy that silly BluRay release to get Karajan's Bruckner in High Def. Prestoclassical is selling it as a high-res lossles download. Depends on whether you have equipment to stream FLAC at high resolution.

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8648861--bruckner-symphonies-nos-4-9

I've purchased and downloaded one track (Symphonie 8, first movement) in the highest resolution just to see if I notice any improvement from my CD copy.


----------



## flamencosketches

^Can't please everyone! 

Karajan's Vienna PO Bruckner recordings are really good, but I can't seem to get into his Berlin recordings for some reason.


----------



## Guest

The best of Karajan's Bruckner, IMO, are those late WPO recordings and the EMI/Berlin recordings, along with the Berlin 5th and 6th (great slow movement, in particular). Audio quality is part of it. I'm curious if the latest high-resolution mastering will change that. There are claims of "original session tapes." Maybe that will make a difference. I think there is a small chance the answer is yes, particularly for the 8th, which is the weakest Berlin recording from the point of view of audio quality.


----------



## bigshot

flamencosketches said:


> Karajan's Vienna PO Bruckner recordings are really good, but I can't seem to get into his Berlin recordings for some reason.


There is a marked difference between Vienna and Berlin. Vienna tends to have more of a lilt and sweetness. Berlin tends to be more strict and austere. Of course those are generalizations, but I prefer Austrian and Eastern European orchestras to heavy Germanic ones myself.

Barenboim wouldn't be my first pick, but I'm sure it's a good basic cycle to learn the music with.


----------



## NLAdriaan

flamencosketches said:


> Karajan's Vienna PO Bruckner recordings are really good, but I can't seem to get into his Berlin recordings for some reason.


This might have to do something with the chemistry between conductor and orchestra. The marriage between HvK and BPO was not always a happy one, also because it lasted too long. It is interesting to compare (sorry, here I go again) HvK and Wand in Bruckner with the BPO, even if there was quite some time between the two recordings. Under Wand the BPO's Bruckner sounds fresh, flexible and transparant, when compared to HvK. The same comparison is interesting for Karajan, Haitink and Giulini in Bruckner with the VPO. There is more consistency in orchestral sound between these conductors. Maybe also because the VPO don't have a chief conductor who can shape the orchestra into a straitjacket?

In general, the BPO overall is the better orchestra compared to the VPO. The VPO has wonderful strings, but the wood and brass stay behind. The BPO is more balanced. In Bruckner however, the VPO seems to rise up, maybe it is the nationalism? And the BPO, like all great orchestras, require a respected conductor, to which they are listening, otherwise they will play on autopilot.


----------



## CnC Bartok

flamencosketches said:


> Pulled the trigger on Barenboim/Berlin Philharmonic. I appreciate everyone's perspective in this thread. I hadn't even considered this one as a choice until a few here wrote of their appreciation for his cycle. Everything I heard sounded great (5th, 9th, 8th). I'll write back with my thoughts whenever I get it (shipping from UK, it'll be a few weeks... meanwhile I have individual recordings by Karajan, Böhm, Tintner, and now Celibidache to explore).


Well, at least you'll have a copy of Bruckner's last completed work, the somewhat empty little cantata Helgoland. Not that many recordings of that, and two of them are Barenboim's! I don't think you have made a poor choice in any way. Barenboim is very solid in Bruckner, I very much like the pacing he manages, rubato in no way intrusive, clearly he's a composer very close to his heart, and my feeling with that set is it gets better the later the symphony. Not far off Bruckner himself!


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> Well, at least you'll have a copy of Bruckner's last completed work, the somewhat empty little cantata Helgoland. Not that many recordings of that, and two of them are Barenboim's! I don't think you have made a poor choice in any way. Barenboim is very solid in Bruckner, I very much like the pacing he manages, rubato in no way intrusive, clearly he's a composer very close to his heart, and my feeling with that set is it gets better the later the symphony. Not far off Bruckner himself!


Its a good cycle. What I'd term a good library set. Weirdly, I like the Chicago cycle better. Some great brass playing.


----------



## flamencosketches

^Honestly, that looks great too. Barenboim was pretty young when he recorded it, no? I'm going to check out a few of the recordings.


----------



## Granate

^^

Only on CD I've been able to experience the wonders of this cycle.

String playing is gorgeous and Brass is spectacular, but in comparison to German orchestras the result can look really bland even by Münchner Philharmoniker standards (I can think of No.7). It's my go-to stereo cycle and has ditched Jochum DG. If you really get into Bruckner, you should get it one day, because I got it in a sale for 27€ from Germany, and it's been one of my best purchases ever. Compare with Solti Chicago too. Very pedestrian conducting but Decca engineers and orchestra do wonders.


















*B005C8VQTO*

IMO, the Berlin Cycle only gets better and particularly referential in the two symphonies that I didn't like much in this DG set: No.5 and No.9.


----------



## bigshot

I really don't like Solti for stuff like this. Too strident. Bruckner has a tendency to be LOUDsoftLOUDsoftLOUDsoft... It can get monotonous. Vienese conductors and orchestras tend to put a little bit of spring and life into it that makes it easier to listen to. I feel the same with Mahler too, but Bruckner is the worst for that.


----------



## Merl

bigshot said:


> I really don't like Solti for stuff like this. Too strident. Bruckner has a tendency to be LOUDsoftLOUDsoftLOUDsoft... It can get monotonous. Vienese conductors and orchestras tend to put a little bit of spring and life into it that makes it easier to listen to. I feel the same with Mahler too, but Bruckner is the worst for that.


Ive never liked Solti's Bruckner either (but love his Brahms and Schumann).


----------



## Guest

I will confess that I bought Karajan's Bruckner cycle _again_. 

I had it on LP and learned Bruckner from it. I was never quite happy with the sound of the CD releases. Now they announced that they have remastered the recordings from the original analog sources, but apparently only for Hi-rez masters on a blu-ray audio disc. (In the past the CDs that accompany the blu-ray disc are just copies of previous CD releases.) The Blu-ray audio format is not attractive to me, you can't rip it to your computer, I don't even have a blu ray drive for my computer or my main stereo.

But I noticed that Presto has the material in the form of a high-resolution FLAC download, symphonies 4-9 (the analog recordings) for only $17.50. I purchased one track and I did get the impression of better audio. So I purchased the 24-bit/96 kHz download of the set. That's less that $3 per symphony, and it is worth it to me not to wonder if I am listening to master that is not as good as it could be for these recordings.

https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8648861--bruckner-symphonies-nos-4-9


----------



## bigshot

I have the remastered CDs and they sound much better than the old LPs did. Mastering matters more than data rate. But it is handy to have them all on a single disc.


----------



## Guest

bigshot said:


> I have the remastered CDs and they sound much better than the old LPs did. Mastering matters more than data rate. But it is handy to have them all on a single disc.


Which CDs are the "remastered" CDs. They have released them umpteen times but I don't recall them claiming any were remastered.

I decided to download the high resolution version just to avoid the possibility that Presto and/or DG was stupid enough to use old 44.1/16 masters rather than basing them on the new master from original analog sources.


----------



## D Smith

@Baron Scarpia. I have these recordings from the Karajan Symphony edition CD's. Have you found the sound quality to be significantly better on the remasterd FLAC? Like you, I'm tempted by the download as I listen to these performances frequently.


----------



## Guest

D Smith said:


> @Baron Scarpia. I have these recordings from the Karajan Symphony edition CD's. Have you found the sound quality to be significantly better on the remasterd FLAC? Like you, I'm tempted by the download as I listen to these performances frequently.


I only compared Symphony No 8, first movement and thought there was a subtle difference from the one in the Karajan 70 box. That's the one which I found weakest, in terms of audio quality. I don't know if the Karajan 70 version is a different master than the Symphony Edition. My suggestion to do what I did, buy one movement for about $2 and see if you find any improvement.


----------



## DarkAngel

D Smith said:


> @Baron Scarpia. I have these recordings from the Karajan Symphony edition CD's. Have you found the sound quality to be significantly better on the remasterd FLAC? Like you, I'm tempted by the download as I listen to these performances frequently.


Remember any CD no matter what remaster is originally used can only play 16/44 resolution music stream.......

















The new blu ray boxset *does not* have remastered CDs, same CDs as the older CD boxset shown

Only the blu ray disc has new 24/96 remaster and can actually play back sound at that resolution for improved sound vs CD










This super cheap Presto UK download set of 4-9 symphonies available as 24/96 or 24/192 resolution FLAC files, which as commented earlier in this thread sound better than any of the CD versions, you must have DAC and compatible player to use these files.....

Also TIDAL streaming now has MASTER series 24/96 of these for member playback, they do sound better now vs thin often shrill sounding CDs


----------



## bigshot

The only advantage of higher rates than 16/44.1 are frequencies beyond the range of human hearing and a noise floor an order of magnitude below anything audible in normal home listening. If you hear a subtle difference, it's likely a small difference in volume level. You can't directly compare tracks without volume matching (and direct A/B switching and blind testing).

I've never seen any real improvement in DGG's remasterings. That label has always been careful about the quality of its CD releases and Karajan recordings enjoyed the most careful attention. Their very earliest digital releases were a bit unnatural and harsh, but since Karajan's death, that stuff has all been corrected. Usually if there is a difference, it's just application of noise reduction to reduce tape hiss. A tiny bit of tape hiss in silent portions of the tracks doesn't bother me. I got the Symphonies box set and the Bruckner symphonies in there sound great.

Sony is another story. The Columbia/CBS CD releases showed lots of room for improvement, and Sony has been systematically doing just that.


----------



## Rmathuln

Baron Scarpia said:


> I will confess that I bought Karajan's Bruckner cycle _again_.
> 
> I had it on LP and learned Bruckner from it. I was never quite happy with the sound of the CD releases. Now they announced that they have remastered the recordings from the original analog sources, but apparently only for Hi-rez masters on a blu-ray audio disc. (In the past the CDs that accompany the blu-ray disc are just copies of previous CD releases.) The Blu-ray audio format is not attractive to me, you can't rip it to your computer, I don't even have a blu ray drive for my computer or my main stereo.
> 
> But I noticed that Presto has the material in the form of a high-resolution FLAC download, symphonies 4-9 (the analog recordings) for only $17.50. I purchased one track and I did get the impression of better audio. So I purchased the 24-bit/96 kHz download of the set. That's less that $3 per symphony, and it is worth it to me not to wonder if I am listening to master that is not as good as it could be for these recordings.
> 
> https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8648861--bruckner-symphonies-nos-4-9


It is possible to rip BluRay Audio to your computer. I do it using AnyDVD as a decoder and DVD Audio Extractor. Results are marvelous.

Be aware the CDs are NOT REMASTERED in the box with the BluRay.


----------



## 89Koechel

flamenco - Hope you'll have good results, with Barenboim (after "pulling the trigger"). Well, maybe it's time to mention, again, one of Daniel B's inspirations - Wilhelm Furtwangler. Daniel has even mentioned ("Why Wilhelm Furtwangler Still Moves Us, Today"), in an eloquent fashion … "He was a subjectivist, who philosophized …", etc. WHY we continue to listen to WF and the older masters, even now. It's certainly NOT because of the recorded SONICS of a WF interpretation - that type of limitation is one we should overcome, by listening BETTER to the spirit of an interpretation. Well, you and others get the idea, I hope.


----------



## flamencosketches

89Koechel said:


> flamenco - Hope you'll have good results, with Barenboim (after "pulling the trigger"). Well, maybe it's time to mention, again, one of Daniel B's inspirations - Wilhelm Furtwangler. Daniel has even mentioned ("Why Wilhelm Furtwangler Still Moves Us, Today"), in an eloquent fashion … "He was a subjectivist, who philosophized …", etc. WHY we continue to listen to WF and the older masters, even now. It's certainly NOT because of the recorded SONICS of a WF interpretation - that type of limitation is one we should overcome, by listening BETTER to the spirit of an interpretation. Well, you and others get the idea, I hope.


I've heard great things said about Furtwängler's Bruckner, not least by Daniel Barenboim as you say. What is a good recording of his, according to you, 89Koechel? Let me know and I'll give it a listen. I really enjoyed Furtwängler's Brahms 1st symphony with the NDR Symphony.


----------



## 89Koechel

flamenco - Well, I'd certainly BEGIN with WF, in Bruckner's 9th - even though it's his last Symphony, this might be the best place to start. One can "preview" this 1944 recording, on youtube, if you want. Pristine Classical has a very-fine reissue, and the old Music & Arts reissue is available from Amazon (about $9, plus postage). It's fairly-well accepted, even 75 years after this performance, that hardly anyone … if anyone … has matched it.


----------



## Konsgaard

Still, the Original-Image Bit-Processing remastering in the Karajan 1970s and 1980s box sets is way better than this new release. The OIBP remastering even removed some stage noise and put emphasis on strings, timpani and brass at certain sections where they used to be drowned-out by the orchestra.


----------



## flamencosketches

Funny that this thread was bumped today, I finally got my Barenboim/Berlin Philharmonic Bruckner cycle  probably going to listen to the first symphony later.


----------



## starthrower

I love my Skrowaczewski set! Such lyrical performances on beautiful, warm sounding recordings.


----------



## CnC Bartok

starthrower said:


> I love my Skrowaczewski set! Such lyrical performances on beautiful, warm sounding recordings.


Indeed, very much like his Beethoven set, which are also top drawer (ditto his Brahms, come to think of it!)


----------



## starthrower

I'll have to look into some of his other recordings.


----------



## DavidA

Three cycles I have, all of which have great points:

























To these I would add Karajan's EMI 4 and 7 and his late DG 7 and 8

Also Dohnanyi's 5 and 9


----------



## Heck148

flamencosketches said:


> What are some that I'm missing?.......
> Thanks in advance


for complete sets - try

Solti/CSO/Decca
Barenboim _/ with Chicago/DG

both terrific....."knock your socks off" stuff...

Walter/ColSO - #4, 7, 9 - essential, in my book.._


----------



## Heck148

Merl said:


> Its a good cycle. What I'd term a good library set. Weirdly, I like the Chicago cycle better. Some great brass playing.
> View attachment 121690


Yes, a superb Bruckner set - splendidly recorded, amazing playing....


----------



## Heck148

bigshot said:


> I really don't like Solti for stuff like this. Too strident. Bruckner has a tendency to be LOUDsoftLOUDsoftLOUDsoft... It can get monotonous.


yes, Bruckner very big on the tension/release format...that's one of the things I like about Solti - he excelled at building the big, long line, the rising tension, and the orgasmic climax...ie - Sym #7/II, one of the greatest Adagios - Solti brings this off amazingly, hugely powerful climax....he doesn't let things lag either, or become to choppy or episodic - which is a real danger with Bruckner - slow, draggy, and chopped up...no thanx...


----------



## jegreenwood

I feel like I may be finally having my Bruckner breakthrough. It took decades. During that time I've owned two cycles Jochum/EMI and Wand/Rundfunks. As I'm just starting to "get" the music, I haven't chosen favorites yet. But I would like to get a cycle with spectacular sound (as well as first rate performances). Something to complement the sets I have. Any advice?


----------



## Azol

Sound-wise great set with all-around fine performances is probably Chailly.
And it's not expensive!


----------



## Knorf

jegreenwood said:


> I feel like I may be finally having my Bruckner breakthrough. It took decades. During that time I've owned two cycles Jochum/EMI and Wand/Rundfunks. As I'm just starting to "get" the music, I haven't chosen favorites yet. But I would like to get a cycle with spectacular sound (as well as first rate performances). Something to complement the sets I have. Any advice?


Easy: Stanisław Skrowaczewski.


----------



## Heck148

jegreenwood said:


> .....But I would like to get a cycle with spectacular sound (as well as first rate performances). Something to complement the sets I have. Any advice?


either -
Solti/CSO [London/Decca] or
Barenboim/CSO (DG)..
both have spectacular sound and great, gripping performances- DG's recordings for Barenboim are esp fine...what a sound!!


----------



## Granate

jegreenwood said:


> During that time I've owned two cycles Jochum/EMI and Wand/Rundfunks. As I'm just starting to "get" the music, I haven't chosen favorites yet. But I would like to get a cycle with spectacular sound (as well as first rate performances).


Not easy since many cycles that could be alternatives (Wand Berlin or Skrowaczewski Saarbrücken) are out of print temporarily. I suggest you go to Karajan or you try warming to Celibidache. Not the best season for the rest of cycles I'm afraid. Barenboim Berlin has good performances, it's inexpensive and has nice sound. That's my current suggestion. Get good hold of that Jochum Dresden or simply search for a killer No.4 and No.8.


----------



## jegreenwood

Granate said:


> Not easy since many cycles that could be alternatives (Wand Berlin or Skrowaczewski Saarbrücken) are out of print temporarily. I suggest you go to Karajan or you try warming to Celibidache. Not the best season for the rest of cycles I'm afraid. Barenboim Berlin has good performances, it's inexpensive and has nice sound. That's my current suggestion. Get good hold of that Jochum Dresden or simply search for a killer No.4 and No.8.


Actually Amazon had one copy of the Skrowaczewski/Bruckner - and I just grabbed it.


----------



## Itullian

I like a few sets, but i mostly grab the Chailly. 
Spectacular sound.
And each symphony is complete on it's own disc.


----------



## DarkAngel

jegreenwood said:


> I feel like I may be finally having my Bruckner breakthrough. It took decades. During that time I've owned two cycles Jochum/EMI and Wand/Rundfunks. As I'm just starting to "get" the music, I haven't chosen favorites yet. But I would like to get a cycle with spectacular sound (as well as first rate performances). Something to complement the sets I have. Any advice?


If you have Tidal streaming the MASTERS 24/96 streams of Karajan DG BPO 4-9 are an amazing revelation, the original CDs were a bit hotly miked and glassy sound that were tiring to listen to for long periods, but the HD remasters have transformed them to sonic bliss, personally I have always felt Karajan had the strongest complete set of Bruckner symphonies and now we can fully hear all the intricate fine detail and ride towering waves of sound, its stature has only grown to new heights.....I have heard these 10+ times in new HD remaster, I can never tire of them

FYI beware the new CD/ Blu Ray set only has 24/96 in blu ray disc, the CDs are standard 16/44 resolution










Speaking of Chailly right now on Tidal I have this streaming........


----------



## jegreenwood

I will certainly be trying out other versions on Tidal.

BTW, I listened last night to Wand conducting No. 2. It appears my breakthrough is not yet complete.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Anyone know anything about the Heinz Rogner set on Brilliant? One of the few cycles I'm completely unfamiliar with.....

I have to admit I have sort of gone off the Gielen cycle, it's a bit too straight-laced to br honest, but he does make a real point of emphasising the whole structure of each. My favourite set has always been Jochum on EMI, but I think Gerd Schaller is giving him a run for his money now.


----------



## jegreenwood

DarkAngel said:


> If you have Tidal streaming the MASTERS 24/96 streams of Karajan DG BPO 4-9 are an amazing revelation, the original CDs were a bit hotly miked and glassy sound that were tiring to listen to for long periods, but the HD remasters have transformed them to sonic bliss, personally I have always felt Karajan had the strongest complete set of Bruckner symphonies and now we can fully hear all the intricate fine detail and ride towering waves of sound, its stature has only grown to new heights.....I have heard these 10+ times in new HD remaster, I can never tire of them
> 
> FYI beware the new CD/ Blu Ray set only has 24/96 in blu ray disc, the CDs are standard 16/44 resolution
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of Chailly right now on Tidal I have this streaming........


Thanks. I will check out the Karajan. I have his Nos. 7 and 8 on EMI. Along with Haitink's No. 4, these were my first Bruckner purchases many years ago. Any reason why DG didn't include 1-3 in the box other than the fact that they are not as highly regarded? I see an earlier box has them.


----------



## bluto32

The recent DG box with both the CDs & Blu-ray audio disc does have all 9 symphonies. The cover art posted above appears to be from Amazon and is misleading. Here is the one I have:









It's under £30 at both Presto and Amazon at the moment.


----------



## jegreenwood

bluto32 said:


> The recent DG box with both the CDs & Blu-ray audio disc does have all 9 symphonies. The cover art posted above appears to be from Amazon and is misleading. Here is the one I have:
> 
> View attachment 148198
> 
> 
> It's under £30 at both Presto and Amazon at the moment.


On Tidal at least it's only 4-9.


----------



## Rmathuln

bluto32 said:


> The recent DG box with both the CDs & Blu-ray audio disc does have all 9 symphonies. The cover art posted above appears to be from Amazon and is misleading. Here is the one I have:
> 
> View attachment 148198
> 
> 
> It's under £30 at both Presto and Amazon at the moment.


An excellent set indeed.

Would have been really superb if it had included HvKs 1966 9th (his best Bruckner recording) and the VPO 7th and 8th he recorded at the end of his life.


----------



## bz3

CnC Bartok said:


> Anyone know anything about the Heinz Rogner set on Brilliant? One of the few cycles I'm completely unfamiliar with.....
> 
> I have to admit I have sort of gone off the Gielen cycle, it's a bit too straight-laced to br honest, but he does make a real point of emphasising the whole structure of each. My favourite set has always been Jochum on EMI, but I think Gerd Schaller is giving him a run for his money now.


Gielen's Mahler cycle is one of my favorites, but I am the sort of Mahler fan who thinks highly of Boulez's cycle. I have never heard his Bruckner and didn't have much interest (I'm a Celi adherent, after all) but I may have to change that. High SQ Romantic symphonic recordings are always interesting to me. Wand's BPO is my go-to 'cycle' for sound quality, even if it's only 4-9. Otherwise I agree with the other commenters in enjoying Solti and Skrow, though admittedly I don't often listen to either.


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> Anyone know anything about the Heinz Rogner set on Brilliant? One of the few cycles I'm completely unfamiliar with.....
> 
> I have to admit I have sort of gone off the Gielen cycle, it's a bit too straight-laced to br honest, but he does make a real point of emphasising the whole structure of each. My favourite set has always been Jochum on EMI, but I think Gerd Schaller is giving him a run for his money now.


Ive got the Rogner 'cycle' (he did 4-9, the others are different conductors - Neumann, Konwitschny and Sanderling). The sound is very good analogue with a crisp and well-balanced soundstage. Rogner, surprisingly, doesn't hang about (unlike his Beethoven) and these are fairly brisk readings that are on the leaner side. Don't let that put you off, though, as they are very good indeed. I particularly like symphonies 4-7 (8 and 9 just don't work as well but they are still good). Not played this in a while but remember it well as it was one of the first sets that got me interested in Bruckner. I think it's OOP now but correct me if I'm wrong. If you've got Spotify the whole cycle can be heard there.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

bluto32 said:


> The recent DG box with both the CDs & Blu-ray audio disc does have all 9 symphonies. The cover art posted above appears to be from Amazon and is misleading. Here is the one I have:
> 
> View attachment 148198
> 
> 
> It's under £30 at both Presto and Amazon at the moment.


Not a fan of complete cycles, but this is the one I'd get. Nos. 7 & 8 are as good as you can find anywhere and IMO even better than his Vienna remakes.

Not sure if anyone mentioned this one, but it is arguably the most consistent set, as Karajan is a little overdriven in the earlier symphonies.


----------



## CnC Bartok

bz3 said:


> Gielen's Mahler cycle is one of my favorites, but I am the sort of Mahler fan who thinks highly of Boulez's cycle. I have never heard his Bruckner and didn't have much interest (I'm a Celi adherent, after all) but I may have to change that. High SQ Romantic symphonic recordings are always interesting to me. Wand's BPO is my go-to 'cycle' for sound quality, even if it's only 4-9. Otherwise I agree with the other commenters in enjoying Solti and Skrow, though admittedly I don't often listen to either.


Agreed that Gielen's Mahler is truly top-drawer, one of my favourites too. And don't get me wrong, his Bruckner isn't poor. It's just short on Brucknerian magic. I think he plays it very straight, so it's a great way to hear Bruckner the Symphonist, not necessarily Bruckner the devout, God-fearing soul searcher.....


----------



## CnC Bartok

Just as a vague guide, these are the sets (avoiding the word "cycle") that I own, with a rough guide to how I feel about each. 

***** - Magical in every way, not a weak performance in sight
**** - excellent, just edged out by the more magical sets?
*** - a very good set, maybe one or two less inspiring readings in there
** - good in parts, doesn't get an outing that often
() - reluctance on my part to award that next star upwards, aren't I magnanimous.

Barenboim/Berlin PO **(*)
Celibidache/Munich PO (3-9) (****)
Chailly/Berlin RSO ****
Gielen/SWR SO ***(*)
Haitink/Concertgebouw O ***
Inbal/Frankfurt RSO ***
Jochum/Berlin PO/BRSO ***(*)
Jochum/Staatskapelle Dresden *****
Karajan/Berlin PO ***(*)
Klemperer/Philharmonia (4-9) ****
Paternostro/Wurttemberg PO **(*)
Schaller/Philh.Festiva *****
Skrowaczewski/Saarbrucken RSO ****(*)
Tintner/Various ***(*)
Wand/Koln RSO ****
Young/Hamburg PO ***(*)


----------



## Azol

CnC Bartok said:


> () - reluctance on my part to award that next star upwards, aren't I magnanimous.
> 
> Celibidache/Munich PO (3-9) (****)


I see what you did there...


----------



## CnC Bartok

Azol said:


> I see what you did there...


Indeed! To translate: "I recognise the reverence afforded to these performances by Celi aficionados, and there is undeniable magic here. But it's just not my thing"; or - being charitable - "these are awful and over-rated, but whatever floats your boat"

Please interpret as one sees fit....:angel:


----------



## Ned Low

I've listened to Celibidache both his Stuttgart and Munich. I personally don't understand his approach with Munich especially in the 4th symphony which is called' Romantic'. It's supposed to evoke scenes of nature, heroism, adventure, love. After all that's what Romanticism's about. Yet Celi's interpretation is a spiritual one. That doesn't really work with this symphony. It's like listening to Celi's own spiritual- Buddhist symphonies.Therefore, i don't honestly understand why people revere his interpretations so much.


----------



## Azol

It either clicks or not.
Talking about Celi's Munich boxset on EMI, I'd say it's a very rewarding listening experience except for a couple of movements where it just doesn't work, in my opinion.
That B4 is magical, Finale coda is worth the price of admission alone.
Also, B6 is one of the best on record (again, personal preference).
I'm not sure how exactly the musicians were able to pull this off, live, no overdubs. Must be some supernatural force present, no less.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Ned Low said:


> I've listened to Celibidache both his Stuttgart and Munich. I personally don't understand his approach with Munich especially in the 4th symphony which is called' Romantic'. It's supposed to evoke scenes of nature, heroism, adventure, love. After all that's what Romanticism's about. Yet Celi's interpretation is a spiritual one. That doesn't really work with this symphony. It's like listening to Celi's own spiritual- Buddhist symphonies.Therefore, i don't honestly understand why people revere his interpretations so much.


That's my general reaction as well. You could seemingly use Celi's approach with any piece of tonal music and make it into something it's not. It is interesting, but we know from other interpretations that there are emotions besides transcendental meditation that the music aims for.


----------



## Ned Low

Brahmsianhorn said:


> That's my general reaction as well. You could seemingly use Celi's approach with any piece of tonal music and make it into something it's not. It is interesting, but we know from other interpretations that there are emotions besides transcendental meditation that the music aims for.


Precisely! Celibidache's great in the sense that you can hear every note and detail of the music. Yet that's not what i'm looking for in the recordings of Bruckner. Fortunately, there are other great recordings of Bruckner my favourite composer : Barenboim( CSO), Karajan( BP), Jochum( BP/SD), Inbal( FSO)... the list goes on.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Ned Low said:


> Precisely! Celibidache's great in the sense that you can hear every note and detail of the music. Yet that's not what i'm looking for in the recordings of Bruckner. Fortunately, there are other great recordings of Bruckner my favourite composer : Barenboim( CSO), Karajan( BP), Jochum( BP/SD), Inbal( FSO)... the list goes on.


I often say that conductors who take the music of the German Romantics and interpret them in strict, fast tempos with light textures are forcing the music into their own personal aesthetic, and I feel the same way about Celibidache's way of taking out the drama and replacing it with a long meditative arc.

So that begs the question, what constitutes the music's intrinsic character? IMO you must convey the drama and emotions of the music the way it was intended, following the harmonic structure and making full use of orchestral color and shape. By definition, strict tempo and thin, straight orchestral color does not allow the story of German Romantic music to come out.

Furtwangler, Bohm, Jochum, Karajan, Haitink, and Barenboim come to mind as those interpreters who "get it" with Bruckner.

I heard Harnoncourt's celebrated 5th yesterday. Impressive performance technically, but I could not see his streamlined way of playing the Adagio as anything other than a curiosity.


----------



## hoodjem

IMHO, Tintner does not impose himself upon Bruckner.

Excellent interpretations in marvelously detailed recordings.


----------



## tskeldon

Hello all!

I was, in a distant life, a brass player in a North American orchestra. I soon left because my ideas on brass playing didn't gel with the prevailing brass performance paradigm. That being the case...

Can anyone recommend a Bruckner set that allows the propagation of Bruckner's orchestral tuttis in a realistic and uniformly convincing three dimensional sound stage without compression? 

As an orchestral performer I have my own ideas about interpretation that are reliably disappointed by everybody else's take on Bruckner, so I don't care about the conductor, or the orchestra for that matter (so capable now are the second tier bands). 

I just want to listen to Bruckner without the engineer 'highlighting' sections and soloists, by moving them forwards and backwards in the mix, or worse...eliminating them in service of 'his/her' educating me about Bruckner!

Presently, I find that despite my frequent enthusiasm to be 'Brucknered' in the moment, I 'always', not just reliably, get up and put it off when the first orchestral tutti invariably disappoints the inner ear of my audience perspective.

Modern brass players have turned to bigger and bigger equipment to win ever darker (less brassy) sound, acquiring too as a byproduct ever greater allowance of volume that today drowns out the inner string and wind voices of the orchestra in tutti play.

19th and early 20th century composers wrote for the orchestra they understood, but that orchestra doesn't exist, because brass players have increased their volume while other sections remain unchanged. So it falls to the music loving producer to correct it.

They shouldn't have to, and unfortunately they usually do more damage than good. I have lots of large orchestral works recorded to great effect by 'less is more' producers, but they don't ever seem to chose Brucker projects.

Ideally, I would a cycle that was released on vinyl. Ideas? Please don't recommend any of the great performances that, however inspired the chamber sections of the pieces maybe, ultimately fail because 1/5 of the piece (tuttis) suffers from poor remedy.

Thanks!


----------



## RobertJTh

tskeldon said:


> Modern brass players have turned to bigger and bigger equipment to win ever darker (less brassy) sound, acquiring too as a byproduct ever greater allowance of volume that today drowns out the inner string and wind voices of the orchestra in tutti play.
> Thanks!


Am I correct in assuming you prefer a more brassy, overtone-rich brass sound to a more mellow but voluminous timbre?
If so, it would be worth seeking out some Bruckner records from orchestras that still maintain their old, 19th century "sound", but those are extremely rare in our modern times, where orchestras employ a streamlined, homogeneous sound that fits all styles and nationalities.
You'll probably have more luck in the historical recordings department. I know old records by French orchestras (the Paris Conservatoire, for instance) that have this bright, "cuvré" sound, that stands out from the rest of the orchestra without mixing or blending, but also without dominating the strings and woodwinds. But there's the problem, French orchestras back then (think immediate post-war, not much later than the late 50's) didn't play Bruckner...


----------



## Heck148

RobertJTh said:


> Am I correct in assuming you prefer a more brassy, overtone-rich brass sound to a more mellow but voluminous timbre?


the idea that a "darker" sound is louder is simply not true, that's not how it works....the best and loudest sounds are both "bright" and "dark".

The greatest brass and woodwind sounds, for me, have large components of of bright, "edgy, "brassy" or reedy" brilliance, and a very resonant, round, tone with lots of pitch....the loudest sounds have both components...as the players push the air faster, [play louder] both components must increase...if there is no brilliance or "edge", the tone becomes unfocused, flabby, diffuse, and lacks projection....if there is insufficient resonance [pitch], the tone is simply thin, crass, strident, a pitchless buzz.

The greatest players achieve both - they maintain focus, projection, with plenty of resonant tone. Obviously, the make of the instruments, the mouthpiece, the reed, the "setup" is crucial to the quality of tone....so there are many factors.
By adjusting the air pressure, the airspeed, the embouchure, the greatest players are able to mix the bright and dark components to achieve a rich palette of tone colors.

IME, the loudest orchestras are the Americans - Chicago, NYPO and the Russians - best exemplified by the LeningradPO [Mravinsky] and old MoscowPO [Kondrashin]....the volume these guys achieve is truly remarkable....
LondonSO is right up there, too....Vienna PO is good also, a smaller scale of tone, but the players make excellent use of it and play with a big dynamic range and timbral variety. The old NBCSO under Toscanini could really crank it out, too...in fact, imo, the big rise in orchestral volume started in the US, with Toscanini's NBC, NYPO, Chicago in the late 30s, 40s and post WWII.

When listening to recordings, do not be fooled by the recording level regarding volume and projection - go by the tone quality....listen for both components....recordings can fool you...also, highlighting and spot-miking can present a false sound picture as well.


----------



## tskeldon

A darker sound is definitely not louder, in fact it is corpulent and pregnant with overtones that betray the composers orchestrational intent. The physics of larger equipment that causes darker sound also invites the pursuit and production of ever greater volume. 

In fact the conventional practice is to push until the brassiness returns (that is the real means by which brass players realize their animal guilt, and actually come to know they are playing loud), at which point they quickly become embarrassed again by the brassy sound that string and woodwind players so much disparage.

Then they get even bigger equipment to curb that manifest brass signature, and that's the trap. The point is that today, maybe less than when I was playing, brass players, as a profession, seemed to suffer from low self-esteem, and are ashamed to sound brassy (even in Bruckner), when they should rejoice in it as their greatest given asset. 

Bruckner's (and Strauss') brass sections shone (German style instruments) radiantly at much lower volumes, and were sweeter at pianissimo, allowing the nuance of the inner orchestration in orchestral tuttis to be heard even in full flush. Have you heard the congested contemporary accounts of Straussian sunrises? Where now is the resplendent God in that Zarathustra?


----------



## tskeldon

Hi everyone,

It appears to be worse than I feared...for these scant replies it appears that there are no great recordings of any Bruckner symphonies, however many great 'performances' may have been committed to tape and digital media over the decades. The problem for Bruckner is that in 'smaller' markets, where it is the case that audiences are less open to music that requires greater musical sympathy and patience both, he is seldom played, and as a result audiences are never habituated to his particularly transcendental musical poetry, preferring instead the low hanging melodic genius of more accessible composers. Thanks anyway!

Tim


----------



## vincula

tskeldon said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> It appears to be worse than I feared...for these scant replies it appears that there are no great recordings of any Bruckner symphonies, however many great 'performances' may have been committed to tape and digital media over the decades. The problem for Bruckner is that in 'smaller' markets, where it is the case that audiences are less open to music that requires greater musical sympathy and patience both, he is seldom played, and as a result audiences are never habituated to his particularly transcendental musical poetry, preferring instead the low hanging melodic genius of more accessible composers. Thanks anyway!
> 
> Tim


I honestly cannot grasp what you intend to say with your post. Not at all, really.

Regards,

Vincula


----------



## Heck148

tskeldon said:


> ..for these scant replies it appears that there are no great recordings of any Bruckner symphonies, however many great 'performances' may have been committed to tape and digital media over the decades.


??? what?? no great recordings of Bruckner??!!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

tskeldon said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> It appears to be worse than I feared...for these scant replies it appears that there are no great recordings of any Bruckner symphonies, however many great 'performances' may have been committed to tape and digital media over the decades. The problem for Bruckner is that in 'smaller' markets, where it is the case that audiences are less open to music that requires greater musical sympathy and patience both, he is seldom played, and as a result audiences are never habituated to his particularly transcendental musical poetry, preferring instead the low hanging melodic genius of more accessible composers. Thanks anyway!
> 
> Tim


Um, okay, whatev.

Here is my list of essential recordings:

(◄ = best combination of sound and performance)

*Symphony No. 3 in D minor *

*Karl Böhm/Vienna PO (1970) (Decca)* ◄
Böhm combines grand opulence with charm, beauty, and elegance in a naturally unfolding reading, the VPO sounding fantastic.

*Hans Knappertsbusch/Vienna PO (1954) (Testament, Decca)*
Knappertsbusch presents a monumental, mystical view with a slow basic pulse throughout, though never plodding. In his hands the massive chords seem to be hewn from granite. The mono sound is clear and full.

*Bernard Haitink/Vienna PO (1988) (Philips)*
Haitink's interpretation is more reined in and searching, providing a mix of ethereal beauty and organic strength.

*Carl Schuricht/Vienna PO (1965) (EMI, Preiser)*
Schuricht is intensely virile, powerful, and dramatic in very present sound.

*Symphony No. 4 in E-flat major*

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Vienna PO (10/29/51) (Orfeo, Decca, Archipel, Music & Arts, Andromeda)*
In Furtwängler's hands the monumental greatness of the work shines through with masterful thought and attention applied to the work's architecture, to overwhelming effect. The live recording is fairly present though there is some extraneous audience noise. The same forces were also recorded a week earlier (available on DG and Music & Arts) in a slightly less inpired performance, though many may prefer it for the more present sound quality.

*Karl Böhm/Vienna PO (1973) (Decca) ◄*
Böhm and the VPO are warmly atmospheric, with the power coming through in a very natural, ethereal way. This is an interpretation where everything just inevitably sounds right, and the sound quality is excellent, full and wonderfully detailed.

*Eugen Jochum/Berlin PO (1965) (DG)*
Jochum's is a deeply probing interpretation, poetically lyrical and majestically warm.

*Otto Klemperer/Bavarian RSO (1966) (EMI)*
Klemperer's live 1966 recording is full of energy, excitement and strength. The sound is very present and full.

*Sergiu Celibidache/Munich PO (1988) (EMI)*
With Celibidache the music is presented as one majestic arc from beginning to end, trancelike in its effect though at a slower pace and with less general variation than conventional performances. Nevertheless, this is one of the most powerful renditions with excellent, detailed sound quality.

*Günter Wand/Berlin PO (1998) (RCA)*
Wand presents a warmly affectionate reading which flows naturally, enhanced by beautiful sound.

*Herbert von Karajan/Berlin PO (1970) (EMI)*
Masterful sense of architecture and ethereal beauty are hallmarks of Karajan's Bruckner interpretation and are much in evidence in his earlier BPO recording, particularly in the eloquent finale.

*Stanislaw Skrowaczewski/Hallé Orch. (1993) (IMP, Carlton Classics)*
Wonderfully inspired account communicating an excellent understanding of the work.

*Symphony No. 5 in B-flat major  *

*Bernard Haitink/Bavarian RSO (2010) (BR Klassik) ◄*
Late in life, having already produced two superlative studio recordings of the 5th, Haitink gave us this live stunner. All his garnered wisdom translates into a magnetic reading of a work which from all Bruckner symphonies demands patience and structural integrity. There is a sense of purpose and inevitability throughout, and the sustained power and beauty of the performance are accentuated by clear, atmospheric sound quality.

*Eugen Jochum/Concertgebouw Orch. (1964) (Philips, Praga)*
Jochum had a close association with the 5th, and all his interpretations are worth hearing. Somewhere between the virility of the 1958 Bavarian and the spaciousness of the 1986 Concertgebouw versions lies this inspired live recording from Ottobeuren Abbey. Jochum marries all the elements together in a balanced reading that is both dramatic and spiritual, making for a powerful experience in a work that can be complex and mercurial. The remastered sound is present and detailed.

*Eugen Jochum/Concertgebouw Orch. (1986) (Tahra, Altus)*
Shortly before his death, Jochum returned to the 5th in a live concert with all the skill of a learned master. The result was a uniquely broad, powerful, revelatory reading which stands as one of the great Bruckner recordings. Every phrase is imbued with meaning, and the sense at the coda to the finale is one of overwhelming culmination. The sound quality is very present and full, with minimal signs of a live recording.

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Berlin PO (1942) (Testament, DG, Music & Arts, Andromeda)*
Furtwängler provides all the inimitable electricity, poignant nobility, and profound understanding of architecture and phrasing for which he is known, not least of all in the eloquently moving Adagio. The interpretation is somewhat on the fast side, but what makes it so compelling is the logic always leading the listener forward from one phrase to the next. Despite the obvious sound limitations, the recording is fairly clean for the period.

*Jascha Horenstein/BBC SO (1971) (BBC, Music & Arts)*
The 5th seems tailor-made for Horenstein's understanding of broad musical architecture, and he produces a uniquely powerful reading. This is an interpretation that stresses the importance of the whole above individual moments. With orchestral playing of immense dedication, the result is a thrilling live performance.

*Daniel Barenboim/Berlin PO (1991) (Teldec)*
Barenboim and the Berliners give a performance of exciting propulsion and volatility, particularly in the rousing coda to the finale. The interpretation is reminiscent of Furtwängler, flexible but disciplined, always pointing forward. The orchestral sound is full and opulent.

*Günter Wand/Berlin PO (1996) (RCA)*
Wand was another conductor with a special affinity for the 5th, and he provides an unerringly steady hand in a performance where from the first to the last bars everything sounds perfectly judged. The BPO's playing is powerful and lush, helped by warm, sumptuous sound quality.

*Symphony No. 6 in A major *

*Herbert von Karajan/Berlin PO (1979) (DG) ◄*
Karajan and the Berliners offer an outstanding version in excellent sound. They are exciting and monumental in the outer movements and especially concentrated and magnetic in a masterful account of the Adagio. The ethereal, homogenous sound world may not appeal to everyone - some will prefer more prominent brass in spots such as you get with Klemperer - but what sets Karajan apart is a seductive elan befitting this symphony.

*Otto Klemperer/New PO (1964) (EMI)*
Klemperer's classic account is luscious and majestic, with excellent playing accentuated by a full, present recording. As usual, his approach is very grounded and yet flexible, so that the Adagio is successfully moving even at a relatively swift tempo.

*Eugen Jochum/Bavarian RSO (1966) (DG)*
Jochum demonstrates his affinity for Bruckner with an interpretation that is affectionately molded as well as bringing added excitement with flexibility of phrasing. The sound has good presence even if not as clear as his slightly less inspired EMI recording.

*Bernard Haitink/Staatskapelle Dresden (2003) (Profil)*
Haitink's reading is disciplined and patiently paced, offering plenty of energy, exquisite attention to detail, and immaculate phrasing. The crystal clear sound will be a bonus for many.

*Sergiu Celibidache/Munich PO (1991) (EMI)*
Celibidache delivers a searching, probing performance that aside from a few ill-timed coughs barely registers as a live recording. The outer movements are powerfully shaped, while the measured Adagio is beautifully poignant.

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Berlin PO (2nd-4th mov. only, 1942) (EMI, Tahra, Music & Arts, Archipel, Andromeda)*
No survey would be complete without mentioning the surviving three movements from Furtwängler's wartime concert. From the passionate nobility and eloquence of the Adagio to the unsurpassed excitement of the Scherzo and Finale, we are unfortunately left wondering what might have been had the first movement been preserved.

*Symphony No. 7 in E major  *

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Berlin PO (5/1/1951) (Tahra, Music & Arts, Archipel, Andromeda)*
Furtwängler combines power and beauty with unmatched interpretive insight. The 1951 Rome performance is uniquely inspired. All three of his accounts are live, and unfortunately none provide ideal sound.

*Herbert von Karajan/Berlin PO (1974) (DG) ◄*
Karajan made three excellent studio accounts, all of which are eminently recommendable. The first two lack the full, transparent sound of his valedictory Vienna effort but compensate with greater concentration. The 1974 DG account is the most powerfully urgent, overwhelmingly so in the scherzo.

*Herbert von Karajan/Berlin PO (1971) (EMI)*
Karajan's 1971 EMI account is more mellow and ethereal compared to the 1974 DG, yet it contains plenty of power as well. The recording is more distant, underscoring the interpretation.

*Bernard Haitink/Concertgebouw Orch. (1978) (Decca, Philips)*
Haitink is unmannered, natural, and lyrical, with lush playing from the Concertgebouw in beautifully warm sound.

*Karl Böhm/Vienna PO (1976) (DG)*
Dignified nobility is the hallmark of this relaxed reading, with beautiful depth in the playing and sound quality.

*Eduard van Beinum/Concertgebouw Orch. (1947) (Dutton, Tahra, Audiophile)*
Van Beinum presents a noble view that refuses to linger, sounding excellent for its age in the Dutton transfer.

*Riccardo Chailly/RSO Berlin (1984) (Decca)*
Chailly is appropriately mysterious and beautiful, helped by a perfectly balanced acoustic.

*Symphony No. 8 in C minor *

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Vienna PO (1944) (DG, Archipel, Music & Arts, Andante, Andromeda)*
This 1944 VPO performance is one of Furtwängler's greatest recordings, presenting intense, inspired interpretation and execution. Seemingly every emotion of the work, from the dramatically angst-ridden to the achingly hushed and poignant, is unearthed here. The sound is remarkably clear for the time even though inevitably allowances must be made for harshness and lack of full sonority.

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Vienna PO (4/10/1954) (Orfeo, Hunt, Archipel)*
Like the case of Beethoven's 9th, Furtwängler in his final year of life left us a live recording of the Bruckner 8th that complements his uniquely intense wartime interpretation with the same orchestra a decade before. The results may not be as cogently gripping, but the performance is more spacious and less frenetic, displaying all his gifts of phrasing, dramatic narrative, and spirtuality. The present, enhanced sound quality adds significantly to the power and beauty such that for many this may be preferable to the wartime version.

*Günter Wand/Berlin PO (2001) (RCA) ◄*
Eloquence is the hallmark of Wand's valedictory live recording shortly before his death at age 90. Every phrase is lovingly sculpted, and the deeply reflective interpretation displays the wisdom of years. Above all, it is his deft, sensitive handling of the central Adagio that sets Wand's version apart. The entire performance has a unique glow, with the beautiful sound of the BPO enhanced by the rich, full sound quality.

*Günter Wand/NDR SO (1987) (RCA, EMI)*
Recorded live in the Lübeck Cathedral, Wand's 1987 account is one of hushed, spiritual reverence. There is an underlying intensity throughout, and the power is unleashed to great effect at the climax of the Adagio and coda to the Finale. The reverberant acoustic adds a special aura, even if not quite as full and opulent as his final BPO version.

*Herbert von Karajan/Berlin PO (1975) (DG)*
Karajan's intense interpretation is an ideal blueprint for a work with which he was closely identified. The 1975 BPO account is powerful, mystical, and unerring in its musical pacing, particularly in the dramatic Finale. The sound quality is full, present, and opulent.

*Carlo Maria Giulini/Vienna PO (1984) (DG)*
Giulini adds to the list of great VPO accounts, presenting a measured, probing, deeply felt vision from beginning to end that brings out the work's epic grandeur and spiritual qualities. The sound is detailed and present.

*Karl Böhm/Vienna PO (1976) (DG)*
Böhm is grand, opulent, unforced, and with luxurious playing from the VPO, presenting the work naturally in all its Romantic glory. The interpretation is both dramatic and eloquent, captured in perfect sound.

*Herbert von Karajan/Vienna PO (1988) (DG)*
Karajan's 1988 VPO account offers much the same qualities as his earlier version but in more full, detailed sound quality. This is a particularly expansive account, offering more of a valedictory, relaxed interpretation as compared to the earlier version's sense of mystery and magnetic concentration.

*Bernard Haitink/Vienna PO (1995) (Philips)*
Haitink's VPO recording offers an impeccable interpretation in clear, opulent sound without any imposition of the conductor's will. Of particular appeal is the beautifully poignant account of the Adagio.

*Jascha Horenstein/London SO (1970) (Music & Arts, BBC)*
Horenstein barely registers as a live recording in a uniquely powerful, measured, thoughtful version in excellent sound.

*Eduard van Beinum/Concertgebouw Orch. (1955) (Decca, Philips, Beulah)*
Van Beinum presents an urgently dramatic view at a flowing pace, the Concertgebouw captured in their virtuosic splendor in full, present sound for the time period.

*Pierre Boulez/Vienna PO (1996) (DG)*
Boulez offers incredibly detailed sound in a very impressive, incisive reading, with perfect pacing and execution.

*Symphony No. 9 in D minor *

*Carlo Maria Giulini/Vienna PO (1988) (DG) ◄*
Monumental and deeply moving, Giulini's expansive interpretation fits this symphony like a glove. The momentum never sags so that the effect is hyptonic and at times awe-inspiring. The VPO is glorious and committed, and the impressive sound quality only serves to enhance one of the great Bruckner interpretations on record.

*Günter Wand/Berlin PO (1998) (RCA)*
Wand's late live recording may seem understated, but it proves to be a beautifully patient reading with immaculate phrasing and magnetic concentration. Indeed, he arguably does a better job than anyone at making a cohesive whole out of this magnificent work, with the BPO offering gorgeous playing in sumptuous, detailed sound quality.

*Wilhelm Furtwängler/Berlin PO (1944) (Praga, DG, Archipel, Music & Arts, Andromeda)*
This intense, apocalyptic performance is from the last months of World War II, and one cannot help but imagine the emotions conjured up within that context. This is the only surviving document of a work Furtwängler revered, and the preserved insights are invaluable with phrases that are deeply and poignantly communicated despite the obvious limitations in fullness and detail from the sound quality.

*Günter Wand/NDR SO (1988) (RCA, EMI)*
This live concert from a decade earlier than Wand's Berlin outing is perhaps a shade less reflective and yet more biting, hushed, and intense while displaying his magical way with the score. Not only is the playing superlative, but the unique acoustic of the Lübeck Cathedral lends an ethereal quality befitting the work.

*Herbert von Karajan/Berlin PO (1975) (DG)*
Karajan and the BPO produced a groundbreaking, intense recording of the 9th in 1966, still revered by many. Their 1975 remake features the same unsurpassed, massive sense of power but with even stronger definition and helped by excellent sound. Karajan is as ever magnetic in his pacing and understanding of Brucknerian architecture.

*Hans Knappertsbusch/Berlin PO (1/30/1950) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts, Memories)*
Knappertsbusch is unique in his flexible, propulsive energy, with passionate playing from the BPO captured in rich, present mono sound. Two versions were recorded days apart, the first one for radio broadcast and the second live. Both are excellent, and although the first is certainly recommendable for the absence of audience noise, this live outing is even more thrilling provided one is not too distracted by the presence of intermittent coughs.

*Daniel Barenboim/Berlin PO (1990) (Warner/Teldec)*
Barenboim offers an inspired interpretation devoid of pretense, simply presenting the 9th in all its glory within a perfectly apt, opulent Brucknerian sound world. The Berliners produce fabulous tone and seem to relish in the freedom to play away.

*Eugen Jochum/Staatskapelle Dresden (1978) (EMI)*
Jochum and the Dresdeners take a no holds barred approach, blazing with intensity as well as featuring the conductor's consummate skill and affection in pacing and phrasing.

*Bernard Haitink/Concertgebouw Orch. (1981) (Philips)*
It may seem like a back-handed compliment to say that Haitink's interpretation is straight-forward, but his unforced approach is pure gain. The Concertgebouw plays with all the power and beauty for which they are known, enhanced by clear and opulent digital sound.

*Bruno Walter/Columbia SO (1959) (Sony)*
Walter in his "Indian summer" eschews extremes of emotion in an interpretation that is noble and direct, yet not lacking for power, highlighting Walter's immaculate gift for phrasing. The orchestral contribution is excellent, with present, detailed recording quality.

*Eduard van Beinum/Concertgebouw Orch. (1956) (Decca, Philips, Beulah)*
Van Beinum is vital and passionate within a fairly contained, efficient interpretation. With luscious playing from the Concertgebouw and full, present mono sound, this is vintage Bruckner performance of the highest caliber.

*Manfred Honeck/Pittsburgh SO (2018) (Reference Recordings)*
Honeck's version has the advantage of superlative sound quality, with excellent dynamic range and clarity. The interpretation is thoroughly engaging, with powerful attacks, beautifully turned phrases, and an impressively hushed, sustained Adagio.

.


----------



## Knorf

Excellent summary, Brahmsianhorn, one with which I have many points of agreement!

I don't think it makes sense to ignore the earliest four symphonies, though.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Knorf said:


> Excellent summary, Brahmsianhorn, one with which I have many points of agreement!
> 
> I don't think it makes sense to ignore the earliest four symphonies, though.


I just don't know them well enough to make an informed recommendation


----------



## Knorf

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I just don't know them well enough to make an informed recommendation


I understand. But why not give 'em a try? You'll probably never love them quite as much as the later symphonies, and that's understandable, but they do very much help form a complete picture of Bruckner the composer, and I personally enjoy them all!

ETA: I'm also very fond of the sacred choral works, the masses and motets and such. Not to mention the String Quintet!


----------



## Pmartel63

While I haven't had time to go throgh all of this thread has anyone heard the Janick Nezet-Seguin Bruckner cycle on Atma records??

It's a triumph to have a complete Canadian Bruckner cycle and managed to find a CD box set which will be listening to over the holidays 

From what I've read it does seem to have gotten good reviews and my FIRST Bruckner complete cycle


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> the idea that a "darker" sound is louder is simply not true, that's not how it works....the best and loudest sounds are both "bright" and "dark".
> 
> The greatest brass and woodwind sounds, for me, have large components of of bright, "edgy, "brassy" or reedy" brilliance, and a very resonant, round, tone with lots of pitch....the loudest sounds have both components...as the players push the air faster, [play louder] both components must increase...if there is no brilliance or "edge", the tone becomes unfocused, flabby, diffuse, and lacks projection....if there is insufficient resonance [pitch], the tone is simply thin, crass, strident, a pitchless buzz.
> 
> The greatest players achieve both - they maintain focus, projection, with plenty of resonant tone. Obviously, the make of the instruments, the mouthpiece, the reed, the "setup" is crucial to the quality of tone....so there are many factors.
> By adjusting the air pressure, the airspeed, the embouchure, the greatest players are able to mix the bright and dark components to achieve a rich palette of tone colors.
> 
> IME, the loudest orchestras are the Americans - Chicago, NYPO and the Russians - best exemplified by the LeningradPO [Mravinsky] and old MoscowPO [Kondrashin]....the volume these guys achieve is truly remarkable....
> LondonSO is right up there, too....Vienna PO is good also, a smaller scale of tone, but the players make excellent use of it and play with a big dynamic range and timbral variety. The old NBCSO under Toscanini could really crank it out, too...in fact, imo, the big rise in orchestral volume started in the US, with Toscanini's NBC, NYPO, Chicago in the late 30s, 40s and post WWII.
> 
> When listening to recordings, do not be fooled by the recording level regarding volume and projection - go by the tone quality....listen for both components....recordings can fool you...also, highlighting and spot-miking can present a false sound picture as well.


I think Furtwangler's BPO, fairly well-captured in the early 50s recordings, had an excellent orchestral balance. The brass could really bring it out, such as here. How different from the sound they had under Karajan a decade later!


----------



## HenryPenfold

Pmartel63 said:


> While I haven't had time to go throgh all of this thread has anyone heard the Janick Nezet-Seguin Bruckner cycle on Atma records??
> 
> It's a triumph to have a complete Canadian Bruckner cycle and managed to find a CD box set which will be listening to over the holidays
> 
> From what I've read it does seem to have gotten good reviews and my FIRST Bruckner complete cycle


I bought 2, 3, 6 & 8 individually, I don't have the complete set.

Yannick undertook a superb Bruckner 9 concert in London a few yers back that I attended, so I was pleased to be able to pick up a few recordings that came out later. Some critics describe the performances as perfunctory or lacking full commitment. I don't hear that. The performance of his greatest symphony, no.3, I rate very highly and would be happy if it were only one of five that I owned. The sound quality is amazing.


----------



## Heck148

SalieriIsInnocent said:


> I'm looking for a set with great sound, nothing plagued with pops and cracks or 80's digital sound.


Barenboim/Chicago - these are on DG from the 70s, a couple early 80s - great sounding, fabulous playing. 3 ,4 ,6 ,8, 9 are real highlights, plus the best #7/III scherzo I've ever heard...


----------

