# You favourite Bruckner symphonies in order.



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

Of course only if you like Bruckner. Mine would be, currently: (favourite first, of course)

2nd
7th
9th
8th
1st
6th
00
5th
4th
3rd
0


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

8, 7, 9

The others


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Depends very much on the day and the performance; 
temper-wise they are quite different, 
the 7th being more elegiac or lyrical throughout, 
symphonies 00-1 being quite conservative and classicist, 
the 9th and 8th being more modernistic and expressively turbulent 
(all in a layman´s terms ;-)).

But:

8
4
9
7
3
5
6
2
1
0
00


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

hpowders said:


> 7
> 7
> 7
> 7
> ...


Do you like Bruckner's 7th Symphony perchance?


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

MagneticGhost said:


> Do you like Bruckner's 7th Symphony perchance?


Yes. It's the only one that wears well with me over time.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

8 and 9 are on equal ground for me, the pinnacle of Bruckner composition.
4 and 7 next.
1,2,6
3 and 5


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

No. 7
No. 3
No. 9
No. 4
The rest.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The only performance of the 3rd I can tolerate is Karajan's, heavily chopped up; the way I prefer it.

For this symphony to begin to emote
Chop out all that extra bloat!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

9

8
4

7
6

2
5
3

1
0
00


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

9
8
7
5
4
3
6
2/1/0/00

Edit: OK, putting the 5th above the 4th since the 5th has one of my favorite finales in all symphonies.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

IMO, in the 5th, not all performances do really capture the Finale as a Finale, for instance such as making the last chords really sound like a finishing gesture. One who succeeds is Barenboim/BPO, among others.


----------



## Überstürzter Neumann (Jan 1, 2014)

8
9
4,5,6,7
2,3
0,1
00


----------



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

Gold: 8, 7, 9, 5.

Electrum: 6, 4.

Silver: 3, 2.

Bronze: '0', 1. 

The nicest thing I can say about the '00' is that it's a decent doffing of the cap to Mendelssohn - a competent effort to cut your teeth with but lacking any real individuality.

5 was my introduction to Bruckner - probably not the best one to start with but I still hold it in high regard as it 'sold' Bruckner to me.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I only know 8 and 4. I bought them as test candidates. I thought 8 was excessively repetitive and I was therefore somewhat disappointed, after an initial trial period. On the other hand, 4 impressed me on the first hearing. I am glad to see that 8 ranks so highly: perhaps it will grow on me


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

^^^I hope you try number 7 someday.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

hpowders said:


> ^^^I hope you try number 7 someday.


And I hope you give more attention to the others, number 7 is good but number 8 and 9 are fantastic


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

8
5
9
3 (original version)
4
6
7
2
1
3 (revised version)
0
F minor "-1"

I'm trying to get a new number for the Study Symphony. Let's spread the word, folks!


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

julianoq said:


> And *I hope you give more attention to the others, *number 7 is good but number 8 and 9 are fantastic


I've immersed myself in ALL the Bruckner symphonies over the years and have 2 complete sets of them.

Awfully presumptuous of you to assume I'm some sort of music listening novice.

I hate ALL Bruckner save for the 7th and Karajan's performance of the 3rd, heavily abridged; just the way I like it.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

hpowders said:


> I've immersed myself in ALL the Bruckner symphonies over the years and have 2 complete sets of them.
> 
> Awfully presumptuous of you to assume I'm some sort of music listening novice.
> 
> I hate ALL Bruckner save for the 7th and Karajan's performance of the 3rd, heavily abridged; just the way I like it.


I haven't assumed nothing. Sorry if you felt offended, I will be sure to not give you any musical advice from now on.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

I'm not sure of making a list but number 7 is my favourite, especially Karajan's last performance with the VPO. I've just ordered his earlier EMI one with the BPO.


----------



## beetzart (Dec 30, 2009)

I'm surprised 2 ranks so lowly. I think it has a lot of charm especially the 2nd movement.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

julianoq said:


> I haven't assumed nothing. Sorry if you felt offended, I will be sure to not give you any musical advice from now on.


I never asked for any advice, thank you! Peace be with you!


----------



## nightscape (Jun 22, 2013)

I have heard symphonies 3-9 at least one time each, so I'm only going to cite those:

In order of preference:

9
6 (I seem to be the odd one here that really likes this symphony almost the best out of all of them)
8
4
7
5
3


----------



## clara s (Jan 6, 2014)

9th and Furtwaengler

and you can sense the sweet taste of an unfinished masterpiece

I travelled all the way to Upper Belvedere, to feel Anton's soul when he wrote it.

Then

7
4
8
3
5
6
2
0
1
00 or F minor -1


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

9
3
8
7
2
6
5
4
1
0
00


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

9, 4, 8, 7, 6, 5, 3, 2, 1, 0, 00


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

^^^^^And we have liftoff!


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

I haven't got around to listening to the sixth yet  and I have only listened to the 8th once and am not too familiar with it, so this evaluation is not final. But, generally, I rank them as such

9, 7, 5, 8, 4, (1-2-3), (0-00)

If I could, I would put the Te Deum in-between 5 and 8, but it's not a symphony, so...


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Yes indeed... I first came to Bruckner through the choral works. My personal favorites are (at the moment):

7
4
8
9
All the rest.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Kudos for putting the 7th at the top! I'm sure sooner or later someone will mention the weak finale.


----------



## Cheyenne (Aug 6, 2012)

8 - wonderful from start to finish
9 - unfortunately unfinished but tremendous in its present state too
5 - wonderful from start to finish, with an awesome, exuberant finale
4 - finale is ineffective at places, the third movement is my favorite of Bruckner's third movements/scherzo's/you know what I mean - I love the trio!
7 - finale doesn't please me
3 (original) - fine throughout
6 - has to grow on me: uncertain
--


----------



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

Mahlerian said:


> I'm trying to get a new number for the Study Symphony. Let's spread the word, folks!


Nice idea, and maybe the '0' should become the '1.5'? :lol:


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

beetzart said:


> I'm surprised 2 ranks so lowly. I think it has a lot of charm especially the 2nd movement.


You are right. The 2 deserves better. It is a great symphony.


----------



## GGluek (Dec 11, 2011)

My favorites, in order, are:

9th


----------



## Rachmanijohn (Jan 2, 2014)

8
2
9
3
7
6
4
5
1


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

एकम्
द्वे 
त्रीणि
चत्वारि
पञ्च
षट्
सप्त
अष्ट
नव


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

*Ahh Bruckner*:
Eighth
Fifth
Ninth
Fourth
Seventh
Third (original)
Die Nulte (zero)
Second 
Sixth
First


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Blast off!

View attachment 33674


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I usually place the 7th over the 8th, but I listened to the Pierre Boulez performance of the eighth and now I'm not so sure.
Boulez doing great Bruckner.
Karajan doing great Mahler.
Who woulda thunk it?


----------



## isridgewell (Jul 2, 2013)

8, 7, 5, 9, 4, 3, 6, 2, 1, 0!


----------



## jim prideaux (May 30, 2013)

7th-what dodgy finale?-tops!

introduction to Bruckner years ago was a result of a speculative purchase of Bohm/VPO vinyl of 7th/8th-reaction to previous generations of conservative 'classical music' types adopting some kind of suspicious silence at the mention of both Mahler and Bruckner-I thought there must therefore be something in this music and I was right-funnily enough it was the same types who appeared to venerate Elgar and I still cannot abide his music-whoops, nearly slipped into the debate that cost me so dearly last summer!

as for other Bruckner symphonies-well 8,4,5,6,9,3 and at that point ignorance kicks in....

coincidence....going to Vienna in February and going to try to get return/standing ticket for VPO under Most performing the 6th alongside Mozart 28th....have no idea if this will come off!


----------



## clara s (Jan 6, 2014)

jim prideaux said:


> 7th-what dodgy finale?-tops!
> 
> introduction to Bruckner years ago was a result of a speculative purchase of Bohm/VPO vinyl of 7th/8th-reaction to previous generations of conservative 'classical music' types adopting some kind of suspicious silence at the mention of both Mahler and Bruckner-I thought there must therefore be something in this music and I was right-funnily enough it was the same types who appeared to venerate Elgar and I still cannot abide his music-whoops, nearly slipped into the debate that cost me so dearly last summer!
> 
> ...


at the Musikverein huh?

excellent

lucky you
write here your impressions after the concert


----------



## Richannes Wrahms (Jan 6, 2014)

9, 8, 7, 5, 3, 6, 4, 2, 1.


----------



## CyrilWashbrook (Feb 6, 2013)

Probably something along the lines of 9, 5, 8, 4, 7, 6, 3, 2, 1, 0.

Giulini's 9 with the Wiener Philharmoniker: transcendental. The ordering of 4, 6 and 7 is flexible - I love all three and find it difficult to put one ahead of the other.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Yes. Giulini certainly had an affinity with Bruckner. I have both his Chicago Symphony and Vienna Philharmonic performances of the Ninth, but the latter must be declared the victor.


----------



## AClockworkOrange (May 24, 2012)

Off the top of my head, I would go with the following at present:

9 - 8 - 5 - 6- 3 - 1 - 7 - 2 - 4

I haven't listened to Symphonies 0 and 00 enough to rank them.

I should also note that I enjoy the 2nd Symphony very much, it is simply a tough field. I feel awful seeing it so low but it is what it is.

The 4th Symphony is the only one which doesn't completely click with me. I don't dislike it but I cannot say that I love it either. I wouldn't be surprised if it falls into place one day though. I have found that I have to grow into some pieces or hear them at the right time under the right circumstances.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Number 7 so low? Ouch!!!


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I haven't listened to Bruckner in a while so I can't really give a precise list. 

I know the first 3 in my list would be some combination of 8, 9 and 5

Next would probably be 7 and 3 or 3 and 7.

Next might be 6 or 2.

1 would probably be last.

Actually 00 is probably last, then 1. 

I'm not sure where to put #4.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Number 4. 0.1: Just a suggestion.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

violadude said:


> I'm not sure where to put #4.


Like some of his other symphonies, the Fourth has a stronger first half than second. The finale has weaknesses in any version, but the 1880 revision (the most frequently performed and recorded) is the best overall. The original version has some fascinating parts (some of which he changed to make the texture less dense and the motivic development easier to follow), but is less than perfect as a whole. That said, hearing the work in concert in a good performance made the finale feel like better music than it normally does, despite the program notes' guarded criticism: "some of the themes seem too slight for their treatment". You don't say???


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

Mahlerian said:


> [...] That said, hearing the work in concert in a good performance made the finale feel like better music than it normally does, despite the program notes' guarded criticism: "some of the themes seem too slight for their treatment". You don't say???


Interesting comment, Mahlerian! But even Robert Simpson came to change his mind about that light second theme in the finale after hearing a version performed by Celibidache.


----------



## Guest (Jan 31, 2014)

Anyway, to answer the OP, here's my list (but it does change sometimes) : 
Top of the podium with joint gold medal : 5 & 8;
Silver : 9;
Bronze : 7;
Runners up : 0,00,1,2,3,4;
Disqualified (for being far too cheeky) : 6.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

TalkingHead said:


> Interesting comment, Mahlerian! But even Robert Simpson came to change his mind about that light second theme in the finale after hearing a version performed by Celibidache.


I don't mind it personally (and feel that in the revised version it offsets the funereal theme that precedes it quite well), except that part right before the coda when the rhythm is blasted out in a fortissimo tutti, which just sounds silly to me.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

Now that I've come around fully to all of Bruckner's symphonies (with 4 and 8 being the laggarts) I feel like I can revive this thread with my contribution.

9
8
5
6
4
7
1
3
2
00
0

Oddly enough it was 2 and 3 that kind of opened Bruckner up for me, but 6 is what made me fall in love.


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

The original version of No. 2 is so good.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

1st Tier: 8, then 9

2nd Tier: 6, then 7

3rd Tier: 2, then 5

4th Tier: ...Nope; still don't really like the 4th.

5th Tier: The Ones That I Haven't Heard Yet.


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

3
8
9
7
6
4
2
5
1
0
00


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

bz3 said:


> Now that I've come around fully to all of Bruckner's symphonies (with 4 and 8 being the laggarts) I feel like I can revive this thread with my contribution.
> 
> 9
> 8
> ...


This comes close to my list, swapping 1 for 2.


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

Pugg said:


> This comes close to my list, swapping 1 for 2.


have you heard the 3rd carefully?


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

Nevum said:


> 3
> 8
> 9
> 7
> ...


Which version of the 3rd is the one you hold in such high regard?


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

Chronochromie said:


> The original version of No. 2 is so good.


i agree much better than the revised one.


----------



## Nevum (Nov 28, 2013)

Chronochromie said:


> Which version of the 3rd is the one you hold in such high regard?


The 1873 version. Especially, as performed by Simone Young. Thats my favorite.
However, I also like the 1889 version, Jochum or Wand, both remarkable.


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

8,9,7
5,4,6
3,2,1
0,00


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

9,4,7,8,3,5,1,00,2,0,6


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3


----------



## yetti66 (Jan 30, 2017)

8,5,9,7,6,4,3,2,1


----------

