# Favorite Bruckner 9th Recording



## ithinkinnotes

Having been lurking and enjoying this forum for years and have been so grateful for all the good advice. I am slowly getting myself into Bruckner's music and starting from 9th onwards. What would be the best recording for me to invest in? I have https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Symphony-No-9-Anton/dp/B000001GAM and very satisfied with the tempo and the control. But am sure many of you will educate me on better recordings.

Thanks a lot. 
Victor


----------



## ahinton

Make sure that you get one with all four movements!


----------



## Guest

ahinton said:


> Make sure that you get one with all four movements!


To that end, Simon Rattle's is very good. I have the Japanese SACD version--very good sound, too.


----------



## ithinkinnotes

Thanks @Kontrapunctus and @ahinton. Just ordered Sir Rattle's version. Truly enjoy his vivacity that he brings to the composition. Looking forward to his LSO chapter.


----------



## Heck148

Solti/CSO is superb
so is Giulini with same orchestra.
Walter ColSO is a long-time favorite as well.


----------



## ithinkinnotes

@Heck148, Sir Solt's is only 3 movements. https://www.amazon.com/Bruckner-Symphony-Chicago-Orchestra-Georg/dp/B00000E38J. Is there another recording that I am missing? Thanks.


----------



## Vaneyes

I don't subscribe to the 4th movement. That said... 

Dresden/Jochum (EMI, 1978)
BPO/HvK (DG, 1966)


----------



## realdealblues

Vaneyes said:


> I don't subscribe to the 4th movement. That said...
> 
> Dresden/Jochum (EMI, 1978)
> BPO/HvK (DG, 1966)


This...both recordings and amount of movements.


----------



## Haydn man

I will agree with the above re Karajan but would also recommend 
Gunter Wand/BPO
Wand seems a natural with Bruckner to me


----------



## tdc

My votes are for the Dresden/Jochum (EMI 1978) already mentioned and also this:


----------



## ViatorDei

*Günter Wand* with the BPO is superb. So natural, so powerful... The best in my book. The best 1st movement without a doubt. To take just one example, that pizzacato descending moment just after the first climax (around the 3:10 mark) is so perfectly paced. And his transitions between parts is so fluid and natural. I could go on. Highest recommendations. Wand's second movement is also very good, but strangely enough, gives me a bizarre 20th century vibe at moments. Walter is champion for me in the 2nd movement and sounds more like a 19th Century Austrian's composition. Wand's 3rd movement is excellent, but I personally like Barenboim's 3rd movement a bit more (probably the only Barenboim Bruckner that I really admire).

Final note: I have recently been discovering *Tintner*'s Bruckner cycle... have been blown away time and again by how perfect, powerful, and authentic-feeling his interpretations are. This is particularly true for the 9th. His first movement is the only one that vies with Wand for me. And his 2nd and 3rd movements are superb as well. I would say it's probably the best overall performance.

(Everyone raves about Giulini's 9th, but it's always left me rather indifferent.)


----------



## shadowdancer

Rec 1974
Sergiu Celibidache, Radio-Sinfonieorchester Stuttgart des SWR
Released by DG


----------



## Heck148

ithinkinnotes said:


> @Heck148, Sir Solt's is only 3 movements.


Bruckner Sym #9 has only 3 mvts...


----------



## Azol

*Giulini* wins hands down.
*Rattle* if you need the 4th movement. Rattle uses a very satisfying newest SMPC edition of the Finale, which is way better than all the earlier attempts. Wildner recorded earlier SMCP edition and Schaller - Carragan one (I would not recommend it!)


----------



## Manxfeeder

ViatorDei said:


> *G
> Final note: I have recently been discovering Tintner's Bruckner cycle... have been blown away time and again by how perfect, powerful, and authentic-feeling his interpretations are. *


*

I share your enthusiasm for Tintner. Of course, his Naxos cycle was what introduced me to Bruckner and also made me a fan, so maybe I'm naturally biased toward it. The first movement of the 4th symphony, more than any other conductor's, always sends me into transcendence.*


----------



## Becca

Heck148 said:


> Bruckner Sym #9 has only 3 mvts...


Nonsense! Bruckner did NOT want a 3 movement torso left, so much so that he even considered using the Te Deum as a finale. I don't know why so many people are against the completion of the last movement as there are only 67 bars which had to be created for the finished work. How many of those who are against it, do not raise any issues with the Mahler 10th, Puccini's Turandot or the Mozart Requiem?


----------



## Heck148

Becca said:


> ..... I don't know why so many people are against the completion of the last movement as there are only 67 bars which had to be created for the finished work.


??? then why is it that so many great conductors do not include the remnants of the incomplete final movement?? I've never heard what Bruckner wrote for a last movement, how authentic is the music that he did compose?? 67 measures - I've not heard that before...


----------



## Becca

Heck148 said:


> ??? then why is it that so many great conductors do not include the remnants of the incomplete final movement?? I've never heard what Bruckner wrote for a last movement, how authentic is the music that he did compose?? 67 measures - I've not heard that before...


I wish that I could answer that question. Why is it that someone like Leonard Bernstein felt that nothing could come after the Mahler 9th even though it was well known that the entire work existed in short score? Maybe the same type of thing, everyone believes that the 3rd movement is a farewell so nothing can come after it. I recommend the following short talk by Simon Rattle...






...and here is a Youtube video of the entire 4th movement...


----------



## Weird Heather

The issue of completions or performing versions of incomplete works has always been rather controversial. Some conductors seemingly object to performing these completions, while others are open to it. Mahler's 10th is still rather controversial, although the Cooke completion has gained some degree of acceptance. In the case of Bruckner's 9th, perhaps the tradition that it is "complete" in its three-movement form works against the acceptance of a reconstructed finale, despite the fact that it is in rather good condition for an incomplete work. I'm glad that it is finally getting some attention, and maybe it will eventually become more popular. I have Rattle's recording, and I find it compelling - it is nice to finally bring some sort of closure to this symphony, even if there remains some lingering uncertainty about Bruckner's ultimate intentions for the finale.

As a listener, I like to give these completions a chance. I listen, understanding that the work is still incomplete and the completion contains some educated guesses as to how the composer might have finished the piece. If the music that results from this process is compelling, then I am happy to accept it as it is.


----------



## Pugg

Heck148 said:


> Solti/CSO is superb
> so is Giulini with same orchestra.
> l.


These are my choices as well.


----------



## Art Rock

Personally I utterly dislike the fourth movement.

For me the 3-movement version is the final thing and it is perfect. Haitink with the Concertgebouw Orchestra is my preferred version.


----------



## ahinton

Art Rock said:


> Personally I utterly dislike the fourth movement.


Whose version thereof? - and, given just how much of its music is genuinely by the composer, do you believe that he suddenly fell off his creative perch to the point of being incapable of composing his final finale?


----------



## Art Rock

The one Rattle recorded. I won't comment on what Bruckner may or may not have intended himself*, but I only comment on the final result. The three movement version is my favourite symphony, the fourth spoils it for me.

* although if it was so close to being finished, and if he was himself satisfied with it, why did he make the suggestion to play his Te Deum as fourth movement?


----------



## ahinton

Art Rock said:


> The one Rattle recorded. I won't comment on what Bruckner may or may not have intended himself*, but I only comment on the final result. The three movement version is my favourite symphony, the fourth spoils it for me.
> 
> * although if it was so close to being finished, and if he was himself satisfied with it, why did he make the suggestion to play his Te Deum as fourth movement?


That Bruckner actually did make that suggestion is questionable, particularly given the tonalities involved in both works; there could be no question that he intended the symphony to end in D major. Not only that, but one has also to consider when during the composition of the finale did Bruckner make this statement, if indeed he ever did so. The principal point at issue here is that, given that Bruckner always intended the symphony to be in four movements, the past assumptions that there was no realistic way in which the finale could be put together after the composer had died have been undermined by the sheer amount of music in Bruckner's hand that have been discovered, folio by folio, over the years. It was once thought that the composer had written hardly any of that finale, but we now know this not to be so.


----------



## Becca

Art Rock said:


> * although if it was so close to being finished, and if he was himself satisfied with it, why did he make the suggestion to play his Te Deum as fourth movement?


Close to being finished is a relative term. We know that he had sketched out all of the movement and orchestrated most of it, all that remained was to orchestrate the rest and make whatever changes came to mind in the process. As Simon Rattle observed in the video above, he could have finished it in another 6 to 8 weeks so it is not surprising that he realized that he would not have that much time, hence thinking of possible alternatives.


----------



## Becca

I wonder - just how much of the negativity towards the completion is also a reflection on the attitude that many have towards Simon Rattle. For what it's worth, there is a 13 year old recording of an illustrated lecture that Nicholas Harnoncourt made with the Vienna Philharmonic in which he played all of the (at that time) known sketches of the finale and made many of the same comments as Rattle did.


----------



## BoggyB

I have the Rattle CD and I (figuratively) say thank you "dem lieben Gott" that I have a complete version of this symphony to listen to. I think in time people will come to accept the full nature of the opus, and that the objections some people have are a result of having become accustomed to the incomplete version.

We should shed tears of joy that we have something here that previous generations did not. In a way it's fitting that there's a version problem because that was already a feature of Bruckner!

Going back to the question of the thread, the *Wildner* recording on Naxos is good.


----------



## hpowders

Not a big Bruckner fan but there is one recording that is the greatest performance this music has ever had recorded, in my opinion:

Vienna Philharmonic under Carlo Maria Giulini.

A perfect Bruckner 9th.


----------



## tdc

I like Rattle as a conductor, and I think this final movement is an interesting glimpse into some ideas Bruckner had for the finale but regardless of what was there in terms of sketches that completed final movement doesn't sound like Bruckner to me.

I give Rattle high marks for his effort which is nice (especially the last minute or so), but I prefer the work unfinished.


----------



## Becca

I can think of some other symphonies which would be better were they unfinished but, unfortunately, they weren't. Fortunately I have the choice of ignoring the composer's wishes and only playing the parts that I like


----------



## merlinus

hpowders said:


> Not a big Bruckner fan but there is one recording that is the greatest performance this music has ever had recorded, in my opinion:
> 
> Vienna Philharmonic under Carlo Maria Giulini.
> 
> A perfect Bruckner 9th.


Having listened to this version again last night, I completely concur! Also, the SQ is excellent.


----------



## Pugg

merlinus said:


> Having listened to this version again last night, I completely concur! Also, the SQ is excellent.


Try the Solti one, you be surprised.


----------



## Triplets

ahinton said:


> Make sure that you get one with all four movements!


I prefer the 3 movement version


----------



## merlinus

Pugg said:


> Try the Solti one, you be surprised.


Maybe, but after listening to how he botches LvB 9, I am not interested.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Much as I like Tintner this is the one that really moves me:










I have this 4 movement version but I can't say the 4th movement does much for me:


----------



## Merl

Wand, Guilini and Abbado for me.


----------



## Francis Poulenc

Go for Celibidache.


----------



## ahinton

tdc said:


> I like Rattle as a conductor, and I think this final movement is an interesting glimpse into some ideas Bruckner had for the finale but regardless of what was there in terms of sketches that completed final movement doesn't sound like Bruckner to me.


But as a lot of it IS Bruckner, as you implying that, at this point in his creative career, Bruckner was sounding unlike Bruckner?


----------



## ahinton

Triplets said:


> I prefer the 3 movement version


Well, if you like being short changed, that's your prerogative, of course!


----------



## ahinton

The sad thing is that there are several really splendid versions of the first three movements that one wishes that the conductors responsible could have had what there is now of the finale...


----------



## tdc

ahinton said:


> But as a lot of it IS Bruckner, as you implying that, at this point in his creative career, Bruckner was sounding unlike Bruckner?


No, I'm not saying that. "A lot of it is Bruckner" but not all, we are free then to decide for ourselves whether or not this finale works. If you like it good for you.

I think the work is outstanding unfinished so no need to fix what isn't broken.


----------



## ahinton

tdc said:


> No, I'm not saying that. "A lot of it is Bruckner" but not all, we are free then to decide for ourselves whether or not this finale works. If you like it good for you.
> 
> I think the work is outstanding unfinished so no need to fix what isn't broken.


Not all, no, but far more of it than was once thought would ever be possible - and, let's face it, Bruckner never intended this or any of his earlier symphonies to be cast in three movements. Those first three movements of the Ninth are indeed outstanding but, inevitably, they lead to no symphonic conclusion. I remain curious as to why you feel as you appear to do about the music that Bruckner himself actually composed for the finale.

A fine essay on the (for some) vexed question of the finale may be downloaded from https://www.abruckner.com/articles/articlesenglish/vandermeijden/ ; although written in English, its author is Dutch.


----------



## tdc

ahinton said:


> Not all, no, but far more of it than was once thought would ever be possible - and, let's face it, Bruckner never intended this or any of his earlier symphonies to be case in three movements. Those first three movements of the Ninth are indeed outstanding but, inevitably, they lead to no symphonic conclusion. I remain curious as to why you feel as you appear to do about the music that Bruckner himself actually composed for the finale.


I think the final movement was a work in progress and who knows how it would've progressed. Just because there are so many sketches left does not mean those ideas were finalized.

I think this Symphony being unfinished just works for it, there is an air of mystery at the end and I like that. Maybe the proper final touches on this enigmatic work were delivered by fate itself.


----------



## ahinton

tdc said:


> I think the final movement was a work in progress and who knows how it would've progressed. Just because there are so many sketches left does not mean those ideas were finalized.
> 
> I think this Symphony being unfinished just works for it, there is an air of mystery at the end and I like that. Maybe the proper final touches on this enigmatic work were delivered by fate itself.


That idea was once widely circulated, as though its dedicatee had decided that it should be left with only three movements, but that was before so many folios from the finale in the composer's hand came to light (and it's not entirely inconceivable that more might yet be discovered, albeit - most frustratingly - not the coda to end all Bruckner codas).


----------



## Becca

works in progress...

Mozart - Requiem
Mahler - Symphony #10
Puccini - Turandot

In the case of the Mozart, the other two AND the Bruckner were left in a far more complete state and yet the Mozart in a third-party completion is part of the standard repertoire.


----------



## R3PL4Y

I have never listened to the four movement version, but now I think that I will have to. I always thought that there was only a small amount of the finale completed by Bruckner. Of course, in many ways the completion of this symphony by third parties would be easier than for another composer, as Bruckner was nothing if not idiomatic. However, I want to ask everybody reading this if they think the work suffers at all from the lack of revisions that Bruckner subjected all his other symphonies too? While I do love the piece, there are some aspects of it, especially some aspects of the orchestration, that I think Brukcner would have gone on to change had he lived a little longer.


----------



## tdc

Becca said:


> works in progress...
> 
> Mozart - Requiem
> Mahler - Symphony #10
> Puccini - Turandot
> 
> In the case of the Mozart, the other two AND the Bruckner were left in a far more complete state and yet the Mozart in a third-party completion is part of the standard repertoire.


The fact is with the Mozart Requiem it is very difficult to say what was actually completed by Süssmayr. As it says on Wiki: "It cannot be shown to what extent Süssmayr may have depended on now lost "scraps of paper" ".

I suspect with Mozart's Requiem less was completed by Süssmayr than he claimed. Either way I don't buy into the logic that because Mozart's Requiem is part of the standard repertoire we should automatically accept any completions deemed as more complete than the Mozart. For the record I prefer Mahler 10 unfinished, I don't have an opinion on the Puccini as I have not yet listened to that work in full.


----------



## ahinton

Becca said:


> works in progress...
> 
> Mozart - Requiem
> Mahler - Symphony #10
> Puccini - Turandot
> 
> In the case of the Mozart, the other two AND the Bruckner were left in a far more complete state and yet the Mozart in a third-party completion is part of the standard repertoire.


So's the Mahler, so why not yet the Bruckner I have less than no idea.


----------

