# Suggested Bruckner listening order?



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I started with No. 3, and would like to know which to attempt to listen to from there?


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Did you like number three? The first one that really hit me was number 6. That first movement is SICK. I think Bruckner is one of those composers that few people can absolutely agree on, as any of the symphonies has the potential to suck you in. 6 and 7, to this day, are the only ones I know really well. Bruckner is a project of mine.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I haven't finished, but I enjoy the first movement.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I definitely wouldn't suggest three as a starting point. But if you enjoy it thats cool. I would suggest 2, 4, 5 or 6. I would suggest 1 as well, but it's not really typical Bruckner. But then again neither is 5 really.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I will go for 2 next then thanks.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

4, 7, 8 and 9 are essential listening.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Manok said:


> I started with No. 3, and would like to know which to attempt to listen to from there?


4.........


----------



## Trout (Apr 11, 2011)

If this is not limited to his symphonies, also check out his sacred choral pieces like his masses and especially his Te Deum, one of my all-time favorites.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

Also his String Quintet is pretty cool.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

6 & 7 I find more uplifting and less a struggle or dark/depressing than say 8 & esp. 9. Don't know if that's any use to you, but anyway. The 6th, with this Viennese grace and ease, and the 7th a mix of things, his most popular symphony and only big success during his lifetime (which is quite sad, given the quality of all his music), esp. with that adagio movement which is homage to his compositional hero, Wagner.

#4 is good too, very visual for me, bringing to my mind Alpine forests and the times of knights in shining armour (the title _Romantic_ may have a lot to do with that). The hunting music in the scherzo is very memorable, the horn being the classic hunt instrument...


----------



## Delicious Manager (Jul 16, 2008)

Most people begin their exposure to Bruckner with No 7, probably his most lyrical and immediately accessible symphony for the Bruckner newcomer. After this, No 4 is almost as 'easy' to get to grips with. Although one of the more often played, No 8 is a mammoth undertaking - its slow movement alone is nearly half an hour long in some performances. I would be interested in which version of No 3 you have heard (Bruckner revised this symphony more than any other and there are three distinct versions). My money is on the 1889 version (if the finale is around 12 minutes long, then it's this version). The other editions of the symphony (1873 and 1877) are well worth the listen, but perhaps once you are more used to Bruckner's music and style. No 6 is very seldom performed, which is puzzling as it's a lovely work. Perhaps this should also be near the top of your list, as should the unfinished No 9 - a white-hot intense work of extreme emotions, but a masterpiece of the highest order. After these, try No 5 - not the easiest to get along with in its stop-start style. This then leaves you with Nos 1, 2 and '0' )yes, there is a Symphony No 0, as well as an early Symphony No 00).

As well as the symphonies, try the three wonderful masses and some of the choral works.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

3 > 4 > > > Mahler.


----------



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

You've got the 3rd and now you're going to get the 2nd. After that I'd be tempted to get nos 4-9 in order - it's a real trip once you've got them all. Nos 00, 0 and 1 are good but you may as well get those after the later blockbusters seeing you've already started somewhere near the middle.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

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

Not really a suggested order - just the order I happened upon.

I would love to get all the Simone Young performances available, but they are so expensive. So far, the only one of hers I have is #3, and it is truly great.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

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

Elder Statesman - 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

I wouldn't have started with 3...
Anyway, go to 4 and 7. Then 6, probably because the magnificent slow movement of 6 prepares you for the monumental adagios of 8 & 9. I've always struggled with 5, so I recommend it for later. Afterwards, catch up on the more juvenile 2, 1 0, -1, -2, etc...
cheers,
GG


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

finished 2, enjoyed the last movement the best will go for 4 next since most people here seem to recommend that the most.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Start with his _Study Symphony_ in F minor, or sometimes labelled as "00". It sounds early Romantic and the value in listening this piece first is that it can show you how far he was accomplished as a symphonist when you then listen to the later works.


----------



## hespdelk (Mar 19, 2011)

I'm a big Bruckner devotee, though I came to it by degrees and ironically didn't click with the 4th till much later, and still find the 7th the weakest of his mature symphonies - which is a contrast to the common experience!

I came to the 3rd late, but loved it right away. The more commonly heard edited version is good, but the original conception has much to recommend it.

Probably tackle the 4th next - I've also come to know the original version of this symphony lately, and have started to have my doubts about the received wisdom that the revised version is so much an improvement rather than merely different..

From my own experience I would recommend the 6th and 9th next. There are wonderful things in all these works though.


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

No 3 is a good place to start instead of the normally recommended No 4. After that I would suggest No 5 followed by No 7 then No 2 and No 4.
No 6 is a little problematical the only fully satisfying account is Klemperer's which no Bruckner collection should be without a newish version by Bernard Haitink and the Leipzig Orchestra is also a worthy mention. 
No 8, for me, has always been a choice between Haitink or Karajan both with the Vienna Phil. The Karajan presents sonic perfection (a little too much perhaps) and Haitink is more natural, in my opinion.
I would recommend Jochum,s collection on Brilliant Classics at bargain price as a good starting place. 
Enjoy the journey.
Please all the above is my opinion only.


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I have the hatnik cycle . I enjoyed hatniks take on the shostakovich symphonies, and a few other things, so I figured I'd go with a conductor that I liked.


----------



## DavidMahler (Dec 28, 2009)

Start with 9. Even though its unfinished, it shows precisely the composer's genius more than all the others


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

Very hard to answer a question like this. All right, maybe try 2, 4, 6 or 7? 1 is a bit different, and 5, 8 and 9 might be a bit more challenging. But in the end, Bruckner is Bruckner, just pick any of them; any Bruckner is better than no Bruckner.


----------



## afterpostjack (May 2, 2010)

I've listened to his 6th quite a lot in the past. But I really got into Bruckner after listening to his 9th (specifically its last movement, which is sublime). The 7th (the finale of the first movement is just perfect) and 8th followed shortly thereafter. Now I'm into his 3rd and 5th a lot. But all of his scherzi are exceptional.


----------



## Mordred (Mar 15, 2012)

The 6th is Awesome!


----------



## tgtr0660 (Jan 29, 2010)

Sticking with the symphonies, do 3, 4, 7, 9, 8, 5, 6, 1, 2, 0, 00. And then jump to his choral works.


----------

