Favourite Bruckner symphony recordings?

[ahinton]

I relate to all of the above. That's why I find it easier from an emotional perspective to to listen to the finale as a stand-alone movement

I find that very hard to understand, since not only was it obviously never intended to be played or listened to as a standalone piece, it would sound very different to the way that it would after listening to the first three movements; I'm not sure quite what "emotional perspective" it would or could have, wrenched from the remainder of the symphony.

[Petrushka]

50 years of listening to Bruckner 9 with 3 movements has undoubtedly increased my resistance to accepting a further movement, which , without questioning the integrity of its authors, may not reflect the work Bruckner may have produced. But by far the most important reason is that I find movement 3 to be an overwhelming listening experience, with very tortuous moments, quite unlike the adagio of the 8th. The ending of the movement, with the sound slowly dissolving to nothing as in the finale of Mahler 9 will do for me, the 3 movements alone make complete sense.

I, too, can relate to all of that (note the bit omitted from your original post, however!). I've got Rattle's recording of the four movement 9th and find the completed finale fails to match up to the quality of the first three movements. Like matthias broucek I can only envisage hearing it again as a stand alone piece, otherwise I've vowed never to listen to it again.

One interesting point: Despite all the publicity generated by Rattle's recording and his advocacy of this 'completion', has it been seriously taken up by anyone else?

[Stanfordian]

I sense you might be rather a Wand-man! I am interested in others' views on Schaller, though....

I don't think any of Schaller's Bruckners are exceptional but he's very good in the early works where the competition is moderate.

[akiralx]

2: Saarbrucken RSO/Wakasugi
3: VPO/Haitink
4: Pittsburgh SO/Honeck
5: Munich PO/Thielemann
6: Aachen SO/Bosch
7: VPO/Karajan
8: Dresden SK/Sinopoli
9: BPO/Barenboim

There you go,all digital and only three dead conductors...

[cloughie]

I guess that my favourite Bruckner recording is Klemperer's sixth, far and away superior to any more recent version of this symphony (which deserves far more outings than it gets). However, I only have the LP version, which is marred by a side-break in the slow movement. It has been reissued opn CD but currently only appears to be available in large boxes of Klemperer recordings. It is a pity that Klemperer chose to conduct a heavily-cut version of the eigth.

From the same generatioin I also rate Bruno Walter's ninth highly.

The Klemperer is not such a big box - you can get 4-9 for under £10 inc p&p.

[ahinton]

I, too, can relate to all of that (note the bit omitted from your original post, however!). I've got Rattle's recording of the four movement 9th and find the completed finale fails to match up to the quality of the first three movements. Like matthias broucek I can only envisage hearing it again as a stand alone piece, otherwise I've vowed never to listen to it again.

One interesting point: Despite all the publicity generated by Rattle's recording and his advocacy of this 'completion', has it been seriously taken up by anyone else?

It hasn't - which, when one thinks of the fact that most performances of Mahler 10 are of the complete symphony, is very puzzling indeed.

[mathias broucek]

2: Saarbrucken RSO/Wakasugi
3: VPO/Haitink
4: Pittsburgh SO/Honeck
5: Munich PO/Thielemann
6: Aachen SO/Bosch
7: VPO/Karajan
8: Dresden SK/Sinopoli
9: BPO/Barenboim

There you go,all digital and only three dead conductors...

Some terrific relatively modern picks. I have a lot of time for Sinopoli's Bruckner, especially 5 and 8. He divides his fiddles too!

[Richard Barrett]

by far the most important reason is that I find movement 3 to be an overwhelming listening experience, with very tortuous moments, quite unlike the adagio of the 8th. The ending of the movement, with the sound slowly dissolving to nothing as in the finale of Mahler 9 will do for me, the 3 movements alone make complete sense.

I agree. When the Rattle recording came out I had another opinion, but it's been changing. Of course Bruckner intended there to be a fourth movement and by all accounts wrote a lot of it, and it's interesting to hear it in its conjecturally complete state, and Rattle (not in general my favourite conductor) I think is as convincing an advocate for it as one could hope for at this stage, but the more I've heard the last movement the less convincing it seems to me, and I don't think I'll be listening to it much if at all in its current version. The ending seems in particular disappointing. It's been said that if Bruckner had actually completed it the final minutes would be much more impressive, but actually there's no guarantee that this would have been the case; he might simply not have been able to conceive a musical transcendence on the level the rest of the piece seems to imply. Moses und Aron is for me an interesting and perhaps rather precise parallel, its second act ending with the words "O Wort, du Wort das mir fehlt!" leading to a nonexistent third act whose libretto ends with the words "vereinigt mit Gott". Schoenberg had plenty of time to write the music of the third act but obviously something prevented him from doing so, leaving something whose incompleteness is perhaps more eloquent than

[vinteuil]

Schoenberg had plenty of time to write the music of the third act but obviously something prevented him from doing so, leaving something whose incompleteness is perhaps more eloquent than

...

http://ahuskofmeaning.com/2011/08/michelangelo-at-the-accademia-part-2-the-unfinished-slaves/

[Beef Oven!]

I, too, can relate to all of that (note the bit omitted from your original post, however!). I've got Rattle's recording of the four movement 9th and find the completed finale fails to match up to the quality of the first three movements. Like matthias broucek I can only envisage hearing it again as a stand alone piece, otherwise I've vowed never to listen to it again.

One interesting point: Despite all the publicity generated by Rattle's recording and his advocacy of this 'completion', has it been seriously taken up by anyone else?

I'm glad to learn that I'm not the only one who listen's to the reconstructed/completed (whatever) 4th movement separately!

Most of the reason is as per vibratoforever's post #42 and the rest is having listened endlessly to squillions of 3 movement recordings and a good many live concerts, including an unforgettable Gunter Wand performance in the early 1990s, it's what has been burnt in my brain.

[BBMmk2]

I've not beren very happy with the completed 9th. It's already been completed by the composer himself. No need for a 4th movement.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I've not beren very happy with the completed 9th. It's already been completed by the composer himself. No need for a 4th movement.

A "Symphony in Dminor" that ends in Emajor?

I share the general reservations about the performable editions of the Finale, AND the general acceptance that the emotional serenity of the end of the Third movement makes for an effective way to conclude a performance - but "complete" it soytenly ain't!

[cloughie]

A "Symphony in Dminor" that ends in Emajor?

I share the general reservations about the performable editions of the Finale, AND the general acceptance that the emotional serenity of the end of the Third movement makes for an effective way to conclude a performance - but "complete" it soytenly ain't!

So what's wrong with being perfectly incomplete? Schubert set an excellent precedent!

[Richard Barrett]

So what's wrong with being perfectly incomplete?

Nothing at all. But Bbm's statement that Bruckner's 9th had "already been completed by the composer himself" is factually incorrect. As with Schubert's B minor Symphony, one might regard its incomplete state as musically valid, but that doesn't make it complete!

[Tony Halstead]

So what's wrong with being perfectly incomplete? Schubert set an excellent precedent!

Yes, but surely what ferney is objecting to is the - dare I say it - grotesque lack of tonal connection between D minor and E major. At least Schubert's shift of tonality is from Tonic ( b minor) to Subdominant major ( E major).
There is the phenomenon of the six Nielsen symphonies, none of which end in the key in which they began. But these different keys are not simply random ones; they are achieved via a process that Robert Simpson called 'progressive tonality.'
In the case of Bruckner's 9th there is absolutely no sense of a 'progression' from D minor to E major. But if the Scherzo had been written in, say, A minor instead of D minor, then there could have been at least some sense of progression, using A minor as a sort of 'bridging tonality' to the 3rd movement's E major.