"In Stephen Johnson's opinion, Bruckner's 6th Symphony is one of the composer's most original pieces and contains some of his most beautiful and arresting music. It appeared partly as a response to the devastating reviews that Bruckner received following the disastrous first performance of his 3rd Symphony." Discovering Music, 5pm today.
Bruckner 6
Collapse
X
-
Roehre
Originally posted by french frank View Post"In Stephen Johnson's opinion, Bruckner's 6th Symphony is one of the composer's most original pieces and contains some of his most beautiful and arresting music. It appeared partly as a response to the devastating reviews that Bruckner received following the disastrous first performance of his 3rd Symphony." Discovering Music, 5pm today.
We'll listen.
-
Roehre
I am afraid I found this Discovering Music (Bruckner 6) programme disappointing.
The connection between 3 and 6 only shows the differences between those two, but ignores the "progress" made by Bruckner if you take in account 4 and 5. Stating that after the premiere of 3 Bruckner didn't compose symphonic music for two years is straightforwardly incorrect: what about the revision(s) of the Romantic symphony?
In stead of losing time by playing fragments of 3, more attention could have been paid to the coda of the 1st mvt, one of the most "Hummable" codas in Bruckner's output, and in a rather canonic form. And there are more passages in 6 showing new harmonic avenues, as well as showing thematic relationships with the work.
The performance of the piece was lacklustre IMO as well.
Compared with e.g. the programmes regarding Brahms' and Schumann's violin concerti, the latter's piano quintet, Beethoven 5, the Mahler symphonies and Lied vd Erde, RVW 5 and Sibelius 5, this was a far more less interesting programme than we got used to.
A pity.
Comment
-
amateur51
Originally posted by Roehre View PostI am afraid I found this Discovering Music (Bruckner 6) programme disappointing.
The connection between 3 and 6 only shows the differences between those two, but ignores the "progress" made by Bruckner if you take in account 4 and 5. Stating that after the premiere of 3 Bruckner didn't compose symphonic music for two years is straightforwardly incorrect: what about the revision(s) of the Romantic symphony?
In stead of losing time by playing fragments of 3, more attention could have been paid to the coda of the 1st mvt, one of the most "Hummable" codas in Bruckner's output, and in a rather canonic form. And there are more passages in 6 showing new harmonic avenues, as well as showing thematic relationships with the work.
The performance of the piece was lacklustre IMO as well.
Compared with e.g. the programmes regarding Brahms' and Schumann's violin concerti, the latter's piano quintet, Beethoven 5, the Mahler symphonies and Lied vd Erde, RVW 5 and Sibelius 5, this was a far more less interesting programme than we got used to.
A pity.
However, I've only just come off the phone with a friend who did listen to it, having never heard the piece before, and she was full of her delight in her new discovery. She is currently immersed in very generously looking after a dying friend in her home, and this programme seems to have provided an oasis in her otherwise very busy, enveloping and potentially draining situation.
This once again highlight's the role of Radio 3 today and programmes such as this. Is it for the expert/knowledgeable enthusiast like you Roehre, or is it for the neophyte like my friend. I could argue that my friend would not have paid much attention to the discussion about Symphony no 3 that you have highlighted Roehre and would still have fallen under No 6's spell - best of both worlds. How to plan for that?
I've just selected a CD performance and send it to her pronto via Amazon.
Thank you Radio 3 and thank you Amazon
Comment
-
Roehre
Originally posted by amateur51 View PostThis once again highlight's the role of Radio 3 today and programmes such as this. Is it for the expert/knowledgeable enthusiast like you Roehre, or is it for the neophyte like my friend. I could argue that my friend would not have paid much attention to the discussion about Symphony no 3 that you have highlighted Roehre and would still have fallen under No 6's spell - best of both worlds. How to plan for that?
It is IMO as simple as that.
What did disappoint me, was the fact that it was more about differences between 3 and 6 (and a very nice comparison with some Beethoven 7) than about 6 itself, missing in the process some obvious internal relationships between the movements and within especially the 1st and 4th mvts. It was IMO therefore less interesting than it could have been, certainly if one compares this Bruckner-6-programme with some others, of which the ones I already mentioned are just a couple of quite recent examples which came to my mind.
Comment
-
Originally posted by amateur51 View PostThis once again highlights the role of Radio 3 today and programmes such as this. Is it for the expert/knowledgeable enthusiast like you Roehre, or is it for the neophyte like my friend.
That said, it's good to see differing points of view expressed so reasonably.It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
tsuji-giri
I thought it was a little below par; programmes are usually of great interest but this one didn't seem to engage fully with the symphony (which I've always found very impressive). I'm going to try to listen again to see if I missed something; what did everyone else think?
Comment
-
Originally posted by antongould View PostFrench Frank obviously only KEs, if I can call you that, can answer your question. Personally as B6 is the symphony I "know" least I found the programme very interesting.
I'm not a 'KE' - I really couldn't say No 6 was the one I know 'least' since I don't know any of the Bruckner symphonies very well - No 9 I can remember a bit of, and there's another that I always recognise but I can't remember which one it is . And that's pretty much typical of my 'knowledge' of music outside of quite a bit of Bach, Mozart and late Beethoven. I'm still looking for a certain depth of analysis rather than interesting things that I didn't know. I listened to Robert Hollingworth on the split choir a few weeks back and was quite stretched to follow everything - but that's what I want.
I will listen and try to answer tsuji-giri's question (glad you found your way over here t-g) when I have.It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
Uncle Monty
Originally posted by french frank View PostI can remember way back in the history of the messageboards when Discovering Music was discussed nearly every week (with no prompting from hosts!), whereas now it passes without comment most weeks.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alison View PostSorry, but I thought Stephen Johnson knew everything.
Surely it's not right to criticise HIM......It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Alison View PostSorry, but I thought Stephen Johnson knew everything.
Surely it's not right to criticise HIM......
But since I am not into Bruckner or Mahler symphonies there's perhaps no surprise that my mind began to wander after a while. But I would never blame HIM for my shortcomings.My life, each morning when I dress, is four and twenty hours less. (J Richardson)
Comment
-
Comment