Bruckner: favourite symphony cycle/boxed set

[jayne lee wilson]

As Bryn (strongly) implied there is no explicit or stated remastering in the current Dresden/Jochum issue of the cycle. I have that light green one from 2000, and if you look closely at the current Amazon photo/listing for the latest one you'll see "(p) 2000 (c) 2020" as the date of compilation.

Sometimes a given reissue, even if not officially remastered, can have minor or significant sonic differences to previous ones, but I don't have the latest here to compare....

No.2, from 1980, playing now from the 2000 CD issue, if not exceptional has few sonic problems, apart from slightly clouded tutti, less acoustic than I'd like....... but this cycle was recorded across 1975-80 so there are inconsistencies.
The few Toshiba remasterings of these I've heard were more revealing of orchestral & acoustic character as you might except, but sometimes more "warts" than "all".... peak distortion/limiting in No.8 etc....

The 2nd here is Jochum in microcosm. The first two movements go quite well, often very beautiful, but the mad rush through the (12'46) finale?
What was he thinking of.....
(Andreae (also 1877) comes home in 13'51 - not much longer but his subtlety of motion, dynamic and phrase - the natural tempo variabile - make such a difference... (playing now off CD..... waspish and tender by turns, not a detail missed, I could listen to this all night....Bruckner comme il faut.))

The current Qobuz Warners offering of the Dresden sounds distinctly inferior in No.2 (clarity, presence etc) to the 2000 CD set, so it is confusing!

[Richard Barrett]

What is the difference please between the DG set - Berliners and Bavarians (which I have) - and his Dresden set?

I just listened to the first minutes of no.6 in both recordings. There isn't much difference in the interpretation from the conductor's point of view; the orchestral sound from the Dresden set is much more detailed and with a wider stereo image; I was listening to the latest remastering which, as has been said, is less murky than previously, although I would now describe it as somewhat harsh. My feeling is that if you have the older one you probably don't need the other.

[EnemyoftheStoat]

It’s not just the brash playing - I don’t think they are that well recorded - they over dominate the Tuttis ( even more than AB’s orchestration )

Thinking about it, when I compared the Jochum AB7 with that recorded by Blomstedt and the same band two or three years later, the latter was a lot more refined.

[kernelbogey]

Jochum:

What is the difference please between the DG set - Berliners and Bavarians (which I have) - and his Dresden set?

[kernelbogey]

Perhaps the better way to look at this now is to consider which versions were authorised by Bruckner. This is where Carragan's heroic scholarship comes in. So with No.2 for example, you have the original 1872 edition, expansively lovely, with the scherzo placed 2nd, and all the crucial references back in the first and last movements; but you also have 1877, much shorter, scherzo 3rd, and without the self-quotations. Both can be considered autograph scores. Similarly the 8th, in its 1887, 1890 or 1892 incarnations.

I now think Bruckner, who bequeathed his original scores to the Austrian National Library in Vienna, came to see at least some of his symphonies as co-existing happily in more than one version. The truly vexed question is of course the 3rd, but what you have there essentially is the remarkable, vast 1873 Original (with all the Wagner quotes) and the 1877/8 revision, later truncated further in 1889/90. But there isn't much substantial difference, certainly in the experience of listening, between 1877 and 1890.

Thank you, Jayne. That is a helpful set of ideas. This thread has given me some inspiration about how to spend the 'dead days' between Christmas and New Year!

(And perhaps it's high time for me to sign up to Quobuz...!)

[Ein Heldenleben]

I understand from elsewhere that these are the 2000 remastering, as in the light green box of that year, which I have.

As for "dodgy" brass, you were never going to get Chicago-type precision in 1970s Dresden (I was going to say they took fewer prisoners, ahem...) but you could argue that there was a more idiomatic blend. I may have to do a comparison of AB symphonies played by those bands.

It’s not just the brash playing - I don’t think they are that well recorded - they over dominate the Tuttis ( even more than AB’s orchestration )

[jayne lee wilson]

I'm intrigued by your continuing advocacy of this set but it seems to be completely unavailable as a CD set otherwise I would have got it by now. Can you link to its availability anywhere or is download the only option?

I can't find the boxset on Amazon now, sadly.....(mind you, the price had reached well into 3 figures a few years back).... their streaming/download offer is of course a low bitrate which won't help 1953 sound at all.. so this is still the best I know........

https://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/album/bruckner-9-symphonien-wiener-symphoniker-volkmar-andreae/0017685122729

Sorry not to be more helpful Pet....

[Petrushka]

Composite Cycles are a great idea, though it might take a while to put mine together....! Blomstedt in original 2 and 3, Venzago in revisions etc.....

But just one usually overlooked recommend...... Andreae (1953, VSO, Music&Arts) in No1......what an impact it has.... if you find can your way to it in any streaming or disc form, you'll never forget your encounter with that one! And it's the Sound of Old Vienna as well....Wiener Blut, indeed.....

I'm intrigued by your continuing advocacy of this set but it seems to be completely unavailable as a CD set otherwise I would have got it by now. Can you link to its availability anywhere or is download the only option?

[jayne lee wilson]

Composite Cycles are a great idea, though it might take a while to put mine together....! Blomstedt in original 2 and 3, Venzago in revisions etc.....

But just one usually overlooked recommend...... Andreae (1953, VSO, Music&Arts) in No1......what an impact it has.... if you find can your way to it in any streaming or disc form, you'll never forget your encounter with that one! And it's the Sound of Old Vienna..... my word, those strings........Wiener Blut, indeed.....

OK, going a little further.... the mono remastering is excellent, and the really big moments in 5, 7 and 8 do not disappoint.... and you get to hear the 1892 8th, (the version preferred by Kna and Furtwangler)....as well....

See Gramophone, 10/2009 (RC).
"A major discovery for all discerning Brucknerians".

If you ever find the CD set, very rare now, the documentation is excellent - well beyond the call of duty.

[Barbirollians]

I would have said Jochum DG or Tintner - although most of my favourite Bruckner records are not in a completed cycle - Solti’s late No 1, Sinopoli No 5 , HVK’s EMI 4 and 7 and Barbirolli’s live Eighth for example .

[Richard Barrett]

Giulini's gloriously spacious versions of 7, 8 and 9 with the Vienna Phil

Indeed I keep coming back to these as my first choices for those three symphonies, although (at the risk of "Bruckneresque" repetitiveness!) I was extremely impressed with Nelsons' 7th, slightly less with his 9th, and when his 8th comes out I shall be clearing my calendar.

[cloughie]

DG - Jochum and Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra.

I also have Solti/Chicago.

Two very sound choices - I also have most of the Solti CSO set on individual CDs - indeed 4 and 7 were two of my very early CD purchases but I also have the VPO 7 on CD - in the days of LP it was always expensive in a 2LP box c/w Siegfried Idyll. (I settled for the more affordable Rosbaud on Turnabout).

[EnemyoftheStoat]

I note that there is no mention of re-mastering on the box-cover illustrations and that the first customer review complains about poor sound quality.

I understand from elsewhere that these are the 2000 remastering, as in the light green box of that year, which I have.

As for "dodgy" brass, you were never going to get Chicago-type precision in 1970s Dresden (I was going to say they took fewer prisoners, ahem...) but you could argue that there was a more idiomatic blend. I may have to do a comparison of AB symphonies played by those bands.

[Joseph K]

Thanks for the suggestions.

I have Haitink's to look forward to in the post.

[jayne lee wilson]

I suspect, for Brucknerians (whoever they are ) the story of Anton being pushed this way and that by well-meaning friends and colleagues, not to mention hostility from reviewers et cetera et cetera is part of this question: What is the true version of this symphony from the composer's point of view?

But to revert to topic: I mostly listen to Jochum.

Perhaps the better way to look at this now is to consider which versions were authorised by Bruckner. This is where Carragan's heroic scholarship comes in. So with No.2 for example, you have the original 1872 edition, expansively lovely, with the scherzo placed 2nd, and all the crucial references back in the first and last movements; but you also have 1877, much shorter, scherzo 3rd, and without the self-quotations. Both can be considered autograph scores. Similarly the 8th, in its 1887, 1890 or 1892 incarnations.

I now think Bruckner, who bequeathed his original scores to the Austrian National Library in Vienna, came to see at least some of his symphonies as co-existing happily in more than one version. The truly vexed question is of course the 3rd, but what you have there essentially is the remarkable, vast 1873 Original (with all the Wagner quotes) and the 1877/8 revision, later truncated further in 1889/90. But there isn't much substantial difference, certainly in the experience of listening, between 1877 and 1890.