Bruckner

[jayne lee wilson]

Well, 10 or 15 minutes of music might just make a little difference... but it depends what you want from it of course. The cuts in the 1877 edition remove some vital thematic cross-references and quotations which do make the symphony richer and more comprehensible - at quite a basic structural and emotional level.

It's a shame to call these things a cul-de-sac when you think of the passionate and scholarly attention given to the matter over many painstaking years, from Haas to Carraghan (not to mention Bruckner's agonies of doubt and revision), to try to realise the more truthfully, Bruckner's far-flung symphonic vision.

It was a labour of love, not dry scholarship; and if it weren't for their and others efforts (across years and continents) we would never have had the performing version of No.9's finale that Rattle's recording has made so significant - indeed vital to understanding and yes, loving the composer, every bit as transforming as Cooke's work on Mahler 10.

[Beef Oven]

Well, 10 or 15 minutes of music might just make a little difference... but it depends what you want from it of course. The cuts in the 1877 edition remove some vital thematic cross-references and quotations which do make the symphony richer and more comprehensible - at quite a basic structural and emotional level.

It's a shame to call these things a cul-de-sac when you think of the passionate and scholarly attention given to the matter over many painstaking years, from Haas to Carraghan (not to mention Bruckner's agonies of doubt and revision), to try to realise the more truthfully, Bruckner's far-flung symphonic vision.

It was a labour of love, not dry scholarship; and if it weren't for their and others efforts (across years and continents) we would never have had the performing version of No.9's finale that Rattle's recording has made so significant - indeed vital to understanding and yes, loving the composer, every bit as transforming as Cooke's work on Mahler 10.

Many great musicians, including Giulini, Thielemann, Karajan, Wand, Jochum et al have not been troubled by versions too much, in the sense that they have all chosen the 'wrong' versions.

10 or 15 minutes can be up to 20%, quite significant. Although it is very rarely said, classical music is often too bloody long! It's a real barrier for so many people (not us of course, I'm happy to listen to a Ring in a day 4/5 time a year!).

You are right to pick up on my 'versions' comments because I was not clear in what I meant. I mean the endless discussions and universally applicable conclusions that non-performers, non-composers and non-musical directors draw. There is arrant nonsense verballed very often on this subject.

The world of music would be a much poorer place without the various versions and you cite an excellent example in the Rattle recording.

For the record, as much as I love the Rattle, I prefer the unfinished version. If not that, then the Te Deum is a wonderful conclusion to the symphony (in my opinion better than the reconstructed finale). Last year I attended a glorious performance by the London Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Yannick Nezet-Seguin of a seamless performance of Christus Factus Est - Symphony #9 - Te Deum. I suppose I'm a dinosaur - albeit a perfectly happy one!

Here's the review of the concert by Ken Ward, Editor of The 'Bruckner Journal': http://www.bachtrack.com/review-lpo-...mphony-te-deum

[ahinton]

For the record, as much as I love the Rattle, I prefer the unfinished version.

Aaargh!

If not that, then the Te Deum is a wonderful conclusion to the symphony (in my opinion better than the reconstructed finale)

AAAAAARRRGGGHHH!!!

I suppose I'm a dinosaur

I'm saying nothing!

[Beef Oven]

Me too!


Wonderful conclusion !


Nonsense!

Thanks mate!

[jayne lee wilson]

Many great musicians, including Giulini, Thielemann, Karajan, Wand, Jochum et al have not been troubled by versions too much, in the sense that they have all chosen the 'wrong' versions.

10 or 15 minutes can be up to 20%, quite significant. Although it is very rarely said, classical music is often too bloody long! It's a real barrier for so many people (not us of course, I'm happy to listen to a Ring in a day 4/5 time a year!).

You are right to pick up on my 'versions' comments because I was not clear in what I meant. I mean the endless discussions and universally applicable conclusions that non-performers, non-composers and non-musical directors draw. There is arrant nonsense verballed very often on this subject.

The world of music would be a much poorer place without the various versions and you cite an excellent example in the Rattle recording.

For the record, as much as I love the Rattle, I prefer the unfinished version. If not that, then the Te Deum is a wonderful conclusion to the symphony (in my opinion better than the reconstructed finale). Last year I attended a glorious performance by the London Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Yannick Nezet-Seguin of a seamless performance of Christus Factus Est - Symphony #9 - Te Deum. I suppose I'm a dinosaur - albeit a perfectly happy one!

Here's the review of the concert by Ken Ward, Editor of The 'Bruckner Journal': http://www.bachtrack.com/review-lpo-...mphony-te-deum

Well, there's not much to add... but in the review you cite Ken Ward is careful to say that the Te Deum is not an integrated conclusion to No.9, more of a juxtaposed reflection on Bruckner's achievement, in that particularly special concert. Personally, I find the tonal clash from the 9th's adagio's end into the Te Deum just plain wrong, not fulfillingly expressive. (I do enjoy the Te Deum, by the way, as a separate piece...)

With the conductors you list, many of them would not have had easy access to performable scores of the original versions, but as in HvK's case with No.2, some did attempt to restore passages (usually from Haas) they felt a given movement couldn't do without. Wand usually played Haas as well.
And I don't think the various editors or commentators of the scores would always have been too categorical about which to play; some will have said, play them all and reflect - which of course can take some time... (but if you know say, the 1873 finale of No.3, it does rather lay bare the savage spatchcocking that is the 1889 "abridgment").

With No.9, I just wish that the musical world - well, conductors - would take up the latest edition of the finale and play it everywhere for a few years - only then could we really appraise it, critically. So much of it was completed, it's a sad reflection upon how "museological" classical performance can become that so few have taken it up. The 3 movements most usually performed are, indeed, a great Bruckner tradition in themselves; but I'm surprised that more performers aren't more excited about playing the work complete.

The Ring in a Day... I often take 2 days to traverse a single Bruckner symphony, 1 or 2 movements at a time. (But at the moment, it's Lutoslawski for me - just a bit easier to take a whole work in one go...)

[Beef Oven]

Well, there's not much to add... but in the review you cite Ken Ward is careful to say that the Te Deum is not an integrated conclusion to No.9, more of a juxtaposed reflection on Bruckner's achievement, in that particularly special concert. Personally, I find the tonal clash from the 9th's adagio's end into the Te Deum just plain wrong, not fulfillingly expressive. (I do enjoy the Te Deum, by the way, as a separate piece...)

With the conductors you list, many of them would not have had easy access to performable scores of the original versions, but as in HvK's case with No.2, some did attempt to restore passages (usually from Haas) they felt a given movement couldn't do without. Wand usually played Haas as well.
And I don't think the various editors or commentators of the scores would always have been too categorical about which to play; some will have said, play them all and reflect - which of course can take some time... (but if you know say, the 1873 finale of No.3, it does rather lay bare the savage spatchcocking that is the 1889 "abridgment").

With No.9, I just wish that the musical world - well, conductors - would take up the latest edition of the finale and play it everywhere for a few years - only then could we really appraise it, critically. So much of it was completed, it's a sad reflection upon how "museological" classical performance can become that so few have taken it up. The 3 movements most usually performed are, indeed, a great Bruckner tradition in themselves; but I'm surprised that more performers aren't more excited about playing the work complete.

The Ring in a Day... I often take 2 days to traverse a single Bruckner symphony, 1 or 2 movements at a time. (But at the moment, it's Lutoslawski for me - just a bit easier to take a whole work in one go...)

Yes, not much to add - just three things from me!

First, it is good that there are diverse views on all this, with no one right answer.

Second, I think that the ninth as is, is perfect and I am not surprised that performers are ambivalent towards the reconstruction. Indeed I think that if Bruckner had written the seventh as a two movement symphony and stopped writing after the adagio, I think that it would have worked perfectly (I don't expect many, if any, to concur with this).

Third, I have no difficulty in listening to a work that takes 78 minutes in, well, 78 minutes! But I am unable to analyse the music technically.

Lutoslawski Isn't it his centenary or similar this year?

[scottycelt]

Composers and conductors, even today, are not averse to tampering with the established Bruckner versions whether these are first, original or God knows what.

I was struck by this modern revision of the Fifth's Finale under the direction of Peter Jan Marthe. He appears to have re-introduced the percussion favoured by Schalk but mercifully a bit more sparingly, and otherwise appears to have mainly stuck to Bruckner's original idea. Whatever one's views it creates a marvellous sound experience. I still can't see why the already glorious music needs this extra embellishment but, what the heck, if some prefer it that way so be it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJ_NHtjw0tE

Some Brucknerians just love tampering with Bruckner's music. They are simply following the composer's example in making alterations. If these are relatively minor I don't see much of a problem though I believe Marthe has composed a completely new version of the Third which is a quite different matter altogether!

Minor alterations I can just about endure, but no new 'versions' please ...

[Roehre]

......

Second, I think that the ninth as is, is perfect and I am not surprised that performers are ambivalent towards the reconstruction. Indeed I think that if Bruckner had written the seventh as a two movement symphony and stopped writing after the adagio, I think that it would have worked perfectly (I don't expect many, if any, to concur with this)....

I concur that Bruckner 7 being an unfinished symphony à la Schubert's 8th would work perfectly well. But contemplating this will be countered by many people who say that scherzo and finale are an integral part of the Seventh.
One possibly can't disagree with that, but it's exactly that argument why I think the 9th should be performed with the finale, as that is the form which Bruckner intended and to which he came tantalizingly close

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I almost wish I was in the situation of somebody coming to Bruckner for the first time, so that Rattle's recording of the four-movement Ninth could become as much my conception of the work as is the Cooke Mahler #10. But I've known the unfinshed version for over thirty years - I bought Karajan's first studio recording in 1980 coincidentally following a particularly painful episode in my life - and the way the third movement ends has "become" irrevocably the way the work ends for me. I've listened to the Rattle finale a few times now, but, to my loss, I bring along too much emotional and autobiographical baggage for it to convince me of its rightness.

[Beef Oven]

I almost wish I was in the situation of somebody coming to Bruckner for the first time, so that Rattle's recording of the four-movement Ninth could become as much my conception of the work as is the Cooke Mahler #10. But I've known the unfinshed version for over thirty years - I bought Karajan's first studio recording in 1980 coincidentally following a particularly painful episode in my life - and the way the third movement ends has "become" irrevocably the way the work ends for me. I've listened to the Rattle finale a few times now, but, to my loss, I bring along too much emotional and autobiographical baggage for it to convince me of its rightness.

Excellent point. Would my view of the ninth be different if I had first come to a completed version? We'll never know!!

The ending of the third is burnt into my brain and soul as the ending of this symphony. The only other ending that works for me is to move immediately into the Te Deum and its massive power chords, and if you pardon the cliche, reconcilliation of the music that has gone before, with a reaching up to God.

That's how I like my Bruckner!

[LeMartinPecheur]

Reference to the choral works in this thread has dealt with the Masses, Te Deum and Helgoland but doesn't seem to have touched the motets.

While I love all these big works and the symphonies, the motets are for me a minor miracle, in the sense that the usually, ahem, extended Bruckner could also produce exquisite miniatures that set up so much individual atmosphere in the space of just a few minutes. And IMHO thay are so wonderful to sing too!

Singing Ecce sacerdos magnus in the school choir, with those trombones, was unforgettable for me aged about 16

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

While I love all these big works and the symphonies, the motets are for me a minor miracle, in the sense that the usually, ahem, extended Bruckner could also produce exquisite miniatures that set up so much individual atmosphere in the space of just a few minutes. And IMHO thay are so wonderful to sing too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmMkHqhe45Y

[Beef Oven]

I concur that Bruckner 7 being an unfinished symphony à la Schubert's 8th would work perfectly well. But contemplating this will be countered by many people who say that scherzo and finale are an integral part of the Seventh.
One possibly can't disagree with that, but it's exactly that argument why I think the 9th should be performed with the finale, as that is the form which Bruckner intended and to which he came tantalizingly close

Glad that at least one person concurs!

[Beef Oven]

Reference to the choral works in this thread has dealt with the Masses, Te Deum and Helgoland but doesn't seem to have touched the motets.

While I love all these big works and the symphonies, the motets are for me a minor miracle, in the sense that the usually, ahem, extended Bruckner could also produce exquisite miniatures that set up so much individual atmosphere in the space of just a few minutes. And IMHO thay are so wonderful to sing too!


Singing Ecce sacerdos magnus in the school choir, with those trombones, was unforgettable for me aged about 16

I mention Christus Factus Est in some posts. I get much pleasure from my DG CD of the Te Deum, motets & Psalm 150.

[BBMmk2]

Excellent point. Would my view of the ninth be different if I had first come to a completed version? We'll never know!!

The ending of the third is burnt into my brain and soul as the ending of this symphony. The only other ending that works for me is to move immediately into the Te Deum and its massive power chords, and if you pardon the cliche, reconcilliation of the music that has gone before, with a reaching up to God.

That's how I like my Bruckner!

Didnt Bruckner have the idea of havin g the Te Deum for the 9th 4 movt?