Let's all learn a new symphony !

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

All these editions of Bruckner's works do seem rather confusing, Novak Carraghan et al. Do we really know what Bruckner intended, at all?

Oh yes: we have all the various editions, all taken from his own manuscripts and alterations. The "trouble" is that Bruckner altered the details of the works (sometimes subtly, sometimes drastically) in order to achieve these "intentions". Thus, there isn't a "definitive" version of, say, the Eighth (for all Haas' attempts to create one) - the two versions of 1887 and 1890 are equally "valid" expressions of the composer's intentions: performers and listeners can prefer one or the other, or revel in both. The editions are merely ways that editors allow the different versions to be accessible to the wider public.

[Barbirollians]

In the Eighth I have always preferred Haas to Nowak - except when Giulini and Jochum are conducting the latter !

I love Jochum's BPO Eighth- all manner of things wrong with it I am sure especially accelerations and decelerations but it was the recording that made me fall for Bruckner after finding him all too long and turgid before.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

In the Eighth I have always preferred Haas to Nowak - except when Giulini and Jochum are conducting the latter !

I love Jochum's BPO Eighth- all manner of things wrong with it I am sure especially accelerations and decelerations but it was the recording that made me fall for Bruckner after finding him all too long and turgid before.

The Jochum BPO was the version I learnt the work from (via a car cassette and several long journeys).

Haas, of course, is the only edition of the Eighth Symphony that Bruckner never saw; and the only one to include Music not written by Bruckner. It has had many superb recordings, (Wand, Karajan, Haitink - Furtwangler [who cuts out the Haas bars] and some, like Böhm, that make up their own conflation of Haas and Nowak) but I've come to prefer the two Nowaks (no - not "Leopold and Kim"!) to get the whole world of this astonishing Symphonies. (Or, "these astonishing Symphony".)

[jayne lee wilson]

What? Scherzo second? Oh, surely that will NEVER do! (sorry, but I think that you know what I'm referring to here!...)...

Yes - but this time it all goes in the opposite direction: once you've heard scherzo second, full 1872 text, nothing else will do!

(And you revisit Giulini or Karajan in the spirit of "the past is another country; they do things differently there...")

[BBMmk2]

So, could you say thyat these 'editions' and Bruckner's own are all hybrids?

[Bryn]

The main one used frequently today which can rightly be termed a hybrid is the Haas edition of the 8th, a small amount of which was composed by Haas, rather than Bruckner.

[amateur51]

but I've come to prefer the two Nowaks (no - not "Leopold and Kim"!)

Are you forgetting the other Novak - the tennis-player?

New balls please!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

So, could you say thyat these 'editions' and Bruckner's own are all hybrids?

Not really, Bbm - as Bryn says, only the Haas can accurately be called a "hybrid", in that it takes the two main editions and splices what he (and many others) thought were the "best bits" of each to make a ... well, hybrid (or "composite") edition. Many conductors have done their own splicing of their favourite passages, but, as these haven't been published, these hybrids are not "editions".

Bruckner did two versions of his Eighth Symphony, each with their own strengths. Rather than this being a weakness, I think we're lucky to have two valid different ideas of how the composer's mind worked - and how Symphonic thought can take different routes. To come back to topic, there are worse ways of spending time than "learning" the two versions equally well - but it can be very disconcerting at first: familiar passages suddenly take different turns that can only seem "wrong" if you're used to the other version(s)! Completely different experience from that of learning a new work for the first time.

[rauschwerk]

Isn't this more than enough of Bruckner for now?

Having collected recordings of about half of Haydn's symphonies, I decided that the best way to get to know the rest was to buy the Fischer set. After listening to all the ones I didn't previously know, I made a list of those I wanted to hear again.

Isn't it curious how nicknames promote the popularity of a piece? Take Haydn 21 and 22 (The Philosopher). The former is, to my mind, a finer piece yet it is the latter which is much better known.

[Sir Velo]

I am, however, taking longer to get to grips with the 1873 original version of 3, having got too used to the 1878 version - and to follow all the twists and turns in the story.

I well remember Richard Osborne's observation in Gramophone that the Third was "the least perfect, but not the least magnificent of the nine".

Currently listening to the 1873 version, played by Inbal and the Frankfurt Radio Symphony; not without its longueurs but, boy!, do those climaxes have weight. One imagines that if the old boy had ever got round to it, he would have been a passionate believer in foreplay, and holding back to the last!

[Barbirollians]

Fascinating. What a sad end to a promising life. His Symphony in E major is now on my playlist.

Astonishingly, considering its interest, Rott's symphony has never been played at the Proms .

[teamsaint]

Here's one that deserves a wider audience.

[Barbirollians]

Here's one that deserves a wider audience.

I don't know it but admire his Fourth in the Bernstein recording.

[Alison]

Cheers Sainty. I don't know any of his. In fact I don't even know how many he wrote!

[teamsaint]

Cheers Sainty. I don't know any of his. In fact I don't even know how many he wrote!

11 according to wiki,Alison.

suffolkcoastal is an expert and keen advocate. 2 is a very fine work IMO, prolly need to listen to more of his stuff,but Walter Piston is my top American just now.