Tackling a serious gap in my musical knowledge

[VodkaDilc]

I would advise starting with the 4th and the VPO/Bohm recording is a great entry point. ..

And the CD is one of those lovely LP replicas, with a nice blue Decca label and black grooves all around. I like these little details.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

The only one of the symphonies that I really struggle with is the 2nd. For some unknown reason I just can't get into it. I have 5 recordings so I'll keep on trying...

After you, jayne ...

[Roehre]

Roehre:Rifling through my LPs I have just come across a couple of Hildegard Knef records which I must have bought during my last trip to Germany in 1997. Seems more than likely that the Bruckner was acquired at the same time.

Quite remarkable, as the forestscape-sleeved (Gainsborough IIRC) Bruckner 4 was originally released for the 1974 Bruckner celebrations. Perhaps there is still a silvery sticker stuck at the front mentioning this?

[jayne lee wilson]

I really do think that Bruckner's time has come. I know that his music has been growing in ever increasing popularity over the decades but there suddenly seem to be an explosion of performances in a way I can't remember having witnessed before.

My entry into Bruckner's world back in 1974 came via the 1944 Furtwangler 8th and 1951 Furtwangler 4th. I would advise starting with the 4th and the VPO/Bohm recording is a great entry point. The only one of the symphonies that I really struggle with is the 2nd. For some unknown reason I just can't get into it. I have 5 recordings so I'll keep on trying...

That is puzzling... but it is the most relaxed, least heaven-storming, of the 9 (or 10 etc...). Maybe you've been a bit nonplussed by its pastoral, laid-back character in the context of those other grander, wilder statements around it? Think of Beethoven 4, between 3 and 5...

Tintner catches that rustic, expansive character perfectly, I guess you have it already? A vital difference with the Tintner (1872 Carraghan edn.) is that he plays the scherzo second, andante third; for me, a better balance - it might help you to concentrate on this recording. Giulini is glorious with the Vienna Symphony, but suffers from an incomplete 1877 edition, where cuts near the end of the outer movements harm the symphonic argument; this version also replaces the horn solo at the end the of andante with a clarinet: replacing the sublime with the mundane.
Rozhdestvensky is almost as good as Tintner, he uses the 1877 edition, but - crucially - restores, or heals, the cuts.

One tactic I have if a work refuses to open up for me is to play, say, the slow movement on its own for a while, or any movement which appeals more... it might work...

[3rd Viennese School]

When I say start with Bruckner 3 I didnt mention which version! Revison 1 2 or 3?

My one is a cross between Revison 2 and 3! With bits added and bits merged.
Hope this clears things up!

As for no.2 - its the only Bruckner symphony where I cant remember wot the tunes are in it! Its that sort of symphony. Long, rambling, even Dvorak symphony no.2 is better!

3VS

[Pianorak]

Quite remarkable, as the forestscape-sleeved (Gainsborough IIRC) Bruckner 4 was originally released for the 1974 Bruckner celebrations. Perhaps there is still a silvery sticker stuck at the front mentioning this?

Sori, dim sticer arian! Not a Gainsborough but detail from a painting by Albrecht Altdorfer (ca. 1480-1538).

[Roehre]

Sori, dim sticer arian! Not a Gainsborough but detail from a painting by Albrecht Altdorfer (ca. 1480-1538).

Dim problem o gwbl. Yes of course, it's Altdorfer (should have got that right from the beginning )

[jayne lee wilson]

When I say start with Bruckner 3 I didnt mention which version! Revison 1 2 or 3?

My one is a cross between Revison 2 and 3! With bits added and bits merged.
Hope this clears things up!

As for no.2 - its the only Bruckner symphony where I cant remember wot the tunes are in it! Its that sort of symphony. Long, rambling, even Dvorak symphony no.2 is better!

3VS

If you can't remember the tunes, dare I suggest a few more hearings might help?

It will be recalled that Mahler 7 baffled almost everyone for about 70 years (even Deryck Cooke didn't "get" the finale), partly because it's a very balanced piece, not easily reducible to tragedy or triumph as, say, No.5 or No.6. See my comments in msg 64 above - you need to stop looking for, or desiring, a great and final emotional punch from Bruckner 2; this is its originality, one that should encourage the listener to relax among its symphonic paragraphs, explore the locality, enjoy the scenery along the way...

I can only reiterate that the 1873 Original of No.3 is the ONLY one that makes symphonic sense, complex and a little unwieldy as it is; but it's important to persist with this first of Bruckner's attempts to build those vast contrapuntal structures he has become both famous and infamous for. The various revisions are especially cruel as their misjudged excisions only encourage the view of this music as disjointed and punctuated by baffling pauses.

Maybe Modern Life is Rubbish, or at least too fast, or too densely populated with alternative, gaudier stimulants, for Bruckner's voice to be heard by many.

TO THE HAPPY FEW

(especially those
who understand
No.2)

[Petrushka]

That is puzzling... but it is the most relaxed, least heaven-storming, of the 9 (or 10 etc...). Maybe you've been a bit nonplussed by its pastoral, laid-back character in the context of those other grander, wilder statements around it? Think of Beethoven 4, between 3 and 5...

Tintner catches that rustic, expansive character perfectly, I guess you have it already? A vital difference with the Tintner (1872 Carraghan edn.) is that he plays the scherzo second, andante third; for me, a better balance - it might help you to concentrate on this recording. Giulini is glorious with the Vienna Symphony, but suffers from an incomplete 1877 edition, where cuts near the end of the outer movements harm the symphonic argument; this version also replaces the horn solo at the end the of andante with a clarinet: replacing the sublime with the mundane.
Rozhdestvensky is almost as good as Tintner, he uses the 1877 edition, but - crucially - restores, or heals, the cuts.

One tactic I have if a work refuses to open up for me is to play, say, the slow movement on its own for a while, or any movement which appeals more... it might work...

Thanks Jayne. I don't have the Tinter recording. The ones I do have are Solti, Karajan, Jochum (EMI), Giulini and Wand (on the Sony box). Do any of these tick your box? The usual thing that happens to me if a work refuses to open up is to play it several times after which it 'clicks' in my head (glorious moment that) and I declare it the best piece ever written, at least for an enthusiastic while. I'll try your tactic of playing the slow movement on its own (heresy normally) and see what happens. Actually, think I'll play the whole thing!

[Bryn]

Thanks Jayne. I don't have the Tinter recording. The ones I do have are Solti, Karajan, Jochum (EMI), Giulini and Wand (on the Sony box). Do any of these tick your box? The usual thing that happens to me if a work refuses to open up is to play it several times after which it 'clicks' in my head (glorious moment that) and I declare it the best piece ever written, at least for an enthusiastic while. I'll try your tactic of playing the slow movement on its own (heresy normally) and see what happens. Actually, think I'll play the whole thing!

As Jayne has pointed out, only Tintner uses the original version (as edited by Carragan). It is a quite different experience from any of the recordings of revised versions, and not only due to the order of the movements.

[Roehre]

As Jayne has pointed out, only Tintner uses the original version (as edited by Carragan). It is a quite different experience from any of the recordings of revised versions, and not only due to the order of the movements.

Not quite. The Carragan pre-first version Symphony 2 was premiered -and recorded- by the Bruckner Orchester Linz, conducted by Kurt Eichhorn, and released on Camerata 30CM-195/6. However, the Tintner recording is preferable.
Please note that Solti (on Decca) restores cuts in his recording of the 1877 version too - that is to make it all the more complicated.

Two remarks not made previously:

-2 is sometimes nicknamed "Pausensinfonie" (certainly in German speaking Europe), as after the disastrous premiere of the first version -due to its treatment of sonata-form especially in the first mvt- Bruckner decided to make this form clearer by inserting general pauses between the (academic!) sections of the sonata-form (mostly -but not exclusively- in the 1st mvt).

-it gives a glimpse of Bruckner's Bach perception as organist. It is AFAIK the only Bruckner symphony with a JSBach quote: the 3rd theme of the 1st mvt stems from the Fuge in g BWV 542 (IIRC)

[jayne lee wilson]

Trust Roehre to know that little bit more...
The Eichhorn only seems available on Arkiv now, rather pricy too.

It's a problem with No.2 especially that conductors tend to make their own versions! Karajan conflates 1872 & 1876, Wand uses 1877 but with the cuts restored (like Rozh. & Solti); The recent, very lovely Dausgaard/Swedish CO on BIS is based on 1877 Nowak, but the conductor seems to have made his own choices about restoring cuts....

Petrushka - both Karajan and especially Giulini do encourage their orchestras to really sing out this score, the "palette" is right, the phrasing and paragraphing truly austro-Brucknerian too. But you have to hear the Tintner for a performance that for me remains unique in its truth to the pastoral vision of this music, which itself seems to stand a little apart from the other symphonies (though you could make a case for No.6 being in a class of two with it...)

[3rd Viennese School]

No, no.2 is 70 minutes long and has had enough outings for now!
I can recall the main tune of mvt 2 scherzo but it does have double repeats! And even a coda.

It's the only symphony I listened too for the first time new that I nearly turned it off during the awful finale (lets face it- most Bruckner finales are except 3 and 5)

I have no problem with no.1. I have the original version. I've still yet to hear no.0 (I have heard the start of it). Is it any good?

3VS

P.S. cause I had trouble with one of my tapes I have a unique version of no.3 scherzo. It's backwards!

[Jonathan]

Ho 3VS,
I rather like no"0" (Die Nulte), it's shorter than the others (about 3/4 hrs) and was not subject to extensive revisions so at least you don't have to worry about that!
It's not especially distinctive but you can hear hints at how his style was going to develop in the later works.
I found Bruckner via no.8 and gradually branched out to the remainder although 7 remains my favourite, followed by 3 (the later version, can't remember the date just now).

[Roehre]

Ho 3VS,
I rather like no"0" (Die Nulte), it's shorter than the others (about 3/4 hrs) and was not subject to extensive revisions so at least you don't have to worry about that!

That is point of discussion. Though no other version has survived (and consequently we don't have to worry which version we are listening to/looking for ), there is evidence that this symphony in d-minor was subject to revision too. As for Bruckner's stylistic development: the "nullte" was likely composed at the same time as no.1, or possibly even between completion of no.1 and the start of the pre-first version of no.2.
The only two symphonies of which we are completely sure that these haven't been revised, are the study symphony in f-minor and no.9.