Tackling a serious gap in my musical knowledge

[Roehre]

...why travel through a landscape by the same route every time?...

My main reason to explore off-the-beat repertoire by great and less great composers.
The works defined by "the usual habits of record companies and programmers" are available any time anyway.

[Roehre]

in fact, the one choral work of Bruckner's that I dearly love is the thoroughly secular Helgoland ... oh, my, what a truly magnificent piece!

You'd better do, as it is the commission for Helgoland which prevented Bruckner of completing 9

[amateur51]

Thanks, Roehre.

I find it curious that, whilst we have Bruckner Symphony cycles by Karajan, Tintner, Wand (twice), Jochum (twice), Barenboim (twice), Norrington, and Inbal; near-cycles by Rozhdestvensky, Furtwängler, Klemperer, and important individual symphonies by Bohm, Szell, Gulini, Horenstein etc etc, only Jochum has also recorded the main Choral works. (Barenboim also recorded some of these in the '70s & early '80s, and Norrington I think recorded the E minor Mass early in his caree*r.)

This Thread has been dominated by the Symphonies, too, and Simpson's The Essence of Bruckner (sounds like a perfume!) devotes just six of its 200 pages to the entire set of choral works. (He spends as much time on the "Nullte" Symphony.)

Are they not (as) "essential" Bruckner? What do people think?

EDIT: * = Sorry, vinty, post overlap!

Every bit as "essential" in my house, fhg!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5MoVbC7yoQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucN16Q8SCSM

[Bryn]

I concur, in general, jlw. I, for instance, got to know the Beethoven String Trios long before the sting quartets. It happened by chance. I just happened upon the Heifetz/Primrose/Piatigorsky recordings in my youth. I loved them, but which I came to the string quartets, I started with the 'lates' and that has clouded my appreciation of the Op. 18 set for years. I now wish I have moved on from the string trios to Op.18 rather than jumping to the 'lates' I am only now begining to come to terms with the Op. 18s.

[scottycelt]

You'd better do, as it is the commission for Helgoland which prevented Bruckner of completing 9

If true, what a marvellous consolation ... !

[Mr Pee]

My favourite recording of the Te deum is Haitink's with the VPO (Philips).Barenboim's Salzburg one (on a somewhat iffy DVD) is pretty good as well.

This is the recording I have, and it's excellent:-



Currently 5.38 from Amazon. Well worth a try at that price!.

[LeMartinPecheur]

FHG, IMO essential person Bruckner is the vocal Bruckner, the devout Catholic , not the symphonist.
His output began (up to 1856 nothing but organ works and choral works for church services + two little piano pieces for use elsewhere, the first real piano work as well as the first orchestral work dating from 1862) and ended with lauding his Creator (the 9th dedicated to Dear God -Dem lieben Gott gewidmet)

The essental musician Bruckner however is the symphonic composer (as well as the improvising organist-but we haven't got anything left of this musicianship unfortunately, apart from testimonies about his playing, and his treatment of the orchestra) - that is how he wanted to be seen in Vienna.

It is not by chance that the great masses are all symphonic, with themes and quotes from the masses ending up in the symphonies and vice versa: Catholic Bruckner meets Symphonic Bruckner.

Um, nice try Roehre at a convincing synthesis of AB the symphonist and AB the church composer but I think you belittle the latter overmuch. For me the motets are absolute jewels of masterpieces, maybe as precious as the 9/10/11(...) symphonies.

But the odd thing IMO is how different the writing in the motets is compared to the symphonies - the former are so terse and compact, with the climax so surely placed. Not that I'm rubbishing the form and content of the symphonies, but there seems to be such certainty in the motets: no need for Nowak, Haas or Carragan editions here!

The Te Deum seems a work of similar confidence, but I'm not so sure of the masses. Thinks: was AB truly a miniaturist??

[jayne lee wilson]

Thanks, Roehre.

I find it curious that, whilst we have Bruckner Symphony cycles by Karajan, Tintner, Wand (twice), Jochum (twice), Barenboim (twice), Norrington, and Inbal; near-cycles by Rozhdestvensky, Furtwängler, Klemperer, and important individual symphonies by Bohm, Szell, Gulini, Horenstein etc etc, only Jochum has also recorded the main Choral works. (Barenboim also recorded some of these in the '70s & early '80s, and Norrington I think recorded the E minor Mass early in his caree*r.)

This Thread has been dominated by the Symphonies, too, and Simpson's The Essence of Bruckner (sounds like a perfume!) devotes just six of its 200 pages to the entire set of choral works. (He spends as much time on the "Nullte" Symphony.)

Are they not (as) "essential" Bruckner? What do people think?

EDIT: * = Sorry, vinty, post overlap!

Well, you could make a case for the choral works being literally "essential":
as their music springs from a response to religious texts, it tends not to have the variety of orchestral texture, evocative sonic landscapes or wide-ranging mood and emotion of the symphonies, but the melodic shapes and harmonic and rhythmical signatures feed through into the symphonies almost throughout the canon (an especially beautiful example is the Kyrie from the F minor mass in the finale of No.2 - excised in the revision!). This more specialised nature of the choral works, (and the practical matters of mounting them and attracting an audience...) is probably why they haven't been so widely played.

Incidentally fhg - the original Melodiya set of the Rozhdestvensky, and the splendid Venezia remaster I have here (in two large boxes!) include every version of every symphony except the 1872 2nd or the 1887 8th. It must be the most comprehensive set of all, but sadly nla. Keep looking! Recently, abruckner.com sourced an 1887 8th from Radio Mayak, Moscow, which Rozh played on 10/03/2009 with the Bolshoi Theatre Orchestra in the Moscow Conservatory Hall. John Berky used to include it with the Venezia box, but I got mine separately and he may still have it. At 95'25, it is magnificent but somewhat sui generis!

EDIT: Roehre in msg 104 is spot-on - and a model of clarity and concision...

[LeMartinPecheur]

As far as non-symphonic works of Bruckner's are concerned, the most important vocal ones (the 3 numbered masses, Te Deum, Psalm 150, most important motets) are covered covered by Jochum on DGG.

The Requiem and two Psalms (112 & 114) are to be found on Hyperion.

His output for piano is concentrated on one CPO CD, while string quartet, string quintet and Intermezoo for string quintet are (were) to be found on Sony (l'Archibudelli)

My journey round the choral works started with singing Ecce sacerdos magnus at school and quite a few of the unaccompanied motets at uni. On LP I got the Barenboim Te Deum (EMI) c/w the JSB Magnificat (natural pairing!), a CRD LP (Saltarello Choir/Bradshaw) with a few of the motets, then the Hyperion Corydon Singers LP with nearly all of them. Still in LP days came the Wyn Morris Helgoland, a great piece. The masses had to wait for CD: no 1 is the Hyperion Best version that Mr Pee has already flagged up, 2 is a Conifer disc under Halsey with more motets, and 3 is the EMI Welser-Most with another Te Deum. The there's the Jochum single disc of motets, Psalm 150 and, yes, another Te Deum (I can see a private mini-BaL on this brewing). And just to make sure, I have the Naxos St Brides Church/ Robert Jones CD of 15 motets.

All these discs seem pretty good to me. Again there's IMO something special in the motets: they are challenging to sing but also in some odd way sing themselves: the effect comes out of the harmony and shape of the phrases - sing the notes right and there's no need to apply any 'interpretation'.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I like Roehre's distinction, even if I sympathize with the flaws LMP suggests. (Of course Bruckner is a miniaturist! In eternity 80 minutes is aphoristic!)

Jayne's suggestions raise as many questions as they answer (always a bonus in my book!): Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and Schubert all wrote Mass settings that do display "the variety of orchestral texture, evocative sonic landscapes or wide-ranging mood and emotion of the[ir] symphonies" and the orchestral forces of Bruckner's choral works are no bigger than those of Brahms' or Verdi's Requiems. "Attracting audiences" is probably the key point, but why have only three recordings altogether of the F minor Mass ever been made? And why should the audiences that fill the Albert Hall when a Bruckner Symphony is programmed stay away in their droves when one of the Masses is programmed. (Anybody remember when a Bruckner Mass last featured in a Prom?*)

And, perhaps above all, why did Simpson rate them so low on his scale of works that demonstrate the "essence" of this composer? No question of audiences being "put off" by a few extra chapters, or Gollancz by the extra paper that would be required. From his positive comments on the choral works, he obviously greatly admired the works. But not eneough to regard them as "essential".

Much more could be written about the masses .... The Symphonies ... have been most often misunderstood. Anyone who can enjoy a Haydn Mass should have little trouble with one by Bruckner ...

... how things have changed since 1967!

EDIT: * = 1994!

[Roehre]

....., but why have only three recordings altogether of the F minor Mass ever been made?

I have got 2 Masses in f myself (Jochum and Chailly), but I know of at least three others (Best, Rilling, Welser-Möst), and I seem to recall other recordings.

But your point why there are so few recordings of this magnificent piece (btw, how many recordings of the great Schubert Masses are there?) obviously stands.

[scottycelt]

I don't quite understand why people should turn up in their droves for Bruckner's choral works in the same way as they do for the symphonies ...

Not that they get much of an opportunity, as ferney says, but I do believe that the composer's great talent and strength lay in symphonic composition and from all the evidence he was pretty quickly aware of that himself.

[LeMartinPecheur]

I have got 2 Masses in f myself (Jochum and Chailly), but I know of at least three others (Best, Rilling, Welser-Möst), and I seem to recall other recordings.

But your point why there are so few recordings of this magnificent piece (btw, how many recordings of the great Schubert Masses are there?) obviously stands.

The UK river-people list at least four further versions, by Barenboim, Celibidache, Colin Davis and Herreweghe.

[Roehre]

Um, nice try Roehre at a convincing synthesis of AB the symphonist and AB the church composer but I think you belittle the latter overmuch. For me the motets are absolute jewels of masterpieces, maybe as precious as the 9/10/11(...) symphonies.

Sorry LMP, but I cannot follow this reasoning. For me the Motets are gems. IMO there is no conflict between the Symphonic Bruckner and the Catholic one - they are two sides of the same composer. But it is B's devout catholicism with which it all started and which played a rather important role throughout his life - including his doubts as displayed in the Ninth while dedicating this work to the Dear God nevertheless.

[scottycelt]

Sorry LMP, but I cannot follow this reasoning. For me the Motets are gems. IMO there is no conflict between the Symphonic Bruckner and the Catholic one - they are two sides of the same composer. But it is B's devout catholicism with which it all started and which played a rather important role throughout his life - including his doubts as displayed in the Ninth while dedicating this work to the Dear God nevertheless.

I don't honestly see what Bruckner's Catholicism had to do with his ability and genius as a composer?

It is quite possible that far too much has been made (and still is) of his alleged 'devoutness'. Of course, his faith was precious to him like countless others and he was immersed in the traditions of the Church, but he deliberately chose the secular symphonic field as his main vehicle of music expression.

He loved dancing, played the fiddle in pubs, was suspended from teaching in a girls' school for 'inappropriate remarks', and from all accounts could eat and drink copiously when in the company of his circle of friends and supporters. That doesn't quite fit the image of a prayerful, repressed and lonely figure that is normally presented to us.

Only the last of the symphonies has any sort of official religious dedication. Whether this often disturbing work reflects sudden religious doubts or is merely an outpouring of guilt and frustration at Bruckner's own perceived 'failures' is up to the listener to decide, but, if it had been the former, surely he would have removed the dedication?

Whatever, what mighty, glorious sounds he left the rest of us to enjoy ...