Barenboim's Bruckner

[springrite]

I have recently purchases Barenboim's Bruckner cycle on the Warner label. I have just listened to #2, which is stunning! Will listen to the rest in the coming weeks.

First of all, is this the same as the TELDEC cycle (with BPO)?

Secondly, since I do not have the DG CSO recordings, how are the two different?

I will probably listen to #5 tomorrow. What do you think of each of the symphonies in this box?

[Todd]

First of all, is this the same as the TELDEC cycle (with BPO)?

Yes. 

I picked it up recently as well.  I was already familiar with some of Barenboim's Teldec cycle, and so some performances aren't surprises.  I do agree that the Second is superb.  I also really dig his Third.  So far the only dud, for me at least, is the Seventh.  I still have to listen to his Eigth.  I will say that I generally find other conductors in individual symphonies. 

I've not heard the Chicago cycle either, but I definitely want to, for what I expect would be stellar brass playing, if nothing else.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I think Barenboim is one of the better Bruckner conductors out there. I've heard individual recordings from both cycles, and have the 3 and 8 from the Berlin cycle, and the 1 from the Chicago. The 3 is all-around excellent, and the 8 is a slightly quirky, swifter-than-usual version that contrasts nicely with some of the heavier renderings out there. (The 1 is just there because I needed a 1 from somewhere, and I picked it up used. The brass playing is indeed stellar.)

[jlaurson]

I think Barenboim is one of the better Bruckner conductors out there. I've heard individual recordings from both cycles, and have the 3 and 8 from the Berlin cycle, and the 1 from the Chicago. The 3 is all-around excellent, and the 8 is a slightly quirky, swifter-than-usual version that contrasts nicely with some of the heavier renderings out there. (The 1 is just there because I needed a 1 from somewhere, and I picked it up used. The brass playing is indeed stellar.)

I think Barenboim is one of the lesser Bruckner conductors "out there". From that cycle I think that No.1 is very good and No.9 is excellent. But the rest--especially No.5--I can't abide. No.4 with Chicago is *very* impressive, even if he misses the Bruckner-point. (Still, it's much preferable to Solti who misses the point more and in that [blare'n'glare] doesn't manage to be nearly as impressive as Bb.
However, he's a-learning rapidly... and seems to be one of the conductors with a real desire to manage to be good in Wagner (he already is), Bruckner (he might arguably be, even if not to my taste, yet), and Mahler (he's totally getting there!).

To show you that my money [or lack thereof] was where my mouth is: When I had the opportunity to get the complete Warner cycle for free, I declined. [Admittedly I already had several individual discs... including said 1st and 9th, which are very good to have. I did, however, jump at the chance to get his Warner-Beethoven cycle, which is easily one of the best of its kind.]

[Sergeant Rock]

I have recently purchases Barenboim's Bruckner cycle on the Warner label. I have just listened to #2, which is stunning!

Amen, brother. I too think that Second is great...it's my top choice (even preferring it to Jochum BSRO, Stein, Giulini and Wand, my other favorites). We've discussed this cycle elsewhere recently (and often in the past too) so I won't repeat myself or attempt to counter Jens' negative comments. Suffice it to say, I don't agree with him.   I find 1, 2, 3, 6 and 9 particularly successful; and, as a crazy homage to Furtwängler, 5 is fascinating. It's certainly different anyway!

I do agree with Jens about Barenboim's Beethoven. Love his Schumann cycle too.

Sarge

[jlaurson]

I won't repeat myself or attempt to counter Jens' negative comments. Suffice it to say, I don't agree with him.   I find 1, 2, 3, 6 and 9 particularly successful; and, as a crazy homage to Furtwängler, 5 is fascinating. It's certianly different anyway!

...wait a second... the glass is half full. We actually agree about Sy.1 and 9. And maybe 2.   
Just not 5, where I find the engineering to undermine whatever there would be to like about the performance.
I want--nay: need!--that walking bass audible--and if it means pushing the levels on the tape.

[Sergeant Rock]

...wait a second... the glass is half full. We actually agree about Sy.1 and 9. And maybe 2.   
Just not 5, where I find the engineering to undermine whatever there would be to like about the performance.
I want--nay: need!--that walking bass audible--and if it means pushing the levels on the tape.

I see what you mean (although it doesn't bother me to the extent it bothers you). I suppose I do come across as something of a hypocrite for dissing Wand's Berlin Eighth primarily on sonic grounds but ignoring the faults in Barenboim's recording. Oh well, hypocrite I am 

Sarge

P.S. Loved Wand's performance.

[MishaK]

I have just listened to #2, which is stunning!

Yes!

First of all, is this the same as the TELDEC cycle (with BPO)?

Yes it is the same. Warner Classics=Teldec+Erato+Nonesuch, etc.

Secondly, since I do not have the DG CSO recordings, how are the two different?

I'll second Sarge on the Warner cycle. IMHO, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 9 are absolutely terrific. 2 in particular is likewise my top choice among all recorded versions. 5 is very special, but also very compelling.

The Chicago cycle is different in a number of respects. Firstly, you get the young Barenboim, who is more brash. This is a Bruckner closer to Schubert in its dancy rhythms but at the same time a little more aggressive thanks to the 70s Chicago brass. The 4th is a great demonstration in brass ensemble playing and a unique interpretation that sticks out in its own idiosyncratic way among the rest of the recorded competition. Where the DG cycle really shines is in the 9th. That is still my favorite recording of the 9th. It is more colorful and nuanced dynamically than the rest of the DG cycle and just marvellously paced and structured. Glorious playing in the last movement too. Apart from the 9th, I also prefer the CSO version of the 1st and the DG cycle also includes a reference-quality performance of Symphony 0 which is omitted in the Warner BPO cycle. Sadly, the complete DG cycle is not available on CD. 0, 1, 4, 7, and 9 can be found individually and in twofers; the rest is OOP, which is sad because 6 is a scorcher of a performance.

I've had the pleasure of hearing Barenboim do Bruckner live many times and he is certainly my favorite living Brucknerian. The one thing that frustrates me about both cycles, though, is that neither captures his full potential in the 4th. I have heard at least two performances of the 4th with him that outclass both of his recordings by leagues. The BPO/Warner recording is pretty good, but marred by oddly muddy acoustics, like some of the other performances in that cycle.

[Leo K.]

I'm seriously considering purchasing the Barenboim Bruckner cycle on Warner and this discussion has been helpful. I've heard his CSO M4 & M6, was blown away by both.

[TheGSMoeller]

I really like the 2nd, 3rd, 5th and 7th from the Barenboim cycle.

[2 cents]

[trung224]

  I think Barenboim´s later cycle is very fine. It has very low points,  ie the Fourth and the Seventh, which among the worst I have heard, but the others ranks from fine (No.3 ,6,8) to excellent (No.1,2,5,9).
   His first cycle is IMHO not as good as his second cycle. More brashy, great respondance from the CSO, especially from brass, but I thinks these performances are unidiomatic, though the Fourth is impressive.
  Bareboim is not among  my favorite Bruckner conductors, but he is definitely among the better Brucknerian out there.

[jlaurson]

apropos barenboim / bruckner:




Dip Your Ears, No. 163 (Visual Bruckner)
http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2013/11/dip-your-ears-no-163-visual-bruckner.html

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I really like the 2nd, 3rd, 5th and 7th from the Barenboim cycle.

Which one - the first (Chicago) or the second (Berlin)?

A while back I listened to the Berlin 8th for the first time in a few years and really liked it. Swift and dramatic, nice contrast to more "spiritual" takes. I was only disappointed by the rushed coda of the finale.

[TheGSMoeller]

Which one - the first (Chicago) or the second (Berlin)?

A while back I listened to the Berlin 8th for the first time in a few years and really liked it. Swift and dramatic, nice contrast to more "spiritual" takes. I was only disappointed by the rushed coda of the finale.

Oh, sorry. The second one with Berlin.

And I agree with the 8th, the coda is a letdown.

[Mirror Image]

I never really cared much for Barenboim's Bruckner recordings, but, then again, I'm not the greatest Barenboim fan in the world either. Give me Wand, Karajan, Bohm, or even Chailly any day of the week over Barenboim.

I own the cycle on Warner Classics, but have yet to hear his earlier DG cycle. After the Warner set, I'm keen to not even bother!

[jlaurson]

I never really cared much for Barenboim's Bruckner recordings, but, then again, I'm not the greatest Barenboim fan in the world either. Give me Wand, Karajan, Bohm, or even Chailly any day of the week over Barenboim.

I own the cycle on Warner Classics, but have yet to hear his earlier DG cycle. After the Warner set, I'm keen to not even bother!

The First and Ninth of the Berlin Cycle are worth the bother (in fact excellent); the Fifth has a great many fans (just not me), as is the Fourth of the Chicago cycle... if for the "wrong" reasons. I.e. it's an impetuous, brash Bruckner, brassy to the hilt, and while that's not my ideal way of the Fourth (he comes much closer to an organic whole in the wonderful, most recent, Staatskapelle Fourth), it's an almost ideal complement for the Boehm.

[jochanaan]

I had 7 from the Berlin cycle on Teldec.  While perhaps not ideal, it's still a compelling reading; I remember the first and second movements as being particularly idiomatic and beautiful.