Mystery Orchestra 17 - Bruckner Symphony No.9

[M forever]

Life is just not the same without a little Mystery.

So, while Greta is resolving the issues with her download links, here is a little Mystery for you to listen to in the meantime.

For those that may have been frustrated because they couldn't guess all the clips in previous rounds, it may encourage you that I have so far not managed to correctly guess clips A and B in Greta's Mystery Comparison myself.
But again, you don't even have to guess anything here. Just post whatever you want to share about this clip.

This time, it's the entire exposition of the first movement of Josef Anton Bruckner's 9th symphony (almost 10 minutes, 22MB):

Mystery Orchestra 17 A
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2etcnq

I may be adding more clips, as usual, depending on how much interest there is for that.

[Lethevich]

I grabbed the file so it's my duty to reply, although as I had expected I can contribute very little at all. This is IMO an impressive recording in a rather standard style, there doesn't seem to be the slowness of some Asahina, Celi or Gulini, no moments of roughness (that usage is not to be confused with sloppiness) as can be found in Jochum's EMI cycle - it's refined and powerful. And as to isolating the conductor or orchestra... no chance. I need a lot more experience. Although it being played so powerfully and (IMO) so well would indicate an orchestra most familiar with Bruckner, and that would be somewhere in central Europe.

(It's gonna be funny to see how wrong that last statement is when the orchestra is eventually revealed )

[M forever]

I grabbed the file so it's my duty to reply, although as I had expected I can contribute very little at all.

Please, no apologies for not making any dramatically "important" and "deep" statements. We are not here to "play critic", to pronounce grandiose verdicts or earth shattering insights in inflated self-important rhetoric. People who want to read stuff like that can go and read "classicstoday".

We convene here to share impressions about the posted clips, like we do in many other threads in this forum, the only difference is that we don't know which recording it is we are listening to, and hence what we are "supposed" to hear.

Any "small" observation can lead to interesting discussions, as we have seen in the last threads. So there is really no need for anyone to "apologize" like that!!! Rather, I think, the people who make the most dramatic statements in other threads but don't have "guts" enough to come here and apply their "expertise" blindly should apologize for the nonsense they post elsewhere.

Although it being played so powerfully and (IMO) so well would indicate an orchestra most familiar with Bruckner, and that would be somewhere in central Europe.

(It's gonna be funny to see how wrong that last statement is when the orchestra is eventually revealed )

Again, it's not about being right or wrong. How many more times will I have to repeat that? And why should that be wrong anyway? An orchestra not situated in central Europe can be very familiar with Bruckner, too. Or it could be one from that (very general) region. Or maybe not. We will see.
It doesn't matter what people think this or that orchestra should be familiar with. That's again for prophets of BS like Hurwitz ("the Vienna Philharmonic never wanted to play Mahler and still doesn't want to").
What matters here is what you and other people *hear*, nothing else. Once the Mystery Perfomers are revealed, we can discuss why we hear what we hear, or why not. So, it's basically the exact opposite from when people listen to a recording, form a preconception about what they are supposed to hear, then think they actually can "hear" that.

[Lethevich]

Again, it's not about being right or wrong. How many more times will I have to repeat that?

Indeedie, I didn't think that it was. It was more a case of jokiesh self-deprecation, hehe (humour makes it easier for me to stick my neck out to post in threads like this)... I expect to learn some useful things from these threads.

[M forever]

Indeedie, I didn't think that it was. It was more a case of jokiesh self-deprecation, hehe (humour makes it easier for me to stick my neck out to post in threads like this)... I expect to learn some useful things from these threads.

See above.

[Que]

Okay, I'll participate again - I did not so bad in MO 15... 
(French sound - though totally wrong choice in conclusion on orchestra, British Orchestra, and HvK - though not with the VPO but the BPO. Wide of the mark in the rest... )

Clip A in Bruckner's IX:

I find the performance quite good, I'm not gaga but this is some seriously good Bruckner playing. In the beginning (after the quiet intro) the strings are dragging a bit - I'd wish I would be able to describe this in more accurate technical terms!  The sound is very spacious without much acoustical reverb. The orchestra sounds "soft" - not meaning the opposite of loud, but the absence of hard edged sonorities. Very present and nice woodwinds. I'm inclined to go with a central European orchestra as well, lingered on the idea of the Czech SO, but dismissed it. I listened to it again - it definitely has a very flowing, lyrical, "uncomplicated" and "light" Bohemian feel to it - but a German orchestra could produce this too. This approach - a touch slow and stately but very lyrical Bruckner, reminds me of Rudolf Kempe - is it him? Maybe not, considering the recording sounds modern.

Q

[Bonehelm]

Sounds quite like Munich PO to me.

[from the new world]

One of the most important aspects for me in listening to a Bruckner performance is the balance and distinctiveness of the brass. In the 9th, the first subject is clearly where such distinctiveness is tested most, (just considering the exposition) and I would say that this recording is perhaps more blended than others. It is worth hearing the short brass figures that precede the tutti (at 2:01) which are recessed behind the string figurations, along with slightly weak trumpets (at 2:22-2:26).

The 2nd subject is rather interesting to compare the strings at different dynamics. They seem more articulate and together when quieter whereas when playing loudly there is no crispness to each note. I would add that the weaker playing of the pizzicati right at the end suggests to me an older recording, before 1990.

[not edward]

Well, I liked this reading a lot: fairly fast tempi yet never feeling hurried, some very characterful wind playing and the brass not standing out too much over the rest of the orchestra (at least that's how it sounded on cheap headphones off my laptop). Interpretatively-wise, this recording reminded me best of Walter and of superficially non-interventionist conductors such as Neumann--but someone with only six Bruckner 9s on CD isn't going to have the widest range of knowledge.

As for the orchestra, I'm going to have to pass: I can say a few I don't think it is (winds not quite characterful enough for the CzPO, brass too restrained for Chicago), but that's pretty much doing things by rote...and I'll probably be wrong anyway.

[Greta]

I'll give it a go, I'm not very familiar with this symphony (yet), great choice. Hopefully the too much July 4th wine won't be impairing.

A - Sound is extremely good, I hear near the beginning clearly the basses tremoloing in my left ear. Wow, impressive brass. There is a great weight to this orchestra. Pizzicato defined, sensitive and musical playing. Cellos have much emotion and longing, in the lyrical string section in the middle. I like how it flows, not an extreme adherence to the metronome. Something kind of tangible and organic about the string sound. I have to say, in the 4th minute, it's so beautiful I almost want to cry. Maybe wine enhances Bruckner. Winds have a round, clear and yet transparent tone, which seems European. Strings are very present though, even when brass are playing.

Hard to say too much about the interpretation as I'm not familiar with "how this piece should go". The conductor does a fine job with the rise and fall of the music, lets it breathe in and out, which is gorgeous. Around 6 minutes a haunting distance to the wind "calls", and immediacy and dynamic contrast to the gently shifting minor-major repeated figures in the 7th minute that is quite affecting. Something rather forward looking about this music here, it reminds me curiously of Sibelius. For some reason, the Concertgebouw and Chailly come to mind. Not sure if a possibility, but this flexible interpretation makes me wonder if this is perhaps how he might conduct this. And often I associate vivid, earthy strings such as these with the Concertgebouw. I don't think that guess is actually close, but there is a reminiscence.

[M forever]

I have to say, in the 4th minute, it's so beautiful I almost want to cry. Maybe wine enhances Bruckner.

Maybe. Or maybe not.

Around 6 minutes a haunting distance to the wind "calls", and immediacy and dynamic contrast to the gently shifting minor-major repeated figures in the 7th minute that is quite affecting. Something rather forward looking about this music here, it reminds me curiously of Sibelius.

Interesting observation. That never occurred to me before.


Thanks for the interesting responses so far. Here is more Mystery for you (and what kind of piece could be more apt for that than one for which the first performance instruction is "Feierlich.Misterioso" ?):

MO 17 B
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3d7bnh

MO 17 C
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2p5z4k

MO 17 D
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2j6jn5

MO 17 E
http://preview.tinyurl.com/36hmus

[Lethevich]

17B - The woodwind in this one is much more promenant compared to 17A (eg at 1:30), which when I relistened to it did sound a little string-heavy. The trumpet at 2:24 sounds a little less restrained (resisting the urge to shout "OMG CSO" based on pure stereotyping) than 17A too, so the impression from this performance is it's a little less polished and buttoned-up. The recording also sounds a bit more powerful, so maybe a more recent one?

DLing the others now.

[Lethevich]

17C - A little slower at the start than the previous two, a more intentionally dramatic performance perhaps. The sound seems a little clearer than the first one.

17D - The first real slowcoach I don't know much Celibidache, so the nearest to this interpretation I have heard is Guilini, but I don't think it's the CSO one which I have a little experience with, as a few points I remember differently - maybe his WP remake? The sound quality of this one didn't seem as appealing to me as in the previous ones - the performance also seems a little slow, although not into ridiculous territory. At 9:30+ IMO the slow speed has a negative impact on the way this theme is played, it doesn't flow as well, any slower and it may almost sound a little "chuggy".

17E - Really clear/impactful sound, the clarity in the section with plucked strings at 3:00+ is better than 17D. The brass here reminded me a bit of Decca's "XTREME brass assault" tactics with Solti, it is a bit offputting for me... (although this will be in part due to the crappy speakers) Most noticable, as in other performances the timpani back the first theme at 2:20 on 17E, but in 17E the brass drown even the timpani out. There is also a noticable bright/raspy trumpet poking through the texture just before the 2:20 main theme. That slight harsh edge in the trumpets/brass reminds me of Jochum's EMI cycle, ditto the heavy brass balance (like the opposite of Karajan's stereotyped blending).

I'm finding it quite difficult to distinguish that much between the first 3, especially 17B and 17C, to be honest. They are both powerful performances IMO. The 17A seems a little over-refined.

[rubio]

I give it a try. I really love Bruckner, but I haven't listened too much to the 9th yet. These are my impressions from these recordings. I generally find all of these clips fascinating, and that's why I easily end up with plenty of recordings of this composer  .

A: This sounds like a historical recording, and the first one that comes to mind is Walter/Columbia SO. It hangs together very well, even if it can seem a bit restrained. I would love to hear the rest of this recording.

B: I wonder a lot about this one. It seems a bit rushed in the opening compared to the others. It has more dynamic contrast than clip A, but maybe it doesn't hang together as good. The strings seem to be quite characteristic. Could it be VPO? I must say I'm one of those who are not yet able to recognize them immediately. Maybe I would need some kind of a listening course.

C: This one I liked a lot, and I wonder very much who it could be. I hear more details here, like the interplay of the winds 2:50-3:20 and the last 30 seconds. This extra level of details together with the superb playing makes the listening experience more valuable to me; at least for this movement. My guess is Wand/BPO.

D: A slower approach. The intro almost seems too slow compared to the other clips, but the tuba playing has a nice organic feeling. I must say I like this recording very much as well. The playing sounds a bit operatic to me, and it has a nice flowing quality to it. I can wallow in these soundscapes. My guess is Giulini/CSO.

E: This one has more contrasts in the playing compared to the other clips and changes are more sudden. The brass section grabs the attention, and really massively blares out the sounds. I like it, and it reminds me of the brass of Staatskapelle Dresden. I haven't heard Jochum's 9th yet, and maybe this is it (but it could be a bit too slow for Jochum...).

In a way I liked all these clips for different reasons, but I think my favourites are C and D. Probably clip B is the one I connected least with.

[Lethevich]

I give it a try. I really love Bruckner, but I haven't listened too much to the 9th yet.

Same here I like Bruckner a lot, but compared to a lot of his other symphonies I found his 9th quite "cold", but listening to these has made me enjoy it a lot more.

[rubio]

Same here I like Bruckner a lot, but compared to a lot of his other symphonies I found his 9th quite "cold", but listening to these has made me enjoy it a lot more.

The reason I haven't listened to the 9th so much yet, is more that I have listened heavily to the 5th and the 8th (and also the 4th). It's quite coincidential, and I guess the 9th is among my favourite symphonies just a tad after the 5th and especially the 8th. The 7th is one I also really need to listen more to. So much fantastic music and so little time  .

[M forever]

Lethe - focusing on fine detail as well as on the overall impression is indeed very important for a good analysis - but aren't we just a little too obsessed with trumpets here, exactly where they stick out and where they don't?   


rubio - have you actually heard Walter's recording of the 9th? Did you listen to these clips on your desktop speakers? 

[rubio]

rubio - have you actually heard Walter's recording of the 9th? Did you listen to these clips on your desktop speakers? 

No, I haven't heard it. But I have heard part of his 4th and sound-quality wise it sounded OK to me (as I remember at least). I even have the CD, but I haven't heard it yet (and I don't want to cheat  ). If the sound is not really bad, I easily forget about it if the performance is good (like all the performances here). I guess I have missed by quite a margin. Well, anyway, this could lead to some nice purchases.

I have very good hi-fi equipment. But there is for sure a big difference listening to a downloaded file (through 10m of so-so signal cable to the pre-amplifier) compared to my hi-end CD player.

[Lethevich]

Lethe - focusing on fine detail as well as on the overall impression is indeed very important for a good analysis - but aren't we just a little too obsessed with trumpets here, exactly where they stick out and where they don't?   

Hehe, there's not much else I can do, they're loud and noticable 0:) I am hoping to do a lot better with practice, but trumpets are a start, maybe soon I'll advance onto horns (and god forbid, overall structure)

[Greta]

B -  Brass are indeed powerful and rather brilliant.  Near the very beginning of this clip, reminds me of Wagner a lot, with the chorale and Tristan moment. The winds have a rather narrow sound. Seems like the flowing part in the 4th minute moves more quickly here. Such incredibly gorgeous and affecting music. Horns are quite bright and powerful around 7 minutes, section following with the repeated theme that keeps shifting keys, also moves along. Nice build there, to a really brassy and slightly marcato peak. American maybe.

C - I like the burnished and kind of within sound of the brass, I feel this is mysterious here. Definite articulation, notes shorter, the opening becomes more pointillistic. The brass sound really fine, totally different than in B, with a darker hue. Elegant and graceful in the flowing section. Ah, I was missing that cello line in B, finely balanced and textured strings, so much detail. This isn't an overly romanticized view, more objective. Winds have almost no vibrato, which makes the mysterious section quite spooky. I think this Europe, could even be Vienna.