Bruckner's 6th Symphony - Blind Comparison

[amw]

X2 is much better—crisper, livelier, "explained" some aspects of the structure to me better than X1 did. Substitutes judicious rubato for actual changes in tempo, which somewhat relieves the relentless Bruckner ostinati. (Bruckner gets a lot of mileage out of turning themes upside down in this movement. I think I like the "climbing" version of the walking theme better than the "descending" one—maybe it's those F-sharps...)

[TheGSMoeller]

Hey, Guys and Gals. I just wanted to say that I really miss you all, and would love to have you return soon. I promise I won't disappoint.


Your friend,
Symphony No. 6

[Brahmsian]

Hey, Guys and Gals. I just wanted to say that I really miss you all, and would love to have you return soon. I promise I won't disappoint.


Your friend,
Symphony No. 6

I am here.  I'm scared of your avatar visage.  Scary.       

[Daverz]

Hey, Guys and Gals. I just wanted to say that I really miss you all, and would love to have you return soon. I promise I won't disappoint.
Your friend,
Symphony No. 6

But I can't listen to the 6th until y'all tell me which one is the best.

[Moonfish]

Hey, Guys and Gals. I just wanted to say that I really miss you all, and would love to have you return soon. I promise I won't disappoint.


Your friend,
Symphony No. 6

[Pim]

My (new) friend indeed! I really like these blind comparisons, great way to get to know a piece.
Here my votes:

y1
Something slightly wooden, as if they have to work hard to keep up with all the tempo changes indicated in the score. Btw, is this finale the piece with the most tempo change indications? Btw if anything convinces me that it is really hard to be a conductor it is this. Just imagine having to make all these decisions about tempo trying to follow the score. I'm sure I would just start crying in front of the orchestra.

y2
Clearer in sound and better at the tempo changes in making them sound more natural, like following from the constraints of the terrain the orchestra has to 'walk through'. There's this naturalness of the tempo changes, in contrast with the more artificial tempo changes that I thought I heard in Y1.

y3
Great the way the clarinet stands out in the opening, then meshes with the orchestra again. The molto lugubre was not lugubre enough to my taste however  . Overall good, but not gripping.

y4
Yep. Great clarinet, great brass. Brisk overall pace with natural tempo changes as in y2. The lugubre is just rightly eery this time, and it all just seems to fit the overall hysteria (e.g. around 8.30-8.50!) of the piece. Hard not to jump up and start cheering at the end. Clear winner for me.

y4 > y2 > y3 > y1

[Cato]

My (new) friend indeed! I really like these blind comparisons, great way to get to know a piece.
Here my votes:

y1
Something slightly wooden, as if they have to work hard to keep up with all the tempo changes indicated in the score. Btw, is this finale the piece with the most tempo change indications? Btw if anything convinces me that it is really hard to be a conductor it is this. Just imagine having to make all these decisions about tempo trying to follow the score. I'm sure I would just start crying in front of the orchestra.

y2
Clearer in sound and better at the tempo changes in making them sound more natural, like following from the constraints of the terrain the orchestra has to 'walk through'. There's this naturalness of the tempo changes, in contrast with the more artificial tempo changes that I thought I heard in Y1.

y3
Great the way the clarinet stands out in the opening, then meshes with the orchestra again. The molto lugubre was not lugubre enough to my taste however  . Overall good, but not gripping.

y4
Yep. Great clarinet, great brass. Brisk overall pace with natural tempo changes as in y2. The lugubre is just rightly eery this time, and it all just seems to fit the overall hysteria (e.g. around 8.30-8.50!) of the piece. Hard not to jump up and start cheering at the end. Clear winner for me.

y4 > y2 > y3 > y1

Yes, a difficult group: I chose Y 2 over Y 4 because of some extraneous noise in the latter, otherwise both were excellent performances.

Concerning your comments on difficult scores, tempo changes, etc.: if you want a score to make a conductor weep, check Schoenberg's Erwartung!

[amw]

Btw, is this finale the piece with the most tempo change indications?

Yes, but it's still not too bad:

Bewegt, doch nicht zu schnell (opening)
langsamer... ritard. ... tempo I (letter F)
Bedeutend langsamer (letter M)
Tempo I (letter Q)
langsamer ... a Tempo (letter V)
langsam ... accel. ... ritard. ... a Tempo (from letter W to letter X)

So you have one basic tempo (with one rit.) from the beginning to letter M, another from M to Q, then back to the first tempo from Q to the end with two significant slowdowns in the coda. Should be easily manageable. It's the tempo changes in, e.g. Messiaen (switching back almost every other bar from "Modéré, presque vif" to "Très lent" to "Vif" to something else, usually with a specific metronome marking) that would give me pause.

Results coming in the next 24 hours btw.

[TheGSMoeller]

So far...

Group Y
Neal: Y4, Y1, Y3, Y2.
Cato: Y2, Y4, Y3, Y1
Pim: Y4, Y2, Y3, Y1

Y1 = 5 pts
Y2 = 8 pts
Y3 = 6 pts
Y4 = 11 pts

Group X
ChamberNut:  X4, X1, X2, X3

[amw]

X1 - On second listen: meh.

X2 - See comments above. I like the sense of a "spiritual journey" one gets from this performance (if it's the one I think it is, I'm pretty sure I liked them in a previous round as well) and in some respects (sound, particularly) prefer it to X4, even if it's not quite as immediate. This is a conductor who definitely understands Bruckner's sense of time.

X3 - Everything exaggerated, tempi pulled around carelessly (perhaps in an attempt to overcome the tyranny of the four-bar phrase). This is not the way to play Bruckner. You have to submit to the four-bar phrase, to allow the obsessive repetition to spin like a prayer wheel and alter our perception of time. The conductor here is trying to play Bruckner as though it were Mahler. I can see why some people would have structural problems with the finale if they listened to this recording.

Also the fortissimos are wimpy. When Bruckner marks more than one f I expect to deafen my flatmates.

Also, they linger on the last chord way too much. It should be short and sharp like the first movement's.

X4 - Much better. Super high energy and the conductor actually more or less follows Bruckner's tempo marks. I could quibble with some of the dynamics, and the brass are definitely too brassy (is this A2 from the first round?) but probably the best performance in this group. I'll let it tie with X2.

Scores:

X2 - 4 pts
X4 - 4 pts
X1 - 1.5 pts
X3 - 0.5 pts

[Pim]

So you have one basic tempo (with one rit.) from the beginning to letter M, another from M to Q, then back to the first tempo from Q to the end with two significant slowdowns in the coda. Should be easily manageable. It's the tempo changes in, e.g. Messiaen (switching back almost every other bar from "Modéré, presque vif" to "Très lent" to "Vif" to something else, usually with a specific metronome marking) that would give me pause.

Thanks amw, I can see how that might work: don't look at all the tempo changes separately, but first identify the overall pattern. And I will take a look at (and maybe even listen to  ) Messiaen and Schonberg's Erwarting (thanks Cato) to find out how difficult it can get.

[Sergeant Rock]

Group X. This has been difficult for me to rate, especially second and third places. It contains my All-Time Top 3 Bruckner Sixths which means I'll probably be helping eliminate one

4 - X3 I actually like it despite the flaws in sound (muffled) and instrumental balance, the weak climaxes. It's the beauty of the softer passages, the phrasing, the lingering that appeals to me. But not enough to place it higher than fourth.

The battle, in brief, between X1 and X2:

3 - X2 The second subject has a folksy lilt, a spring to the rhythm that seems more in character than X1's smoother take. The transitions between sections are more seamless, more natural. X2 is probably the better "interpretation", closer to what Bruckner wanted but it's also less emotionally gripping than X1. What I didn't like: the clarinet at the beginning was a bit recessed; the third subject could've packed more punch (X1 explodes here); the coda lacked the clarity of X1.

2 - X1  I love the drama of this performance and the dramatic and clear sonics (all the voices in the final pages of the coda are heard for example). After much deliberation I'm giving my homies second place.


1 - X4  I should recuse myself. I know this one too well (undoubtedly imprinted on it) but I really do think it's near perfection as architecture (the parts fit so well together) and in instrumental balance and detail (woodwind are not going to let themselves be overwhelmed by the brass). It's also a thrilling performance, the coda magnificent, the final chord properly short and decisive.

1 - X4
2 - X1
3 - X2
4 - X3


Sarge

[Brian]

X1: I'm leveling the sound quality playing field by blasting all these on my laptop speakers. This seems like a really good account: straightforward, on the level, pretty freaking exciting. Everything, even the second theme, seems emphatic and decisive.

X2: Okay, I love the extra staccato snap this conductor brings to the first theme. It's so menacing! The second theme, by contrast, is softer, slower, and more lyrical than in X1, and transitions are handled more sensibly. Maybe it's those cruddy laptop speakers, but other than those two things I could not hear a very significant difference between X1 and X2. amw and Ray could, obviously. Still, I agree that this one has an edge.

X3: Nice timpani. This orchestra feels smaller. The other kids are right, lots of luftpause and teensy-weensy stretching of phrases. Nice horns. Oh the ending is way too drawn out and artificial. Overall, it's okay, but not as good as the first two.

X4: Love the detailing of violas and clarinets in the opening. It's clarinetapalooza, hooray! This is very fast. Holy SHIT the clarinet trill at 3:50. Did I mention clarinets are my favorite wind instrument? Great woodwinds overall, superb balance, great ending.

1. X2
tie-2. X1 and X4. I will do a shootout tomorrow with headphones to determine the winner of this.
4. X3

[Brahmsian]

1 - X4
2 - X1
3 - X2
4 - X3


Sarge

OMG!!!!    We have found Brotherly Bruckner Bliss in this round, Sarge!    An historic day! 

[TheGSMoeller]

Great job, listeners! Wonderful comments!
And thank you, Sarge, for not revealing the performances, I know it's less blind for you at this point. 

I originally had 5 participants per group, I will give at least another 4-5 days for their scores. If not I have Cato to help out, who has proven in the past to be the Superman of comparisons!

[Cato]

Great job, listeners! Wonderful comments!
And thank you, Sarge, for not revealing the performances, I know it's less blind for you at this point. 

I originally had 5 participants per group, I will give at least another 4-5 days for their scores. If not I have Cato to help out, who has proven in the past to be the Superman of comparisons!

  :  Heh-heh! 

Now I really am interested in X 4 since Sarge is positive that it is his favorite! 

[Moonfish]

Finally listened through the Y group!     

Y1: Great beginning. The pace a bit hurried at first, but it has character and power.  It lets Bruckner's light shine through in its timbre (1st part) to then gently hover over the section that follows.  The pace decreases.  I like the horns in this rendition. Personally I think the oscillation between power and delicacy as well as in pacing (rapid to slow) allows Bruckner's musical poetry to shine through in a unique fashion.
B+


Y2: Pace is good. Brings good power forward.  Poetic. Enjoying it. A little hurried at times. Doesn't sculpt as well as Y3. Loses definition towards the end.
B


Y3:  Starts in a haunting fashion with the whispering entries with horns that have "character". Brawny. Definitely has umph and power. Transitions nicely into the sweeter theme while still sculpting a very much alive piece of music.
Rolls nicely into the section that follows and maintains the oscillations between delicacy and power. Goes delicate. Swirls in a poetic wonder. I really like this movement and how it is played by the orchestra.  Keeps up its delicate power. Not sure if I like the solo horn in the mid-section but the accompanying growth of the horn section and the repeats make up for it.  Returns to softness and tranquility in a sweet fashion.  Ends in bravura. Excellent version of this movemement. 
Haunting and powerful. I prefer the slower pace. Definitely my top choice in the Y category. A

Y4: Lots of energy and fast paced. Keeps up the energy throughout the movement. At first I placed this last, but after listening to Y1 and Y2 over and over I felt that those two slackened in their focus towards the latter part of the movement while Y4 kept it going. So.. I had to side with Y4 in second place although Y1 was a very strong competitor. They all were actually.  Y4 shines in its own unique way. It has a bright clarity throughout, but the continued focus/energy throughout the movement made me side with Y4 in second place. I preferred the slower pace of Y3 over Y4.
A-


My ranking:
Y3 >  Y4 >  Y1  > Y2

[TheGSMoeller]

So far...

Group Y
Neal: Y4, Y1, Y3, Y2.
Cato: Y2, Y4, Y3, Y1
Pim: Y4, Y2, Y3, Y1
Moonfish:  Y3, Y4, Y1, Y2

Y1 = 7 pts
Y2 = 9 pts
Y3 = 10 pts
Y4 = 14  pts

Group X
ChamberNut:  X4, X1, X2, X3
Sarge: X4, X1, X2, X3
Brian:  X2, X1, X4 ,X3
amw: X2, X4, X1, X3

X1 = 11 pts
X2 = 12 pts
X3 = 4 pts
x4 = 13 pts

[amw]

Make it X2 I guess.

[TheGSMoeller]

Make it X2 I guess.

thank you, kind sir.