Bruckner's Abbey

[calyptorhynchus]

Another reason to deplore Bruckner's later revisions is that even if you accept that his earlier works were inadequate in structure (which I don't), there no reason to think that Bruckner could usefully rewrite a symphony in an earlier style at the time he was writing his last works. The stylistic evolution in between makes it unlikely he could achieve any better result revising (and I don't believe that he did). He would have been much better off continuing to write his later works. Imagine if instead of a Ninth that had to completed by musicologists over a century later, he had finished it and started a Tenth! I would trade all his revisions of the 1880s and 90s for that.

[Lilas Pastia]

Chiming in with my current overview of the 8th: three versions by Klaus Tennstedt: BSO, LPO and BPO. In that order.

First on top is the Boston performance, a knockout, enthusiastic performance : gleaming, dynamic, propulsive and impulsive. And fantastically played. "Of the moment" in the best sense. Second is a quite amazing LPO live version. Tennstedt lurches into the phrases and the orchestra follows him every step of the way. Very, very impressive. The 8th as you wish the next concert will sound like. Third and last, the strangely aloof, unconnected Berlin concert version barely a month removed from the London one (a Testament release). Marmoreal, impressively conceived but you can hear the restraint. Conductor and orchestra going their own way without listening to each other. Clearly the orchestra think they know better than the maestro.

[Karl Henning]

Nice to see our Boston band giving satisfaction.

[Papy Oli]

Haitink / LSO Live / Bruckner 4 is in full streaming here

[madaboutmahler]

Haitink / LSO Live / Bruckner 4 is in full streaming here

Thank you for this, Oli - listening to some of it now!

[Lilas Pastia]

I failed to connect with that one, except in the Finale, where Haitink's experience clearly shows - actually one of the best I have heard in that movement. The rest is well structured and confidently played, but in a curiously reserved and undemonstrative way.

[eyeresist]

The rest is well structured and confidently played, but in a curiously reserved and undemonstrative way.

Sounds like Haitink to me

[Lilas Pastia]

Right, but Haitink seconde manière ! He was much more impulsive in the fifties and sixties. A look at the timings of his 8th from 1969, 1981, 1995, and 2005 will show that his interpretation gained 16 minutes (20%) in the interim. Of course it's not all  a matter of speed. Rythmic tranchency and harmonic edge gave way to heft and space, with the extra time devoted to an ever fuller sound, especially in phrase or paragraph endings. Which is not to say he was too 'light' and progressively became 'heavier' as years made wrinkles sag and energy wane.

IOW this is very much a case like Giulini's, once a mercurial, volatile conductor who in a matter of a very few short years became much more interested in fleshing out the harmonic fabric than delineating the rythmic bones and muscles underneath. With some conductors this has never been an 'issue': Munch, Stokowski, Monteux, Toscanini, Karajan, Szell, Paray, Markevitch never wavered in their personal ethos over the 'flesh' vs 'bone' conundrum. In a few cases there was an abrupt change: Giulini, Haitink, C. Davis, Klemperer, Celibidache, Böhm (in his very last years), Walter, Scherchen, Bernstein. The reason may have been failing powers, lower energy levels, or simply the realization that after a lifetime of Nikisch-Strauss-Toscanini-Szell devotion to the god Rythm, in their last years they simply realized that after paying their dues to it they felt free to explore a different way of music-making.

Honestly it's hard to tell and generalizations such as I have made only serve to show that there is no single truth in terms of interpretative decisions. 'Prima la parole, doppie la musica'. Words first, music second. In this particular context I'd link Parole with melody-harmony and Rythm with the rythmic aspect of music.

When it's all been said and done, categorizing an artist's response to an evolving world is valid only inasmuch as it serves to present a snapshot at a given time of his/her development.

Eyeresist: in a nutshell you are singularly right on. But there are all those peripheric aspect to consider. An endlesssly fascinating discussion...

[Herman]

Right, but Haitink seconde manière ! He was much more impulsive in the fifties and sixties. A look at the timings of his 8th from 1969, 1981, 1995, and 2005 will show that his interpretation gained 16 minutes (20%) in the interim. Of course it's not all  a matter of speed. Rythmic tranchency and harmonic edge gave way to heft and space, with the extra time devoted to an ever fuller sound, especially in phrase or paragraph endings. Which is not to say he was too 'light' and progressively became 'heavier' as years made wrinkles sag and energy wane.

This is not a characterisation that rings a recognition bell with me. In the time Haitink used to perform any given program three times in Amsterdam (thursday, friday and sunday afternoon) the sunday crowd usually got the best performance (even though Thursday night is traditionally the connoisseur night): a couple of minutes longer, more passionate and expressive.

[Lilas Pastia]

Hi, Herman, nice to hear from you. I bow to your knowledge of Haitink's artistry ( one of my most revered conductors), and can only vouch for what I have heard from recordings. I have been at the Concertgebouw four times, but NEVER under Haitink  .

The eighth twice under Celibidache and close in time (September 1993 in Munich and April 1994 in Lisbon). I have another Celi-MPO version from Tokyo's Suntory Hall, 1990 vintage. On average they clock in at 20, 16, 32 and 31 minutes. Three different venues, therefore in theory three different occasions to aurally observe the famed epiphenomena develop. Well, they do have slightly different outlines, but the core is the same: a telluric Bruckner instead of a volcanic or mystic one. My favourites are the Lisbon and Tokyo ones, but the Munich is also excellent - almost too much so - as much echt-Celi as could be conceived. Having been acquainted with Celi's 100 minutes Eight for over 15 years, I have come to terms with what at first hearing was absolutely intolerable.

When I put a Celi MPO 8th in the machine, I simply shelve any other interpretation I know and let myself be sucked in the conductor's (composer's ?) conception. Between Munich, Tokyo and Lisbon, I prefer the latter. A wee bit more spontaneity than in MunichI, a wee bit more freedom than in Tokyo. Very slight differences. But over the course of a 100 minutes work they tend to accumulate and a winner emerges.

Celi's 8th is not what I suggest for a first hearing. There are at least a dozen others I would suggest. Having said that, Celi's Munich performances of Bruckner give a very special view of the composer, his music, his era, ethos, culture and whole musical background that no other conductor comes near to suggest.

A BEST  8th . Nahhhh. I doesn't exist. Any decent collection needs 4-6 version of suitably different views. A Celi MPO belongs to it.

[MishaK]

I think I will have to finally buy the Wildner soon.

Don't waste your money. Wildner is an awfully dull conductor. If you're not convinced by Rattle and are looking for a more compellingly performed completion of the finale you should check out the new recording of the Carragan completion by Gerd Schaller. Really outstanding performance on all levels. I actually do like Rattle's take on the SMPC version, and the first three movements are much better than what I heard him do live (and much better than his abysmally static fourth). Otherwise your options are a reasonably solid earlier version of SMPC with Markus Bosch or the earliest version of SMPC with Inbal. But the latter was written I think before some additional original fragments were unearthed.

[Uncle Connie]

A BEST  8th . Nahhhh. I doesn't exist.

Oh rubbish, of course it does.  It's whichever one I choose to play today.   

Celi Munich, or Stuttgart, or Tokyo (sorry, don't have Lisbon)  will be on other days.  They often are played - well, not Stuttgart so much, but the others.  Today it's a much more ordinary, even a foursquare version:  Heinz Rögner, RSO Berlin.  There's nothing wrong with this performance, there's just nothing monumental or brilliantly individual either.  And that's why I like it (and some others in the same vein) now and then; I get to hear the glories of Bruckner without some stunning genius of a conductor intruding his (or her, meaning Simone Young) interpretive ideas into the mix.  Helps me keep the dividing line clear, between what is (insert name of genius conductor) and what is Bruckner. 

Frankly, that's the trouble with my Bruckner collection.  It's too big.  I wound up accumulating so many "special" and "brilliant" performances, as well as some "ordinary" ones, that I'm now at the level where the question isn't so much "Which Bruckner shall I play?" as it is "Whose Bruckner shall I play?"  I'm not at all sure that's a good thing.  (But it doesn't stop me accumulating yet more, which will be relevant to my next post....)   

[Uncle Connie]

Okay, here's that other post about accumulating too many versions, and how ain't no way I'm stoppin' now....

I've slipped a bit out of touch, I just discovered last night.  First, I discovered that they finally released Simone Young's First, for which I had been waiting (but obviously forgot to check on for at least six months now).  Okay, no problem, it's ordered, onwanrd and all that....

But then I came across the following, about which I knew absolutely nothing:


[asin] B007S6R3E0[/asin]


Turns out it's a whole new cycle, and in addition to the Second (which is ordered just on principle, as I adore the Second), he's got sets of 0/1 and 4/7 out there, and apparently plans to do the rest.  (It's CPO.  Do they ever leave a planned set unfinished?)

The reviews I've seen (quoted on Amazon and Arkiv) are mostly gushing with praise.  My question:  Has anybody here heard any of these, or heard any rumors, and if so what's the consensus?  Note - won't stop me buying at least those I collect with wild abandon anyway, like 0 and 1, but might make me hold up on the 'lesser' (to me) numbers.  ('Lesser' = 'less critical to satisfying my ravenous appetites.')

[Lilas Pastia]

Oh rubbish, of course it does.  It's whichever one I choose to play today.   

Celi Munich, or Stuttgart, or Tokyo (sorry, don't have Lisbon)  will be on other days.  They often are played - well, not Stuttgart so much, but the others.  Today it's a much more ordinary, even a foursquare version:  Heinz Rögner, RSO Berlin.  There's nothing wrong with this performance, there's just nothing monumental or brilliantly individual either.  And that's why I like it (and some others in the same vein) now and then; I get to hear the glories of Bruckner without some stunning genius of a conductor intruding his (or her, meaning Simone Young) interpretive ideas into the mix.  Helps me keep the dividing line clear, between what is (insert name of genius conductor) and what is Bruckner. 

Frankly, that's the trouble with my Bruckner collection.  It's too big.  I wound up accumulating so many "special" and "brilliant" performances, as well as some "ordinary" ones, that I'm now at the level where the question isn't so much "Which Bruckner shall I play?" as it is "Whose Bruckner shall I play?"  I'm not at all sure that's a good thing.  (But it doesn't stop me accumulating yet more, which will be relevant to my next post....)

I like the Rögner too, but not quite as much as his splendid fourth. BTW the Tokyo Celi is also with the MPO, recorded live from Suntory Hall. A different acoustic experience.

'Whose Bruckner?'  is also my dilemma. I ended up listening to all my versions of all the symphonies, as listening to just one only makes me clamour for more. And more... After over a year of listening to the 8th I'm almost done. Right now listening to Sinopoli. The last one will be Prêtre. A certain fatigue set in around recording # 50 last spring and I was ohne Bruckner for a few weeks. Somehow interest was rekindled and I resumed my listening schedule. Then it will be on to number 9 and another 6 months of listening to just that one. Maybe there's a cure out there but I haven't heard of it.

[Lilas Pastia]

Okay, so Sinopoli it was tonight. The first thing that struck me (almost painfully) was the humongous tonal range of the orchestra. They outdecibel any other outfit I've heard. Absolutely staggering. It goes without saying that they have total command of the score. Everything is played to the hilt. Timpani pound and rage, brass make a huge sound, strings have a volume and density that is almost intimidating. For some reason winds haven't made an impression, but it's probably because I was so impressed with the other - noisier - sections of the orchestra.

Curiously they have not recorded the work often. Apart from the Sinopoli and Jochum versions I know only of one by Thielemann, which I haven't heard. I do have them on a live aircheck under Haitink, from 2004. Although the sound can be awesome in places, Haitink conducts the work better than Sinopoli IMO. He shows much more subtlety and naturalness in his handling of the dynamics (Sinopoli rarely dips under mf and when he does things are sometimes inaudible, like the three drum rolls following the climax of I), and he finds much more emotion in the various episodes. The eight can sound like a sonic quilt. A good conductor binds all the sections seamlessly, but surprinsingly few achieve that. Sinopoli does, but his quilt pieces are uniformly bright and bold in colour. The eye/ear tires.

It is hugely impressive, but it becomes predictable rather quickly. Uniformly solid, insufficiently varied tempi. Relentless outpouring of the orchestra's tonal proficiency. Maazel on EMI (Berlin Phil) does pull out all the stops in the same way. His is the only BP version I know that manages to exploit the orchestra's might without sounding coarse. But he snips 6 minutes off Sinopoli's timings, and the results sound suitably grand, hugely dramatic but everything is held tautly together. Not my favourite version, be he shows how a megadecibel eight ought to go. In the end my verdict is: too unvaried in tempi (slow) and dynamics (loud). I may come to appreciate it more with time, but that first exposure had a strangely offputting effect. I recall having had the same impression with his equally intimidating third. It may be the fault of the engineers, but I don't think so. They're not responsible for the musical decisions.

[jlaurson]

Okay, here's that other post about accumulating too many versions, and how ain't no way I'm stoppin' now....

I've slipped a bit out of touch, I just discovered last night.  First, I discovered that they finally released Simone Young's First, for which I had been waiting (but obviously forgot to check on for at least six months now).  Okay, no problem, it's ordered, onwanrd and all that....

But then I came across the following, about which I knew absolutely nothing:
Vinzago's Bruckner


Turns out it's a whole new cycle, and in addition to the Second (which is ordered just on principle, as I adore the Second), he's got sets of 0/1 and 4/7 out there, and apparently plans to do the rest.  (It's CPO.  Do they ever leave a planned set unfinished?)

Looks like you already pulled the trigger.

I have that (2nd) on my desk, but not gotten around to hear it. Will be looking forward how it compares to the excellent Schaller (PROFIL).

[Uncle Connie]

Looks like you already pulled the trigger.

I have that (2nd) on my desk, but not gotten around to hear it. Will be looking forward how it compares to the excellent Schaller (PROFIL).

Uh-oh.  I am beginning to become very embarrassed at the mounting evidence that I have really and truly lost touch with Bruckneriana.  I didn't know about Schaller either....  In common with Venzago, I confess I hadn't even heard of the man.  Obviously, time to get my ears out of the old pile of Furtwängler and Knappertsbusch and pay attention.

So the first Schaller volume now goes on the next-up-for-purchase list, many thanks for the tip by the way, and my bankruptcy just became assured.  Oh well.  Even today after all the Bruckner brouhaha, good Seconds are hard to find, and I'm one of those weirdies who, if asked to rank the Bruckner symphonies in order of personal preference, would list the Second, well, second.  After the 8th and just before the 0th.  I always did favor the underdog....

[jlaurson]

Uh-oh.  I am beginning to become very embarrassed at the mounting evidence that I have really and truly lost touch with Bruckneriana.  I didn't know about Schaller either....  In common with Venzago, I confess I hadn't even heard of the man.  Obviously, time to get my ears out of the old pile of Furtwängler and Knappertsbusch and pay attention.

So the first Schaller volume now goes on the next-up-for-purchase list, many thanks for the tip by the way, and my bankruptcy just became assured.  Oh well.  Even today after all the Bruckner brouhaha, good Seconds are hard to find, and I'm one of those weirdies who, if asked to rank the Bruckner symphonies in order of personal preference, would list the Second, well, second.  After the 8th and just before the 0th.  I always did favor the underdog....

I had only heard of the Schaller a month or two ago myself when the PROFIL people showed me their upcoming release book...  and I was surprised that they seemed to consider it a major release. I've only heard 1-2-3 with him, now, but especially the 1st and 2nd are terrific. Not the orchestra in every detail (like someone else has said somewhere around here), but definitely the interpretation and over-all impression.

I'm not a particular fan of Simone Young's Bruckner, though, admittedly.

I, too, love the Second... though after the place of honor for the 8th, which sort of runs outside the competition, I love the 6th... then 5th, then a block with 9 and 7 and 2. Then the rest.

[Uncle Connie]

I'm not a particular fan of Simone Young's Bruckner, though, admittedly.

I on the other hand am completely sold; something of the Celibidache of Original Versions, I'd say.  But I suspect, like 'Celi', or 'Kna,' she's an acquired taste, and the fact that I acquired it and others didn't is just one of those things known as "personal taste."  Some people think Karajan was god.  I don't.  C'est la vie.

I, too, love the Second... though after the place of honor for the 8th, which sort of runs outside the competition, I love the 6th... then 5th, then a block with 9 and 7 and 2. Then the rest.

Good point I think that 8 is a thing apart, as presumably the 9th would have been had he finished it, but he didn't, so. 

Of the others my current ranking - note, much of this changes from week to week, though never dramatically - would go:  8, 2, 0, 1, 7, 6, 4, 5, 9, 3.  The current locked-in slots are the first three and the last two.  The middle is very fluid, and especially I think the 7th wanders up and down the scale nudging its way higher or lower as the version to hand commands.  It's also important to point out that the gaps between the numbers are mostly very, very narrow.  Which is to say, I wouldn't be without a one of these for one single minute. 

[Uncle Connie]

A BEST  8th . Nahhhh.  It doesn't exist. Any decent collection needs 4-6 version of suitably different views. A Celi MPO belongs to it.

Agree completely, despite my silly joke the other day - and I'd be very interested in your 4 - 6 desert island list (valid only for today, if you're at all like me).  Just for fun, here's mine, with the understanding that one or two of these may change more or less at whim:

Furtwängler, BPO '49

Knappertsbusch, BPO '51

Horenstein, LSO '70

Kempe, Zürich '71

Young, Hamburg '08

Nezet-Seguin, Montreal '09 

     (The last-named is flying high at the moment because of the wild youthful intensity I hear.  This could wear thin as my innate conservatism takes its toll....)

     Now admittedly that's a flawed list in the respect that there's no Nowak edition anywhere.  But I'm thinking that really isn't important unless we base an assessment solely or substantially on the effect of the Haas inclusions, and while they matter, they aren't decisive.  (If that sort of thing were decisive, then 'Kna' and Young couldn't be there either owing to the radically different versions involved.  Then I'd have to add the "runner-up" for today's list, which happens to have been Michael Gielen, and find one more Haas that I couldn't stand to be without.)

     Just for fun of course; I really mean it, my great loves do vary rather frequently.  Wouldn't it be so much simpler if we liked simpler music?  (Also boring....)