Bruckner's Abbey

[Lilas Pastia]

Resuming my Bruckner journey with a couple of 7ths this week. Both hailing from Munich, but both presenting so totally different artistic results as to be from different planets.

Foreword: I consider the 7th as the one Bruckner symphony where tempi/timing differences are among the least pronounced. Excepting the widely varying Adagio, the mean (average) timing for the other 3 movements is a mere 2 minutes short or in excess of 42 minutes (20-10-12). If one was to make a standard deviation study based on Berky's list, I'm quite confident it would concur with my totally unscientific opinion. The 7th is probably Bruckner's most classical symphony, his most obvious (and successful) attempt to win critical support for his ' enlarged classical symphonic structure'.

I listened first to the 2007 Thielemann performance with the Munich Philharmonic (previously manned by Celibidache). Thielemann's view is a comfy, zennish yet big-hearted one of Bruckner's most popular symphony. His conducting comes across as very controlled, intellectually unbending, if outwardly 'open' and plush-sounding. It works best in the first movement, where pure intellectual rigour will reveal the movement's beauty and perfect structure. The Adagio is also very well made, but the limits of a purely intellectual approach show the seams in the movement's various sections. They just don't connect with each other. IOW the continuity of the movement is interrupted instead of being picked up and varied in a seamless flow. This is especially apparent in the middle section. Big outbursts appear pompous and noisy instead of emotinally charged. The buildup and big climax are suitably resplendent, but the ensuing grief-laden coda doesn't register as the heart of the work - as it should be.

Good Scherzo, where nothing goes wrong - except that once again it's a bit generic - a model of its kind (better than Karajan). The Finale is too slow, and the big brass pronouncements all end on a softly voiced chord - why ?? I've always heard the last note of that musical phrase strongly articulated, not smoothly farted away. In any case, the whole thing is still powerful and beautiful, but by the end it's clear we have once more been subjected to a conductor's comment on the 7th, not a performance of the work. As if a Bruckner symphony could be subjected to the Wagner or Tchaikovsky treatment. IMO it would work much better if Schumann or Brahms had been the aesthetic models.

The other Munich performance I heard had been taped 20 years earlier (1977), across town in the Herkulessal of the Residenz. This is a BRSO performance under Karl Böhm (an Audite record). Böhm had not recorded any Bruckner between 1936 and 1971. He did the 8th in Munich (1971), then the 3rd and 4th in Vienna (Decca, 1973), the 7th and 8th in Vienna in 1976 (this time under DG with markedly different aural results), and finally the 7th in Munich again. There were a few unofficial recordings here and there (the 8th in Cologne, late fifties and again in Zurich, 1981). According to the liner notes, Böhm claims to have played al the symphonies during his carreer. I don't know about that. I would kill to have a good sounding 9th under him. No trace of that seems to have ever surfaced.

In any case, the proof of the pudding was in the listening. The first thing I noticed is how much BRSO-sounding the BRSO sounded. Böhm always respected the culture and sound of the orchestras he worked with. The BRSO is famous for its agile, slightly angular and easily moulded sound. And the Herkulessaal recordings have always been consistent in that regard: athletic mid-range, pure and shiny high frequencies, and light, transparent bass. The sound as compared to the previous year's Vienna DG recording is very different. Böhm's interpretation is also substantially different. Working in the studio (Vienna) or live (Munich) tended to accentuate Böhm's Janus-like conductorial personality: mercurial and highly combustible in concert (even well into his eighties), magisterial and formidably in control in the studio.

So, these two performances hail from the same city's two great orchestras, but could hardly be more different. The most egregious example is in the scherzo where, at practically identical tempos, they seem to be conducting two different pieces. Thielemann is grandly, smoothly symphonic (if that means anything). Böhm's conducting has an edge-of-seat, geyser-like quality to it. End of paragraph chords are punched out viciously, to tremendous effect.

The finales are very different, but thoughout I noticed the astounding work of the Munich horns (same in the first movement coda). Their gloriously strong projection and euphonious voicing crown the work in thrilling fashion. Too often the coda to these two movements are a morass of brass vying for prominence with a see of furiously sawing strings. Here there is no doubt as to how Bruckner's magnificent vision ought to triumph. An astonishing last-minute convergence of totally different views, at the service of the composer.

[Daverz]

I've also ordered it, as well as Herreweghe's. Neither has been dispatched yet, though.

For me it was done in by the Telarc sound (CD layer only), which make the strings sound anemic.  I suppose it could be one of those Telarcs where you have to crank the sound way up.  I'll have to wait until the neighbors are not around to test this theory.     But I'm sure I'll be consulting the excellent analysis disc again.  I have plenty of good 5s, including the K's (Karajan, Kempe, and Klemperer), and if you want a similarly fast 5, Rögner does it 30 seconds faster.

[Drasko]

This looks quite interesting:


http://www.mdt.co.uk/MDTSite/product/NR_July09/MACD1227.htm

ANTON BRUCKNER

Symphonies, Nos. 1-9 & Te Deum

Recording of the 1953 cycle with the Vienna Symphony Orchestra / Volkmar Andreae

Although hardly known today, the Swiss conductor Volkmar Andreae (1879-1962) belonged to the great generation of Bruckner conductors born while the composer was still in his prime. This exalted group ranged from Bruno Walter (born 1876) to F. Charles Adler (born 1889), and included such masters as Hermann Abendroth, Wilhelm Furtwängler, Otto Klemperer, Hans Knappertsbusch, and Carl Schuricht. Volkmar Andreae conducted Bruckner for half of the Twentieth Century. It is regrettable that his commercially recorded legacy is so meagre, for his eloquent advocacy surely deserved better. These Bruckner performances originally given in 1953 and archived in excellent sound for Austrian radio audiences will reward careful listening. Musicologist Kurt Blaukopf wrote concerning this historic cycle: “The performances given by the Vienna Symphony under Andreae’s direction and preserved on tape by the Austrian Radio have the significance of a musical monument.” Despite the profusion of Bruckner recordings available in modern sound, such a monument merits our enduring attention. All except the 4th Symphony previously unissued.

Music and Arts 9cds MACD1227

Sizeable preview (not for much longer)
http://www.abruckner.com/downloads/downloadofthemonth/August08/
http://www.abruckner.com/downloads/downloadofthemonth/June08/
http://www.abruckner.com/downloads/downloadofthemonth/July08/

[jlaurson]

Robert Simpson, The Essence of Bruckner


Thought I'd dabble with that, finally.

[Lilas Pastia]

The Andreae recordings should be a worthy addition for the completist. The orchestral playing is surprinsingly good in those I've heard (the ones Milos provided the links for). No doubt the boxed set will be invaluable if some effort to refurbish the sound has been made.

[ChamberNut]

Bruckner's Abbey - Composer thread with the most views.  0:)

[Opus106]

Bruckner's Abbey - Composer thread with the most views.  0:)

Here's the shocking bit: Elgar's thread has the most replies! It's locked yet leading RVW's by 150 posts! Rule Britannia?

[ChamberNut]

Here's the shocking bit: Elgar's thread has the most replies! It's locked yet leading RVW's by 150 posts! Rule Britannia?

Yeah..........well I think the Elgar thread had more bickering and trash talking that made up a lot of that thread, instead of pure musical discussion, hence why it was locked.

[Lilas Pastia]

Indeed, the Abbey is the crème de la crème among 'serious' threads... 0:)

[karlhenning]

I still owe a listen at the Sixth to Cato . . . .

[AB68]

Anyone familiar with these recordings?
Who is the conductor?
http://www.amazon.com/Anton-Bruckner-Symphonies-vol-Nos/dp/B001NCOLM2/ref=dm_ap_alb1/183-7858603-1948235

[Lilas Pastia]

Anyone familiar with these recordings?
Who is the conductor?
http://www.amazon.com/Anton-Bruckner-Symphonies-vol-Nos/dp/B001NCOLM2/ref=dm_ap_alb1/183-7858603-1948235

Check here

[MishaK]

Check here

Thanks for helping the emptor to cavere. 

[Lilas Pastia]

Sure, much caveat was in order here !!

[Lilas Pastia]

Listened to this  week: the 8th with the Bamberger Symphoniker under Eugen Jochum. It dates from June 1982 and was recorded in THE abbey (St-Florian, that is !). Also from St-Florian, played on Bruckner's organ: about half an hour of organ pieces, mainly preludes and fugues. These predate the symphonies. But far from being immature or half balked, they are fully formed gems. Unlike the symphonies though, they are terse in expression, concentrated in form, and pack a wallop within their 6-7 minutes duration. For those who yawn waiting for the next orchestral climax, that could be a good fix !

Both items are on the Download of the Month page from John Berky's Bruckner site. The organ pieces are from the same year. The whole progtram seems to have been offered as a 2LP set by the Austrian Radio. I downloaded and burned it to disc, putting the organ works first, and the symphony second. since it clocks in at 82 minutes, it doesn't fit on a single cd.

Is it worth it? I've already hinted at the great value of the organ pieces (very rare on record). There is another 1982 Jochum Bamberg version out there, dating from September, and recorded in concert (80 minutes, and fitting on a single cd when burned). I haven't put it back in the player to compare (will do tonight), but if memory serves, it was a bit tidier (2 minutes shorter and no clunkers), and the recording was resplendent. This St-Florian version is well recorded too, but in different acoustics. There are some strange balances (very forward wind choir) that may have to do with microphone placement. The timpani are sometimes extremely loud, while at other times they rumble in the background. This is a bit disconcerting.

Other than that, this is a quite extraordinary interpretation. Like the 09.1982 version, it presents Jochum's Bruckner in much better light than the 2 commercial recordings, where he is sometimes impatient, sometimes erratic, and fails to deliver the coda as the apotheosis it should be. The first movement and esp. the scherzo are very dramatic, with heavy accenting of the downbeats. Timings are slower than DG or EMI by 2 and 1 minute respectively. This Adagio is 2 minutes slower than any other Jochum (they are all in the 27 minutes range). It is seraphically beautiful, very moving, and there is no gratuitous acccelerando to the huge climax (IMO it disfigures his 2 commercial readings). He cleverly saves maximum dynamic range for the second portion of the climax, like two big waves, the second more powerful than the first. Great string and brass playing in IV. As mentioned before, the timpani don't swamp the orchestra in the couple of outbursts midway in, but they attack savagely in the last one just before the coda. Hearing the 09.1982 coda is the main reason I'll put it back tonight, because if I'm not mistaken, this St-Florian is the most glorious I'ver ever heard. Böhm in Zürich, Cologne and esp. Vienna offer a hugely dramatic, overwhelmingly powerful experience, but he makes the music sound deeply grim and tragic. Here, Jochum lets it build and open up in an exultant expression of unmitigated triumph. It has a surge, a lift that pinned me to my seat ( I know, it's an oxymoron  ). Fantastic voicing of the last three chords, complete with a huge ritard.

There's a later Jochum 8th (1984, 79 minutes, on Tahra). It hails from Amsterdam, and although it's beautiful and very, very fine, I think it yields in power to these two Bamberg versions. So, be warned about strange balances and the occasional trumpet crack, but do hear it yourself with this free download !

[mahler10th]

I am in a quandry.
Which if the two sets would you pick up first - the Chailly or the Barenboim?
Please advise.  I am thinking the Chailly, but Barenboim has GOT to be good...

[jlaurson]

I am in a quandry.
Which if the two sets would you pick up first - the Chailly or the Barenboim?
Please advise.  I am thinking the Chailly, but Barenboim has GOT to be good...

I'm not the biggest fan of either, to be honest, but between the two I clearly favor Chailly.
I should point out that Sergeant disagrees with my Barenboim-Bruckner assessment, but of his Berlin
cycle, I consider No.5 a questionably engineered mess* and much of the rest not much above average. The
9th is brilliant, admittedly, and the 1st (+ Helgoland) very good. But both can be gotten individually
with ease and for little money.

[* With potential on great speakers, but even then not a favorite interpretation of mine]

[mahler10th]

Thank you J.

[Sergeant Rock]

I'm not the biggest fan of either, to be honest, but between the two I clearly favor Chailly.
I should point out that Sergeant disagrees with my Barenboim-Bruckner assessment, but of his Berlin
cycle, I consider No.5 a questionably engineered mess*
[/size]

Yes, I prefer Barenboim...mainly because his interpretations are quite individual. You won't hear anything like his Second and Fifth from anyone else. Chailly has the better sound but I find his Bruckner (save his glorious Seventh) rather pedestrian. But really, Jens is not wrong. It's a matter of taste here and I would not be disappointed if you chose Chailly.

Sarge

[MishaK]

I will disagree with J and agree with Sarge. The Barenboim/BPO set is musically possibly the most consistent Bruckner set out there. The performances of Nos.1, 2, 6, 5 and 9 are among my top choices for those symphonies and none of the rest are weak. The sound is admittedly slightly odd in some of the recordings. These were all live performances at the Philharmonie in Berlin and while that is a wonderful acoustic space to listen to a performance as an audience member, it seems to be treacherous for recordings. I have yet to hear a recording that adequately represents the space. That being said, none of it is a 'mess' in any sense and on some of them , e.g. No.2, the sound is very good.

The Chailly set lacks consistency. There are some truly outstanding performances, e.g. 6 & 7, but also some completely forgettable ones, of which No.9 is probably the worst - a completely pale, lifeless thing that just sort of goes by. A real downer, given that in many ways those three surviving movements are Bruckner's crowning achievement. The sound on the Chailly is superb, though!