Author Topic: Bruckner's Abbey  (Read 493810 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Daverz

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 6000
  • You can't fool me, it's turtles all the way down!
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #60 on: June 10, 2007, 10:07:33 AM »
This set contains all of the symphonies except Nos. 0 and 00, which I'll have to find somewhere else (possibly in another set).

They are in the Skrowaczewski set, and you can get them (Symphony in F and Symphony No. 0) separately as well.

Quote
Yesterday, I listened to Symphony No. 1 [...] What I found was a stormy work with great power and energy, punctuated by a nice interlude in the form of a lovely slow movement.  I was especially amazed at the scherzo; seldom have I heard one with such power.

Spot on, it's a great work, but for a power scherzo, wait until you get to No. 8.  For the masses, there's a Jochum set, and Barenboim on EMI has great choral work.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2007, 10:09:41 AM by Daverz »

Bonehelm

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #61 on: June 10, 2007, 10:43:18 AM »
Anyone heard Gunter Wand's 4th with Munich Philharmonic? I have the live recording and it sounds BETTER than most studio recordings. It wasn't until the end where the audience broke out with thunderclap that I realized it was an on-stage performance.

Offline Lethevich

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 9748
  • I spilled my drink!
  • Currently Listening to:
    Rihm, Bialas, Ballif, Schumann, Schubert
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #62 on: June 10, 2007, 10:46:44 AM »
And what happened to poor Nietzsche! Was he condemned for his Wagner diatribes??

His music was too bad :)
Peanut butter, flour and sugar do not make cookies. They make FIRE.

Steve

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #63 on: June 10, 2007, 10:47:46 AM »
Anyone heard Gunter Wand's 4th with Munich Philharmonic? I have the live recording and it sounds BETTER than most studio recordings. It wasn't until the end where the audience broke out with thunderclap that I realized it was an on-stage performance.

I've only heard it twice, but I defintely enjoyed it. For a live recording, the sonics were excellent. Boneheim, what is you studio-reference recording for this piece? I generally prefer Karajan in the 4th.

Bonehelm

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #64 on: June 10, 2007, 11:04:55 AM »
I've only heard it twice, but I defintely enjoyed it. For a live recording, the sonics were excellent. Boneheim, what is you studio-reference recording for this piece? I generally prefer Karajan in the 4th.


I wasn't comparing it to a performance of the 4th in particular, but rather studio recordings as a whole. Don't you think everything sounds so crisp and clear (especially the ending flourishes, BRILLIANT)? Some studio recordings have duller sound and the layers of the sound aren't projected as smoothly.

P.S. Not to be a spelling nazi or anything, but could you please start calling me Bonehelm instead of heim? Thanks a lot  :)

Offline Lethevich

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 9748
  • I spilled my drink!
  • Currently Listening to:
    Rihm, Bialas, Ballif, Schumann, Schubert
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #65 on: June 10, 2007, 11:21:47 AM »
Anyone heard Gunter Wand's 4th with Munich Philharmonic? I have the live recording and it sounds BETTER than most studio recordings. It wasn't until the end where the audience broke out with thunderclap that I realized it was an on-stage performance.

Which one? I assume there are several. Mine on Profil Medien is very nice, but didn't blow me away as much as Jochum (EMI) or Karajan (EMI)'s.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2007, 11:29:02 AM by Lethe »
Peanut butter, flour and sugar do not make cookies. They make FIRE.

Bonehelm

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #66 on: June 10, 2007, 11:39:40 AM »
Which one? I assume there are several. Mine on Profil Medien is very nice, but didn't blow me away as much as Jochum (EMI) or Karajan (EMI)'s.

Robert Haas edition, with Naxos.

Steve

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #67 on: June 10, 2007, 11:44:33 AM »


I wasn't comparing it to a performance of the 4th in particular, but rather studio recordings as a whole. Don't you think everything sounds so crisp and clear (especially the ending flourishes, BRILLIANT)? Some studio recordings have duller sound and the layers of the sound aren't projected as smoothly.

P.S. Not to be a spelling nazi or anything, but could you please start calling me Bonehelm instead of heim? Thanks a lot  :)

Yes, sorry about misspelling your name so often.  ;)

Bonehelm,

Yes, the entire recording was quite vibrant. Have you heard Karajan?

Offline MishaK

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #68 on: June 10, 2007, 11:45:32 AM »
I've only heard it twice, but I defintely enjoyed it. For a live recording, the sonics were excellent. Boneheim, what is you studio-reference recording for this piece? I generally prefer Karajan in the 4th.

If you haven't heard Kubelik (BRSO/Sony) or Böhm (VPO/Decca), you should. Karajan has nowhere near the detail of these two nor the inexorable organic progression.

Steve

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #69 on: June 10, 2007, 11:48:25 AM »
If you haven't heard Kubelik (BRSO/Sony) or Böhm (VPO/Decca), you should. Karajan has nowhere near the detail of these two nor the inexorable organic progression.

Of those two, I've only heard the Bohm, and I don't remember being entirely impressed.

'has nowhere near the detail'

Could you elaborate?

Bonehelm

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #70 on: June 10, 2007, 12:05:13 PM »
Yes, sorry about misspelling your name so often.  ;)

Bonehelm,

Yes, the entire recording was quite vibrant. Have you heard Karajan?

Yes, Steve. I have but I still prefer Wand's. As Mensch had said, I find HvK's interpretations not as crisp, and often rushed...as is the case with his LvB symphonies (except for the 5th's 1st movement, where the momentum and force delivers at a perfect pace - probably my favourite interpretation of that particular movement).

Offline MishaK

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #71 on: June 10, 2007, 12:43:28 PM »
'has nowhere near the detail'

Could you elaborate?

I mean the sectional balances and the phrasing of the secondary parts. Much of that is simply inaudible with Karajan. A lot of the woodwind parts as well as violas and second violins are hard to hear at all with Karajan. There is a lot more texture and polyphony to this stuff than you would glean from hearing just Karajan. Wand (BPO, especially, but NDR as well) is also mandatory listening. I would also get the Celibidache Munich version on EMI, just for the ability to see everything laid out in unsurpassed color in slow motion, not as an interpretive reference. After hearing Celi, when you listen to anyone else, you won't miss anything!

Offline beclemund

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 524
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #72 on: June 10, 2007, 12:48:39 PM »
Yesterday, I listened to Symphony No. 1, and I posted my first impressions in the "Purchases Today" thread.  What I found was a stormy work with great power and energy, punctuated by a nice interlude in the form of a lovely slow movement.  I was especially amazed at the scherzo; seldom have I heard one with such power.  Considering that this is an early work, and not generally considered the best of his output, I will be interested to hear the others.  I am listening to them in order, so I'll be posting something about No. 2 before long.

His first symphony is early in terms of chronology with the other symphonies, but it was completed at the ripe young age of 42. Bruckner was long a student of the form before he was inspired to craft his symphonies. And, as you are aware, the Study Symphony and the Nullte were begun before his first (though the 0 was revised after completion of the 1st). From that view, the first can be considered a mature work. It is certainly an exciting piece especially with Jochum's mercurial tempi. The sound is particularly good in the set you have... it is almost hard to believe the performances are from the 60's (other than the '58 5th which does show its age).

I would be interested to hear the thoughts of others about No. 1, and about the others as I move on to them.  Also, recommendations for a second Bruckner cycle would be useful; these seem like symphonies that I should have more than one performance of.  Also, perhaps when I'm done with these I will move on to some of his other music.  Any thoughts on his masses?

Jochum's DG masses with the same Bavarian group from that DG symphony cycle are also very good. Barenboim's EMI recordings of Bruckner's vocal works are also quite good, and the set includes Bruckner's Te Deum which he considered his finest work. It certainly sounds that on the EMI set.

As far as other cycles go, I think you might be best served with an à la carte selection of your favorite symphonies. Georg Tintner has a great cycle from Naxos that is budget priced. But if I had to do it over again, I probably would have selected only his 3rd and 7th as I don't find I listen to any of the others near as much. Stanislaw Skrowaczewski's Saarbrücken set is another that has received strong positive reviews. His timings seem very similar to Jochum's though, so you may get a general feeling of sameness with that set. Tintner's cycle on the other hand features a broader reading and some interesting versions (non-standard). Both of those sets, however, can be purchased piecemeal so if you wanted to add the 0 and 00 symphonies, you could purchase them separately rather than the whole cycle.

There will be a great variety of suggestions on which composers you should seek to compliment your cycle. Sinopoli's 5th, along with Karajan's EMI 7th and '88 8th, and Giulini's 2nd (and OOP 8th--but available as a CD-R from Arkiv) make for some of the finest recordings of all Bruckner's symphonies. Tennstedt's budget priced 4th and 8th combo is another great choice. Klemperer's 1964 Philharmonia 6th, Wand's late 6th with the BPO and Böhm's 4th (along with Karajan's 4th--the EMI release is lower priced and just as fine as the later DG release) are all among those that I would not want to be without. If money is not an object, Barenboim's Chicago 1st coupled with Te Deum is another fine recording; it is OOP though, so you would have to seek it out on the secondary market.

I just ordered the Celibidache box from EMI and I am looking forward to his controversial interpretations. And Inbal's 4th (original version) is next on my list as the Scherzo is completely different from the later "hunting horn" scherzo in the Haas edition.
"A guilty conscience needs to confess. A work of art is a confession." -- Albert Camus

Offline beclemund

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 524
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #73 on: June 10, 2007, 12:55:26 PM »
I wasn't comparing it to a performance of the 4th in particular, but rather studio recordings as a whole. Don't you think everything sounds so crisp and clear (especially the ending flourishes, BRILLIANT)? Some studio recordings have duller sound and the layers of the sound aren't projected as smoothly.

That is actually true of Wand's last recordings with the BPO as well--full of exciting, live tension while having clear studio-like sound. I think I may have to add those Munich performances to my list though. ;)
"A guilty conscience needs to confess. A work of art is a confession." -- Albert Camus

Bonehelm

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #74 on: June 10, 2007, 01:13:13 PM »
That is actually true of Wand's last recordings with the BPOas well--full of exciting, live tension while having clear studio-like sound. I think I may have to add those Munich performances to my list though. ;)

 ??? I meant the MPO recording, not Berliner Philharmoniker.

Offline MishaK

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #75 on: June 10, 2007, 01:21:23 PM »
??? I meant the MPO recording, not Berliner Philharmoniker.

I think that's why he said "as well".

Offline Sergeant Rock

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 22465
  • Location: Wine Country Germany
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #76 on: June 10, 2007, 01:29:48 PM »
If you haven't heard Kubelik (BRSO/Sony) or Böhm (VPO/Decca), you should. Karajan has nowhere near the detail of these two nor the inexorable organic progression.

Agree with you, O, about the detail in the Böhm but still I've never liked that recording. It seems souless to me. I get no rush from it. I admire it; can't love it. Karajan (EMI) remains my favorite version despite the lack of clear detail...or maybe because it lacks detail. The recording makes the Berlin Phil sound like a giant organ (especially so on my old Angel LPs) and I think that works very well for Bruckner. Somebody said Karajan rushes. I've never felt that...and I'm the guy who claims you can't play Bruckner too slowly. In other words, I generally prefer my Bruckner slow. No way would Karajan's Fourth be my favorite if he were a speed demon. Listen to the chorale in the climax of the first movement's development. It's like time is standing still. Listen to how rushed Böhm is. No...I definitely prefer Karajan....and Celi.

Sarge
« Last Edit: June 10, 2007, 01:31:19 PM by Sergeant Rock »
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

Bonehelm

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #77 on: June 10, 2007, 01:42:22 PM »
I think that's why he said "as well".

Oh I'm sorry, didn't read the post carefullly.  :)

Heather Harrison

  • Guest
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #78 on: June 10, 2007, 02:03:24 PM »
This thread certainly got going again.

I just listened to the Second; it is an interesting contrast to the First.  It doesn't have the same raw energy; rather, it is more introspective.  I found the finale especially striking in its rapid and frequent changes of mood.  I also love the chorale-like passages in the slow movement.  Like the First, this one was also immediately appealing to me, but additionally I got a sense that there was, perhaps, more going on here; while the First seemed immediately accessible, the Second may need a few more hearings.

So far, I am impressed with the sound quality of this set, especially given its age.  It seems that I made a good choice.

I'll be listening to the Third soon, and I will post my thoughts.

Heather

Offline MishaK

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Bruckner's Abbey
« Reply #79 on: June 10, 2007, 02:20:55 PM »
Agree with you, O, about the detail in the Böhm but still I've never liked that recording. It seems souless to me. I get no rush from it. I admire it; can't love it. Karajan (EMI) remains my favorite version despite the lack of clear detail...or maybe because it lacks detail. The recording makes the Berlin Phil sound like a giant organ (especially so on my old Angel LPs) and I think that works very well for Bruckner. Somebody said Karajan rushes. I've never felt that...and I'm the guy who claims you can't play Bruckner too slowly. In other words, I generally prefer my Bruckner slow. No way would Karajan's Fourth be my favorite if he were a speed demon. Listen to the chorale in the climax of the first movement's development. It's like time is standing still. Listen to how rushed Böhm is. No...I definitely prefer Karajan....and Celi.

I am listening to Wand with the BPO right now. So much more compelling. Throbbing with life and such rich textures. Far better attention to dynamic range, too.