Bruckner's Abbey

Started by Lilas Pastia, April 06, 2007, 07:15:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 35 Guests are viewing this topic.

mahlertitan

having heard both the music of Mahler and Bruckner, i must say that despite both masters shared a close personal relationship, there is little similarity in their music. If there is any (which i doubt) was definitely unconscious on Mahler's part. i remember that Bruno Walter gave an interview once, where he said that he has never heard a single note of Bruckner in Mahler, (excerpt in the 2nd, interestingly). To which I also agree, you can try to make things up and make fancy connections here and there, but the connections are nothing more than "notes" juggling.

Lilas Pastia

#361
I see... ::)

No music or work of art exists in a vacuum. I don't think there's any problem in finding or acknowledging influences here and there (didn't Bruckner quote liberally from Wagner's works?).

But I guess if Walter's ghost has been summoned from Hades to help your argument, there's nothing else to add. Too bad, it could have been an interesting discussion.

mahlertitan

Quote from: Lilas Pastia on August 06, 2007, 02:52:06 PM

But I guess if Walter's ghost has been summoned from Hades to help your argument, there's nothing else to add. Too bad, it could have been an interesting discussion.

gee, i didn't realize... sorry about that

M forever

#363
All this music did indeed not come out of a vacuum, and none of these composers actually completely "made up" their music. They filtered and concentrated it from what was around them. So it is very hard to say which common elements were "quoted" from each other, or which were "in the air", or which were just part of basic musical vocabulary, unless it is a direct quote where the nature of the quote and the context make it obvious and a reference is intended. Just like authors quote from and elaborate on each others' ideas using all the same basic material of language. In your first example, Bruckner described the music as a nightly procession of knights or monks something like that (or maybe something completely different, I don't remember since it never interested me much what he said about that, it is obvious that he just made that up to satisfy the contemporaries' hunger for programme notes). In Mahler's 1st, we have a (nightly?) funeral procession, so there are definitely some athmospheric parallels. In how far Mahler thought of Bruckner 4 when he came up with that, we don't know. The parallel is just too thin to assume he must have. It is just a very basic piece of musical vocabulary. As far as the opening of the 4th movement and the beginning of Mahler's 6th are concerned, I personally would say they have next to nothing to do with each other. In both cases, it is just a repetition of notes as a framework on which the music is build. But the athmospheric situations appear to me to be almost exactly opposite. In Bruckner's 4th, the repeated note form a steady, underlying pulse to a highly charged, but steadily floating musical structure above which motivic elements float in and out of sight, and it is these elements which propel the music forward - the underlying rhythmic structure actually held everything together and back. In Mahler's 6th, it is the exact opposite. It is the driving force of the pulse which relentlessly drives the developent of the music forward.

There are certainly a lot of parallels between Bruckner and Mahler, but these are more athmospheric and general than concrete. There are also a lot of parallels between them in some elemens of their "tone", and not just in the obvious cases, e.g. the use of folkloristic elements. Bruckner's influence on Mahler can be very clearly felt in things such as the way both use these folkloristic elements and blow them up to demonic, cosmic proportions. Or the overlaying of very opposite musical structures such as folk music themes and religious chorales (e.g. in the finale of Bruckner 3).

It is pretty obvious that there is a lot of the musical tradition which preceded him, all of it, not just Bruckner, in Mahler's music, and this is a very interesting and complex subject. Constantin Floros' book "Mahler und die Symphonik des 19. Jahrhunderts in neuer Deutung" explores this subject in depth with many musical examples, highly recommended reading just like the two accompanying volumes "Die geistige Welt Gustav Mahlers in systematischer Darstellung" and "Die Symphonien".

Choo Choo

Quote from: M forever on August 06, 2007, 11:55:49 AM
My only reservation would be if Berlin Classics once again used the damn Sonic Solutions NoNoise signal processing on these recordings, as they did on many of their releases.

Alas they have done precisely that on their recent reissue of Rögner's recording of #9 - and it's like listening with both ears full of mud - which is a great shame because even so, you can tell that underneath all that mush and clatter there must have been a fine performance.

Lilas Pastia

Thanks, M forever, for this most interesting development of this idea :D. I feel it's just what my unerudite and untrained mind is picking up (but without the ability to understand and phrase it properly).  :P

Of course it's easy to play the tune detective and come up with the kind of examples I gave, but it's something different to explain the context in which such similarities are perceived. In this view, I won't call them 'borrowings' from Mahler, although the 1st symphony's slow movement seems more prone to that decription than the other example I gave. The utter disparity of mood and language between 4:IV and 6:I is something that makes this quasi-common starting point all the more startling.

Mahler himself was prone to self-quoting, so I don't think it's farfectched to detect influences in his music, esp. his earlier works (as is obviously the case with the Rott symphony - if that's not a blatant case of borrowing friom Mahler, I don't know what is).


mahlertitan

#366
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on August 06, 2007, 05:10:55 PM
Mahler himself was prone to self-quoting, so I don't think it's farfectched to detect influences in his music, esp. his earlier works (as is obviously the case with the Rott symphony - if that's not a blatant case of borrowing friom Mahler, I don't know what is).


there is a big difference between "self-quoting" and "others-quoting"

see, although Hans Rott's scherzo "sounds like" Mahler, his development section of the Scherzo is highly unmahlerian. (and the excessive use of triangle too). To me, this might've been a huge coincidence, that Hans Rott's scherzo sounded so much like Mahler's 1st.

M forever

Quote from: Lilas Pastia on August 06, 2007, 05:10:55 PM
In this view, I won't call them 'borrowings' from Mahler, although the 1st symphony's slow movement seems more prone to that decription than the other example I gave. The utter disparity of mood and language between 4:IV and 6:I is something that makes this quasi-common starting point all the more startling.

Hmm...no, sorry, these two examples are simply too basic to assume more, really. The alternation 1-5-1-5, that's one of the most basic pieces of musical vocabulary, not an idea of Bruckner either, not really a musical idea in general, just a very basic building block, that's been used millions of times, and the same applies to the repeated single note in the other example.

Bonehelm

M, would you do the not-so-well-educated-in-music members like me a favor and sum up the similarities and differences of the two composers, Gustav and Anton? These are what I know now, please correct and add something if you will:


Mahler's music: Self-indulgent, emotional, direct, overwhelming, constantly-changing, complex, progressive, over the top.

Bruckner's music: Subtle, religious, spacious, broad, sacred, warm, lush, metallic (the German brass), impressionist, dissonant.

mahlertitan

Quote from: Bonehelm on August 07, 2007, 06:07:16 AM
M, would you do the not-so-well-educated-in-music members like me a favor and sum up the similarities and differences of the two composers, Gustav and Anton? These are what I know now, please correct and add something if you will:


Mahler's music: Self-indulgent, emotional, direct, overwhelming, constantly-changing, complex, progressive, over the top.

Bruckner's music: Subtle, religious, spacious, broad, sacred, warm, lush, metallic (the German brass), impressionist, dissonant.


where did you hear those? (9th symphony aside of course)

Bonehelm

Quote from: MahlerTitan on August 07, 2007, 06:09:05 AM
where did you hear those? (9th symphony aside of course)

I read those from a review of a recording of that symphony.

mahlertitan

Quote from: Bonehelm on August 07, 2007, 06:53:49 AM
I read those from a review of a recording of that symphony.

good, that's all i need to hear.

Cato

Quote from: Bonehelm on August 07, 2007, 06:07:16 AM
M, would you do the not-so-well-educated-in-music members like me a favor and sum up the similarities and differences of the two composers, Gustav and Anton? These are what I know now, please correct and add something if you will:


Mahler's music: Self-indulgent, emotional, direct, overwhelming, constantly-changing, complex, progressive, over the top.

Bruckner's music: Subtle, religious, spacious, broad, sacred, warm, lush, metallic (the German brass), impressionist, dissonant.


I have mentioned at various times a marvelous analysis by child prodigy/musicologist/composer Dika Newlin, which was published 60 years ago: Bruckner, Mahler, Schoenberg, which is still available. She shows the connections among all 3.

I will suggest that you read that and then rethink your opinion.

Interesting that you do not mention "religion" also in connection to Mahler.  Both he and Schoenberg were drunk with religion!
"Meet Miss Ruth Sherwood, from Columbus, Ohio, the Middle of the Universe!"

- Brian Aherne introducing Rosalind Russell in  My Sister Eileen (1942)

mahlertitan

Quote from: Cato on August 07, 2007, 07:27:11 AM
Interesting that you do not mention "religion" also in connection to Mahler. Both he and Schoenberg were drunk with religion!
AGREED!!! :D if there ever was a man so fascinated with religion, that man is Mahler. let me quote Bruno Walter again" the difference between Mahler and Bruckner is, Bruckner has found God, while Mahler was searching for God throughout his life..".

Sean

M

This was linked on the Classical videos thread, Karajan with the Bruckner 9 scherzo- I remember you saying you hadn't heard him in it for a while: amazing power and excitement from absolute minimum of means; I don't really think this kind of musicianship is matched elsewhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO6HltIxevU

mahlertitan

Quote from: Sean on August 09, 2007, 01:27:35 AM
M

This was linked on the Classical videos thread, Karajan with the Bruckner 9 scherzo- I remember you saying you hadn't heard him in it for a while: amazing power and excitement from absolute minimum of means; I don't really think this kind of musicianship is matched elsewhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO6HltIxevU

i have the bruckner 8th with Karajan conducting Wiener Philharmoniker too

M forever

Quote from: MahlerTitan on August 07, 2007, 07:33:39 AM
AGREED!!! :D if there ever was a man so fascinated with religion, that man is Mahler. let me quote Bruno Walter again" the difference between Mahler and Bruckner is, Bruckner has found God, while Mahler was searching for God throughout his life..".

You have to be careful with Walter and his quotes. He was obviously an important eyewitness, but he also had his own ideas and agendas and saw everything through the prism of his own somewhat convoluted world view. His writings are quite tedious to read and full of pseudo-philosophic musings, so you should take him always as just Walter, not a reliable and "objective" witness.

Quote from: Sean on August 09, 2007, 01:27:35 AM
M

This was linked on the Classical videos thread, Karajan with the Bruckner 9 scherzo- I remember you saying you hadn't heard him in it for a while: amazing power and excitement from absolute minimum of means; I don't really think this kind of musicianship is matched elsewhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO6HltIxevU

It doesn't really matter what you think about musicianship, since you are not a musician yourself, Sean, just lean back and enjoy and don't try to figure out and judge these things. You can't.

But thanks for linking to the clip, that is from the TV recording (it actually has the logo of the 2nd public German TV channel in the corner) of a concert in 1985 that I went to myself. If the camera panned up a little higher, you could actually see me, I sat right above the bass section. That video is available in Japan and I already have it on my wish list. There is also a concert video of the 9th with the WP from the late 70s which I have. Then there is a live video of the 8th with the WP from a concert, again in the 70s in St.Florian. The well known video of the 8th with the WP in the Musikvereinssaal (which is the same performance as the late DG recording of the 8th), BTW, is not a live performance, it is studio, they just filmed it that way to make it look like a concert.

mahlertitan

Quote from: M forever on August 10, 2007, 01:29:45 PM
But thanks for linking to the clip, that is from the TV recording (it actually has the logo of the 2nd public German TV channel in the corner) of a concert in 1985 that I went to myself. If the camera panned up a little higher, you could actually see me, I sat right above the bass section. That video is available in Japan and I already have it on my wish list. There is also a concert video of the 9th with the WP from the late 70s which I have. Then there is a live video of the 8th with the WP from a concert, again in the 70s in St.Florian. The well known video of the 8th with the WP in the Musikvereinssaal (which is the same performance as the late DG recording of the 8th), BTW, is not a live performance, it is studio, they just filmed it that way to make it look like a concert.

i uploaded that too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh2L5V8eWwc

mahlertitan

Quote from: Heather Harrison on July 08, 2007, 04:23:43 PM
Today, I found Harnoncourt's interpretation of Symphony No. 5 in a store, and since I want to compare a few performances of this symphony, I had to buy it.  After I listen to it, I'll post my impressions of it and see how it compares to Jochum's interpretation.

Heather

which one?

Que

I had two blank draws before on Klemperer/Bruckner 4. The GROC/EMI is calcified/"granite" and doesn't rock my boat at all. The '47 RCO (Tahra) has its good moments but is erratic and inconsistent. I'm hoping third time is lucky... :)
Anyone familiar with this recording?



Funkhaus, Saal 1, WDR Cologne, 5 April 1954

Q