Bruckner's Abbey

[vandermolen]

Do you own HvK's cycle, Jeffrey? If you don't, then don't hesitate! Also, if you don't own it, try and get the older set (the one with the cover I've been posting about on the 'Listening' thread) as it's a deluxe type of packaging with an attractive booklet.

Just the Ninth Symphony John. I think it's the older version on DGG. I have boxes (not of all the symphonies in some cases) by Knappertsbush, Celibidache and the complete symphs with Jochum on DGG. My favourite No.8 is Horenstein ( I was at the concert as a boy). I think that Wand is perhaps the greatest Bruckner conductor of all. I was at his final concert in London - Bruckner Symphony 9. Best I have heard although I wouldn't be without Furtwangler's doom-laden 1944 recording from a bombed out Berlin.

[Jo498]

Here's a question for everyone: what do you think Bruckner's intent was in his music? You could definitely call this music absolute music in the sense that there's no kind of program with any of the works with only the subtitle of Romantic given to Symphony No. 4 and that subtitle alone hardly tells us anything. What do you guys think the music is expressing?

Interestingly, there are some programmatic titles or short remarks for the 4th symphony. The older scherzo is for some reason known as "Volksfest" (popular festival), the later one as Jagd/hunt. A subsidiary theme in the first movement is associated with a certain bird call.
The 2nd movement of the 7th is obviously funeral music and was later associated with Wagner's death. Bruckner called the end of the first movement of the 8th "Totenuhr" (death clock), the scherzo of that work has been called "der deutsche Michel" (German Mike, this is a 19th cent. national stereotype, like "Tom" for Brits) and parts of the finale are supposed to be inspired by a meeting of the emperors of Germany, Austria and Russia (Dreikaisertreffen). All this seems fairly strange, but there are authentic remarks from Bruckner giving these associations (up to Russian Cossacks parading at the beginning of the 8th finale). So at least the 8th seems to have some nationalist undertones.

Of course this is far from a program à la Strauss but it seems to show that some of the symphonies might not be as "absolute" as one would expect. Still, I am not sure what could be gained from such scattered remarks for understanding the music.

[Mirror Image]

Just the Ninth Symphony John. I think it's the older version on DGG. I have boxes (not of all the symphonies in some cases) by Knappertsbush, Celibidache and the complete symphs with Jochum on DGG. My favourite No.8 is Horenstein ( I was at the concert as a boy). I think that Wand is perhaps the greatest Bruckner conductor of all. I was at his final concert in London - Bruckner Symphony 9. Best I have heard although I wouldn't be without Furtwangler's doom-laden 1944 recording from a bombed out Berlin.

That HvK 9th is fantastic. Wand is very good and is similar to HvK in the regards to allowing the music to breathe and keep from stopping and starting. The flow of the musical line in Bruckner is absolutely essential and Wand certainly understands this BUT he's not as dramatic as HvK and the Berliners, for my money, were in the better shape during their cycle with HvK. This is just me being nitpicky, though, but I also admire Giulini, Bohm, Haitink, and Skrowaczewski as well. I can't say I'm fond of Celibidache. I'll have to check out Horenstein's 8th.

Interestingly, there are some programmatic titles or short remarks for the 4th symphony. The older scherzo is for some reason known as "Volksfest" (popular festival), the later one as Jagd/hunt. A subsidiary theme in the first movement is associated with a certain bird call.
The 2nd movement of the 7th is obviously funeral music and was later associated with Wagner's death. Bruckner called the end of the first movement of the 8th "Totenuhr" (death clock), the scherzo of that work has been called "der deutsche Michel" (German Mike, this is a 19th cent. national stereotype, like "Tom" for Brits) and parts of the finale are supposed to be inspired by a meeting of the emperors of Germany, Austria and Russia (Dreikaisertreffen). All this seems fairly strange, but there are authentic remarks from Bruckner giving these associations (up to Russian Cossacks parading at the beginning of the 8th finale). So at least the 8th seems to have some nationalist undertones.

Of course this is far from a program à la Strauss but it seems to show that some of the symphonies might not be as "absolute" as one would expect. Still, I am not sure what could be gained from such scattered remarks for understanding the music.

Absolutely fascinating, Jo498. I didn't know Bruckner's 8th had those kinds of 'programs' within it. I need to research that symphony a bit more. Perhaps you could tell me what you hear in his music and what you feel the music expresses to you?

[vandermolen]

That HvK 9th is fantastic. Wand is very good and is similar to HvK in the regards to allowing the music to breathe and keep from stopping and starting. The flow of the musical line in Bruckner is absolutely essential and Wand certainly understands this BUT he's not as dramatic as HvK and the Berliners, for my money, were in the better shape during their cycle with HvK. This is just me being nitpicky, though, but I also admire Giulini, Bohm, Haitink, and Skrowaczewski as well. I can't say I'm fond of Celibidache. I'll have to check out Horenstein's 8th.

Absolutely fascinating, Jo498. I didn't know Bruckner's 8th had those kinds of 'programs' within it. I need to research that symphony a bit more. Perhaps you could tell me what you hear in his music and what you feel the music expresses to you?

Yes, the Giulini No.9 on DGG is special.

[Mirror Image]

Yes, the Giulini No.9 on DGG is special.

It certainly is in a class of its' own. There's no denying that. Perhaps the best 9th I've ever heard.

[ritter]

I can't say I'm fond of Celibidache.

I bit of a digression on my side, but I was listening to Celibidache conducting Wagner's Siegfried-Idyll this morning (as reported in the WAYLTN thread) and was downright horrified  ! And what I've heard of his Bruckner (including a documentary where he is at St. Florian) was not to my liking either. He's the polar opposite of the type of music-making I enjoy and admire.

As for Böhm, I think his DG Eighth is very accomplished; the one with the BRSO on Audite significanly less so (I notice some ensemble problems in the scherzo--surprising, given the high quality of that ensemble  ).

And yes, the Giulini Ninth is a very special recording!

Cheers,

[Mirror Image]

I bit of a digression on my side, but I was listening to Celibidache conducting Wagner's Siegfried-Idyll this morning (as reported in the WAYLTN thread) and was downright horrified  ! And what I've heard of his Bruckner (including a documentary where he is at St. Florian) was not to my liking either. He's the polar opposite of the type of music-making I enjoy and admire.

As for Böhm, I think his DG Eighth is very accomplished; the one with the BRSO significanly on Audite less so (I notice some ensemble problems in the scherzo--surprising, given the high quality of that ensemble  ).

And yes, the Giulini Ninth is a very special recording!

Cheers,

Yeah, Celibidache seems to be admired by many listeners, but, like you said, it's music-making that I'm not interested in. Bruckner's music is already purposely laid out that it's going to be a long and slow-burn, but I certainly don't want to hear a conductor who slows it down even more unless it's what HvK did with the Adagio in the 5th. This I will allow as HvK doesn't really do this kind of thing very often in Bruckner, he must have wanted us to hear how this particular movement unfolded. Anyway, yes, Bohm's 8th is excellent as is his 4th on that Decca Legends series. Giulini also conducts a great 8th (also on DG).

[Mirror Image]

Cross-posted from the 'New Releases' thread -

Coming in July:

[asin]B01FR2N5TI[/asin]

Can't say I know this cycle at all. I barely know Simone Young's Hamburg cycle (surprised this hasn't been boxed up). Any comments on Venzago's Bruckner? I remember reading that Hurwitz didn't think much of it.

[Mirror Image]

Well, taking Brian's post in the 'New Releases' thread into consideration, I think I'll stay clear of Venzago's Bruckner. Sounds unappealing. I don't like the idea of a small-ish orchestra performing Bruckner. I like my Bruckner resplendent, brassy, apocalyptic, disturbing, and painted with massive brushstrokes.

[Jo498]

Absolutely fascinating, Jo498. I didn't know Bruckner's 8th had those kinds of 'programs' within it. I need to research that symphony a bit more. Perhaps you could tell me what you hear in his music and what you feel the music expresses to you?

As I am unusually wary of program music I don't really know myself how to understand/interpret such remarks. I do not think it is a fully-fledged program but it also seems less "absolute" than I thought. And I mainly have the info from one book although this seems reliable and was written by a non-partisan music professor. But unless you read German I cannot point you to another source. I was fairly surprised myself when I read this book a few years ago.

But I have come to the conclusion that the "absolute" vs. "program" music was and is often presented in a skewed fashion that does not really reflect what most composers between Beethoven and Mahler when those issues were relevant thought. We see this in pieces like Mendelssohn's "Hebrides" or Scottish symphony that are not really program music but not completely "abstract" either because they obviously want to evoke certain moods, landscapes etc.

I am not sure. But I have the suspicion that Bruckner felt that his way of musical thinking was so different from both the Liszt/Wagner ("program") faction and the Hanslick/Brahms absolute faction that he was led to such remarks because the former faction supported him. There are some elements that might be fairly uncontroversial: there is obviously music evoking nature, like the "bird calls", the horn signals etc. There are chorales and other elements close to church music (sometimes brief quotations from Bruckner's own church music). There are some Wagnerian gestures. There is some Austrian dance music (often underplayed, it's not only there in the scherzo movements but also in some subsidiary themes elsewhere)

[asin]349960891X[/asin]

[PerfectWagnerite]

Just the Ninth Symphony John. I think it's the older version on DGG. I have boxes (not of all the symphonies in some cases) by Knappertsbush, Celibidache and the complete symphs with Jochum on DGG. My favourite No.8 is Horenstein ( I was at the concert as a boy). I think that Wand is perhaps the greatest Bruckner conductor of all. I was at his final concert in London - Bruckner Symphony 9. Best I have heard although I wouldn't be without Furtwangler's doom-laden 1944 recording from a bombed out Berlin.

As some have mentioned previously regardless of how many 9ths you have the one you must hear is the 1988 Luebeck 9th with Wand's very own NDR group. Just one of those rare occasions where everything sort of just exists on another plane that is hard to describe. There is a stillness and luminescence in the reading where the silence between notes mean as much as the actual notes themselves. The audience is mouse quiet, perhaps awed into reticence by Wand's concentration. Just a surreal performance. It is available at a very reasonable price.

Haven't heard the Furtwangler recording as most of the time extra musical "juice" is a lot of hot air (and I am NOT saying this one is). Like the so-called "Nazi" Beethoven 9th where Hitler and his henchmen might or might not have been in the audience. Or Bruno Walter's 1938 Mahler 9th where the only added musical tension is the feeling that conductor and orchestra couldn't wait to get the heck out of there.

Interestingly, there are some programmatic titles or short remarks for the 4th symphony. The older scherzo is for some reason known as "Volksfest" (popular festival), the later one as Jagd/hunt. A subsidiary theme in the first movement is associated with a certain bird call.
The 2nd movement of the 7th is obviously funeral music and was later associated with Wagner's death. Bruckner called the end of the first movement of the 8th "Totenuhr" (death clock), the scherzo of that work has been called "der deutsche Michel" (German Mike, this is a 19th cent. national stereotype, like "Tom" for Brits) and parts of the finale are supposed to be inspired by a meeting of the emperors of Germany, Austria and Russia (Dreikaisertreffen). All this seems fairly strange, but there are authentic remarks from Bruckner giving these associations (up to Russian Cossacks parading at the beginning of the 8th finale). So at least the 8th seems to have some nationalist undertones.

Of course this is far from a program à la Strauss but it seems to show that some of the symphonies might not be as "absolute" as one would expect. Still, I am not sure what could be gained from such scattered remarks for understanding the music.

Interestingly these are the nicknames of the Bruckner symphonies given in both the Skrowazewski and Barenboim sets. I am not sure how many of them actually stuck.

Symphony No. 1 in C minor ("The Saucy Maid"), WAB 101 (various versions)

Symphony No. 2 in C minor ("Symphony of Pauses"), WAB 102

Symphony No. 3 in D minor ("Wagner"), WAB 103

Symphony No. 4 in E flat ("Romantic"), WAB 104

Symphony No. 5 in B flat ("Tragic"; "Church of Faith"; "Pizzicato"), WAB 105

Symphony No. 6 in A major ("Philosophic"), WAB 106


Symphony No. 7 in E major ("Lyric"), WAB 107

Symphony No. 8 in C minor ("Apocalyptic"; "The German Michel"), WAB 108


Symphony No. 9 in D minor ("Unfinished"), WAB 109

[Mirror Image]

As I am unusually wary of program music I don't really know myself how to understand/interpret such remarks. I do not think it is a fully-fledged program but it also seems less "absolute" than I thought. And I mainly have the info from one book although this seems reliable and was written by a non-partisan music professor. But unless you read German I cannot point you to another source. I was fairly surprised myself when I read this book a few years ago.

But I have come to the conclusion that the "absolute" vs. "program" music was and is often presented in a skewed fashion that does not really reflect what most composers between Beethoven and Mahler when those issues were relevant thought. We see this in pieces like Mendelssohn's "Hebrides" or Scottish symphony that are not really program music but not completely "abstract" either because they obviously want to evoke certain moods, landscapes etc.

I am not sure. But I have the suspicion that Bruckner felt that his way of musical thinking was so different from both the Liszt/Wagner ("program") faction and the Hanslick/Brahms absolute faction that he was led to such remarks because the former faction supported him. There are some elements that might be fairly uncontroversial: there is obviously music evoking nature, like the "bird calls", the horn signals etc. There are chorales and other elements close to church music (sometimes brief quotations from Bruckner's own church music). There are some Wagnerian gestures. There is some Austrian dance music (often underplayed, it's not only there in the scherzo movements but also in some subsidiary themes elsewhere)

[asin]349960891X[/asin]

Thanks for your feedback, Wagnerite. I certainly understand what you're saying, but I think, as so often with music, that the music means something different to all of us. Allow a simpleton like me to explain what I hear (in rather condensed form): I hear a man that is on a spiritual journey. Each symphony brings him closer and closer to reaching the end, but even this end remained unresolved. The questions that jump out to me are: what does it all mean? What's the point of arrival when the destination is so far away? I also hear a man that is deeply in fear of what the future holds not only for himself, but for civilization as an entirety. Maybe I need to get out more? Maybe I'm completely bonkers? I wager all of the above.

[Turner]

Concerning Bruckner and programme content, his own remarks for the early versions of the 4th Symphony should of course be mentioned (they can be seen in the Wikipedia article on the symphony, for example). But they seem quite naive compared to today´s understanding of and mythology about the music´s sublime traits. They also suggest a livelier, more episodic and descriptive way of playing Bruckner than it is fund in some conductors: rather Abendroth´s than Karajan´s or the later Celibidache, for instance. I wouldn´t like to be without both ways of the interpretation, though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._4_(Bruckner):
"In the first movement after a full night's sleep the day is announced by the horn, 2nd movement song, 3rd movement hunting trio, musical entertainment of the hunters in the wood.[2] There is a similar passage in a letter from the composer to Paul Heyse of 22 December 1890: "In the first movement of the "Romantic" Fourth Symphony the intention is to depict the horn that proclaims the day from the town hall! Then life goes on; in the Gesangsperiode [the second subject] the theme is the song of the great tit [a bird] Zizipe. 2nd movement: song, prayer, serenade. 3rd: hunt and in the Trio how a barrel-organ plays during the midday meal in the forest.[2]

The autograph of the Scherzo and Finale of the 1878 version of the symphony contains markings such as Jagdthema (hunting theme), Tanzweise während der Mahlzeit auf der Jagd (dance tune during the lunch break while hunting) and Volksfest (people's festival).[2] In addition to these clues that come directly from Bruckner, the musicologist Theodor Helm communicated a more detailed account reported via the composer's associate Bernhard Deubler: "Mediaeval city -- Daybreak -- Morning calls sound from the city towers -- the gates open -- On proud horses the knights burst out into the open, the magic of nature envelops them -- forest murmurs -- bird song -- and so the Romantic picture develops further...[2]

There does not seem to be any clear hint of a program for the third version (1880) of the symphony's finale.[2]

[André]

Bruckner tried mightily and to little avail to be recognized as a serious composer. From the beginning his music was  considered weird and unpractical, then met with openly derisive skepticism. His attempts at 'fitting in the crowd' consisted of blatant flattery vis-à-vis the musical establishment and not very convincing attempts to tailor a niebelungish program to his fourth symphony, the first to make something like a breakthrough in the musical public.

Throughout all this, he remained true to his musical self: he knew but one way to make music, and stuck with it regardless of the criticism, cynicism and ridicule it was met with. His innate lack of confidence led him to revisit, revise and alter his scores, mostly to the good. Some music lovers prefer his first thoughts (symphonies 2, 3, 4 and 8 ), but most concede that he 'mainstreamed' his music to great effect.

Regarding his composing style, it is now acknowledged that he was one of the few originals AND true geniuses in music. In that respect, one must take into consideration the fact that classical music did not evolve according to a straight line of originals and geniuses. On the contrary, the latter categories appear more as a kind of sore thumb when set against the likes of Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms and, yes, Wagner and Debussy.

Bruckner, like C.P.E. Bach, Nielsen and Ives is one of those originals and geniuses that owe little (very early in their career) to mainstream composers. Their musical worlds are balls, squares and triangles that (sometimes uncomfortably) inhabit a giant bubble, with the argument tossed to and fro with seeming incoherence. Phrases can be curt and quirky, or unendingly beatific.  It takes great openness of mind or an inborn innocence to 'fall' for Bruckner, head first. Most come to terms with his music through prolonged and intermittent exposure.

When it comes to interpretation, Bruckner can be sampled in many, many ways. Both the forceful, propulsive yet lyrical interpretations of Abendroth, Andreae, Böhm, Kubelik, Schuricht or the cosmically expansive vistas laid out in the late recordings of Celibidache, Asahina, Karajan can unravel his music in true, authentic interpretations. There are those conductors who have revisited the composer's world over many decades, finding new ways to resolve an impossible conundrum, starting fast, ending slow, or vice-versa: Jochum, Klemperer, Maazel, Haitink, Knappertsbusch, Wand. Some others have taken late to Bruckner but have made their mark in interpretations of rare import and coherence: Prêtre, Szell for example.

[Jo498]

While I don't doubt his originality, Bruckner owes a LOT to Beethoven and Schubert. His symphonic style is basically a fusion of elements from Beethoven's and Schubert's 9th (C major). Plus some Wagner and Catholic church music. In many ways Bruckner is as firmly rooted in tradition as Brahms.

[André]

Certainly. The structures are inherited from Beethoven, the type of musical phrases from Schubert. It's the cells within the bones and muscles that are totally original. Had Beethoven or Schubert lived to 100, they would never have evolved in the direction of Bruckner.

[Mirror Image]

Bruckner tried mightily and to little avail to be recognized as a serious composer. From the beginning his music was  considered weird and unpractical, then met with openly derisive skepticism. His attempts at 'fitting in the crowd' consisted of blatant flattery vis-à-vis the musical establishment and not very convincing attempts to tailor a niebelungish program to his fourth symphony, the first to make something like a breakthrough in the musical public.

Throughout all this, he remained true to his musical self: he knew but one way to make music, and stuck with it regardless of the criticism, cynicism and ridicule it was met with. His innate lack of confidence led him to revisit, revise and alter his scores, mostly to the good. Some music lovers prefer his first thoughts (symphonies 2, 3, 4 and 8 ), but most concede that he 'mainstreamed' his music to great effect.

Regarding his composing style, it is now acknowledged that he was one of the few originals AND true geniuses in music. In that respect, one must take into consideration the fact that classical music did not evolve according to a straight line of originals and geniuses. On the contrary, the latter categories appear more as a kind of sore thumb when set against the likes of Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms and, yes, Wagner and Debussy.

Bruckner, like C.P.E. Bach, Nielsen and Ives is one of those originals and geniuses that owe little (very early in their career) to mainstream composers. Their musical worlds are balls, squares and triangles that (sometimes uncomfortably) inhabit a giant bubble, with the argument tossed to and fro with seeming incoherence. Phrases can be curt and quirky, or unendingly beatific.  It takes great openness of mind or an inborn innocence to 'fall' for Bruckner, head first. Most come to terms with his music through prolonged and intermittent exposure.

When it comes to interpretation, Bruckner can be sampled in many, many ways. Both the forceful, propulsive yet lyrical interpretations of Abendroth, Andreae, Böhm, Kubelik, Schuricht or the cosmically expansive vistas laid out in the late recordings of Celibidache, Asahina, Karajan can unravel his music in true, authentic interpretations. There are those conductors who have revisited the composer's world over many decades, finding new ways to resolve an impossible conundrum, starting fast, ending slow, or vice-versa: Jochum, Klemperer, Maazel, Haitink, Knappertsbusch, Wand. Some others have taken late to Bruckner but have made their mark in interpretations of rare import and coherence: Prêtre, Szell for example.

This post deserves a round of...

[calyptorhynchus]

"Here's a question for everyone: what do you think Bruckner's intent was in his music? You could definitely call this music absolute music in the sense that there's no kind of program with any of the works with only the subtitle of Romantic given to Symphony No. 4 and that subtitle alone hardly tells us anything. What do you guys think the music is expressing?"

I think that Bruckner was a mystic, attuned to the energy of the universe (which he would have called "God"). This is why most of his symphonies begin with the famous string vibrato, which is an expression of the buzzing potential energy of the universe. His symphonies then explore the different expressions of this energy, the different tempi, ranging from energetic scherzi to slow movements that are very slow. But whatever the tempi he explores, they are counterpointed to the timeless tempo implied by the opening vibration. Bruckner when working on his symphonies may have had in mind certain programmes (as in the 4th) or certain programmes for parts of symphonies (as in the 8th) and he certainly referred to objective sounds like one of the calls of the Great Tit in the first movement of the 4th. And I think you can also say that different parts of his symphonies have different moods: calm and contented, mysterious, elated, even panic-stricken (parts of the Ninth). However, these are foreground to the cosmic background as it were.

[Mirror Image]

"Here's a question for everyone: what do you think Bruckner's intent was in his music? You could definitely call this music absolute music in the sense that there's no kind of program with any of the works with only the subtitle of Romantic given to Symphony No. 4 and that subtitle alone hardly tells us anything. What do you guys think the music is expressing?"

I think that Bruckner was a mystic, attuned to the energy of the universe (which he would have called "God"). This is why most of his symphonies begin with the famous string vibrato, which is an expression of the buzzing potential energy of the universe. His symphonies then explore the different expressions of this energy, the different tempi, ranging from energetic scherzi to slow movements that are very slow. But whatever the tempi he explores, they are counterpointed to the timeless tempo implied by the opening vibration. Bruckner when working on his symphonies may have had in mind certain programmes (as in the 4th) or certain programmes for parts of symphonies (as in the 8th) and he certainly referred to objective sounds like one of the calls of the Great Tit in the first movement of the 4th. And I think you can also say that different parts of his symphonies have different moods: calm and contented, mysterious, elated, even panic-stricken (parts of the Ninth). However, these are foreground to the cosmic background as it were.

Very interesting take on Bruckner's music. I agree that there's certainly an aim at expressing music that goes beyond our meager existence.

[PerfectWagnerite]

"Here's a question for everyone: what do you think Bruckner's intent was in his music?

What was his intent? How about getting just getting performed and maybe just make a few $$$?