Bruckner good, Mahler boring?

[12tone.]

Hey again,

So It's been awhile with me checking out all the Bruckner symphonies on Chailly's box set:



I'm really enjoying them a lot and find them deeply moving.  But now, having been a Mahler fan before, going back to Mahler, I'm finding his music disturbingly violent and not as nice as I used to think it as. 

I know I enjoyed his 1rst and 5th symphonies especially and going back to them, especially with the 5th, very violent and gritty. 

Anyone else feel this way?  I know I can't listen to Mahler much anymore...

[EmpNapoleon]

I know what you mean.  I don't think Bruckner has the childish frivolity of Mahler, that makes me happy sometimes.  There are obviously many other differences between the two.  If you don't like Mahler anymore, don't listen to him.

[mahlertitan]

I seldom listen to Mahler nowadays, not because I don't like his music, or his "Childish frivolity". I feel that once you have listened to Bruckner, it's hard to go back and listen anyone else, he moves you in ways no other composers do.

[Daverz]

Some conductors can overdo the Vehemenz in Mahler, at least so you might not want to listen to them every day.  You might try a gentler Mahler conductor like Walter, or a more "objective" interpreter like Bertini.  I do listen to a lot more Bruckner than Mahler.   Often I'll hear the start of a Bruckner symphony, and I'll have to stay for the whole ride.  Listening to Mahler doesn't bore me, but it can tire me. 

[12tone.]

I forgot to say that the Mahler box I have is the Chailly one as well, except that it's the cheaper reissue.  So it's this box but packaged at, what was it... $40 or something, instead of the $110?



It's from the same company that put out the cheaper box of Levine's Ring cycle, and Ashy's Mozart PC cycle.  Those black and white boxes, except this Chailly box is in color.

I find Chailly's Bruckner good, but his Mahler certainly doesn't stand up against Abbado...at least for me.  I might try Abbado again...

[Bonehelm]

I forgot to say that the Mahler box I have is the Chailly one as well, except that it's the cheaper reissue.  So it's this box but packaged at, what was it... $40 or something, instead of the $110?



It's from the same company that put out the cheaper box of Levine's Ring cycle, and Ashy's Mozart PC cycle.  Those black and white boxes, except this Chailly box is in color.

I find Chailly's Bruckner good, but his Mahler certainly doesn't stand up against Abbado...at least for me.  I might try Abbado again...

If you want dramatic/heavy-handed Mahler, you can't go wrong with the late Bernstein DG set. It's never boring.

[12tone.]

Maybe 'boring' was the wrong word.  I mean I didn't like the music much at all.  I find Mahler too violent and gritty...

I like the calmness of Bruckner now. 

[mahlertitan]

I forgot to say that the Mahler box I have is the Chailly one as well, except that it's the cheaper reissue.  So it's this box but packaged at, what was it... $40 or something, instead of the $110?



It's from the same company that put out the cheaper box of Levine's Ring cycle, and Ashy's Mozart PC cycle.  Those black and white boxes, except this Chailly box is in color.

I find Chailly's Bruckner good, but his Mahler certainly doesn't stand up against Abbado...at least for me.  I might try Abbado again...

I have no quarrels with Chailly's Bruckner, they are excellent. But, you need to get yourself a copy of 1873 version of Bruckner's 3rd.

[Symphonien]

Bruckner good, Mahler boring?

Other way around.

[mahlertitan]

Other way around.

that what i used to think...

[max]

For me there isn't a single symphony - not by Beethoven, Mahler or Brahms - that's equal to a late Bruckner work!

[Que]

Maybe 'boring' was the wrong word.  I mean I didn't like the music much at all.  I find Mahler too violent and gritty...

I strongly agree with Daverz here.
You just discovered that most conductors overegg the pudding in Mahler.
Mahler does not need 20th century hysteria projected upon his music. He was a late Romantic Viennese composer with Bohemian roots - it seems very hard for modern conductors the conceptualise his music accordingly.
Go for Bruno Walter, or Kubelik, or the more "objective" Haitink.

Q

[Grazioso]

The problem is that people always talk about the two composers in the same sentence, as if they were somehow related and one has to choose between them. The men and their works bear little in common. Heck, why not talk about Hans Rott?

That said, I no longer enjoy Mahler as much (though I appreciate and admire his work even more), while I do enjoy Bruckner about as much as ever. But having "been there, done that", I'm generally more interested in exploring other (quasi)Romantic symphonists these days.

[johnQpublic]

going back to Mahler, I'm finding his music disturbingly violent and not as nice as I used to think it as. 

NICE??? NICE??

I'm pretty sure Mahler did not intend on his expression to be merely nice.

[longears]

Bruckner good, Mahler good.  Both long-winded enough to severely challenge the sleep-deprived.

[71 dB]

Mahler good
Bruckner better
Elgar best 

[locrian]

Meh.

[Cato]

Report Card

Bruckner: Good
Mahler: Good
Elgar: Below Average - needed a good case of Mountain Dew next to his desk before starting assignments.

[Renfield]

Well, to answer Grazioso's post, Bruckner had been Mahler's teacher for a time, and the influences of the former in the latter's music are, at least to my ears, very much present. Not as present as Wagner is in Bruckner, but then again almost everyone is present in Mahler, anyway!

More seriously, I consider Bruckner like the philosopher Edmund Husserl: he was in his own world, focused in his art (or craft, if you will, for he did craft his symphonies most meticulously) and seeking to perfect a form under his own standards. His music is "ideal".

Mahler's music, on the other hand, is a direct product of his expectations and worries, not necessarily his ideals alone (semantically, and as I see it). In a very existentialist mentality, he meant to be disturbing, and he meant to appear "crass". His music "had a point."


In other words, two completely different aims, from two rather different composers. And frankly, having listened to a lot of Mahler, and then going through Bruckner (and listening a lot of his work too), I still listen to Mahler with the greatest pleasure, whether conducted emotionally, dispassionately or merely "to the letter". It's always Mahler.

[mahlertitan]

Well, to answer Grazioso's post, Bruckner had been Mahler's teacher for a time, and the influences of the former in the latter's music are, at least to my ears, very much present. Not as present as Wagner is in Bruckner, but then again almost everyone is present in Mahler, anyway! ;

interesting claim....