Bruckner gets no respect!!!

[mahler10th]

I got Bruckner before I got Mahler.  I got Sibelius before I got Bruckner.  I got Beethoven before I got Sibelius.  I got Tchaikovsky before I got any of them.  Now I've got them all, and a whole lot more besides.  Took a long time for me to get Bruckner because his symphonies are so MASSIVE, at first I couldn't understand them fully...took a lot of listening and piecing together.

Bruckner as a person was fairly diminutive and self-depreciating, was he not?  How he wrote such powerful, moving works I don't know.  He's due all the respect in the World.

[Sergeant Rock]

Bruckner as a person was fairly diminutive...

Only in height, not girth.

Sarge

[ChamberNut]

I think the name of this thread could be renamed to:  "Bruckner - Finally getting the respect he deserves"

[springrite]

Only in height, not girth.

Sarge

Vertically challenged, but horizontally enhanced!

[Haffner]

Why challenge? Your observations pinpoint exactly the difference between Mahler and Bruckner, composers I love in equal measure - Bruckner is a believer, Mahler a sceptic. Harmony for Bruckner is part of the grand scheme of things, whereas for the ever-enquiring Mahler they can be, to quote Joyce, 'portals of discovery'. Bruckner is architecture, Mahler process with no fixed outcome. Both approaches lead to great art. Only taste, temperament, and perhaps age, decide which you favour most. At present I am more a Brucknerian (with no faith).

A really interesting post, J.! I loved the last sentence especially. Very well put.

I discovered Bruckner relatively recently. I'd have to say (after listening to his entire cycle of symphonies several times) that Bruckner seems to have the Wagner-ian monumentality-of-the-intensely-spine-tingling-kind down to a Science. And I guess I'm just a dude that tends to look for and love that kind of thing in music (being a heavy metal dude probably has alot to do with that). The only symphony by Mahler that as a whole completely awes in me in that Heavy Beethoven/Wagner/Bruckner way is his 9th...truly an extraordinary Masterpiece that probably stands up to anything by Bruckner. I'm leaning toward Mahler's 3rd as well...phenomenal.

Oh hell, I'm wasting my time trying to play this game, Mahler never wrote anything approaching a less than brilliant symphony.

Mahler took some dazzling chances tempo and instrumentation-wise...perhaps more than Bruckner overall.

It's weird, I've never completely warmed to Mahler's 2nd, which is one that most posters would pick as their ante against a composer like Bruckner. I even have two of the best (I've heard) recordings of it, the Klemperer and the Boulez. I love the 1st movement, and towards the end, but I don't feel it like, say, the entirety of Bruckner's 8th.

But I'm strange...

[Haffner]

A juggernaut, the irresistable force...

Sarge

The Inexorable

[eyeresist]

I discovered Bruckner relatively recently. I'd have to say (after listening to his entire cycle of symphonies several times) that Bruckner seems to have the Wagner-ian monumentality-of-the-intensely-spine-tingling-kind down to a Science. And I guess I'm just a dude that tends to look for and love that kind of thing in music (being a heavy metal dude probably has alot to do with that). The only symphony by Mahler that as a whole completely awes in me in that Heavy Beethoven/Wagner/Bruckner way is his 9th...truly an extraordinary Masterpiece that probably stands up to anything by Bruckner. I'm leaning toward Mahler's 3rd as well...phenomenal.

...

It's weird, I've never completely warmed to Mahler's 2nd, which is one that most posters would pick as their ante against a composer like Bruckner. I even have two of the best (I've heard) recordings of it, the Klemperer and the Boulez. I love the 1st movement, and towards the end, but I don't feel it like, say, the entirety of Bruckner's 8th.

Interesting. I would have thought Mahler's 1st and 5th the most metal-accessible. For the 2nd, I assume you bought these on recommendation? I found Klemperer too dry, not Romantic enough. Haven't heard Boulez, but imagine he's similar...

[Varg]

It's weird, I've never completely warmed to Mahler's 2nd, which is one that most posters would pick as their ante against a composer like Bruckner. I even have two of the best (I've heard) recordings of it, the Klemperer and the Boulez. I love the 1st movement, and towards the end, but I don't feel it like, say, the entirety of Bruckner's 8th.

You must hear the Celibidache/EMI recording of that one!

I too like the Wagnerian thing about Bruckner. The first time i hear the second movement of his 7th, i though: "wow, that sounds like Wagner".

[Haffner]

Interesting. I would have thought Mahler's 1st and 5th the most metal-accessible. For the 2nd, I assume you bought these on recommendation? I found Klemperer too dry, not Romantic enough. Haven't heard Boulez, but imagine he's similar...

The 1st movement on the Klemperer is pretty darn inspiring for me, but the Boulez seems to be more "even" instrumentally throughout the piece. By "even" I mean that Klemperer seems to downplay play the strings a bit more than Boulez, and I'm not sure (even checking the score) if that's the way Mahler wanted that played.  Having listened to the Boulez again last night, I actually like it a bit better than the Klemperer. Not quite as "monumental" in that Bruckner-ian way  ;.

[Haffner]

You must hear the Celibidache/EMI recording of that one!

I too like the Wagnerian thing about Bruckner. The first time i hear the second movement of his 7th, i though: "wow, that sounds like Wagner".

Now the Celibidache 8th sounds interesting! I'm still not over the Karajan/BPO rendering of that piece, Varg. I have heard the Jochum 8th which was really good.

I enjoyed Celibidache's EMI rendering of the 7th. To me the last part of the 1st movement is about as Metal as you can get (you know, in that super-positive, uplifting, Manowar/Iron Maiden way).

[drogulus]

Interesting. I would have thought Mahler's 1st and 5th the most metal-accessible. For the 2nd, I assume you bought these on recommendation? I found Klemperer too dry, not Romantic enough. Haven't heard Boulez, but imagine he's similar...

    Bruno Walter recorded a very fine romantic 2nd, a stark contrast to the Klemperer approach. The Walter is available in a 2-CD set with the 1st and Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen. The sound is quite good for the era (1958-60).

     

      Like many others, I got into Mahler first, and the interest in and appreciation of Bruckner has been a slow process. Recently I've been listening to Bruckner more, and I would say that both composers are now among my favorites.

      The Bruckner I've been listening to on my iPod these days includes this Hyperion CD with the Te Deum and the Mass in D minor.

     

[Haffner]

    Bruno Walter recorded a very fine romantic 2nd, a stark contrast to the Klemperer approach. The Walter is available in a 2-CD set with the 1st and Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen. The sound is quite good for the era (1958-60).

     

      Like many others, I got into Mahler first, and the interest in and appreciation of Bruckner has been a slow process. Recently I've been listening to Bruckner more, and I would say that both composers are now among my favorites.

      The Bruckner I've been listening to on my iPod these days includes this Hyperion CD with the Te Deum and the Mass in D minor.

     

Double OOO!

[eyeresist]

Like many others, I got into Mahler first, and the interest in and appreciation of Bruckner has been a slow process. Recently I've been listening to Bruckner more, and I would say that both composers are now among my favorites.

I got into Mahler first as well, but now for me Bruckner is The Man. This isn't the thread to go into my issues with Mahler....
BTW, I was lucky enough to get Karajan's Bruckner cycle for $60 last year - new (it was an Italian edition, now NA).

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I got into Mahler first as well, but now for me Bruckner is The Man. This isn't the thread to go into my issues with Mahler....

Why not confess in Bruckner's Abbey?  0:)

[Mirror Image]

As i strolled through Barns and Noble and Borders today (the only places with a sizable classical section anywhere near me) i found what must have been 25- 30 recordings of Mahler, yet there was not ONE, NOT ONE Bruckner recording in either of the stores. What in the world is that all about. I found it almost as ridiculous as the what seemed like 1,000 cd's of Mozart. Is Mahler such a better composer than Bruckner to get a vast selection of works for sale when Bruckner has 0. I say NO!

This might just be in my part of the world but does anyone else see this, and if so what do you think about it?

I think people who enjoy Bruckner and Mahler would both disagree that Bruckner doesn't get any respect. That's certainly not the case at all. Why there are more Mahler recordings than Bruckner is beyond me, but Mahler is quite popular and has been for the past few decades, but I don't think you should draw the conclusion that Bruckner somehow isn't respected because a lack of recordings. I'm not a classical musician at all, but perhaps Bruckner's music is difficult to perform well? Maybe he's falling out of favor among the younger classical listeners? There are several factors that can come into play.

As far as your shopping experience goes, what did you really expect? You're shopping at a B & N and a Borders. Two of the most lousy stores to ever exist with an even lousier music department ran by people who are totally incompetent and, more importantly, clueless about music. I'm surprised they even had any Mahler recordings.

[jochanaan]

...I'm not a classical musician at all, but perhaps Bruckner's music is difficult to perform well?...

It is.  Not technically--the notes aren't particularly hard (at least not for the woodwinds, although some of his movements are endurance challenges for the brass! )--but everything has to be not just precise but totally "musical," almost like Bach or Mozart.  Also, some of the cross-rhythms can be downright challenging even for musicians used to 20th-century music! Mahler's music, for all its brilliance, is in some ways easier to put together.

[starrynight]

Everybody's favourite composer is underrated in some way.   

[RJR]

Rodney Dangerfield would disagree with you on that one.

[karlhenning]

It is.  Not technically--the notes aren't particularly hard (at least not for the woodwinds, although some of his movements are endurance challenges for the brass! )--but everything has to be not just precise but totally "musical," almost like Bach or Mozart.  Also, some of the cross-rhythms can be downright challenging even for musicians used to 20th-century music! Mahler's music, for all its brilliance, is in some ways easier to put together.

Very interesting, jo! I've never performed any of the instrumental music, and I think I've only sung one of the unaccompanied motets (which had some challenges even for a professional choir).

[springrite]

Rodney Dangerfield would disagree with you on that one.

The name "Bruckner" just does not sound cool. I mean, do you think anyone would know Rodney Dangerfield had he kept his original name?