Mystery Orchestra 17 - Bruckner Symphony No.9

[Lethevich]

B -  Brass are indeed powerful and rather brilliant.  Near the very beginning of this clip, reminds me of Wagner a lot, with the chorale and Tristan moment. The winds have a rather narrow sound. Seems like the flowing part in the 4th minute moves more quickly here. Such incredibly gorgeous and affecting music. Horns are quite bright and powerful around 7 minutes, section following with the repeated theme that keeps shifting keys, also moves along. Nice build there, to a really brassy and slightly marcato peak. American maybe.

C - I like the burnished and kind of within sound of the brass, I feel this is mysterious here. Definite articulation, notes shorter, the opening becomes more pointillistic. The brass sound really fine, totally different than in B, with a darker hue. Elegant and graceful in the flowing section. Ah, I was missing that cello line in B, finely balanced and textured strings, so much detail. This isn't an overly romanticized view, more objective. Winds have almost no vibrato, which makes the mysterious section quite spooky. I think this Europe, could even be Vienna.

^^^ That is what I am aiming for, hehe. Gotta listen to a lot more recordings to reach that level though. It would be nice if more people commented on these tracks, so I could listen for what they are noticing.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Okay let me give it a try. Sorry M I haven't had time lately, not because I am too chicken-shit to try it out

Clip A) I like the timpani in the beginning, a soft, palpable sound that is felt rather than heard. The recording sounds a bit distant but a lot of modern recordings are made this way so if you have the right sound setup it would sound awesome. I like the wind details such as the almost chamber music like the flute entry at 4:38 and the flute, oboe and horn entries at 6:10. The brass sounds American with its rather bright wound. The athletic and lean strings with its golden sweet tone almost certainly points to an American orchestra. Overall a very nuanced, controlled, balanced and the least overbearing reading of all. The closest I can compare it to would be Skrowaczewski/Minnesota on Reference Recordings. Not my favorite Bruckner but does have its charms.

Clip B) A rather coarser and robust beginning. A more blender orchestral timbre and a huge string sound. Monstrous horns, nasal oboes and a rather meek timpany all point to an orchestra of the ilk of the Vienna Philharmonic. I especially like the huge brass sound a 7:11 but am lukewarm about the rather weak percussion at 8:20.

Clip C) I will say off the bat this reminds me of Harnoncourt. A rather strained horn at 1:00 and a nervous oboe vibrato also remind me of Harnoncourt. Every detail is emphasized, like he is trying to teach us something. Just listen to the dynamic shading in the opening string tremolo for example. Also the quirky tempo changes such as the race to the climax at 2:20 is perculiar. Some other rather odd things include the rather annoying dimmuendo at the end of almost every sustained string note and the spare vibrato in the strings. Maybe the lack of vibrato is the reason every phrase needs to be clipped off. Overall a rather odd presentation of the work.

Clip D) My guess is Celi, even Giulini is not THIS slow. Theme 2 doesn't arrive until 4:05, a full minute past almost every other performance. I like the woodwinds, very nice and detailed. Brasses could use some ooph, certainly not as powerful as in Clip B. The oboe solo at 7:20 is by far the best of all the clips with a true pp and amazing expressive and dynamic shading. One thing that annoys me is the need for a BIG ritard at the end of every phrase which kind of robs this performance of some forward momentum.

Clip E) Sounds Soviet, overbearing brass and dynamics that rarely falls below mezzo-forte. The tremolo in the beginning is way too loud and lacks any mystery. Do the horns have to do a sforando or crescendo at the end of every note?

[Greta]

D - Those brass could knock you over, but they handle it well and keep things in tune. Very fine dynamic contrast. I like what he does with the flowing sections, has some rubato and certain notes have more weight to shape the line. On subsequent repetitions he seems to take them slightly slower, and drinks in the wash of sound Bruckner has written. I actually don't think this is that slow, I guess because I'm not that familiar with the piece. No idea where this group is from. Leaning towards Europe based mostly on the winds. Wow, interesting, the shifting repeated figures at 8 move at a clip compared to the tempos he took previously. Nice for the horn line there. 

E - This seems like an older recording, something about the quality of the strings, the sound of the brass,harsher. Very powerful brass, almost overblowing and losing control in parts. That cello as counterpoint in flowing section is a beautiful stand out. This seems to be a classic romantic reading, I'm wondering if this could be something like NYP and Bernstein. Really don't know about the location of the orchestra. The brass are well, ballsy, drowning out the other sections often. Maybe this is also CSO. Not bad at all, though I really didn't connect with it.

A and C are my favorites. I want to get to know Bruckner much better and got a hold of the Karajan set. I've listened to the whole movement, but don't like him as much as these clips. Man, A really gets to me, I listened to it again completely sober and it is so musical. C, the orchestra has a beautiful tone and a resonant recording, kind of a modern reading and a nice contrast to A.

[PerfectWagnerite]

E - This seems like an older recording, something about the quality of the strings, the sound of the brass,harsher. Very powerful brass, almost overblowing and losing control in parts. That cello as counterpoint in flowing section is a beautiful stand out. This seems to be a classic romantic reading, I'm wondering if this could be something like NYP and Bernstein.

No way it is Bernstein. Bernstein always cultivated a very lean focused kind of sound. This is about as different from Bernstein as it can get.

[Greta]

Yeah, I really have no idea of the conductor or orchestra as you can tell. Romantic interpretation, but a rather brash, loose sound.

[Greta]

Quote from: Greta on 05-07-2007, 00:44:46
Around 6 minutes a haunting distance to the wind "calls", and immediacy and dynamic contrast to the gently shifting minor-major repeated figures in the 7th minute that is quite affecting. Something rather forward looking about this music here, it reminds me curiously of Sibelius.

Interesting observation. That never occurred to me before.

I was browsing Amazon tonight looking at Kullervos, the new Davis recording, and a reviewer there thought so too:

"...I hear in Kullervo, as the liner-note writer does, quite a strong influence of Bruckner. In all of Sibelius's later music that I can think of the style of Bruckner is as much an absentee as is the style of Brahms, and here in Kullervo the passages that most recall Bruckner tend to associate themselves most with the presages of late Sibelius that took a good many years to reappear."

Apparently there is reference to it in the liner notes of that recording. Interesting, because I actually have been listening to Kullervo a lot lately.

What is also interesting, in reference to the 9th Symphony, it and Kullervo themselves are contemporaries, separated by maybe a couple years.

[M forever]

Bernstein always cultivated a very lean focused kind of sound.

Huh? Which Bernstein are you talking about? Leonard?

[M forever]

I guess I have missed by quite a margin. Well, anyway, this could lead to some nice purchases.

Who says you missed anything? I just asked you if you had heard Walter's recording. If you have it, it's not cheating if you listen to it for comparison. Nobody could say anything about any performance or recording if he didn't have some kind of background knowledge and reference points, and that may include knowing one or a number of recordings of the piece in question.

I have very good hi-fi equipment. But there is for sure a big difference listening to a downloaded file (through 10m of so-so signal cable to the pre-amplifier) compared to my hi-end CD player.

An analog connection from the sound card to the receiver (which is, I guess, what you mean by "pre-amplifier"), or a digital (SPDIF)?

[M forever]

Clip C) I will say off the bat this reminds me of Harnoncourt. A rather strained horn at 1:00 and a nervous oboe vibrato also remind me of Harnoncourt. Every detail is emphasized, like he is trying to teach us something. Just listen to the dynamic shading in the opening string tremolo for example. Also the quirky tempo changes such as the race to the climax at 2:20 is perculiar. Some other rather odd things include the rather annoying dimmuendo at the end of almost every sustained string note and the spare vibrato in the strings. Maybe the lack of vibrato is the reason every phrase needs to be clipped off. Overall a rather odd presentation of the work.

Does it remind you of Harnoncourt because you know his recording, or because of ideas you have about what an Harnoncourt interpretation of this symphony could sound like? He did actually record it, with the WP. Does the orchestra sound like the WP?
I am not "suggesting" it does or it doesn't. Not at all. Just asking.

[M forever]

OK, because you are having so much fun here, here is one more clip. But just one! I don't want to overfeed you with Bruckner here.

MO 17 F

http://preview.tinyurl.com/298rws

[PerfectWagnerite]

Huh? Which Bernstein are you talking about? Leonard?

Yeah, that one. I don't know why there is this feeling that if it is wild and uncontrolled then it is probably Lenny's work. I listen to Bernstein and he is actually quite controlled, almost classical, at least the SONY years. Granted his later DG recordings are at times rather perculiar. His SONY Mahler, for example, is actually much less over-the-top than Mehta or his later DG readings. Maybe because there is less dynamic range on the SONY recordings so the sound doesn't sock you the same way as the DG readings.

Does it remind you of Harnoncourt because you know his recording, or because of ideas you have about what an Harnoncourt interpretation of this symphony could sound like? He did actually record it, with the WP. Does the orchestra sound like the WP?
I am not "suggesting" it does or it doesn't. Not at all. Just asking.

I don't have the Harnoncourt Bruckner 9th. I have 7 and 8 (I may even have #4 but like you I can't remember).
And no, it doesn't sound like the VPO, but hey, Simon Rattle's Beethoven Cycle with the VPO doesn't sound like the VPO either so sometimes a recording doesn't always reveal the character of an orchestra.

[Greta]

Yeah, that one. I don't know why there is this feeling that if it is wild and uncontrolled then it is probably Lenny's work.

Well, the brashness of the playing was not what made me think Lenny, actually it was the rather romantic, lyrical, extroverted reading. I'm often a Lenny fan.

And no, it doesn't sound like the VPO, but hey, Simon Rattle's Beethoven Cycle with the VPO doesn't sound like the VPO either so sometimes a recording doesn't always reveal the character of an orchestra.

And Rattle's Mahler 5th didn't necessarily sound like Berlin. Fooled M at first. And those two have in common...

Seriously though, I've heard nothing but bad things so far about Rattle's Beethoven.

Is the way the orchestra sounds? Is it just too idiosyncratic? Wrong topic, but I'm curious.

[rubio]

An analog connection from the sound card to the receiver (which is, I guess, what you mean by "pre-amplifier"), or a digital (SPDIF)?

A 10 m Mini jack - 5 pin DIN cable connect the Soundblaster soundcard of the PC to the Stereo Preamplifier (not a surround receiver) of my stereo rig (which consists of CD player - Preamplifier - Poweramplifier (so not an integrated amp) - speakers).

Clip F: I like this one a lot also. The opening seconds of the movement sounds the most mystical to me  . When I listen to clip D and F one more time, it seems more likely this last clip is Giulini and that clip D perhaps is Celibidache/Stuttgart. It's probably too slow for Giulini. I feel quite uncertain about this, though. Anyway, more important than my guesses is that I very much like this last clip. The whole movement is played in a softer, organically flowing way that really appeals to me. My favourite together with clip C. Maybe I like clip F the most.

I listened to Wand/NDRSO yesterday, and I would be surprised if clip C is Wand (like I originally guessed), even if BPO sounds different to NDRSO. It's transparent, quite detailed reading and thus it could be Chailly/RCO.

If you have it, it's not cheating if you listen to it for comparison. Nobody could say anything about any performance or recording if he didn't have some kind of background knowledge and reference points, and that may include knowing one or a number of recordings of the piece in question.

I don't have a very good musical memory, even if I remember characteristics of the style. I hope this will improve though. I could of course do an A-B comparison between the recordings I own of this symphony and the clips, but I would feel that would be cheating anyway . The only 9th's I have heard so far are Giulini/VPO (but it's one year ago now), Wand/NDRSO and one more which I don't remember.

Clip E) Sounds Soviet, overbearing brass and dynamics that rarely falls below mezzo-forte. The tremolo in the beginning is way too loud and lacks any mystery. Do the horns have to do a sforando or crescendo at the end of every note?

I guess that could be possible with that brass playing. Maybe it is the Mravinsky/Leningrad PO (Melodiya) CD which I sadly have not listened to yet.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Seriously though, I've heard nothing but bad things so far about Rattle's Beethoven.

Is the way the orchestra sounds? Is it just too idiosyncratic? Wrong topic, but I'm curious.

It is the way Rattle make the VPO sound almost like a periodic instrument ensemble. You usually associate the VPO with a lush, warm texture with an almost unlimited dynamic range and walls and walls of string sound. Under Rattle you don't hear that. A lot of people therefore don't like his take on Beethoven.

[M forever]

And Rattle's Mahler 5th didn't necessarily sound like Berlin. Fooled M at first. And those two have in common...

...nothing that matters in that context. Certainly nothing caused in a negative way by Mr Rattle.

I thought at first this could be the SOBR, and that's so close to the BP sound (very few people could reliably tell these two orchestras apart, I can't either, as we have seen) that that is really nothing one could "blame" Mr Rattle for at all.

M's confusion had to do with the fact that while it was audible from the playing that this was very likely an orchestra in the German tradition, the somewhat thinnish, slightly muffled and bass light sound and the traditional orchestral seating with the basses on the left suggested to me after a few moments of spotchecking here and there that this could be an older SOBR live recording, maybe something like the live Kubelik recording on Audite. But I wasn't sure about that either, and Mr Athletic revealed the clip before I could do more careful listening.

Another "confusing" factor was the very flexible and expressive trumpet playing which is something I missed from the BP for a long time. I basically grew up listening to the BP trumpets with principals Groth and Kretzer, both of which are phenomenal trumpet players, technically as "perfect" as anyone can be, with extremely powerful, very solid sound, exactly what Karajan needed for "his" massive BP sound, but I always missed a cartain degree of freedom and lyrical style in their playing. Groth, for instance, didn't "play", he executed his parts coolly, his playing sounded like something crafted from stainless steel. Very impressive, but not my personal "ideal".
The kind of playing heard from the two new principal trumpets (both Hungarian, interestingly but not so surprisingly - I have heard and met a lot of very good  Hungarian trumpet players - they seem to have a trumpet player factory somewhere there) is something which I personally prefer by far and which I welcomed very much when I heard it on newer recordings (e.g., Abbado's Mahler 6). But it still isn't something which I easily associate with the BP, but much more with, for instance, the SOBR - where both these Hungarian gentlemen actually played before they came to Berlin.

But again, that has nothing to do with anything Mr Rattle "did". That was more *my* superficial listening and jumping to conclusions.

And the WP in his cycle does sound rather like the WP. The idea that that orchestra necessarily has to sound like "walls" of string sound is both a cliché and also wrong.

While their string sound is indeed fabulously rich, it also has a fairly firm, sinewy core, and it is highly articulated, and what's more important than that, that orchestra is incredibly flexible in what kind of sound blend they can give conductors. Probably even more flexible than any other orchestra, while usually still retaining their typical Viennese characteristics.

That vast spectrum of sound is demonstrated on a lot of recordings, they were extremely creamy and rich for Giulini or Karajan, velvety and compact for Muti, steely and edgy for Kleiber, impeccably together and disciplined for Maazel or Solti, a flowing, vibrant mass of string sound for Bernstein.

They don't sound all *that* different in Rattle's Beethoven cycle from the lean, articulated kind of sound they produced, in varying degrees, for, say, Levine, Kleiber, Harnoncourt or Böhm.
Yes, less vibrato, they sound a little like on a diet, but especially the wind colors are as characteristic as ever.

That big "wall" of string sound is really more something that is associated with the old BP under Karajan, and many, though not all, German orchestras (remember the Beethoven 5 clip with Wand/NDR)?

Musically, I have no opinion about Rattle's Beethoven. I have it, but haven't really listened to it that much.

[Greta]

Clip F - This is really nice playing. Very powerful brass, whose balance comes from the bottom end. Which makes for a strong, yet not overly bright sound. The winds sound a bit European, beautiful dulcet tones. Lyrical, musical playing. On the slower side, but more relaxed, rather than slow. I must say, this one affects me in the same "way" that A did. Nice delicacy here in the flowing section. I like the way they build slightly and seamlessly go into the 2nd half of it (with the cello counterpoint), and then float a touch on the upward interval into the super-romantic high violin line there...giving room to put weight on the highest point of that melody at 5:13, gorgeous. 6:38 lingers, before the oboe solo, very nice. Haunting winds, this approach makes their calls sound natural and free. Nice tension when the horns come in. I love how this conductor structures the rise and fall. Very big and slightly separated sound at the last peak. Don't know who the conductor is, but I would also call this one a favorite.

I fixed my links and now have up the Trauermarsch of Mahler's 5th in my Mystery Comparison if anyone wants to come over. Some great clips there to listen to!

[M forever]

Clip F - This is really nice playing. Very powerful brass, whose balance comes from the bottom end. Which makes for a strong, yet not overly bright sound. The winds sound a bit European, beautiful dulcet tones. Lyrical, musical playing. On the slower side, but more relaxed, rather than slow. I must say, this one affects me in the same "way" that A did. Nice delicacy here in the flowing section. I like the way they build slightly and seamlessly go into the 2nd half of it (with the cello counterpoint), and then float a touch on the upward interval into the super-romantic high violin line there...giving room to put weight on the highest point of that melody at 5:13, gorgeous. 6:38 lingers, before the oboe solo, very nice. Haunting winds, this approach makes their calls sound natural and free. Nice tension when the horns come in. I love how this conductor structures the rise and fall. Very big and slightly separated sound at the last peak. Don't know who the conductor is, but I would also call this one a favorite.

Interesting observations.

rubio also pointed out an "appealing, organically flowing" quality in this performance. He also made this interesting statement:

Clip F: I like this one a lot also. The opening seconds of the movement sounds the most mystical to me  .

What is it that makes this opening sound so "mystical" to you?

[rubio]

What is it that makes this opening sound so "mystical" to you?

I love the opening of this symphony. First the fragile blanket of strings in the background and then the repeated call and response between the tubas and the brass/timpani. Also, when the intensity rises with the strings and the tuba straight afterwards. This first minute or so, it helps me building my expectation for this symphony/"journey".
I relistened to this part for all the clips. For me what is it important is the pace used for the call and response section (tuba and brass/timpani) and how the build-up of the strings/tuba is carried out afterwards (how fast it builds and the intensity used). Also the sonorities of the instruments play an important role for me. I like them on the dark/deep-sounding side (tuba, brass).

For this part clip A and Clip F hits my spot, and especially clip F. It's kind of perfect for me, as it's slower paced than clip A. Both clips have the right, dark sonorities. Clip C is also very nice, but it does sound a bit less mystical to me. I guess it's the sound of the intruments, and it get's a bit of a lighter feel. Clip E is good also, but when it starts to rise in intensity it's a bit too much brass attack for me here (but I do like it for the rest of the movement). Clip B just is too fast for me, and rob the sense of mystic feeling. This is the one I like the least for the intro to the movement. Clip D feel a bit too slow in the start with a bit of lack in dynamic contrasts, but on the other hand it gives a very interesting alternative. I'm a bit struck by the slowness of the start here, but I quickly get used to it for the rest of the movement.
Anyway, this is the just the start of the movement, nice though it is  .

[Greta]

rubio, we seem to have similar tastes... 

[M forever]

Thanks for elaborating on that. I would actually like to say something about that opening passage, too, but according to the rules, I have to wait until the end 

Just for clarification, the opening calls rising from the "mist" aren't played by the tuba, but by all 8 horns unisono (which is a really great sound and which shows that Bruckner was a great orchestrator, even though his orchestration isn't as "rich" as some other composers', but he apparently had a very fine sense of sound - he could have had that play just by 4 or 2 or even 1 horn, it would still have been the same notes, and it would still come through, but the character of the sound would be different), the "responses", if we want to call them that, are played by trumpets and timpani.

This "response" sound is something I think he took directly from Beethoven's 9th. In several places, most notably in the development, Beethoven uses that exact same sound with two trumpets in low register and timpani in piano (or even pp) as a very subtle, but striking way to reaffirm the root of the key - I am sure Bruckner thought of that when he wrote his own 9th in d minor.