Repertoire: The BEST Bruckner Ninth
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ธ.ค. 2020
- Finding a great recording of Bruckner's incomplete Ninth Symphony is easy. There are a lot of them, and I'll tell you which are the best. Just avoid the ones containing any of the various, utterly vile completions of the weak and ineffective finale. Have a look for details!
- เพลง
![Supernova - aespa エスパ 에스파 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240517](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bepqfR-pxY0/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't usually go for Giulini when I want to listen to Bruckner but boy, oh, boy his 9th with the Wiener Philharmoniker is a true masterpiece. I've heard many versions of this symphony but only with Giulini I finally came to fully "understand" it. Definitely in my top 10 favourite recordings of all time.
Greetings from Washington State. Your videos have kept this Band Director motivated each day. I also play in my local orchestra but the online performances we've been putting out rarely call for horns (smaller ensembles). Listening to CD's and watching your videos has been keeping me going. Thank you!
Wow, thanks!
I am not a Bruckner fan, but Manfred Honeck and Pittsburgh performing the Ninth Symphony may change my mind. The music never drags due to the conducting and the brilliant playing, especially by the brass. What a brass section.
That Jochum recording does everything right with this symphony. This is a difficult piece to pull off, especially in the third movement where you need to pull together all the subsections coherently, and he does it. Thanks for identifying it!
For decades Bruno Walter's version of Bruckner's 9th was my standard. Then recently I became acquainted with Schuricht's version with the Vienna Philharmonic. For an old agnostic like me this was almost a religious experience. A flawless understanding of pacing and structure.
did you try the Giulini version with the VPO on DG?
@@Felipe.Taboada. I have it on my shelves along with his VPO 7th. Both are fine renditions. However, the Schuricht for me is exceptional in all respects. One recent version has deeply impressed me: Cornelius Meister with the ORF Vienna Radio Symphony (on Capriccio). It just misses the greatness of Walter & Schuricht, but only just.
I often enjoy looking back on your TH-cam library and yesterday was one of those occasion. I was minding my own business listening to several Bruckner 9ths and found one in my collection I had not heard: Simon Rattle with the Berlin. At the end of the 3rd movement as I was sitting back to take it all in when my meditation was disturbed by a 4th movement I had not expected! I listened to it twice thinking that doesn't even sound like Bruckner and then watched your talk and felt validated that I wasn't crazy. It is not good. Sounded like someone trying to imitate Bruckner. Watching you made me feel better for your clear explanation. I'm thankful for the 3 divine movements we have and ask for nothing more.
I love the Honeck version. His liner notes showing his thought process are a great insight in to how he crafted the music. Thanks for giving this recording a shout out.
Mehta's 9th with the VPO in the mid-60's was my introduction to Bruckner, and my love and awe for that performance has never faded.
On the 12.03.2021 (One day before the Lockdown came in Germany) I had heard the Bruckner Symphonys 1-8.
On this morning I sat in the bus and I thought , maybe it's time to hear the ninth symphony, cause first I had heard the 4th and then I wanted to hear the rest in the right order.
In the past heard every symphony many many times and I knew those very well, so I wanted to hear the ninth.
The sky was a little foggy and it was cold.
And then I heard the first movement of the Decca Version with Bernard Haitink.
And it was so incredible for me, this situation was so magical. The music is apocalyptic, like the 8th and one day later the Lockdown came.
An experience which I had just one time in my whole life.
Thank you for sharing your personal experience!
As someone who has suffered through several 9th completions, I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of the Finale Completions. I first came to know the 9th from Mravinsky and Horenstein. Since then I've heard almost all the versions you mentioned. Thoroughly enjoyed your comments. Keep up the good work. Jim in Mexico
The review we were waiting for before the end of the year,
A very interesting talk Dave, I'll definitely be listening some of those recommendations and considering some of the points you made.
I agree with you 100% about completions of the 9th. I have the Harnoncourt lecture, which is excellent. Interestingly, I do enjoy the better completions of the Mahler 10th... for what they are worth... There are simply some incredible moments that I would be so sad not to know...
Mr.Rainer Kuchl once said on japanese tv that Bruckner 9th with Giulini was so great ,one of the happiest time.He became music itself.tremendous experience.
The Honeck has become my absolute favorite Bruckner 9. I suppose I’m biased because I was there live. But I absolutely love this recording.
My other go to is the Giulini with Vienna. I was concerned you weren’t going to like the Giulini because you mentioned “unconscionable lengths”. But I love it also. Thanks for your videos!
Thank YOU!
Dear Mr Hurwitz.
I would like to thank you for making this talk about recordings of Bruckner's 9th symphony. I know Jochum's recording of the symphony very well and you're right. But I don't want to listen to it only.
Well, it's not as if you don't have other options!
I own a few other recordings of Bruckner's 9th so it's OK.
I have just become obsessed with Bruckner for the first time listening to a vinyl record of Karajan doing the 9th symphony. It was a first pressing DGG of 1976, cost me five australian bucks. I will definitely be looking out for more Bruckner in future.
To keep the massive sonata form movements in mind, I have been creating nicknames for all the themes. The first movement's A theme I call the "Phantom of the Opera" theme, because it sounds a bit like it; the B theme I nickname the "Mendelssohn" theme, and the C theme I nickname the "Ben Hur" theme.
Yeah agreed - it's a crass idea to even think of a completion in this instance. Why can't people just be satisfied with the fact they've got three fantastic movements of actual, firing on all cylinders, Bruckner?! Have to say for me Harnoncourt's VPO RCA is pretty much my go to version anyway, putting aside the fascinating musicological examination of the sketches - a really vicious Scherzo (the best since Jochum's I think) and an apocalyptic third movement which is a truly satisfying conclusion. The recording quality is fantastic too.
Happy Christmas and a better New Year to one and all.
Giulini and Vienna on DG has long been my reference recording. It's magnificent in every aspect, and to my humble ears, the Vienna brass section has never sounded more radiant. Barenboim and the Berlin Phil and the Karajan recording are both very exciting as well but fall just a bit short of Giulini's profundity.
Agree. The Giulini is one of the few recordings of anything that I'm completely happy with in every respect (although Wand's very late 9th recorded in Japan is every bit its equal).
Same. The coda of the first movement gives me goosebumps every time. And is there a more vicious reading of the Scherzo?
@@tomgauterin1723 l’ve never been disappointed by Gunter Wand in anything and his late Bruckner 4th is spectacular. I will look for that 9th in Japan. Thanks!
@@pawdawNothing beats Barenboim.
Yes - no completion, I have always felt, can make this great work satisfactory. The most serious set-back to any completion is the fact that there is no coda anyway. The fragments though do contain what is perhaps Bruckner's greatest chorale. We must be thankful that he placed the Scherzo second, as the end of the great Adagio really does seem like an end in itself.
I love that the symphony ends with the adagio.
I think there are a few really good ideas in the finale sketches. The chorale theme is heavenly, and the fugue is interesting. But all in all, it's a patchwork that doesn't really fit together. The first three movements however are among the most impressive things ever composed.
No argument there!
"A patchwork that doesn't really fit together"? There are people who would say that about the finale of the Eighth. Of course those are people who haven't really given the Eighth a chance.
It is worth a listen only for the chorale. I heard it in Musikwerein by the Berliner for the first time. Didn’t understand much of it and thought that it was destroying the whole concert, until the chorale came and made me feel real Brucknerian trascendence.
@@albertbauli C’est normal quand on sait que le thème du choral est issu de l’adagio.
"Qui finisce l'opera, perché en questo punto il maestro è morto" (Toscanini addressing the audience on the premiere night of Turandot, when he, in the middle of the third act, put down his baton and left the rostrum).
Bruckner's 9th - as Schubert's 8th - makes the same magnificent impact as Michelangelo's 'non finito', The Slaves - all perfect in their incompleteness. Maybe, even, perfect because of their incompleteness!
I sampled the Pittsburgh, Manfred Honeck
disc and was immediately won over with the wind chord at the beginning. Got to get it now. Cheers David for the heads up, though no thanks for the more money to spend!!
Dave's channel makes me broke!
😂
When David mentioned Rattle ( the only completion I really can be bothered to listen to from time to time) I was really surprised... good thing I was seated at that moment, too. This is great recording of the B9, Finale or not. But the only B9 that I'd take to a proverbial desert island would be Giulini Vienna account.
I love the Jochum Dresden, I agree the scherzo is phenomenal, quite scary it screams wonderfully. Trouble is it spoils every other because I am always thinking "not as good as Jochum" even when listening to Wand who sounds a bit tame.
To me Jochum is the top one .
I have heard so many Bruckner 9s that I can not recall them all. Mercy on my ears (and neighbors), I like this one loud. There is a three-note phrase for bassoons/horns 1 beat before the last tutti 3-note 'pickup' into the wind up of movement one that can never match the volume of the conclusion, but I have heard a few recordings that almost do it. I wonder if they double the parts there?
David- For me watching an ill Leonard Bernstein conduct the 9th in Wien, not that long before his death is one very great experience. By
the end Bernstein was out on his feet. But by George ,by somebody who really disliked Bruckner other than his 9th and 6th symphony it is an
astonishing performance. Bernstein could play the 8th on the piano by memory ,but still disliked the repetitions. I was looking forward to
see him conduct the work in London after the Wien performance. But he just didn't have the strength to conduct this absolute masterpiece.
For me a trip to hell, which I believe Bruckner wanted to get back from in the finale. What we get in the fourth is some junk early minimalism,
followed by the only vintage Bruckner ,the chorale. Later on towards the end of the Samale-Phillips-Coehrs +Mazzuca finale for which I saw the first performance in Berlin with Simon Rattle in 2012. We hear another sample of some minimalism , for which I believe Hans Zimmer in the da vinci
code "chevalliers de sangreal" was inspired by. Although I believe that Zimmer does not like Bruckner. BUT as you say , the final movement
who has ever tinkered with it ,is unsatisfactory, to say the least. A dying Bruckner saying his farewell to life . Conducting by a "dying" Bernstein
is what I will treasure.
The way the adagio ends is the best proof we have that it is poor judgment to complete the finale
Totally agree. Great talk.
I listen to Wand's versions with Berlin (4, 5, 7, 8, 9) or the NDR (1-3), and Klemperer's 6th. I'm done with searching new versions. Many versions by Wand bc he regularly programmed these works and conducted all life long radio orchestras which often record their performances for broadcasting. The 'Rundfunks' dug into their archives after his BPO recordings were critically acclaimed.
Someone once said (somewhere) that Bruckner, knowing he would not complete the ninth, made (consciously or unconsciously) what became the finale (i.e. the third movement) more "final" or finale-like than he would otherwise have done - which I think is discernible in that movement. And this symphony is one of the greatest things he ever donated to this Earth. In short: don't even think about it!
"As a three-movement symphony it is a perfectly balanced masterpiece." I totally agree. And with this final adagio what a way for a great composer to finish his career!
I just had listened to the magnificent adagio from the Ninth and then noticed this video in the recommendations. Well, I guess I am going to listen to other ten versions. I don't complain though.
Absolutly agree... Don't Touch the ninth finale... For me the third mov. In The ninth Bruckner is already an extremely wonderful finalle.
You‘re the best David! Can we expect the no 8 soon? I’d love to hear your rambling on that pieces Edition history... :D
8th will be coming in the New Year. Stay tuned...
@@DavesClassicalGuide Just curious: do you start listening all these versions again before you do the video? Or does all this come straight from memory?
@@jean-pierrejabouillet8416 Both. Some I remember well, and others I need to check because I haven't heard them in such a long time. In particular, I often spot check specific moments to make sure that I remember them accurately and can describe them relative to each other.
Dave’s memory is impressive. Certainly it sets him apart amongst critics. In one of these videos he sang the main themes of the finales to two Mozart piano concertos, and remarked how similar they are. For as much as I listen, I don’t remember music like that. If I decide to listen to a piece so as to memorize it, I can (as for the listening exams we took in repertory courses for music history, for example - I remember it being especially difficult in Mozart, because the themes are often so similar from piece to piece), but my mind isn’t in that gear when I listen normally. In one way it’s good, because it means that I can be surprised by the same piece over and over again, but I couldn’t do what Hurwitz does. I do remember my impressions and critical thoughts, I remember when and where I bought most of my records, I remember which are my favorites, but I generally don’t remember the music itself.
If you play something for me I can often tell you what it is, but if you asked me to hum the tunes from a piece, even one I’ve listen to many times, I couldn’t do it except with a handful of my very favorites.
Hello from Canada! Thanks David for your comments. I have been watching your youtube talks on many composers (big fan of Mahler, Bruckner, and many others) and recordings for several months now and enjoy them immensely. This talk made me write for the first time. The Bruckner 9 with Jochum and the Staatskapelle Dresden on Seraphim and EMI was the first Bruckner I ever heard, decades ago - it is what made a Bruckner fan of me - and led me to the other symphonies. I always wondered why every other Bruckner 9 I ever heard thereafter left me disappointed compared to the one I first came to know and love - today you gave me some insight as to why. Although I find the bass end a little weak in the Jochum recording, there is nothing to match its ferocity and passion. It's the only recording I've heard, where very early in the first movement, as it builds to a grand crescendo to state the first big theme with all the brass, etc., (time 2:20) he pauses the timpani role and creates a beat of total silence, then crashes in with the theme. All other recordings that I've heard let the timpani role go through that rest, perhaps washing out the impact of the statement of the big entrance of the theme. The scherzo is as fast and ferocious as any I've heard, and his Adagio is celestial. When the Adagio breaks into the brief but heart-rending hymn-like passage in the strings (time 17:47) Jochum cries out - other conductors seem to just sight-read it. When I bought and listened to Nickolaus Harnoncourt's lecture on the fragments of the finale I excitedly sought to hear every reconstruction I could find: Letocart, Carrigan, Schaller, early Mazzuca et al. (all fragmented and lumpy), Marthe (unbearable), and I agree that Rattle's with the Berlin is the most flowing - I always felt that Rattle's recording of the finale, while the most naturally moving, was a bit 'thin' compared to the quality of the rest of the the symphony - you explained why! It was a first draft! I appreciate that! Love your stuff and all the best!
Thank you for watching, and for taking the time to write and share your experience. I know exactly the moments you mention in the Jochum 9th, especially in the Adagio--and they are some of the reasons I love it so much as well. I appreciate your pointing them out.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Thanks for responding - I will continue to be watching!
Now I am truly surprised by a recommendation - wouldn’t have guessed you’d be complimentary, even mildly so, of Rattle’s Bruckner 9th. If I ever hear you endorse a Norrington recording, I’ll truly question my own sanity.
I recommended Norrington's Stuttgart Beethoven cycle. HIs "Planets" was also quite good.
@@DavesClassicalGuide thanks! I’ll pull myself off the fainting couch now. I’m a “Planets” obsessive and I’ve never heard Norrington’s - I’ll find a good place to stream it.
@@davidcowelljr5703 What he said.
@@davidcowelljr5703 LMFAO
Now i want to listen to all my recordings.
I completely agree with you. The alternative is sacrilege.
I agree with David that no one should complete Bruckner’s 9th. The three movements he left make for a completely satisfying work. I can’t imagine anything following that wonderful Adagio. For contrasted interpretations of the 9th, try Dohnanyi/Cleveland’s lean and mean version with Giulini/Vienna! I’ll take Giulini every time, though I used to like Dohnanyi too and have great respect for his Bruckner.
Dohnányi IS lean and mean -- just the way I like it! I can always go full bore Apollonian some other day...
The Dohnanyi recording has been my favorite for a long time
4:55 I take your word for what happened with the Wand in Lübeck 1988 CD audio. However, in NDR's upload of the same performance, I can actually hear a Horn counter-melody** that I have yet to hear any other conductor bring out.
** the location is in the Scherzo's Trio at bar 113 or rehearsal mark "D", 4th pair of horns. It's an inversion of what the 1st Violins and Celli are doing, so always a nice touch whenever I hear Wand play it
I will always love Bernstein's DG recording, but boy is Jochum a master, his Bruckner 9th is fabulous
The timpani reinforcement of the trombones may have been some Amsterdam rarity, it is on Beinum recording as well and the odd timpani crescendi at the beginning of Bruckner 8 finale too (Beinum, Haitink CO recordings). I'm wondering, where it came from.
Yes, undoubtedly in the parts owned by the orchestra.
@@mswdesign9164 Very unlikely. Mengelberg last conducted the 9th on 22-02-1928. That was well before the Orel (1934) and Nowak (1951) editions from the Musikwissenschaftlicher Verlag appeared. Van Beinum conducted the MV score for the first time in 1939. According to the book 'Bruckner en het Koninklijk Concertgebouworkest' (p.134) Van Beinum added the timpani reinforcement for his 1956 recording, but it is unclear whether he did so already in 1939.
I even like Celibidache in the last mov. one minute slower than Giulini, who is himself slower than the others (one I do not like is Abbado/Lucerne). I think the symphony should be a last mov. symphony - but totally agree with you - this is what we have and it is great.
Has anyone listened to the Ivan Fischer’s recent recording? I truly liked it, very interesting choice of tempi and beautifully played by Budapest… I also love the idea of Fischer recording the Ninth only at a very mature age…
You're right with every word.
Concerning the recordings: My best loved are Jochum / Dresden and Bernstein (both), the latter because of the contrast between stamping and flowing.
About the finale: Cohrs himself gave me a lecture that all what he did came from Bruckner. I listened, and when he finished (and it took a long time, believe me), I said: "As I understand, Bruckner channeled God, and you channeled Bruckner - well: channeled God was a better composer than channeled Bruckner." That was the last time, Cohrs spoke with me.
Cohrs' method looks logical - but logic was not Bruckner's composition technique. As you explained, Cohrs takes the fragments and then looks, what Bruckner did in other symphonies with similar stuff. I asked Cohrs, if Bruckner was a computer. No - why? Becaus, I said, if you work this way, you must believe that Bruckner wasn't a genius, who made decisions, but a more or less intelligent engine, which arranges the similar stuff always in the similar way. But is this fact with Bruckner?
Cohrs is convinced that one can act like in a murder mystery: One can find the solution like a Hercule Poirot of music. I'm not so convinced.
Moreover, Cohrs argues that the finale was nearly completed by Bruckner himself, and one has just to bring the newly found material in the right order. As you said: To a brucknerian every bar matters and he cannot imagine that God made drafts.
The finale itself as completed by Carragan and by Cohrs and the others (I know them nearly all): Oh dear, it's so poor... As I first heard it, I had the impression to hear a bad imitation of Bruckner. I thought at first that the passage I heard was by the guy who made the completion - but it was not! It was one of the parts completed by Bruckner himself.
I can imagine that Bruckner felt not to be able to surpass these 3 movements, which are in a wonderful balance. As you observed in Haydn, it's here also: The 1st and the 3rd movement correspond, not with themes, but with sound, with the shape of the chorals, a.s.o. Between them the crazy scherzo like an outbreak of insanity between to movements which beg for a reconciliation between man and God - Bruckner even dedicated the symphony to God. I think, he couldn't finish it and wrote one of his feeblest movements, because he wanted to much, he stressed himself too much to bring to God the final gift. As Harnoncourt observed: There are incredible moments in the last movement. But as a whole, the symphony comes to a perfect end with the 3rd movement, and it's much more satisfying than this undecided and weak music of the 4th.
Besides: The austrian composer Gottfried von Einem once got a commission to finish the last movement. After having looked at the fragments, he said, it would be impossible for anyone, who is not a genius of Bruckner's stature, and resigned. But he used fragments of the finale for his "Bruckner Dialog", which was recorded by Milan Horvat and by Lovro von Matacic.
Finally listened to this; it's too bad Bruckner didn't finish his 9th by writing for his finale: 'Private Property, Trespassers Will Be Prosecuted' .... and left it at that.
One of the interpretive choices I listen for in this piece is, how to voice the brass in the main theme of the adagio? (Sleeper pick for a recording, Dohnanyi/CO)
The Dohnanyi recording is very fast-paced but IMO no one matches the excitement of its first movement
I like Giulini's earlier Chicago one even more. It's not quite as stretched out as the Vienna one (which is outstanding - no argument there).
I agree 100% that Jochum's Dresden recording is the greatest of the 3-movement recordings (along with Furtwangler's). I question Rattle's being the best 4-movement recording because of the version used. Rattle's BPO are massively powerful and full-bodied while still light-footed and exciting. But the completion of the coda sounds rushed and less idiomatic than that used by, say, Wildner on Naxos which seems far more 'Brucknerian' and effective. As for the lower quality of the finale itself, it needs to be remembered that what we have is a first draft. Any first draft of anything is going to sound imperfect and inadequate. Nevertheless what we have contains many passages of great beauty, and an originality that forces one to reconsider Bruckner's plan for the whole symphony. There is a feeling of sublime transcendence with the finale, as if after the lingering farewell to life of the adagio one now has crossed over into a spectral, after-death realm. As you say, geniuses pioneer new and untrodden territory - exactly as here! I feel tremendously grateful to the musicologists for a 4-movement Ninth that even more profoundly moves me than the incomplete version.
Well, I don't hear any "new territory" or "sublime transcendence" in this finale, and I question what the latter even means in musical terms, but I appreciate the contrasting opinion that you offer and obviously your personal response is a valid one. I do think, however, that Rattle's version more intriguingly suggests the differences between the three-movement standard version and a four-movement conception--but again, that's just my personal opinion and yours may well be the more useful because you plainly enjoy the completed finale more than I do. Thanks for commenting.
You said that the "Lubeck Version" by Guenter Wand is not so good because of the bad acoustics. But I remember you recommended his Eight, in the very same location, as one of the top three. Didn't you say so? thank you very much for your valuable advice, David.
Yes. And I said at that time that 8 turned out great and 9 did not, in the same acoustic.
I’m liking the Schuricht more than the Jocum. It’s as savage as Jocum and he manages to bring out details of the score (particularly the horns in the first movement). I’ll take Jocum (any of them) over most any others...except for Schuricht! Wand is good. Emotional and well-balanced. I conducted this, if I remember, in St. Petersburg about 30 years ago but I was very young and can’t attest to the quality. Nevertheless, I do like to hear the inside of the score. Too often, conductors get “violin-itis” and you just hear the top end and, if you’re lucky, bass. By the way, Schuricht did a rough and even mean-spirited Schubert 8th. It’s really cool!
You’re right about these monstrous completions of Bruckner’s 9th. Ghastly!
Wow, I can't wait to hear the Schuricht now. I'm working my way through the Complete EMI recordings of his. His LvB is terrific!
I went to a Gunter Wand Concert in London during August 2001 where he conducted the Bruckner 9th (with the NDR). I wonder if that was the last time he conducted it?
Gunter Wand last Bruckner concert was on October 28-30 2001,at the Muziekhalle in Hamburg.
The 4th symphony. The recording is available in the Gunter Wand Live box from Sony/RCA (33 CDs.)
@@dirkh.44 So the London concert might have been his last ninth?
@@michaelwilliams2337 Yes,I think so.
Edouard van Beinum with the Concertgebouw on Epic is my own favorite - even more terrifying than the Jochum, for me.
Minnesota Orchestra under Skrowaczewski is currently my favorite record of the Ninth, though I’ve not heard Jochum’s. I tend to prefer Bruckner performances that stay out of Mahler territory. In other Bruckner symphonies I’ve not liked Giulini or Jochum because they take a Dionysian, over the top approach in the big, brassy passages that would be great for Mahler, but doesn’t make sense to me In Bruckner. I hear it as church music, I guess, so a measured, emotionally disciplined approach makes more sense to me.
Having listened to certainly at least 20 or 30 different recordings of the 9th, I will echo the view that the Giulini / Vienna recording is perhaps the best (it is definitively my favorite, at least). I will go a step further and say it’s perhaps amongst the best recordings of any music, period. The Giulini / Vienna 8th is also something special.
Jochum and Kubelik B9: I am in complete agreement. I feel reassured on my taste and predilections.
I'm a little late weighing in here, but I agree with your recommendations and especially with your comments regarding attempts to complete the work via an unnecessary fourth movement based on whatever Bruckner left as fragments or sketches.
The symphony is fine and quite fulfilling in its three movement form.
My fave continues to be the intense VPO performance led by Giulini, but, as you say, each of the mentioned recordings is very good to excellent. Jochum/Dresden is in a class by itself, and Bernstein/VPO is very compelling, particularly on video.
Thanks for a great talk. Now on to the eighth symphony....
Another review in which Zubin Mehta appears with a high note, and deservedly so. I know you have mention several times but I agree absolutely in considering Mehta an outstanding conductor, who, God knows why, is underrated by the most snob classical world.
I doesn't know a Mehta disc that is less than excellent, even in his Sony days. Perhaps not the reference guy, but always extremely good and exciting. What do you think?
I think my opinion has been pretty clearly expressed.
@@DavesClassicalGuide , sorry, I know your opinion through your videos about Mehta🙂
I was asking to the rest of subscribers, but as my English isn't quite good, maybe I have failed the question.
@@josecarmona9168 Thanks for clarifying! I turn it over to the crew!
@@DavesClassicalGuide Thanks for it!!!
I agree, Mehta is definitely an underrated conductor. I think his tenure with the NY Phil did a lot of damage to his reputation--unfairly I might add. He is always an exciting, consistent conductor who puts his all into everything he conducts and has a great eye for orchestral talent (as director of NY he built a brass section to rival Chicago's). Many of the local critics of his concerts were always frustratingly vague and imprecise when it came to what it was they disliked about his performances. One mistake was probably recording a lot of pieces that he had already recorded with the LA Phil or that the NY Phil had already recorded itself--meaning he was in competition not only with himself but also with Bernstein and Boulez. And even when he outperformed his predecessors (his Mahler's 5th far outclasses Bernstein's), he didn't get the notice they deserved.
I'm still new to the Bruckner scene, but I stumbled across Celibidache's 9th and I liked it quite a bit. Is there anything wrong with this one in your point of view? Haven't seen no one mention him, and I was wondering why...
All the best, David, good health to you!
Celi is, as usual, very slow and heavy, but it's certainly a good performance. As I noted, most recordings of this symphony are very good, so please continue to enjoy it. Your instincts are sound!
I like hearing every possible permutation, 3-movement traditional versions or 4 movement completions. It's all potentially interesting and potentially enlightening, so I don't really get the "shouldn't listen to completions" purism. Life's rough. I welcome any insights from any quarter. That being said, I'm still pretty keen on the 3-mvt versions by Jochum (Dresden), Giulini (Vienna), Dohnanyi (Cleveland), and Welser-Most (Cleveland).
It depends on what you are listening for. I do not make these videos for committed Bruckner fans only. I didn't say one shouldn't listen to completions. I said that this one sucks for the specific reasons noted, and that if you're looking to find a great recording of the Ninth I'd stick with the three-movement version. It seems that you agree. I think this is sensible advice. Obviously you enjoy hearing every possible permutation because (a) that's your choice, and (b) you have a certain fund of knowledge and experience that leads you to believe it would be time well spent. However, you might want to keep in mind that not everyone is in the same position as you are, and these videos are for those people too.
Eduard van Beinum also had the timpani double the trombones in the first movement coda. I assume Haitink got that from him.
Just out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on the late Furtwängler recording?
Meh.
okay so i agree, i dont want to listen to movements bruckner didnt write,
just for clarity, if i listen to jochum and the staatskapelle dresden does it include it, or do i just have to skip the end?
cheers cheers
No, Jochum never played any version of the finale.
@@DavesClassicalGuide
fabulous
100% agree with Bruckner 9 being a 3-movement symphony! I can't be doing with any of the completions. And lots of great choices since, as you say, very few conductors actually mess up this symphony. Giulini/VPO and any/all of the Jochum performances are among my all-time favourites along with Lovro von Matacic and the Czech Phil on Supraphon. (By the way I once heard Matacic do a concert with the Philharmonia in London where he played the 9th Symphony as the first half, then intermission, then Te Deum. It used to be quite a common 'solution' and I must say it worked a charm on this occasion.)
Another great talk, Dave, and I'll echo other commenters by saying we're all eagerly anticipating your views on the 8th.
However, as this is Beethoven's 250th birthday, I'm going to say, c'mon, man! Ideal cycle and box sets apart, you've only done his 9th among the symphonies. The rest, please! His 250th birthday only comes around once in 250 years, after all!
I honestly don't care about his birthday, and neither does he. He's dead.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Fair enough,. But his birthday was only the lead in to your talks on his symphonies, which we all, of course, DO care about. Pretty please!
@@olegroslak852 Maybe next year! But thanks for suggesting.
But Dave, as a three-movement symphony, Bruckner’s ninth has a quiet ending! More seriously, I don't see any problem with finishing the fourth movement as long as it's a good, enjoyable piece of music, like how Sussmayr completed Mozart’s Requiem. Just bill it as «Bruckner’s ninth completed by x». Of course, it would have to be done by a really good composer.
So what if it has a quiet ending? The first movement of the 8th originally ended loudly, and Bruckner revised it to make it end quietly. That is my point: you can't judge a genius based on past procedures. And to say that the finale is fine "as long as it's a good, enjoyable piece of music" really says nothing. It's not good. It's awful. So is Sussmayr's completion of Mozart's Requiem, by the way.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Oh boy, sounds like a future talk about Mozart's Requiem would be really interesting. The comment about the quiet ending was made in jest as you have mentioned that quiet endings are the «kiss of death» for other pieces. I agree that it's better to leave it alone than make an unsatisfying completion, a point that you made really well in the video. Thank you for replying.
The 9th ending is perfect as is. Bruckner devoted this symphony to "aus den leben Gott" - to the living God. The ending to me of the third movement sounds like ia descent into heaven. It is sublime.
Remember : A schmegegge is one who doesn't have enough class to considered a schmuck...
Question - why is Jochum’s Bruckner ‘rough’ compared to others? Is it the Dresden sound, his interpretation, or both? At first I thought the sound was off-putting but have since come to enjoy it.
It's both.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Thanks!
I love Knappertbusch's 1950 live recording of Bruckner's Ninth. The sound quality is awful and the audience is noisy but the music has a propulsion to it...
It's availiable on TH-cam. CD or vinyl is too expensive, last I checked.
8:50 you are righta bout the finale, imo all of them are ridiculous, but interesting.
the Giulini-VPO version is unsurpassable in my opinion, i've never heard a better performance.
Hi
Besides being a music lover, do you consider yourself an audiophile, do you consider the medium to reproduce music very important? With all due respect, I would like to know what audio equipment you use to evaluate your records. for example what speakers, amplifier, cd player et cetera.
Best regards
Jonn
I am not an audiophile and will not get into that discussion.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Well, I didn't mean to "debate". just knowing what medium you were listening through when evaluating the records.
Best regards
The shade! Venzago is a wonderful wonderful conductor of Schoeck.
Who isn't?
@@DavesClassicalGuide I've heard plenty of slightly crappy Schoeck performances, live and on CD. I feel he really gets that music to its core, the wondrous sonic beauty and openness of Venus, or the filigree detail of Massimila Doni. I've always wanted to hear what he would do with Lebendig Begraben. His Bruckner, I agree is mystifyingly awful, it's just that you said he was useless at everything! Werner Andreas Albert is simply wonderful in the Schoeck Elegie too, so it's not as if he's the only great Schoeck conductor. :) p.s. just discovered this channel, very enjoyable content!
@@greatmomentsofopera7170 I think you put your finger on a problem: you can't make a reputation as a Schoek conductor, but if you do demented Bruckner everyone will talk about it and, even if it sucks, it may still turn out to be good for name recognition at least. There's no such thing as bad publicity.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Haha! You may be right!
I'm trying to listen to every major 19th century symphony this January, hence why I came across this video. So far have done Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Brahms and Bruckner, now into Mahler. Then I'll do Tchaikovsky and Dvorak, and the major French ones and start poking into the 20th century in February: Rachmaninov, Sibelius, Nielsen, Elgar, Strauss, Vaughan Williams, Hartmann, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Weill, Dutilleux, Langgard, etc. etc. It's fascinating to do it in such a concentrated span, and see the development of each composer in the form, and then zoom out to the bigger picture. Many of the pieces I'm revisiting of course, but some I'd shamefully never heard before: Schumann 2 for instance, an absolute revelation!!!
@@greatmomentsofopera7170 Wow! I'm impressed. Have a great time, and thanks for spending some of it watching.
I am also not a fan of the finale. I will check out the Jochum. My all time favorite 9th is the very old Furtwangler one. I have a feeling you won't agree :). Wonderful, informative video by the way . Thanks so much!
@Pep Ay You describe pretty well what is magic about Furtwängler's way in Bruckner (could also apply to other stuff by the way). But I do not unserstand why you term it "ultra-Wagnerian", to say nothing of "naturalistic". Just a trifle on petty lexical issue, but please enlighten me.
@Pep Ay I follow you on Wagner's embrace of Schopenhauer's philosophy but do not get how it translates in the way Furtwängler's interprets Bruckner, e. g. stresses, makes imporant, the "conduit", the moments of passage, which seems otherwise merely transitional.
Any comments on the screaming trumpets in the Adagio of the Rozhdestventsky? No sound quite like it in the history of recorded music, IMHO...
Vulgar.
Hehehe... DH does not mince words.^^
I own the Rattle and the Harnoncourt and was glad they each got a mention (esp. Harnoncourt). Excellent talk. I would be curious to hear how you think the Bruno Walter holds up after all of these years.
I've always found Walter to be soooo soft-edged. Sometimes it strikes me as very distinctive and different, and sometimes I just hate it.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Walter was my very first 9th and I loved it dearly...until I started hearing the competition. By the time I got to Giulini/VPO, Walter really started to fade for me.
Walter and klemperer were my intro to the 9th. Still like them both. Sound of the klemperer has not aged well though. Walter always sounds a bit transparent, maybe due to the reduced string section.
You're right concerning Rattle's sense of weight and direction. I love your work, Dave, but I still disagree about the value of hearing Bruckner's last thoughts amplified. But you have a point about God calling him home! LOL!! Perhaps Bruckner's greatest finale was the one only heaven gets to hear!
While I enjoy disagreeing with Dave, and often do, I can't fault his appraisal of of Bruckner ninth completions.I have often wondered if I am just too silly - I hate them all. Thank you, Dave. They are dreadful and I shall cite you as my source.
This is probably the exact kind of comment you don't want! Sorry! But there's a 3rd Haitink version of Bruckner 9, on LSO Live, and I really like it (not as much as the ones you right call the best, but a very strong second-tier contender). I wonder what you'd make of it?
Kill me now.
It's such a pity that the finale's completions are so uniformly unsuccessful. The scalar chorale theme is absolutely ravishing, but not much else in the movement is worthy of any note at all.
Bingo!
Excellent criticism of the finale of the 9th. I have tried listening to various completions out of curiosity, in all cases only once, and you are absolutely right. Something similar happens with Schubert's 10th symphony in Marriner's complete box. It just isn't harmonically interesting enough to be real Schubert finished product. Brian Newbould is overly cautious in completing it (not "bould" enough?), an understandable policy but unsatisfying as Schubert.. Pierrre Bartholomee did better in his realization on Ricercar, but still, it seems too "cookie-cutter" harmonically--certainly, Schubert would have added more spice. Oh well, perhaps we shouldn't be so greedy as to crave audition of every scrap from the masters' pens...
Anybody have any comments on Warner's transfer of the Jochum Dresden cycle? There were adverse reviews on the sound EMI gave the original issue - too much 'edge'. Warner did a decent job with EMI's Kempe Strauss and Sawallisch Schumann recordings, how about Jochum's Bruckner?
I love that "edge." Why ruin it?
I have listened to the first 7 symphonies of Jochum's Dresden cycle that's in the Jochum Icon box through a good stereo system and have never noticed any problems with the sound. I've also listened to the first 3 discs in Kempe's Strauss box and think the sound is good there too.
@@Don-md6wn Thanks, Don. David, I love 'edge' on brass, not on violins. There are plenty of appallingly 'edgy' cds from the mid-70s to late 90s. Every hi-fi system reproduces differently, of course, but there's a night and day difference on my system between early digital and most of what's being put out today. Even DGG seem to have finally got it right.
I got this Jochum cycle on Brilliant and have always wondered if there is a difference in sound with the earlier EMI or the latter Warner incarnations. The only thing that gets me with it is that when I downloaded it into my computer the 4rth text writes that it is Abbado's Bruckner 4rth which it just isn't thankfully.
@@Don-md6wn Thanks again, Don. I just bought the Dresden box on Warner, currently at a super-bargain price, and after listening to the first four symphonies I'm absolutely blown away. The first symphony's recording is a tad old-fashioned, shades of 'cold-nose' stereo, but there's no hint of harshness in this or the other three. Performances and recording are magnificent. Either Warner have done a top-notch job or critics of the sound are objecting to prominence of the Dresden brass. To my ears, given how Bruckner allocates his music between strings and brass, that prominence is totally appropriate. For the first time, I've not only got through symphonies 2 and 3 without taking a break, but I'm actually looking forward to replaying them.
I totally agree with you about the finale.
To me it doesn’t help, and actually hurts this symphony. To me, there is a finality at the end of the adagio, especially with the coda.
The Bruckner 9 will always be complete for me with the 3 amazing movements we have.
And then there's Horenstein's gripping BBC Legends recording with the BBC Symphony.
I have no problem with the thematic ideas in the finale. But I think that Bruckner had committed himself to writing a "big" finale like the 5th or the 9th, not light like the 6th and 7th, but this did not sit well with him and he couldn't resolve it. It's then a "first movement symphony" AND an "adagio symphony" AND a finale symphony. It didn't work. And finally, the lack of a coda prevents any satisfying conclusion. I've heard some decent attempts (Rattle) but ultimately you cant suspend disbelief at the coda.
Perhaps the reason the finale and especially the coda is incomplete or missing is that it is meant to have many completions by many listeners, if only in the minds of the listeners.
Well, that was the result, but it certainly was not Bruckner's intention.
@@DavesClassicalGuide I would certainly agree, as well as with the integrity of the three movements we have. I was 14 when I got the Seraphim edition of Schurict and VPO. I'm not sure if the 9th is the place to start with Bruckner but, boy, it stuck with me.
My understanding was that Bruckner completed a draft of the whole finale movement including the closing bars but these are among the folios filched by souvenir hunters in the hours immediately following his death. Other evidence for the existence of a coda section was the testimony of his physician who reported having had it played to him by the composer.
Bruckner thought that the Te Deum would be a good conclusion to the ninth. If it's good enough for him then it's good enough for me.
Except it's not that simple and he didn't REALLY think that. Just ask the Brucknerites. They speak to him regularly.
I enjoyed this review--and rant--thoroughly. I agree one hundred percent that the existing three-movement "torso" of the Ninth should be left as it is. Not only are those sketches for a finale, and the speculative completions, unconvincing, I happen to think Bruckner got stuck precisely because the work is perfect just as it is, as a three-movement symphony. That apocalyptic climax in the Adagio, followed by the seraphic coda with its reference to the opening of his Seventh Symphony, makes a more than fitting capstone to his career. As to recordings, my longstanding allegiance to the Jochum/EMI has recently been surpassed by the absolutely devastating Honeck, which may well be the greatest performance ever of this work.
What rant?
It's a good idea the ninth should had have a light Finale. It begins indeed with a citation of the sixth's finale.
No, it doesn't.
BTW David: I guess you're not eagerly awaiting the next Beethoven Tenth Symphony or the Schubert 7th 'the Finished' 😃
Nope.
I absolutely agree with your opinion on the finale, and I'd go even further to say that just by playing the finale is a sign that shows the conductor's lack of understanding of the music. There's no point to play music that is not supposed to be played. By the way, I think a video on historical Bruckner recordings would be interesting
I must respectfully disagree with DH whether the finale should be played in a completion version. As observed by William Carragan (of course, it seems as if DH on principal dislikes everything Carragan says), the Mozart Requiem as filled out and completed by Sussmayr has definitely entered the mainstream repertoire, but there is more Sussmayr than Mozart in it, no-? Thus the inconsistency of the musical world is laid out perfectly clearly...
In other words, one wrong justifies another.
I like much of the finale. However, I listen to it on its own, because it is really an unsatisfactory conclusion to the symphony after the adagio. If the rest of the symphony was merely decent, or the slow movement was mediocre, I would enjoy the trek through purgatory to heaven.
Edit: Even if Bruckner had completed and revised his finale a few times, I still would only listen to it as a stand-alone piece. Not even he could have written a satisfying ending to that symphony.
I disagree with your assessment of the finale, although I agree that most of the completions are unsatisfactory. I think the most successful completion is the one as conducted by Rattle--it was done by a team of musicologists (Samale, Philips, Cohrs, and Mazzuca), and my impression is that it presents Bruckner's ideas with a minimum of intervention, allowing us to get an impression of what may have been intended. I find the 'solo' completions, for example, Carragan's and Létocart's a bit conjectural, and I feel as though they both impose too much of their own ideas on the material, and both of them fall short. Clearly nobody but Bruckner could have finished it. Still, I think Bruckner's ideas are stronger than you give them credit for, and they are worth an occasional listen. I think, in a way, you recognise this based on your assessment of Rattle's performance. Are the opening ideas of the finale really as weak as you say, or are they dark and desolate 'gropings' to the path towards resolution following the devastating dissonance of the adagio's climax? (Haha, sorry about that sentence, I'm definitely not a writer!) It's certainly unlike any other Bruckner finale...it definitely sounds like a first draft...but I'm grateful for the glimpse of what might have been.
I too am grateful for a glimpse of what might have been, but having glimpsed it, I am even more grateful that what might have been never was. Rationalize it all you like--it's just lousy music.
Why hear the slowest of the slow performances: Giulini, Bernstein, Haitink. These plod... One thing is to have a spirituality with the music and another is a perverse affection for interminable slow tempi. Earlier Jochum, Schuricht, Abendroth, Early Bruno Walter, Volmar Andrae and finally Furtwangler are the best Ninths ever recorded. Period. They give you everything. Mehta was a slow performance but superbly well phrased and of demonstration quality recording. Special. I don't agree with Dave's suggestions.
I'm unclear on whether or not the Finale is worthwhile... 😉
Listen and judge for yourself.
Haitink did a third Ninth, with the LSO...
Lucky us.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Apparently not so lucky (you labelled it a CD from Hell)
@@JaneSmith_ Exactly.
"Shmegeggy Bruckner Guys!" Love it!
Totally disagree, when I first heard the completed version I was blown away.
Don't you ever have the excitement of what could have been with Elgar's 3rd, Mozart Requiem, Bach Art of Fugue ?
Your logic is looking backwards we are so used to the Adagio as the ending, instead of looking forward.
I heard Runnicles conducting the complete version and when the themes pile up in the crisis chord my hairs stand on end!
Each to their own and despite your valid objections , I would rather have the final version than an imaginary version in heaven😀
There is no final version. It's a joke. Either you know the difference between what constitutes a composer's original work or you don't.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Yes I agree there is no final version but there can be (and will be) several reconstructions of the Finale. Just as Elgar 3 was elaborated by Anthony Payne and once heard cannot be unheard, so might as well make the best of it :)
Nobody said it's the composer's original work, the sketches are a starting point.
@@sansumida Nothing is easer than to "unhear" bad work, or even worse, fake work.