The Classical Music Recommendation Thread

[MrJosh 892]

2 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

 

A tragically short career, dying at 47 from a heart attack, and unfortunately like so many of his generation in his final decade he was following the Pied Piper of Serialism.  I discovered him because he was one of Copland's closest friends.

 

If you enjoy Music for Piano, the other instrumental work of his that is closest in character is the Partita for wind quintet, which I highly recommend.

 

 

Thanks for sharing! I really enjoyed this too. Woodwind Quintet is my favorite chamber ensemble and this was great to hear. 

 

That's super sad that he didn't live past 47.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

Probably been asked & answered here before, but which recording of Der Ring des Nibelungen does everyone like, and why?

 

Looking for recommendations!

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

Don't listen to Marian when he's going to diss the Solti cycle. It's great!

[Disco Stu 15,495]

59 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Probably been asked & answered here before, but which recording of Der Ring des Nibelungen does everyone like, and why?

 

Looking for recommendations!

 

I've been listening to the more recent Elder-Hallé cycle and like it quite a bit.  No idea what the Wagner die-hards think of it, but it was perfectly fine for my purposes: a nice sounding recording for someone who isn't interested in becoming a die-hard.

 

I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I was pulled in that direction by the very attractive cover art for each opera 

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

5 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Don't listen to Marian when he's going to diss the Solti cycle. It's great!

 

I'll give it another chance someday, but whenever I listened to bits of it, Solti seemed to take the whole thing too moment by moment, turning too many brief bits into climaxes. I prefer Karajan's big arcs.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

5 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

 

I've been listening to the more recent Elder-Hallé cycle and like it quite a bit.  No idea what the Wagner die-hards think of it, but it was perfectly fine for my purposes: a nice sounding recording for someone who isn't interested in becoming a die-hard.

 

I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I was pulled in that direction by the very attractive cover art for each opera 

 

Added!

6 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Don't listen to Marian when he's going to diss the Solti cycle. It's great!

 

It's Solti I'm familiar with, but would like to try something different.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

28 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

I'll give it another chance someday, but whenever I listened to bits of it, Solti seemed to take the whole thing too moment by moment, turning too many brief bits into climaxes.

 

It fits the music and makes it more interesting. I don't want too long arcs in a four-hour opera.

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

1 hour ago, Jurassic Shark said:

It fits the music and makes it more interesting. I don't want too long arcs in a four-hour opera.

 

I don't find them *too* long. I find Solti's too short.

(That's what she said…)

[Chen G. 3,940]

22 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Looking for recommendations! @Chen G.? Aren't you a Wagner nut?

 

All Wagnerians are Wagner nuts. Its how we roll!

 

But I have to admit that - in keeping with Wagner's own ideas of "music drama" - I prefer to watch a Wagner opera than strictly listen to it. So yeah, I know the Solti and also the (unbelievably slow-tempo-ed) Goodall Ring and a few others, but when I think of the Ring, I think of performances I can watch like the Chereau-Boulez Ring, the Kupfer-Barenboim Ring, the Shenk-Levine, etc.. More recently, this was a really great Walkure. They don't even have to be staged: Opera North's Walkure was pretty aces, and I like this Rheingold.

 

For recordings, I recently stumbled across this excerpt (of what's easily my favourite part of the Ring) and will definitely look for the complete piece if I can find it: Basses often make great Wotans, and there are very few Wagnerian basses like ol' Salminen.

[Muad'Dib 1,800]

 

[karelm 2,901]

Speaking of the moon, I really love this brand new exciting piece by Michael Daugherty, Valley of the Moon.  I heard it over the holidays on a TV broadcast and it was fantastic but unfortunately, I can't find that performance anywhere and here it is just a mockup.  

 

 

[Schilkeman 951]

Michael Kamen does not get brought up enough around here, really underrated. Great orchestrator. 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Anyone ever listen to Josef Labor?

 

This quintet is very nice.  Perhaps lightweight, but that's exactly what I want sometimes.

 

 

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Hope this can go here: Did DG ever release Karajan's 60s recordings of the Nutcracker and Romeo and Juliet on CD? I'm amazed Discogs isn't helping. No interest in the 80s recordings whatsoever and I'm obviously not buying the complete 240 CD set.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

They did release his Wiener recording of the Tchaikovsky ballet suites, which is his best recording of the works.

[bollemanneke 3,334]

When was that recorded? On DG?

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

61 and 65 on Decca.

 

https://www.discogs.com/release/1809238-Tchaikovsky-Karajan-Wiener-Philharmoniker-Ballet-Suites

 

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Hmm, I still think that Berlin has more 'fire' in the Trepak, and the recording is definitely superior.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

My favorite recording of Nutcracker is by Berlin, but the more recent Rattle recording from 15 years ago or whatever.

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

 

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

 

A bit like CE3K's The Conversation on steroids, and I seem to hear traces of Rosenman, too.

[bollemanneke 3,334]

This is making me SO happy!

 

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

It's a great cycle!

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Yeah, though I really didn't like his Jupiter. The only HIP performance that works for me is Jaap Ter Linden.

[Schilkeman 951]

I'm a full-on HIPster these days. I remember in college having a friendly argument with my theory professor about whether or not Beethoven should be played on period instruments. I said then that I thought Beethoven, of all composers, would want the bigger, more powerful sound of modern instruments, since he was so progressive as a composer, and constantly searching for new, better pianos and such. Years later, I heard Gardiner's Beethoven and did a full 180 on the spot. Beethoven had never made more sense to me.

 

I find all "big band" performances of anything pre-1860, or so, practically unlistenable, now. Too many compromises, no matter how competently performed.

[karelm 2,901]

7 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I'm a full-on HIPster these days. I remember in college having a friendly argument with my theory professor about whether or not Beethoven should be played on period instruments. I said then that I thought Beethoven, of all composers, would want the bigger, more powerful sound of modern instruments, since he was so progressive as a composer, and constantly searching for new, better pianos and such. Years later, I heard Gardiner's Beethoven and did a full 180 on the spot. Beethoven had never made more sense to me.

 

I find all "big band" performances of anything pre-1860, or so, practically unlistenable, now. Too many compromises, no matter how competently performed.

 

So, should Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique be played with ophicleides instead of tubas that are used these days?  Should Handel's Messiah be played without women in the choir?  Should Bach's passions be played without dynamics?  It's important to understand conventions and limitations of the time but also do what the composer meant, not necessarily what they said.  To me, period performances are just an interpretative device.  Another point of view, not necessarily the better one.  

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

On 18/02/2023 at 1:07 PM, bollemanneke said:

Yeah, though I really didn't like his Jupiter. The only HIP performance that works for me is Jaap Ter Linden.

 

I go to Marriner for Nos. 40 and 41.

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Me too until I discovered he had recorded them so many times that I couldn't find my favourite one on CD. We need a complete Marriner box set.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

Just now, bollemanneke said:

Me too until I discovered he had recorded them so many times that I couldn't find my favourite one on CD. We need a complete Marriner box set.

 

That would be about 600 CDs, I believe.

 

Try his EMI Jupiter. It's great.

[Schilkeman 951]

2 hours ago, karelm said:

So, should Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique be played with ophicleides instead of tubas that are used these days?  Should Handel's Messiah be played without women in the choir?  Should Bach's passions be played without dynamics?  It's important to understand conventions and limitations of the time but also do what the composer meant, not necessarily what they said.  To me, period performances are just an interpretative device.  Another point of view, not necessarily the better one.  

The modern tuba is a very robust instrument, like all modern brass, so yes, I would say use the ophicleides. Evidence shows that boys voices used to break much later than they do today. Unfortunately there is no real way (ethically) to replicate the sound of a teen boys choir. Women's choirs are the best compromise. Bach used sparing dynamic markings, true, but Bach was also not writing to be published, with repeatable performances by players who were not under his direct observance. 

 

The point of HIP is to be informed, as best as possible, of the performance practices of a time before recorded music, and applying that knowledge. Getting instruments that are as close as possible to what the composer heard in their time (and mind) is the first step. The second is learning how to play them. That's the part that trips up some of the lesser HIP orchestras, but there are lesser modern orchestras, as well, so I don't see a difference there. The third step is interpretation. This is the most subjective part, and requires solid scholarship on the part of conductors and performers.

 

To me, gut strings, natural brass, wood-mallet timpani, and wooden flutes sound correct for the music that used them. I wouldn't use them for Stravinsky, or Copland for the same reason. I also don't want a sforzando in Stravinsky to sound the same in Beethoven.

 

I'm not saying anyone is wrong for liking modern-instrument performances. You do you. There's enough fine performances out there for everyone. I know what I like, and I'm knowledgeable enough to know why. That's enough for me.

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

This seems a good opportunity to comment on the massive Gardiner Beethoven box I got for Christmas:

 

Took me a whole month to get through everything (with all the other new music I also had to listen to), and then I wanted to listen to some things again before solidifying my thoughts.

 

Not everything in the box is brilliant (unlikely with such a long list of works), but quite a lot is, and the rest is at least really very good. I was surprised how not so different most of the symphonies felt from the 60s Karajan cycle I grew up with. I'm happy to have both. Gardiner's versions are amazingly energetic and transparent. They've certainly given me a new appreciation for the 3rd and 5th which I had grown rather tired of over the years. The 9th doesn't necessarily convince me in every aspect (it's still hard to beat Szell); unlike with most of the other symphonies, some parts feel just a touch on the slowish side. On the other hand, the extra transparency Gardiner gets out of the fugues is stunning. It's certainly still a very fine recording.

 

The one part of the set that couldn't quite win me over are the piano concertos. The period piano just sounds a bit sad to my ears. I've only listened to each of those once though, so perhaps I'll get used to them.

 

Perhaps the biggest surprise for me: Leonore (the Ur-Fidelio) sounds unexpectedly modern. I'm mainly familiar with the Bernstein recording of the usual version, and after one listen, it's hard to say if it's more down to the performance or the differences in composition, but quite a few parts sounded more like Wagner than Beethoven to me. Being so famous for period performances, Gardiner keeps surprising me with modern (to me) sounds (see also his Planets).

 

The set also contains a bonus disc with "interviews" with Gardiner - in fact it's Gardiner giving interesting insights into his approach to this cycle. Which is what made me think of the set in this context, because his comments on period instruments fit well into this discussion. One thing is the balance of instruments that's significantly different with modern instruments, and indeed (as mentioned above) the transparency of these performances is stunning. As Gardiner says, the instruments aren't easy to play, but they weren't in Beethoven's time either, and the presumably correct tempi are pretty much the limit of what great musicians can get out of them. That's how Beethoven composed these works though, and if some parts sound a bit harsher/less smooth than on modern instruments, that's how it was meant to sound. (I'm not talking about flubs, of course)

 

Singing in a choir that often focuses on Renaissance and Baroque repertoire (next up: motets from the Song of Songs by Melchior Franck and and Leonhard Lechner - cool (and seriously lewd) stuff) is also frequently insightful. I remember a recent comment by our choir director that while it's important to understand how drastically interpretations have changed through the eras and how a specific bar of music was understood and meant to be performed at the time it was written, that doesn't mean the composers themselves got to hear ideal interpretations of their works. Musicians at the time, and especially choirs, quite likely were much worse than they are today, and thus many performances were probably authentic, but not necessarily good. Ergo, the key to a "correct" interpretation today is understanding how the score was intended, but still drawing on modern training and skill levels to deliver a good performance.

 

(Also, keep in mind that just because things like dynamics weren't explicitly notated at Bach's time, that doesn't mean all music was performed sameish-ly. Many rules and conventions were simply known, and adhered to, by the composers and performers - they simply hadn't yet invented writing them down)

[Schilkeman 951]

6 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

The period piano just sounds a bit sad to my ears.

I admit that the fortepiano is an acquired taste. I’m working on acquiring that full Bilson set, but I totally get some people just not warming up to that sound. It has a touch of the honky-tonk about it.

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

 

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Did any period instrument groups ever record a complete set of Telemann's overtures/suites? I've heard a few of these TWV 55 works now and just adore them, but I want to listen to more. I can't seem to find a complete set. Is it worth wondering why we do have several complete Bach cantata sets? I can't believe how joyful Telemann's music is.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

23 minutes ago, bollemanneke said:

Did any period instrument groups ever record a complete set of Telemann's overtures/suites? I've heard a few of these TWV 55 works now and just adore them, but I want to listen to more. I can't seem to find a complete set. Is it worth wondering why we do have several complete Bach cantata sets? I can't believe how joyful Telemann's music is.

 

A substantial amount of Telemann's music was clearly written quickly to get the money flowing in, at least partially due to his wife's gambling debt. His great pieces are indeed great, but his production doesn't have the consistently high level as Bach's.

 

Which recordings of the overtures are you listening to?

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Um, well, I started with a smattering on Brilliant Classics, just called Telemann CCollection. There I discoverd 55D6 played by Federico Guglielmo among others. Then I bought an Il Giardino Armonico album that I posted about earlier and I also own an overture album by Il Fondamento, a Belgian group. Also checked one out by Zefiro, but they keep playing the first movements with too little forces.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

Check out this twofer from Akademie für Alte Musik Berlin!

 

 

 

 

[Tom Guernsey 2,277]

57 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

The (two) orchestral suites also dispense with the original ballet score’s choral element, which sucks. Obviously they were designed as easier-to-perform works for common concert performance (choirs are expensive for orchestras to add to performances!) but on album, there really is no reason to listen to the suites.

 

That said I’m also not a fan of Tchaikovsky’s Nutcracker suite, lol… it left off most of the ballet’s best music!! (And long as they are, I’ll also stick with my complete Sleeping Beauty and Romeo & Juliet, thankyouverymuch…)

 

Yavar

I think I only have one recording of one of the suites because it was coupled with something else. Makes sense that they miss out the choral sections, although I'd think an orchestral only version of the full thing would make it a much more viable option as an actual ballet. For a regular concert, a chorus is probably easier to procure!

 

I enjoy the Tchaikovsky ballet suites although agree they miss out a lot of great stuff, but make a nice selection of highlights. In fairness, the Nutcracker isn't too long anyway. I need to give Sleeping Beauty (Tchaikovsky) and Cinderella (Prokofiev) another listen.

 

For Prokofiev's Romeo & Juliet, my go-to recording is with the San Francisco Symphony conducted by Michael Tilson Thomas which is almost 80 minutes of highlights and was, if memory serves, curated by MTT himself. It does much to remove some of the repetitious material and is an excellent summary of the full thing and a better summary than the three suites that Prokofiev himself selected - there's a recording on BIS which reorders the suites into chronological order but ends up missing out some interesting sections that MTT includes. For the full thing, my favourite recording is the Cleveland Orchestra conducted by Lorin Maazel. I did have another recording of the full score which I didn't think was very good so don't have any more! Could probably do with another recording of the full ballet though.

[Yavar Moradi 2,576]

29 minutes ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I enjoy the Tchaikovsky ballet suites although agree they miss out a lot of great stuff, but make a nice selection of highlights. In fairness, the Nutcracker isn't too long anyway.

 

I mean, it's over twice as long as the suite, and on most recordings requires two discs (I actually really enjoy the Gergiev one with insanely fast un-danceable tempos that somehow fits on a single CD without any cuts!)

 

Also, the other two Tchaikovsky ballets besides The Nutcracker did not have suites done by the composer, but only later people hacking out what they considered highlights.

 

31 minutes ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I need to give Sleeping Beauty (Tchaikovsky) and Cinderella (Prokofiev) another listen.

 

Sleeping Beauty is definitely my favorite Tchaikovsky ballet. I highly recommend the complete recording conducted by Andre Previn. (Bonynge is also good despite slower tempos.)

 

32 minutes ago, Tom Guernsey said:

For Prokofiev's Romeo & Juliet, my go-to recording is with the San Francisco Symphony conducted by Michael Tilson Thomas which is almost 80 minutes of highlights and was, if memory serves, curated by MTT himself.

 

I mean, at least that's a packed full CD, which IMO goes well beyond a "suite" even if it's still excerpted. You've successfully interested me in the MTT album and I do usually like him as a conductor (not usually a big fan of Maazel though... I really dislike the way he conducts Sibelius, one of my favorite composers).

 

Yavar

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

29 minutes ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I think I only have one recording of one of the suites because it was coupled with something else. Makes sense that they miss out the choral sections, although I'd think an orchestral only version of the full thing would make it a much more viable option as an actual ballet. For a regular concert, a chorus is probably easier to procure!

 

I'm not so sure about that. Here, ballets are usually performed at the opera houses, because they have a stage. They have a choir, too, and at least with the repertoire system that is common here, the choir is on stage most nights anyway, so having them there for a ballet as well is probably not a big stretch. By contrast, the big concert halls also have their own in-house choirs, but those usually rehearse and get paid on a per-project basis, so choir vs no choir is probably a significant budget choice for every concert.

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

Taking this over here as well:

 

On 09/05/2023 at 10:46 AM, Tom Guernsey said:

Had to give it a listen and yes, blimey, what a fine work - a few passages remind me of Shore's Lord of the Rings. Bruckner really went all out with his choral music, it's a lot more bracing and epic (to use a slightly naff but apt description!) than one expects from religious music of the period. I'm sure you're familiar with his three masses. I think quite a few people round here who've never heard of Bruckner would probably quite enjoy some of his choral music (and symphonies).

 

Bruckner's choral writing runs the gamut from small and intimate (several of the motets; there's also the 2nd mass which was scored without brass) to full bombast (the 3rd/f minor mass, and of course the Te Deum). Here's another favourite that we very briefly had on our choir rehearsal schedule some 10 years ago (but sadly never actually performed in concert):

 

[BB-8 3,457]

Of Bruckner's symphonies, I would recommend his 6th, which starts like an epic action score. Also warmly recommended is this recording with CSO and Haitink:

 

https://m.soundcloud.com/chicagosymphony/bruckner-symphony-no-6-in-a

[Tom Guernsey 2,277]

13 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

 

I mean, it's over twice as long as the suite, and on most recordings requires two discs (I actually really enjoy the Gergiev one with insanely fast un-danceable tempos that somehow fits on a single CD without any cuts!)

 

Also, the other two Tchaikovsky ballets besides The Nutcracker did not have suites done by the composer, but only later people hacking out what they considered highlights.

More like four times as long as the suite, but the Nutcracker is a nice length - mine is the MTT recording with the San Fran Symphony, which I very much like and generally gets a listen at Christmas, at least! I have MTT with the LSO for Swan Lake and the Previn Sleeping Beauty, but at about 2 and a half hours each, I find myself flagging well before the end! Even Mahler doesn't go on that long...

 

I didn't know that about the highlights - I mean 20 minutes of a 2.5 hour score is never going to be truly representative but if I want a little bit of Tchaikovsky, it works for me! For some reason he's never been one of my favourite composers, even though I absolutely adore Russian composers, but guess I prefer the slightly more angular/rough sound of Prokofiev or Shostakovich than Tchaikovsky.

 

13 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Sleeping Beauty is definitely my favorite Tchaikovsky ballet. I highly recommend the complete recording conducted by Andre Previn. (Bonynge is also good despite slower tempos.)

According to iTunes I listened to Sleeping Beauty last only a few months ago but will clearly have to give it another listen.

 

14 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I mean, at least that's a packed full CD, which IMO goes well beyond a "suite" even if it's still excerpted. You've successfully interested me in the MTT album and I do usually like him as a conductor (not usually a big fan of Maazel though... I really dislike the way he conducts Sibelius, one of my favorite composers).

 

Yavar

I would definitely recommend you trying the MTT Romeo & Juliet - to me it seems an ideal presentation of the music if you don't necessarily want the full thing. Maazel's full version is quite bracing - the Stealing the Enterprise fight segment (you all know what I mean!) really is played at full tilt. Might have to check out another version sometime to compare but have to admit that I don't listen to the full thing very often.

 

Despite having many, many Sibelius symphony cycles I don't have any by Maazel but sounds like I'll give it a miss! My favourites for Sibelius are probably Vladimir Ashkenazy and Osmo Vanska.

 

14 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

I'm not so sure about that. Here, ballets are usually performed at the opera houses, because they have a stage. They have a choir, too, and at least with the repertoire system that is common here, the choir is on stage most nights anyway, so having them there for a ballet as well is probably not a big stretch. By contrast, the big concert halls also have their own in-house choirs, but those usually rehearse and get paid on a per-project basis, so choir vs no choir is probably a significant budget choice for every concert.

Interesting, but guess that makes sense. To be fair, so many ballets aren't performed as such these days and are just presented as concert music. I mean, when did anyone last see the Rite of Spring?!

 

13 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

Bruckner's choral writing runs the gamut from small and intimate (several of the motets; there's also the 2nd mass which was scored without brass) to full bombast (the 3rd/f minor mass, and of course the Te Deum). Here's another favourite that we very briefly had on our choir rehearsal schedule some 10 years ago (but sadly never actually performed in concert):

Shame you didn't get to perform it in concert, that would have been great!

 

11 hours ago, BB-8 said:

Of Bruckner's symphonies, I would recommend his 6th, which starts like an epic action score. Also warmly recommended is this recording with CSO and Haitink:

 

https://m.soundcloud.com/chicagosymphony/bruckner-symphony-no-6-in-a

Another work to give another listen to! I have the Tintner cycle on Naxos as well as a few individual recordings. For the 6th the other version is Otto Klemperer, so should be pretty good!

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

1 hour ago, Tom Guernsey said:

Despite having many, many Sibelius symphony cycles I don't have any by Maazel but sounds like I'll give it a miss! My favourites for Sibelius are probably Vladimir Ashkenazy and Osmo Vanska.

 

I have the Ashkenazy cycle (two Double Decca albums), but never really warmed up to it, and haven't revisited it much after getting the Berglund box on (then) EMI. I also have an incomplete Karajan cycle I picked up later in London, and it's fascinating because it sounds completely different from any other version I've heard (but very good nonetheless, for the symphonies at least). For some of the tone poems, the old Rosbaud album on DG is still my favourite, even though it's just in mono.

 

1 hour ago, Tom Guernsey said:

Interesting, but guess that makes sense. To be fair, so many ballets aren't performed as such these days and are just presented as concert music. I mean, when did anyone last see the Rite of Spring?!

 

About 20 years ago I guess - at the State Opera.  I'm generally not terribly interested in ballet, so most of the time I'll be happy with concert performances (at least if they're not overly abridged). But there's a few narrative ballets where the staging really makes a difference. The John Cranko staging of Prokofiev's R&J that's still performed in Vienna every few years is amazing and really works like a leitmotif-driven silent film. In that case, the staging is just as essential as with an opera production.

 

1 hour ago, Tom Guernsey said:

Another work to give another listen to! I have the Tintner cycle on Naxos as well as a few individual recordings. For the 6th the other version is Otto Klemperer, so should be pretty good!

 

Tintner is generally really good, though not quite first rate, maybe just because his orchestras are mostly perfectly fine but not in the same league as the top versions. At the time, his full cycle was a must have, because he generally recorded the original versions of the symphonies, most of which had only one or two recordings (or none at all) at that point, but the important ones have been recorded and performed more frequently in the 20+ years since. In some cases, I find his versions *too* original (there's some oddities in the 7th and 8th for example where it seems perfectly reasonable why Bruckner revised them), but he does have the original longer version of the 3rd, which in my opinion is the only way to go with that symphony (although that's the one of the earlier versions that's achieved the most traction since and is performed and recorded semi-regularly these days).

 

I always have a few standard Bruckner symphony recommendations ready. For full cycles, Karajan will always have a special place in my heart, because for most of the symphonies that's the versions I grew up with, and mostly they're very good. Wand's cycles are also first rate - any of the three I guess; though I've only got the Kölner one from around 1980 and his last (incomplete) one with Berlin (maybe the best 8th I've heard, and an achingly beautiful opening horn on the 4th). There's a third one consisting of live recordings, and what I've heard from it was stunning, but it never seems to be available for a reasonable price.

 

I also have a Barenboim cycle which is perfectly alright but almost completely unnecessary in comparison to others.

 

I wouldn't recommend the "full" (it only starts with the 3rd) Celibidache (Munich) cycle to anyone who isn't a hardcore enthusiast, but his sloow 7th is far and away the best version I've heard of that symphony (Bruckner's most popular, but I never liked it much until I head the Celi), and while his 4th isn't as precious as Karajan's and Wand's in the little details, the version he does the coda makes it the absolutely best ~5 minutes of music I've ever heard in my life.

 

There's also a new complete (including the two unnumbered symphonies) cycle by Thielemann and the Wiener Philharmoniker that I'm very interested in (but waiting until it becomes affordable). Thielemann has been doing at least one Bruckner symphony at the Musikverein with whatever orchestra he's currently leading for many years, and back when it was the Munich Philharmonic (same as in Celibidache's cycle), I went to most of them and loved them; he's very close to Celibidache in overall approach. I stopped going when he did an 8th that I didn't like at all (although I'd loved the one he did a few years earlier). But I did attend a rehearsal for the 1st when he began his Vienna cycle (pre-COVID; a part of it was then recorded without an audience during the height of the pandemic), and that was very good, as are the few snippets from the other symphonies I've seen in web adverts.

 

The 6th, which has been mentioned above, doesn't get much love, although it's one of my favourites. The complex interaction of rhythms in the first movement is amazing, and the finale shows more than any other orchestral piece that Bruckner's primary instrument was the organ. I've only heard it live once (Rattle with the LSO, mostly very good), and I've always found most recordings I've heard somewhat lackluster (perhaps that's the reason why most critics seem to have little regard for the works). I love Karajan's version, and Barenboim's take was also fine (perhaps the best in his cycle).

 

And then there's the 9th, famously unfinished because after working on it for 10 years, several of those dedicated to the finale, Bruckner died before he could complete it. Apparently pretty much the entire symphony was completed on a string level, and much of it was orchestrated, but many of the pages were lost and only some have been found again (so far at least). Many people claim that Bruckner couldn't complete the symphony because it's "obviously complete" in its 3-movement form - simple over-romantisation of his last completed piece being a going-to-heaven style adagio, in my opinion. What remains of the final movement is stunning, strikingly modern for its time, and to me absolutely essential to the symphony as a whole. For those who strictly dislike reconstructions, I'd recommend the Harnoncourt recording with the Wiener Philharmoniker, where before the interval he presents the surviving original fragments of the finale (with explanations in between). It's a very fragmented affair, which is why he performed the completed first three movements (without the finale) after the interval, but very fascinating and still very listenable. And the "regular" part of the 9th is a very fine performance (although I'm not fond of some of Barenboim's other Bruckner symphonies).

 

But if you *don't* mind reconstructions, I'd recommend the Samale/Phillips/Cohrs/Mazzuca performing version, which has been in development for many years. I first heard it in a 1993 recording by Kurt Eichhorn with the Bruckner Orchester Linz (in fact the first version I heard of the symphony), but it has since then been improved (including more recently found pages of Bruckner's original sketches). The latest version I have is a 2012 recording of Rattle with the Berlin Philharmonic, which I can recommend - the three standard movements are good but not great (I'd suggest also getting Karajan, or Wand, or Celibidache for those), but the finale is stunning. Avoid Gerd Schaller, who's done his own completion - but neither his adaptation nor his interpretation are good.

 

Pro tip: Don't get me started on Bruckner if you're not prepared for posts like this.

[BB-8 3,457]

I grew up with some of Inbal's recordings of Bruckner's original versions. The 3rd really stands out - I have since preferred the original version over the castrated later versions.

 

 

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

1 minute ago, BB-8 said:

I grew up with some of Inbal's recordings of Bruckner's original versions. The 3rd really stands out - I have since preferred the original version over the castrated later versions.

 

The third is the only one I've heard by Inbal, and as far as I know he was the first to record it. Essential in those days, and certainly a fine version as far as I remember, though at this point actual decades (plural) may have passed since I last heard it.

[Yavar Moradi 2,576]

22 hours ago, BB-8 said:

Of Bruckner's symphonies, I would recommend his 6th, which starts like an epic action score. Also warmly recommended is this recording with CSO and Haitink:

 

https://m.soundcloud.com/chicagosymphony/bruckner-symphony-no-6-in-a

I’m not a huge Bruckner fan because I feel like he usually repeated the same formula with his symphonies. They aren’t diverse in a way like say the symphonies of Mahler, Beethoven, Shostakovich, Raff, or Sibelius are. But the 6th symphony for me is the most different from the pack, and it’s therefore always been my favorite. I second this recommendation.

 

Yavar

[karelm 2,901]

My favorite No. 3

 

[Tom Guernsey 2,277]

On 11/05/2023 at 11:08 AM, Marian Schedenig said:

 

I have the Ashkenazy cycle (two Double Decca albums), but never really warmed up to it, and haven't revisited it much after getting the Berglund box on (then) EMI. I also have an incomplete Karajan cycle I picked up later in London, and it's fascinating because it sounds completely different from any other version I've heard (but very good nonetheless, for the symphonies at least). For some of the tone poems, the old Rosbaud album on DG is still my favourite, even though it's just in mono.

 

Always difficult to respond to such a long and detailed post so in the true spirit of procrastination, I didn't but not to say I don't appreciate your long and interesting response (and everyone else's!). Anyway... picking out a few bits to specifically respond to!

 

That's fair on the Sibelius Symphonies/Ashkenazy - I don't know what it is about that set but I really love it. I have the Berglund set on many a recommendation but iTunes tells me I only listened to it once! Will have to give it another listen. I have the Karajan cycle with the Berlin Philharmonic with the first three conducted by Okko Kamu (don't know if Karajan didn't like the early symphonies?!) which I think was the first full set I got (one of the many DG 3CD "Trio" albums of core repertoire I picked up and which are mostly excellent - the Ravel orchestral works and Prokofiev concertos albums are especially good). I also have the Boston Symphony set with Colin Davis, as well as a couple of the LSO live albums. I seem to remember there's a third set that Davis did with the LSO which is meant to be pretty disappointing.

 

On 11/05/2023 at 11:08 AM, Marian Schedenig said:

About 20 years ago I guess - at the State Opera.  I'm generally not terribly interested in ballet, so most of the time I'll be happy with concert performances (at least if they're not overly abridged). But there's a few narrative ballets where the staging really makes a difference. The John Cranko staging of Prokofiev's R&J that's still performed in Vienna every few years is amazing and really works like a leitmotif-driven silent film. In that case, the staging is just as essential as with an opera production.

I'm not that interested in ballet either, just the music. I have actually see R&J, I think it was at Covent Garden, but also saw The Nutcracker at the same venue (albeit from the cheapest seats so I saw about a third of The Nutcracker... but the music sounded great and I was happy just to listen!). I think I'd enjoy seeing R&J again. Vienna is already on the holiday list so maybe that'll come back as an extra reason to go.

 

On 11/05/2023 at 11:08 AM, Marian Schedenig said:

Tintner is generally really good, though not quite first rate, maybe just because his orchestras are mostly perfectly fine but not in the same league as the top versions. At the time, his full cycle was a must have, because he generally recorded the original versions of the symphonies, most of which had only one or two recordings (or none at all) at that point, but the important ones have been recorded and performed more frequently in the 20+ years since. In some cases, I find his versions *too* original (there's some oddities in the 7th and 8th for example where it seems perfectly reasonable why Bruckner revised them), but he does have the original longer version of the 3rd, which in my opinion is the only way to go with that symphony (although that's the one of the earlier versions that's achieved the most traction since and is performed and recorded semi-regularly these days).

 

I always have a few standard Bruckner symphony recommendations ready. For full cycles, Karajan will always have a special place in my heart, because for most of the symphonies that's the versions I grew up with, and mostly they're very good. Wand's cycles are also first rate - any of the three I guess; though I've only got the Kölner one from around 1980 and his last (incomplete) one with Berlin (maybe the best 8th I've heard, and an achingly beautiful opening horn on the 4th). There's a third one consisting of live recordings, and what I've heard from it was stunning, but it never seems to be available for a reasonable price.

 

I also have a Barenboim cycle which is perfectly alright but almost completely unnecessary in comparison to others.

 

I wouldn't recommend the "full" (it only starts with the 3rd) Celibidache (Munich) cycle to anyone who isn't a hardcore enthusiast, but his sloow 7th is far and away the best version I've heard of that symphony (Bruckner's most popular, but I never liked it much until I head the Celi), and while his 4th isn't as precious as Karajan's and Wand's in the little details, the version he does the coda makes it the absolutely best ~5 minutes of music I've ever heard in my life.

 

There's also a new complete (including the two unnumbered symphonies) cycle by Thielemann and the Wiener Philharmoniker that I'm very interested in (but waiting until it becomes affordable). Thielemann has been doing at least one Bruckner symphony at the Musikverein with whatever orchestra he's currently leading for many years, and back when it was the Munich Philharmonic (same as in Celibidache's cycle), I went to most of them and loved them; he's very close to Celibidache in overall approach. I stopped going when he did an 8th that I didn't like at all (although I'd loved the one he did a few years earlier). But I did attend a rehearsal for the 1st when he began his Vienna cycle (pre-COVID; a part of it was then recorded without an audience during the height of the pandemic), and that was very good, as are the few snippets from the other symphonies I've seen in web adverts.

 

The 6th, which has been mentioned above, doesn't get much love, although it's one of my favourites. The complex interaction of rhythms in the first movement is amazing, and the finale shows more than any other orchestral piece that Bruckner's primary instrument was the organ. I've only heard it live once (Rattle with the LSO, mostly very good), and I've always found most recordings I've heard somewhat lackluster (perhaps that's the reason why most critics seem to have little regard for the works). I love Karajan's version, and Barenboim's take was also fine (perhaps the best in his cycle).

 

And then there's the 9th, famously unfinished because after working on it for 10 years, several of those dedicated to the finale, Bruckner died before he could complete it. Apparently pretty much the entire symphony was completed on a string level, and much of it was orchestrated, but many of the pages were lost and only some have been found again (so far at least). Many people claim that Bruckner couldn't complete the symphony because it's "obviously complete" in its 3-movement form - simple over-romantisation of his last completed piece being a going-to-heaven style adagio, in my opinion. What remains of the final movement is stunning, strikingly modern for its time, and to me absolutely essential to the symphony as a whole. For those who strictly dislike reconstructions, I'd recommend the Harnoncourt recording with the Wiener Philharmoniker, where before the interval he presents the surviving original fragments of the finale (with explanations in between). It's a very fragmented affair, which is why he performed the completed first three movements (without the finale) after the interval, but very fascinating and still very listenable. And the "regular" part of the 9th is a very fine performance (although I'm not fond of some of Barenboim's other Bruckner symphonies).

 

But if you *don't* mind reconstructions, I'd recommend the Samale/Phillips/Cohrs/Mazzuca performing version, which has been in development for many years. I first heard it in a 1993 recording by Kurt Eichhorn with the Bruckner Orchester Linz (in fact the first version I heard of the symphony), but it has since then been improved (including more recently found pages of Bruckner's original sketches). The latest version I have is a 2012 recording of Rattle with the Berlin Philharmonic, which I can recommend - the three standard movements are good but not great (I'd suggest also getting Karajan, or Wand, or Celibidache for those), but the finale is stunning. Avoid Gerd Schaller, who's done his own completion - but neither his adaptation nor his interpretation are good.

Thanks for all the Bruckner recommendations. I think he's a composer I'm more likely to pick up individual recordings than more sets (unlike, say, Sibelius, where a complete set fits on 3 discs). Don't think I'd ever really associated Karajan with Bruckner - I would have imagined his lustrous sound turning Bruckner a bit stodgy somehow, but maybe not?! Will have to see what I can pick up.

 

I did give my Klemperer recording of the 6th a listen the other day off the back of his thread and enjoyed it very much. I guess, unlike Mahler (as a lazy comparison), I can't pick apart Bruckner's symphonies in my head as readily, but that's largely through just not having listened to them nearly as much. I might have to go through my complete Tintner cycle at the least. I know what you mean about the orchestras not necessarily being A list, but the RSNO are generally pretty reliable and the recordings are decent.

 

What do you think of the Honeck version of the 4th? I have been picking up various of Honeck's Pittsburgh albums of various things (his Beethoven 5 is terrific) and enjoying them greatly.

 

I have a version of the 9th on Naxos conducted by Wildner with the New Philharmonic Orchestra of Westphalia (a name forever ruined by Henning Wehn who did a show called Westphalia is not an Option...) with a reconstructed fourth movement which I recall enjoying but haven't listened to in ages.

 

On 11/05/2023 at 11:08 AM, Marian Schedenig said:

Pro tip: Don't get me started on Bruckner if you're not prepared for posts like this.

Got the memo too late, but I enjoyed your post!

[Marian Schedenig 8,153]

4 hours ago, Tom Guernsey said:

Don't think I'd ever really associated Karajan with Bruckner - I would have imagined his lustrous sound turning Bruckner a bit stodgy somehow, but maybe not?! Will have to see what I can pick up.

 

Karajan was my introduction to Bruckner, so there's certainly some bias there, but also Bruckner was one of his personal specialities, so he's certainly known as a Bruckner conductor.

 

In my view, there are two general types of conductors when it comes to Bruckner: Those who work with his individualities like strict general pauses, sudden rough tempo changes etc., and those who try to smooth them like you would with "normal" composers. Many otherwise great conductors fall into the second group, and I've never been inclined to agree with Bruckner being treated like that. Karajan, like (obviously) all the others I recommend, falls into the former group.

 

I have to say though that as close to my heart as some of Karajan's tender moments in the 4th are (and the whole thing in general, because that recording of that symphony is really what started it all for me), he's take on the coda seems surprisingly indifferent - almost like a mere afterthought, when in Celibidache's case the coda by itself is entirely in a league of its own.

 

4 hours ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I guess, unlike Mahler (as a lazy comparison), I can't pick apart Bruckner's symphonies in my head as readily, but that's largely through just not having listened to them nearly as much.

 

It's the other way round for me, perhaps for the same reason, but more likely because something about Bruckner's strict formality (not so much in the overall symphonic forms but in the quite predictable way he develops his patterns - the bit that I believe makes him a direct ancestor to Philip Glass) resonates with me.

 

4 hours ago, Tom Guernsey said:

What do you think of the Honeck version of the 4th? I have been picking up various of Honeck's Pittsburgh albums of various things (his Beethoven 5 is terrific) and enjoying them greatly.

 

I've never heard of them, but I guess I should have a look for them now.

 

4 hours ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I have a version of the 9th on Naxos conducted by Wildner with the New Philharmonic Orchestra of Westphalia (a name forever ruined by Henning Wehn who did a show called Westphalia is not an Option...) with a reconstructed fourth movement which I recall enjoying but haven't listened to in ages.

 

According to Classics Today, Wildner also uses the Samale/Phillips/Cohrs/Mazzuca reconstruction, but the 1996 revision, which is at least two versions higher than the one Eichhorn recorded (there's a full list of all the revisions somewhere). Rattle's 2012 Berlin recording uses the "conclusive" revision from 2012. I'm only familiar with Eichhorn's and Rattle's recordings, so I don't know how much Wildner's version differs from either, but I can tell you that compared to Eichhorn's version, the conclusive edition recorded by Rattle has an entirely different coda, and it's one of my favourite parts of the whole movement.

Addendum, because I realised I hadn't finished my Karajan excursion…

 

4 hours ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I have the Karajan cycle with the Berlin Philharmonic with the first three conducted by Okko Kamu (don't know if Karajan didn't like the early symphonies?!)

 

My Karajan Sibelius set on EMI/Warner, recorded between 1976 and 1981, has all the symphonies except the 3rd, so he did at least do the first two. (I like the 3rd, shame it's not included).

 

And regarding his Bruckner affinity: Karajan only recorded one full cycle of the symphonies on DG (I think there are bits and pieces on other labels as well), but he did regularly perform them live, and Bruckner was certainly one of his primary composers. He did the 8th with the Wiener Philharmoniker in 1988 (I think he took that on tour to NYC as well, if memory serves), and his very last concert, some 3 months before his death, was the 7th, again with the Philharmoniker. Both are available on DG - and I believe neither of them are live recordings, i.e. he took the time to make dedicated recordings even at the very end of his life.