Regarding Mravinsky, it just sounded WRONG to me, emphasis and modulations more Mravinsky than Bruckner.
What I liked about Jochum was/is simply the sound and the way the Dresden orchestra understands and modulates the Brucknerian tone palette. I was born in Austria, this sound is in my veins.
That was a German joke...Though I was born in Klagenfurt.Regards to you, Marc.
Matacic did a live recording with the NHK SO in the late 1960s and I recall it being the first time I had ever heard the Adagio go over 30 minutes (it's actually a superb performance, btw). In those days the NHK was not quite the orchestra that it is today and whilst I can get on with their string section the brass is another matter: extremely loud indeed, pretty much unbalancing everything. A player from an American orchestra (I won't name which one) once said Japanese brass players were 30-years behind western orchestras - they have more than caught up today. There's another Matacic B9 made in Paris (I think it is the Orchestre de Paris) and it's wonderful. You do not often hear French orchestras playing Bruckner, but this one is fabulous. I may have reviewed it here, in fact.
Agree about Schuricht. I don't get any Schuricht, especially his Mahler! Same with Abendroth, even Knappertsbusch in Bruckner What is his Munich 8th all about).I think we have disagreed about Mravinsky's Bruckner before. There is much I find objectionable in Mravinsky's conducting - he can almost completely disregard colour in his recordings (they sound like the equivalent of 1950s Soviet concrete housing estates) he sometimes has little sympathy for the composers he conducts (Mozart and Beethoven, for example). But, he has a magnificent orchestra at his helm and in Bruckner (and Wagner for that matter) they sound as they should, and he understand the broarder picture. That B9 is massive, a towering edifice - but gloomy as hell. I think the Matacic French B9 and this Mravinsky B9 are highly distinctive in a way that Karajan, Haitink, Baraneboim, Jochum are simply are not.
WF is WF, of course. I believe it isn't a recording you can just listen to every day. It'll wear you down. Rather like many WF recordings do. I can listen to his 1942 Wagner T&I Prelude and Liebestod all the time, however. Music & Arts once coupled their B9 with this work but i do not remember which performance of the Tristan they used. It's a very appropriate coupling, given there isn't a Te Deum by WF.
BTW, i was recently listening to the Giulini B9 with the VPO on the Japanese Esoteric SACD disc. These are supposed to be state-of-the art transfers - the VPO strings sounded god awful. It was a good time to reassess the recordings as well. I found it underwhelming and not as impressive as I once did. Ironically, when I tested the Esoteric SACD of the Boulez Mahle 6 with the same orchestra - a recording I have always intensely disliked - the opposite view. Enjoy your B9 listening.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Fantastic review, Marc Bridle.
I recall the occasion I played all of my Bruckner 9's to determine which was 'the best'. THis was 1989, I had 9 recordings: Jochum, Dresden, Karajan, Matacic, Mravinsky, Furtwangler, Haitink, Barenboim, and Schuricht. Jochum was clearly number 1 until I played the Furtwangler. Like the '43 Coriolan, it is simply mind-blowing. The one I liked least was Mravinsky - he had 'keine idee'. I understood Karajan, full of glib sound and fury, signifying nothing, Schuricht confirmed that I did not 'get' his Bruckner, and the Haitink was a non event.
Message Thread
« Back to index | View thread »
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb