While the Wand version you recommended (at the cathedral) is my favorite I greatly admire Karajan's interpretations. He had a wonderful affinity for the 8th. And as you say it makes sense to call the 1975 a reference recording.... Regarding Zubin Mehta I attended a live performance of the 8th in 1971 in L.A. with Mehta conducting the L.A. Phil and it was stupendous! I went with my father, not a classical music fan, and to my surprise and delight he was Blown Away by the piece! "Fantastic! I 've never heard anything like it!" he whispered quietly after the 1st movement ended, and afterwards he raved about it at a late dinner. It is one of my very fond memories :) .
My intro to Bruckner was via the 8th recorded by the VPO- first by Schuricht (courtesy of my high school library), then Solti, both relatively new at the time. As this was years before I heard the Ring cycle, it was my first exposure to a full Wagnerian orchestra with those Wagner tubas, the eight horns, in stereophonic sound. What an experience!
Dave, I'd like to recommend Karajan's fabulous Saint Florian 1970's Unitel DVD performance. In many ways Karajan achieves a mystical flow and power there that come through for me more strongly than in his other three recordings. Perhaps the venue of Saint Florian and Bruckner's time there still retain the deep spirit "of the place" because Karajan here seems to surrender himself into the work in ways that for me he did not realize as fully in his other renditions. A truly magnificent performance! I do like also the 1975 performance that you recommend, but it seems to me that the Saint Florian releases an additional transcendental dimension to the work.
In 1968/69 those Eugen Jochum DG Bruckners sat in the bin at the Yale Co-Op until their loose plastic wrappers clouded over and split - at least a year if not more - the same unsold discs.
Have you done a video over the horrors of listening to Classical Music on vinyl? I grew up in a house that was transitioning from vinyl to CD. I heard the horrors first hand. " race to the turntable in the middle of a Bruckner or Shostakovich movement. Flip the album, prepare the side and try to get back into the music".
Yes, every Bruckner on a single disc; or the Beethoven 9th on a single disc, had that break in the slow movement! But at least we got up and got some exercise, lol.
@bbailey7818 I don't think every Beethoven 9th on a single lp split the slow movement. I remember the budget RCA reissue (Candem Classics) of Charles Munch's BSO version was cut with an extraordinarily long first side containing the complete first three movements (consequently, it is prone to end of side distortion). 4th movement on it's own on second side - hey they could have put an overture on too!😊
@@curseofmillhaven1057 "inner groove distortion" is what I call "end of the side distortion", That moment of "chaos" at the end of Bruckner's ninth always got the worst of it.
Thanks, Dave for this persuasive case for Karajan's analog DG as the reference recording for Bruckner 8. There was really no competitor for that honorific status at the time. Now, of course, there are others including my personal reference, you guessed it, Karajan's digital VPO version. When I first heard the analog DG 8th, it blew me away. It's still probably the most intense version I have heard. But the digital one is warmer, flows better, and sounds better overall (DG gave Karajan tinny sonics frequently in the '70's. His final version also seems more about Bruckner and less about Karajan's admittedly thrilling manipulation of the score in the 1975 version. The version that introduced me to the work was Solti's VPO recording; I still regard it highly as one of that conductor's few successful Bruckner outings. Next came Jochum/DG; a disappointment. Then came Karajan/1975, and for the first time I really "got" the work's vast dimensions and "apocalyptic" qualities.
Bruckner's 8th is nominated as the 'Apocalyptic' in the 1964 edition of the Guinness Book of Records (longest instrumental symphony) so the nickname is at least 60 years old.
@@MDK2_Radio The Mahler 3rd calls for an alto solo and two choirs, so it doesn't count as an "instrumental" symphony. The Mahler 9th would count, and the average performance is probably a couple minutes longer than that of the Bruckner 8th.
The irony is that pretty much the only way you can get it nowadays is in a box set. The Vienna and EMI recordings are available as stand-alone, but the reference you mention can only be found that way as a used CD for a pretty high price.
I was thinking about what exactly a “reference recording” means, and I have a rather unusual example: Machaut’s “Messe de Notre Dame” - the most important sacred work of the 14th century. I wound up binge collecting just about every recording of the work I could find. As you can imagine, different medieval music groups try every approach to the music they can get away with. Some perform it with only non-falsetto male voices, necessitating a very low pitch (e.g. Andrew Parrott with the Taverner Choir) while others allow counter-tenors. Everyone has different ideas about the addition of extra sharps and flats (“musica ficta”, to use the technical term). There’s a recording by the Ensemble Organum which sounds almost like “Le Mystère des Voix Bulgares”, which adds large amounts of supplementary eastern-sounding vocal ornamentation. This requires the basic tempo of each movement to be a lot slower than in most other performances. I’m certainly not opposed to this performance, but I couldn’t really make it my reference recording, because I don’t want to internalise all the very particular idiosyncrasies of this performance as my default understanding of the piece. In the end, I settled on the Hilliard Ensemble recording as my reference, not because it’s indisputably the best, but because it’s a well-sung, expressive performance of the piece, with plausible non-extreme tempos, and which doesn’t lock me in to any performance choices which feel too eccentric. I still like a lot of the more eccentric performances out there. But I didn’t want to learn the piece from them.
Amazing piece of music. I really like two versions: The Deller Consort and Pro Musica Antiqua, with Safford Cape. But these are not reference versions. Maybe the Hilliard or the Oxford Camerata (thanks to Naxos' distribution around the globe)?
@@ericodealmeidamangaravite1921 I haven't heard the Deller version. The Jeremy Summerly version is good, though I prefer the vocal and recorded sound of the Hilliard. There's a really old recording by the Purcell Choir conducted by Grayston Burgess which was my first exposure to the work.
My collection includes only one complete Bruckner cycle, the one with the colored angel wings--that this reference recording is part of. I've been very fond of it since having it on vinyl when it originally came out. There are others I enjoy, but this for me is top of the mountain. One of Karajan's very best recordings, and that's saying a lot.
Apparently Karajan wanted to do Bruckner a bit earlier with DG but they thought Jochum’s sufficed. As you say shows how unpopular it must have been. I must say I love Jochum’s crazy Dresden 8 for its brass! Ps love the quote on your shirt.
It’s funny, yesterday you talked about how Parsifal used to put you to sleep (during the prelude! I can understand if that happened during Act I before Parsifal shows up after only an hour…) and took forever to get into it, when I liked it the first time I really gave it a listen. It may have helped that I was in my 40s instead of my teens. Anyway today it’s Bruckner’s 8th, a work you clearly love and have forever while I’m still trying to get into it. And I have Suitner/Berlin Staatskapelle. Go figure. I’ll get there sometime. Maybe I’ll listen to Karajan/VPO. I don’t need the reference per se, just a good one where the musicians get the music and do it justice. Thanks for the very interesting series.
One thing I've learned over the years: though Bruckner worshipped Wagner and paid particular attention to his orchestration and some harmonic aspects, they really have nothing much in common. To my ears, Wagner was always more goal-directed and, frankly, more purposeful and sure of himself than Bruckner ever was. Mahler and Wagner have much more in common than Bruckner and Wagner. Just my .02.
Mahler was not a fan of Bruckner's Symphonies. He treasured the score of No3 because he loved the man dearly as a teacher. The piece he was reaĺly enthusiastiic about was thd Te Deun which he did conduct,, saying it was 'for the tongues of heaven-blessed angels'.
Interesting that Karajan, who I generally associate with disinterest on brass sounds, was able to set the standard for a Bruckner symphony. I’ve actually never heard it. Given how much I like the 8th generally, I guess I owe it to myself to give it a listen eventually.
Dave, let me start by saying I love your reviews. I listen as I take my daily walk and it has a wonderful way of shortening the time. But I occasionally find myself disagreeing, and this is one of those times. I sense you are not a big fan of Jascha Horenstein, but it was his ancient performance with the Vienna Pro Musical on Vox/Turnabout that kindled my 60+ year love affair with Bruckner. Perhaps it’s a case of imprinting, but to this day I find myself going back to it as a primer on true spirituality in music It was part of the reason I became a minister and still serve part-time in retirement). I know that numerous people have been deeply moved by Karajan’s interpretation, but despite trying on many occasions to embrace Karajan’s vision it continues to feel ersatz and not genuine to me. Numerous other conductors strike me as drawing far deeper from the well of Bruckner’s faith, so I can’t help but think this is more than just a blind devotion to one interpretation, especially because I have had the same reaction to other Karajan recordings. Oh well, another opinion for what it’s worth.
Dave, I meant to ask: why do you say Bruckner is great for conductors who don't understand sonata form? It would seem someone would need a very sophisticated understanding as Bruckner really plays around with sonata form, makes it his own. PS: OMG! You heard Karajan and Vienna Phil perform Bruckner 8th LIVE???!!! If only there was a time machine. ;)
I've talked about this extensively in other videos. Have a look at the Bruckner playlist for the "Why So Much Bad Bruckner" (or words to that effect) chat.
My dad's "go-to" for showing off vinyl vs CD Hewas giulini's Bruckner 8th. "inner groove distortion' , "surface noise"... all that fun stuff. I imprinted on it. or Brainwashed by it might be the better terrm.
Excellent choice. This is the recording I learned the Bruckner 8th on in the early 1980s--in fact, I learned most of the Bruckner symphonies from the Karajan recordings of this period. I've moved on and have other preferred recordings--Giulini and Wand and Otmar Suitner (thanks for the recommendation, Dave). But this is still a fine performance. I'm not the biggest Karajan fan, but he did have a great affection for Bruckner and it shows in this and other recordings. Dave--it would be great if sometime you did an ideal set of Bruckner symphonies. I've watched all of your videos on best and worst recordings Bruckner symphony recordings, but I'd be curious how you'd put them into an ideal set.
I find this performance too much in the 'cathedrals of sound' mould. Reified somehow. The signature Karajan glutinous sound is also overdone to my ears, not helped by the engineering. But hey, it's a great performance, just not to my taste. They did a better job of it on the other side of the Wall: Suitner at the Staatskapelle, Kegel in Leipzig or Jochum on tour in Dresden.
I bought that version on vinyl. It was my first Bruckner symphony. I was 14. I still have it that version and still love it. Never bought it on CD. Perhaps I will.
Dear Dave, I love your reference recording serie but this particular Bruckner choice makes me think about the selection criteria. This was a reference recording when it came out but, as you said, it was soon surpassed, in quality and critical opinion, by various other recordings, above all the one of Karajan himself, considered by many to be one of his best recordings ever. That means, his previous version is an historical reference recording of little value to today's listeners.Wouldn't it be more interesting to indicate the reference recordings updated to our times?
It doesn't mean that at all. It's still an excellent performance, well worth hearing, and an excellent way to ge to know the work. It's an approach that many may find useful if they are serious about collecting recordings. I assume my viewers are smart enough to know if they want to embark on this sort of journey. Great performances don't date, even if there may be others that might be considered superior.
Thanks Dave for your reply. It is convincing and I agree with you, that version is great However...due to the unquestionably high reputation of the later digital version, this may be a good case for a double reference recording ! Thanks again for your amazing videos.
Hi David! What are your criteria to determine if a piece of music is classical music or not? Why Pink Floyd's the Wall is not considered an Oratorio? Or "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" is not a Tone Poem? Similarly... why Moriconne's film music is classical while McCreary's or Zimmer's is not included as classical music even when played by well know orchestras? (Zimmer's latest Dune music is revolutionary imho)
@@DavesClassicalGuide I'd be interested in this video, but I can't find it in the 450 Music Chats playlist. I wish you'd stated the name of the video. (Then again maybe you can't remember the name, which is understandable.)
Why can't I sit through a complete Bruckner symphony? What is wrong with me? My attention can be gripped by so many symphonies by other composers but there's some type of block in my brain. Bruckner was clearly an incredible symphonist because not only do orchestras perform Bruckner with great frequency but there are SO MANY recordings with cycles continuing to be recorded. Sigh... I'm going to catch the next shuttle to planet Bax.
Relistening to this. It’s a wonderfully engineered recording (as opposed to the DG Also Sprach of the same period). HvK gets a wonderfully rich sound and the orchestra is spectacular. But he misses the episodic nature of the adagio. There are “cathedral” moments that beg for space to breathe, and these are missed opportunities.
I've always preferred Karajan's Berlin Phil recording of Bruckner Eighth over his Vienna Phil version. As for Jochum, I think he excelled more in other Bruckner symphonies, but there's also a recording of the Eighth Symphony that I like, where he conducts the Bamberger Symphoniker recorded by NHK.
Agree on this one. I also prefer the Vienna performance which I too heard in Carnegie Hall. Bruckner 8th is music that has been with me for over 50 years. My first hearing of the 8th was a live Boston Symphony performance with Erich Leinsdorf. I was transported and wanted to hear it again though in those days the only recording I could find was a very murky "electronically enhanced for stereo" performance with Furtwangler! I wonder who conducted the 1st LP recording. The earliest I know is the 1955 performance with Van Beinum and the Concertgebouw. Interesting performance with a very different point of view from the likes of Furtwanger and Karajan.
I'd probably give up a kidney to have been able to hear Karajan at Carnegie. ;) First performance I heard was more than 20 years ago by some student orchestra and it failed to move me. I thought it was my problem. But when I heard Karajan's on disc I realized it's all about the performance.
@@NN-df7hl Please keep your kidneys. The Vienna recording, according to the people I know who were there and my own opinion is pretty much that is what we heard at Carnegie Hall. Play the CDs on a big system with real speakers, sit back and enjoy! It was one of my life event that I could say "I was there" and grateful that I was.
