Customer Reviews

Bruckner: Symphony 9 with Finale Reconstructed by Samale, Phillips, Mazzuca, & Cohrs (2-CD Set)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Were one simply to compare this recording's first three movements to any other performance on CD, one would have to think of Furtwängler's sense of structure, coupled with a fine feeling for dynamics that comes out in the shading of every phrase. Kurt Eichhorn's reading of Bruckner's final symphony is, in the literal sense of the word, stunning: any sensitive listener will be awed by both the delicate insights and the raw power of this recording. But there is more--the performance continues on with the fourth movement as completed by Nicola Samale, John Phillips, and Giusseppe Mazzuca. Don't confuse this completion with that by William Carragan from 1983. Whereas the earlier attempt has a tendency to sound silly at times, as if Bruckner had completely lost his ability during his final illness, this later offering has grandeur and dignity, a stature that makes one think "this is the real Bruckner." According to the notes (which do not mention the Carragan completion by name), Bruckner's friends walked off after his death with parts of this movement as mementos; these bits and snippets have been slowly resurfacing over the years, and one gets the impression that Samale et al. had more of the original to work with than had Carragan. Their use of Bruckner's methods of development, too, add to the credibility of this version. In toto, then, one gets with this recording a memorable performance from Kurt Eichhorn and the Linz Bruckner Orchestra, one which comes, I believe, as close as we'll ever get to hearing the full symphony as Bruckner conceived it. Keep checking this site, and grab a copy when you can--don't let this one get away.

I basically agree with the other reviewers of this recording. The first three movements are close to perfect. I've never heard the Adagio as well or sensitively played. However, I do think Eichhorn conducts the completed Fourth Movement way too slowly. It sounds downright lugubrious at the tempo Eichhorn has chosen. For my money, the completed Fourth Movement sounds more convincing on the recording done by Marcus Bosch with the Aachen Symphony, a 2007 recording on Coviello Classics. Paradoxically, Bosch's recording of the first three movements is much too fast. Nevertheless, Bosch's tempo for the Samale-Phillips-Cohrs-Mazzuca completed Finale seems about right -- not too fast and not too slow -- and makes this controversial "completion" sound quite convincingly Brucknerian. Additionally, it is important to note that the Bosch recording uses the most recent revision by those editors, which is considerably more convincing than the one recorded in 1993 by Eichhorn. Consequently, the Bosch recording of the Ninth is essential for anyone interested in the completed Fourth Movement.

Eichorn's overall conception of the symphony is noble and affectionate. The performance is, to say the least, one of the most unhurried that I have ever heard: Celibidach/Munich Philharmonic seems just a bit slower and Giulini (DGG/Vienna Philharmonic) slightly faster - though there is no completion of the unfinished finale in either of these. The phrasing in the more lyrical music is very affectionate. The interpretation is one for the committed lover of Bruckner who is used to the vast time-scale and slow development of his music. The effect of this is is a downplaying of the dramatic contrasts in the music though I admit to a certain personal tension whilst listening to the "completion" of the final movement whilst I waited for something to happen! I prefer Carrigan's version of this last movement as the prolonged fanfare of the coda seems to me to be crying out for a restatement of the chorale theme in the manner of, say, Symphony 5 (though that said I think that Carrigan's trumpet decorations sound more like Sousa than Bruckner). The Bruckner Orchestra of Linz's playing does not really rival ensembles like the Berlin or Vienna Philharmonics or the Chicago Symphony or Amsterdam Concertgebouw Orchesters in the first three movements. Comparing like with like, however, the Camerata disc is better than Wildner/Naxos in orchestral playing (though it is also much more expensive) but does not rival Inbal's version of the "Committe Completion". Talmi on Chandos uses Carrigan's first version and so there are substantial differences in the coda. All of the three versions mentioned so far are also much quicker and dramatic and whether or not you prefer this is just a matter of taste. I also found the sound rather dense and bass-heavy and this made orchestra detail rather difficult to hear in the louder passages.

Well,here is a Bruckner Ninth to reckon with! I fully agree that the first three movements have the kindof ferocious intensity that Furtwaengler brought to the score, and the addition of the reconstructed Finale makes this indepensible. This movement is truly the crown of his symphonic finales, and Eichhorn makes it sound glorious. Among modern Ninths, I still love the Tintner on Naxos, but the Eichhorn is even more a MUST. Avoid the Wildner performance on Naxos, it is very lax and sounds like the conductor is basically unsympathetic to the music.

I think Eichhorn is a very good Bruckner conductor. I love his version of the 6th. He is not quite in the league of Furtwangler, Wand (BPO) or Tinder but his Bruckner is worth hearing. I just don't know about this completion of the 4th movement. Its various versions just dont sound like like the composer. There was enough that Mahler left to give us a good idea when it comes to his 10th but I think there was just not enough that Brucker left to have that final movement make sense.

There is no other way to put this: This is a performance of absolutely staggering importance.

Just a simple remark--if you don't approve of performing versions of composer's unfinished sketches, no one is holding your hand to the fire forcing you to listen. In the meantime, those of us with intellectual curiousity, although we know such things as this and other performing versions can never really exist as the composer would have completed them, would still rather hear the skethces in some way rather than having them remain mute in archive drawers. Again, no one is forcing you to listen.

The first three movements of this speak volumes for Eichorn's vision of this piece. As for the final movement it's a lark. It's not meant to be taken seriously. Credibility is not to be found within it. I dont care if Hass, Nowak and Lowe worked on piecing it together it just doesn't work. Who are we to begin to Think that we know what Anton's intention's were for this. This was a very bad mistake in common sense for Eichorn to tackle in the first place. Foolish and Bizarre to say the least. These first 3 movements will stand up well over the years to come. As for the 4th movement of Bruckner's 9th.......it does not exist today tomorrow or next week. It's quite complete as is. This is all beyond laughable. You want a 9th that makes time stand still? Pick up Christoph Von Dohnanyi's reading with the C.O. or Carlo Maria Giulini's with the CSO. Forget about His VPO interpretation, his earlier one floors the other. Slower is better? Not hardly.