Re: Bruckner and the Art of Interpretation


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Joe S. on December 14, 2000 at 10:20:10:

In Reply to: Bruckner and the Art of Interpretation posted by Chuck Jackson on December 13, 2000 at 20:34:23:

I've heard a story (believed by me to be true) more than once about R. Strauss at a rehearsal conducting one of his tone poems in the U.S. and suddenly stopping. He repeated the rehearsed section several times and then went on without comment.

Later when asked about it, he remarked that he had never heard all of the parts of that particular section fit together properly - as written - before that rehearsal.

I would tend to refer to the ink first, a qualified conductor's interpretation section, and my own instincts third. A fourth-ranking consideration would be previous performance practices. Occasionally, performance practices on particular pieces are so prevalent as to be "trademark", but I think that most all of these particular "trademark" spots in the respective repertoires of the various instruments are well-known by their respective performers.

Perhaps it shows my lack of "multi-culturalism", but some of the European performances that I have reviewed sound to me more "curious" than "correct" or "preferred". Many of the discrepancies that I've heard on these recordings remind me more of the pitfalls of some of the U.S. community orchestras than of alternate interpretations. On the other hand, when reviewing recordings by European orchestras of the caliper of the Berlin Philharmonic or the London Symphony, although the tone qualities of particular instruments may sound a bit different, their interpretations are unwaveringly insightful.

Enjoy the Bruckner. To be honest, I'm only familiar with about three of his symphonies and three or four other symphonic works.


Follow Ups: