Symphony No. 8

I don't see a problem with revised works until debates emerged about Bruckner's various versions of each symphony (I think with exception of Symphony no 7). Tchaikovsky, Mahler and considerable number of symphonists particularly revised their works thoroughly, but it is Bruckner who gets most attention because usually his revision are done under pressure from many who didn't understand him as quoted from one of his admirers "He is a genius without talent".

This symphony is fascinating mainly because the market only practically has original Haas 1890 version and Nowak recordings in the market and only Inbal, as I understand, recorded this 1887 version. What struck me was this symphony's difference from Haas version is like stepping into an alternate universe. It doesn't sound independent from Haas version, yet there is many intriguing differences.

I personally love the first and second movement. The first movement is much more spiritual and mysterious compared to Haas version, whereas the latter sounds rushed when you hear both versions of the same movement. The second movement has much more vigour whereas the Haas version is more simplified and rather, dignified compared to a much more brash 1887 version. My only complaint is the 1887 version of Adagio, with painful counterpoints and very, very sappy climax. No fault of Tintner for that is why the Adagio is the only redeeming feature of 1890 Haas Version.

Georg Tintner maybe the sole sparkling gem of Naxos' compared to a huge array of maestros on other labels like Deutche Gramophon or EMI. Listeners don't simply buy his Bruckner because simply the recording is much more affordable. The Ireland Symphony is on a class on it's own with Tintner leading "Die Nullte" symphony, i considered the best symphony of Bruckner after Symphony no 4 and 8. I think it's one of the CDs that all lovers of symphonic music should own.

Allow me to add my two cents worth on this recording. First of all, this is the first time I've heard the original version of Bruckner's 8th. I must say its a fascinating experience, since it diverges so substantially from the 1890 version that we all know. Particularly the first three movements. The last movement is virtually the same, except for the coda and final peroration. Overall, I find the orchestration more interesting, colourful, and polyphonic; although it lacks the emotional impact of the standard 1890 Nowak version. Well...to be fair, I did find much that is quite beautiful and spiritual in this version that seems to be lacking in the later edition. But overall, if I had to make a choice, I'd prefer the standard 1890 edition. My suggestion: if you already have a recording of the 1890 version, you have to add Tintner's eighth to your collection, just to hear the composer's fascinating first thoughts. The performance is first rate and both the conductor and orchestra make an eloquent case for this rarely performed version. Oh yes, I almost forgot, this double cd set includes the 0 symphony (interesting historically but not particularly inspired). If, on the other hand, this is the only recording you have of Bruckner's 8th (highly doubtful but I suppose stranger things have happened), hurry up and buy the standard 1890 version as well! I recommend Karajan's 1958 version on EMI with BPO. Its a lot better than his last version on DG, which is very muddy and lacks a clear polyphonic texture. I haven't heard Celibidache's recording(s)(a little harder to find in my neck of the woods), but I suspect he has a far less conventional approach than Karajan. I would also recommend Giulini's VPO recording on DG, except I haven't heard it yet, but going by hearsay it seems like a winner. Bruckner's symphonies need spaciousness, and Giulini is one conductor who can always be counted on for that. Although in other works, say Brahm's first for example, it can work to his detriment. Anyway, coming back to the 1887/1890 comparison of Bruckner's 8th, I guess the ideal version would incorporate elements of the 1887 account but merge them with the more mature and emotionally powerful 1890 Nowak version. However I doubt that will happen any time soon....

Nearly thirty years ago, a former member of the L.A. Philharmonic under Otto Klemperer said to me that he thought of Bruckner as a composer who "had had his day," despite the efforts at the time (the mid-1970s) to foster a widespread revival of interest in his work. The individual in question was Austrian by birth, a man of profound musical education, and an admirer of Bruckner's symphonic art. It simply struck him as implausible that these gargantuan scores, with their extreme demands on audience attention, had much of a future in the concert hall. With slightly less tenacity, perhaps, than Mahler, Bruckner has proved my old friend (long since departed from this earth) wrong. One symptom of the curious peristence of Bruckner is the proliferation of recorded versions of his scores. The Fourth and Seventh Symphonies in particular may be obtained in dozens, if not scores, of competing performances. But it is a mark of how central Bruckner has become to the symphonic repertory that a half a dozen complete sets of his symphonies bedizen the "B" pages of the recorded music catalogues at any given time. To call attention to itself, then, any new traversal of the Bruckner symphonies must possesses extraordinarily individual character. The late Georg Tintner's cycle, for Naxos, is one such, and his interpretation of the mighty Eighth Symphony (C-Minor) tells us why. Tintner - who died, in his late eighties, a year ago - lavished studious attention on the different versions of Bruckner's scores. For his recording of the Eighth, he chose the rarely visited first-version of the work, which is the longest of the two major competing versions, and whose First Movement is significantly different from the one that most of us know. In the familiar version, the First Movement ends quietly; in the original version, it ends with a tremendous fortissimo dominated by the brass and underpinned by the tympany. Minor differences distinguish the other movements of the first version from those of the revised score. The difference that distinguishes Tintner's delivery of any of the Bruckner symphonies in any of their versions, however, is his slow tempi; only Celibidache takes a slower Eighth and not by much. But the slowing-down results in no loss of tension: This is Bruckner the religious visionary yearning for his God. It is "Geistlicher Bruckner," "Spiritual Bruckner." (Note: In the Scherzo, Tintner is not noticeably slower and is, in fact, faster than some other interpreters.) The National Symphony Orchestra of Ireland is a first-rate orchestra. We also get Bruckner's early D-Minor symphony, "Die Nullte," also called Symphony No. 0. Superb.