Originally posted by urtextmeister:
I don't usually chime in here, but listening seems to more and more important to me these days. Here are some things:
Music by Albert James Fillmore
(A friend of mine put together this recording of piano, vocal, string music by this American composer. Very pleasant, nostalgic sort of stuff).
Prokofiev Concerto #1 with Argerich.
(I am a sucker for this concerto. That first theme always sends chills).
Schubert #9 with Norrington.
(Could it be that Schubert and Bruckner are not that far apart? Big, broad chunks of music that just won't go away. Kind of like inviting someone for the weekend and two months later they are still there.)
I don't usually chime in here, but listening seems to more and more important to me these days. Here are some things:
Music by Albert James Fillmore
(A friend of mine put together this recording of piano, vocal, string music by this American composer. Very pleasant, nostalgic sort of stuff).
Prokofiev Concerto #1 with Argerich.
(I am a sucker for this concerto. That first theme always sends chills).
Schubert #9 with Norrington.
(Could it be that Schubert and Bruckner are not that far apart? Big, broad chunks of music that just won't go away. Kind of like inviting someone for the weekend and two months later they are still there.)
Schubert's 9th symphony truly is justified in being called "Great". His previous 7+ symphonies are nothing like the ninth with, like you so aptly put, large broad ckunks of music. The only difference in the case of Bruckner was his affinity to the organ. The man was, for lack of another example, the Franz Liszt of the organ, it was his instrument. Hence the big broad rolling themes that Bruckner uses to such great success in his symphonies seem to emulate the organ. I can understand people not liking Bruckner but I cannot understand them calling him second rate. This man was and is one of the great symphonic composers of the 19th century.
Comment