Had I never listened closely enough?

[cloughie]

there is often a "key" that lets you into a particular musician.

Sometimes though, its just us.....that musician just isn't going to speak to us........so we have to learn that an acceptance of this is ok.

Personally, not spending lots of time getting to grips with Bruckner......going to leave him for others to enjoy !!

I think with me it's Chopin!

[teamsaint]

I think with me it's Chopin!

being the odd one out can be fun.

I feel like that in a world that can't get enough of pippa middleton .

[jayne lee wilson]

Well, this fell on deaf ears didn't it?

It was arguably Beethoven who pioneered expansive symphonic structures in his 3rd and 9th symphonies, the latter hugely influential on later composers, most especially Bruckner. Believe it or not, Bruckner actually knew what he was doing.

The finales (and not just the finales) are highly original structures which from No.2 on have very little to do with sonata-form, being more concerned with various keys trying to establish themselves, like plateaux, towards and through which thematic developments grow, always with an adventurous path to the establishment of the tonic. As there are often several themes this creates very fluid forms which can seem hard to follow. The much-discussed pauses aren't symphonic gaucherie, simply a result of Bruckner moving on, no-nonsense, to the next stage of his argument. I would suggest the 7th's finale as one of the best examples - just sink in and let it unfold around you, forget about tracing any kind of sonata sections. The themes are indeed memorable enough to be easily recognised as they recur in their constantly evolving shapes.

It may seem strange to forum members not to attempt some conscious following of symphonic forms, but it can work against an understanding of Bruckner if approached too rigidly from the experience of sonata-form.
I sometimes think of the finales of the 6th and 8th symphonies as "rondo-variation form with multiple themes" in which the variations are always developing!

[Bryn]

Well, this fell on deaf ears didn't it?

It was arguably ... developing!

I heard that; pardon.

[teamsaint]

Well, this fell on deaf ears didn't it?

perhaps on busy ears, in a busy world !!

I see Bruckner as a lifestyle choice !!:
snowball:

Maybe this stuff will help me give the 7th another chance .

[rauschwerk]

It was arguably Beethoven who pioneered expansive symphonic structures in his 3rd and 9th symphonies, the latter hugely influential on later composers, most especially Bruckner. Believe it or not, Bruckner actually knew what he was doing.

The finales (and not just the finales) are highly original structures which from No.2 on have very little to do with sonata-form, being more concerned with various keys trying to establish themselves, like plateaux, towards and through which thematic developments grow, always with an adventurous path to the establishment of the tonic. As there are often several themes this creates very fluid forms which can seem hard to follow. The much-discussed pauses aren't symphonic gaucherie, simply a result of Bruckner moving on, no-nonsense, to the next stage of his argument. I would suggest the 7th's finale as one of the best examples - just sink in and let it unfold around you, forget about tracing any kind of sonata sections. The themes are indeed memorable enough to be easily recognised as they recur in their constantly evolving shapes.

It may seem strange to forum members not to attempt some conscious following of symphonic forms, but it can work against an understanding of Bruckner if approached too rigidly from the experience of sonata-form.
I sometimes think of the finales of the 6th and 8th symphonies as "rondo-variation form with multiple themes" in which the variations are always developing!

That's a logical argument in favour of falling in love, unfortunately.

[Parry1912]

For me:

Just about anything written before 1750 and almost everything written after 1975! Plus all minimalism, avant garde or 'experimental' music and Charles Ives.

[vinteuil]

For me:

Just about anything written before 1750

Parry - does this mean that for you, so far, Bach is a closed book?

[Parry1912]

I like much of the organ music and odd things like the Italian Concerto but otherwise I'm not that fussed.

[Serial_Apologist]

For me:

Just about anything written before 1750 and almost everything written after 1975! Plus all minimalism, avant garde or 'experimental' music and Charles Ives.

Where have I heard this before?

Oh yes - Peter Maxwell Davies speaking of his music college professor, who held similar views. Do you happen to be him?