Re: New topic: which Bruckner boxes should be avoided?

On Thu, 04 Jul 2024 11:13:39 -0700, Raymond Hall wrote:

On 5/07/2024 3:57 am, Pluted Pup wrote:

On Thu, 04 Jul 2024 10:30:18 -0700, Roland van Gaalen wrote:
>

n the last year or so, I bought six Bruckner boxes (each containing
recordings on CD of all or most of Bruckner's symphonies).
>
I already had six or seven! (Plus a number of individual recordings.)
>
Frankly, I think they're all great, with perhaps one exception (*).
>
So, as far as buying Bruckner boxes is concerned, the question is not
which are good ('good' being the default; I mean: almost all Bruckner
boxes are 'good' in some sense), or how to rank them (the good ones all
have their particular merits; ranking them makes no sense) but which are
bad!
>
So: which Bruckner boxes should be avoided, do you think?
>
(*) At this stage, I have my doubts about one particular conductor, now
dead, who, although famous and 'competent' or even 'perfectionist', is
notorious for his dull studio recordings and may be vastly overrated.

>
Well, which one is maybe the bad one? I might have it,
but slips my mind. I get irritated with particular
recordings, such as Bruckner Fourths missing those
special moments, but the boxes I have all have something to it
elsewhere.
>
Are you hinting about Barenboim's studio DG Chicago
box? I don't have it but have the individual 0
symphony CD in order to get Helgoland.

>
Strange, but I have always believed, that DB's Chicago Bruckner was the
one to get. If only because of the Chicago brass. Virtually impossible
to get of in physical CDs. Maybe download??

I never heard it, I was just making a guess.
I'd rather hear the name of the possibly bad
cycle of the original poster rather than making guesses.

>
Even so, Jochum/Dresden is great for the brass, whilst Wand/Cologne is
maybe my favourite cycle for overall unity.
>
Ray Hall, Taree