Reynier Bordes wrote:

>John Profitt writes on Bruckner editions.  Thank you for your clear
>synopsis.  But I have e few questions: Symph.  Nr.1:< Tintner should be
>the first to record the genuine Linz version 1>.  I have not heard this
>version, but Grove states that the Haas and Nowak versions from 1866 are
>practical identical.  Is that so?

Yes, the Nowak and Haas editions are essentially the same (Nowak reprinted
the Haas), but the version used for these scores is Bruckner's autograph,
which includes revisions, of the original 1866 score, which date from 1877
and 1884. Note that these revisions are NOT the wholesale rewrite of 1890,
which produced a substantially different work from what went before. That
major rewrite is known as the "Vienna" version.  Nevertheless, what we know
today as the "Linz 1866" edition in reality dates from somewhat later in
Bruckner's career with significant revisions from the first draft.

Although the autograph of the original 1866 score no longer exists, the
full set of performance parts from the 1868 premiere do exist, and it is
these performance parts that have been used to reconstruct a full score
of the true 1866/1868 version of Symphony 1.  It is this that Tintner has
recorded for the first time.

>Symph.  Nr.8: Grove says that version 2 (Haas and Nowak) is greatly
>improved: is this so? Again, I have not heard the very first version and
>have only the partiture of the Nowak version (Eulenburg).  Looking forward
>to your comments.  Regards.

Matter of opinion, I guess.  Bruckner thought so--the comment was his, but
given the circumstances of Hermann Levi's rejection of the first version,
it is understandable that the composer would want to move on.

The first version of Symphony 8 is a substantially longer work than the
revision; the orchestration is somewhat different; the ending of the first
movement is really wild and wooly in I, and may cause heart palpitations in
those who think they "know" this work from years of listening to II.  The
trio is completely replaced, the adagio is restructured and the finale is
cut considerably.  For all practical purposes, I is a different symphony
from II--most thematic material is the same, but the structures are quite
different.

I personally find version I to be exciting and enjoyable to listen to,
especially with two excellent recordings, from Inbal and Tintner.  On the
other hand, I would not give up any of my favorites recordings of version
II (either Haas or Nowak), such as Karajan/Vienna for Haas or
Szell/Cleveland for Nowak.

I hope this helps.

John M. Proffitt
General Manager & C.E.O.
Radio Station KUHF-FM