Or perhaps because it wasn’t the Berliner Philharmoniker? Or maybe the Ligeti/Webern/Wagner program didn’t allow for a longer, completed Ninth to be performed? The SPCM completion was performed by Rattle again in 2018.

Someone should ask him. God knows he loves to talk...😂

Possibilité de suivre avec le Manuscrit du Finale ici: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fKLYhmaufrljnaMsi=mJruPcjuHTLwbHAw

I agree. I played this to my very practical, non-arty chap who loves Metal, and he spontaneously started to create a story for the first movement. From an amateur player's perspective, who brings along non-musician friends to some chosen concerts, and not to most others, the two Walton symphonies are in the top drawer. We, the players (strings - can't talk for any other section), absolutely love playing them, and the audience is engaged from start to finish. Amazing stuff.

Igor Levit, Salzburg Festival 2020: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHnSZXZ_j6-WmaMsi=anebKXfO-SPkWbAZ

@@Tracotel Igor Levit is at 9:54 1 minute slower, not really at 138. So, Beethoven added metronome marks and no living or dead pianist ever played it at 138 half note. I wonder why... This version above just sounds like slapstick. Is there a composition from last or this century, where the performers play the music 10-20% slower than indicated? There is some variation in the interpretation of a piece, but at this speed there is no room left. You only can go slower. It should be a hint that nobody plays at that speed. Most recordings are above 40 minutes in length. It should be around 33 minutes, if MM taken seriously. The MM reading changed.

@@gdudas You obviously didn't listen to Levit's performance. The first movement has to be considered at the "correct" speed since this sonata is obviously substantial and quite developed, there are numerous stop-and-go moments in the music, which explains the natural flexibility implied by this type of writing, Levit does that perfectly. But when the music is straightforward, Levit is simply flying! The first movement is probably a good example of Beethoven's quote: "100 (here 138) according to Mälzel, but only for the first bars, because the feeling also has its own tempo and cannot be expressed by this number."

Same regarding Harnoncourt: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZLRfYmoibVoZ6Msi=F02JKnFE4J-8O1Xz&t=4659

The only direct testimonies we have are those from Richard Heller, Bruckner's physician, and Max Auer, Bruckner's biographer. After consulting some hypothetically lost manuscripts in possession of Franz Schalk, Max Graf wrote that there was "a 'Haupthema' (whether the first or the fourth movement's is unclear but most probably the first), a 'Fugenthema' (certainly the Finale's Fugue), a 'Choral' (also certainly the Finale's) and the 'Quintenthema' of the Te Deum and once these four themes are even combined all together (übereinandergestellt), there is a quadruple superposition (eine vierfache Thürmung) as we find at the end of the Eighth Symphony." Max Graf was a music critic and Max Auer, who also mentioned the same combination (probably repeating what he read from Graf), was a dilettante only. One can reasonably say that both these "amateurs" should not be considered as critical or musicological researchers. Richard Heller, Bruckner’s doctor, testified that a majestic “Alleluia” was to conclude the Ninth Symphony. Indeed Bruckner explained to Heller that the Finale had to end with “a song of praise dedicated to the dear Lord” based on a theme from the second movement. At the time Bruckner played passages of the finale on the piano to Heller however, was the order of the inner movements ‘scherzo-adagio’ or ‘adagio-scherzo’? We have neither a clear nor certain answer. The idea of quoting themes from other symphonies is purely speculative. However, this is what I did by integrating quotations of the main themes from the Eighth, Fifth, and Seventh symphonies into the coda I composed.

kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5fQi5yJr5utn9U

@@Tracotel So the choice of quoted symphonies is a complete guess? The testimonies described here do not even mention that other symphonies should be quoted and some completions don't do this. Bruckner cited the seventh and eight symphony in previous movements of his final symphony, so that's a rationale for recalling them. What is the reason of quoting the fifth symphony? Is that because it provides a good melodic transition between fragments of eight and seventh symphony?

@@Sbigneus There is no 'guess' regarding the coda as very few significant material has survived. Examining the last months of his life provides sufficient evidence that Bruckner was in the final phase of composition: orchestrating. The coda (the conclusion) might have been more advanced than was believed for more than a century. The last extant bifolio of the score is identifiable as number ‘31E/32’ (end of the recapitulation and transition to the coda). Yet, one of the sketches refers to a ‘Bifolio 36,’ suggesting the coda was drafted to this point and beyond. It's probable that Bruckner had commenced notating it in full score, although there is no surviving trace of it. These pages may have been lost forever. What remains merely consists of a few sketches, most of which are thematically and rhythmically uncharacterized, barely legible, scratched, and therefore open to infinite interpretation. Furthermore, it is uncertain whether some of them were even intended for the coda (for instance, sketch ÖNB 3194/3r, which opens the beginning of the coda in my completion, however utilized ‘by default’). Roughly, this movement is 40% complete vertically (orchestration) and 70% complete horizontally, which means 60% of the movement is available, partially or fully orchestrated, or under the form of sketches, considering the five missing gaps in the exposition-development-recapitulation torso plus the 6th gap corresponding to the necessary transition leading to the beginning of the unknown coda. With these gaps more or less reconstructed or purely created, we have approximately 75-80% of the entire movement, but we do not know the shape and scale of the coda itself. We can conclude that the narratives claiming, on one side, that there is almost nothing from this movement, and on the other side, that even the coda can be almost entirely reconstructed from existing sketches, are both baseless and therefore false. Any alternative assertions regarding the available material and its actual content should be regarded with the highest caution and skepticism.

Thanks Kevin!

"The other completion which sounded convincing for me was the one composed by Roberto Ferrazza. May I ask what the author thinks about it?" I am not convinced at all. "Ferrazza discards the sketch which opens coda here (and in SPCM) and his ending is way more reserved." There is obviously zero evidence that Sketch ÖNB 3194/3r was meant for the coda, but it is the only significant music from Bruckner's hand to build a coda. I used this sketch by default, as the SPCM did and Carragan as well, but differently.

Max Graf specified, 'as we find at the end of the Eighth Symphony.' It is unclear what the use of such a combination could have been or, as I explained, whether Bruckner ever composed these kinds of combinations or intended to integrate such a 'device' into his coda. The actual content of the coda remains almost completely unknown, leaving room for maximum speculation.

You are wrong, Levit actually did it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rHnSZXZ_j6-WmaM

That was the time when the London Philharmonic was at its peak.

Likely for the coda, but unconvincing and without the slightest evidence from Bruckner's hand... => Max Graf wrote after consulting some hypothetically lost manuscripts of Bruckner's Finale to the 9th Symphony in possession of Franz Schalk that there was "a 'Haupthema' (whether the first or the fourth movement's is unclear but most probably the first), a 'Fugenthema' (certainly the Finale's Fugue), a 'Choral' (also certainly the Finale's) and the 'Quintenthema' of the Te Deum and once these four themes are even combined all together (übereinandergestellt), there is a quadruple superposition (eine vierfache Thürmung) as we find at the end of the Eighth Symphony." Max Graf was a music critic and Max Auer, who also mentioned the same combination (probably repeating what he read from Graf), was a dilettante only. One can reasonably say that both these "amateurs" should not be considered as critical or musicological researchers. However, having no satisfaying alternative, the idea of a "Halleluja" theme culminating with a superposition of the four main themes of the symphony remains for me the most structurally convincing and the most musically effective possibility. Two other combinations, presented here, that use the Te Deum motive, the chorale, the first movement's main theme and the fugue theme from the Finale as described by Graf/Auer have been easily realized but have been discarded because they are musically unsatisfaying.

@@Tracotel I absolutely admire your completion of Bruckner symphony, although I would like to ask some questions. Why the thema from the first movement is considered to be more probable to be the 'Haupthema' mentioned by Auer than the one from the fourth movement? When it will be used the superposition it will include three motives from finale: 1)main theme, 2)fugue and 3)choral. The finale was rich in allusions and quotations from Te Deum, so the fifth thema from Te Deum can be considered a distant part of the finale as well.

@@Sbigneus "Why the thema from the first movement is considered to be more probable to be the 'Haupthema' mentioned by Auer than the one from the fourth movement?" Because the 'Fugenthema' serves as the main theme of the Finale.

@@Sbigneus The 'Quintenthema' is actually just the accompanying motive from the Te Deum, nothing more.

There is often a certain contempt towards English music. Vaughan Williams suffers from the same kind of unjustified underrating.

....yes.....YES, EXACTLY.....BRAVO from Acapulco!