Kritik zur 3. Symphonie [am 29.6.1891] im Londoner ”Guardian” Nr. 2379 auf S. 22, signiert ”C. L. G.”:
"               Music.
     [... über Händel und die Musik der Zeitgenossen ...]. Handel saw gems on a dunghill and set them in the diadem of his genius. The moral of this somewhat cynical reasoning would seem to be that thieving is only permissible in one who can give as good as he takes. This maxim has recently received a striking illustration in the new symphony introduced by Dr. Richter, at his last concert but one. The composer, Herr Bruckner, is no novice, having been born as far back as 1824. His familiarity with the science and literature of his art is sufficiently attested by the fact that he has long held a professorship at the Vienna Conservatorium. He enjoys a great reputation as a remarkably fine organist, and he has written, inter alia, seven symphonies, on the last of which, performed at one of the Richter concerts in 1887, his fame as a composer chiefly rests. The work now under consideration, No. 3, in D minor, has been thoroughly revised, so that it cannot be regarded as an immature or early work. In its remodelled form it has been produced recently in Vienna and with the most brillant succes. Those, however, who had heard No. 7, felt certain migivings [sic] as to the character of No. 3. If the supreme manifestation of Bruckner's genius proved little more than a sonorous medley of Wagnerian reminiscences, what might be not be expected from the earlier work? The key of D minor, again, was ominous. Still there was the enthusiasm of the Viennese as a guarantee of merit, and the fact that Dr. Richter had twice performed the work in the Austrian capital. Unluckily the result has more than justified all these forebodings. Herr Bruckner, with all his learning–or, perhaps, because of all his learning–has not escaped perpetrating one of the naïvest "cribs" on record. He starts away in D minor, and with one of the most characteristic themes from the Choral Symphony of Beethoven also in the same key. The theme is diluted, but it is unmistakable, and it is brought back in the finale. Other Beethovenish reminiscences abound.  For the rest the symphony is, to use a favourite word of the author of the analytical programmes, extremely "strepitous." Herr Bruckner here has the advantage of Beethoven; he has a bigger band, and he makes all possible use of it. The work is not dull; it is a strange mixture of learning and frivolity, like a professor masquerading as a pierrot. But it is one of the most remarkable examples of which we are aware of the dangers of the giant's robe in music. The Viennese must be strangely forgetful of their greatest composer. As for Dr. Richter, we can only explain the anomaly on the supposition that the immense amount of music he has produced has tended to blunt his critical faculties.                 C. L. G."