~HIP SQs~

[snyprrr]

Joseph Martin Kraus/Lysell Qrt. (Musica Sveciae)

Four major key SQs, only one with 4 mvmts. Very Mozartean, friendly and warm. SQ No.5 is played with HIP instruments, though the players' style does not sound different. Check Kraus thread.

[snyprrr]

I'm getting to that point where just about anything I would be interested in this area is going to start costing the big $$$. I'm trying to slowly back out of this before I run out of gas money.

I'm interested in the French and their contribution to the origins of the SQ: Gossec, Gretry, Vachon, Davaux, Saint-Georges. Which one of these composers would be most worthy of my attention?

[snyprrr]

Gretry: Six SQs Op.3 (1761-65; 1773)/ KochSchwann-"Haydn Quartett"

wellwellwell... you classical era guys keep telling me I'm not going to get what I'm looking for in this era, ah, but here was a perfect example. Just sample the opening Larghetto of the SQ No.6 in c minor: I seriously haven't heard this style yet in my classical survey. This is exactly what I was talking about. It almost reminds me of Finzi, ha, but not quite!

I was very hesitant about this music, but from the very first note it was a tonic in the midst of my "HaydnPleyelMozartBoccherini" slog. This is certainly not Haydnesque SQ writing. It's all very light (no mvmt. really lasts longer than 4mins.), but the melodic appeal is right there. Right there. Haydn could develop all day long if he had Gretry's melodic appeal.

I've heard that the new version of these SQs (within the last year or two)... sucks. The reviewer (Arkivmusic) said the recording (and possibly the playing) were not "so." However, this Koch 1991 release is "so," and I find it just simply, as they say, delightful. I got mine for $9.99. I think there's one or two more cheap copies on Amazon before they get to be $100!

You want... you need... you get!

It will be interesting to compare this with the Gossec Op.15.

[snyprrr]

Well, I'm at the $$$ crossroads. Every purchase hereafter will have to be done carefully.

Richter Op.5 vs Albrechtsberger Op.7

Whom will I love more?

[snyprrr]

Well, I'm slowly coming to the realization, for good or no, that Haydn is pretty much the man here, with Mozart the clear exception.

It's just that everyone is infused with Haydn, or Haydn's style is infused with everyone. However, Haydn seems to have "phases," some of which I like better than others (early/late vs. middle). In a way, I still find Haydn quite businesslike, which sometimes brings me down, considering he is the best going.

I'll go as far to say that Mozart's SQs sound like they're from another planet altogether. K387 seems to come out of nowhere. Nobody was writing half-hour SQs but him (after Haydn Op.20), a feat not taken up with regularity until middle-period LvB. As far as I know, 59/1 is the first "epic" SQ. Please, please let me know any others. I know that later Haydn gets a bit more expansive.

One thing I noticed about Haydn @Opp.50-64 is that he actually begins to "sound like everyone else," or everyone at the time is just sucking off the same teat. Regardless of Haydn utilizing 4 mvmts. as opposed to every else's 3, during this time, everyone except Mozart was writing 15-19min. SQs, as if by consensus a quarter hour SQ had been deemed the standard. Perhaps this is what was "commercial?"

Speaking of which, it appears that Pleyel and Dittersdorf might be trying to out do one another at one point. Both have a very extrovert, "populist," mercantile sound, Pleyel especially in his "Prussian" SQs. All this seems to come together in the late 1780s, leading up to Mozart's death, after which it appears "The Song Remains the Same" until Beethoven's Op.18 (1800).

I will have to complete my Haydn survey, and I would like to try one more Boccherini, but I really would like to try some others, such as Vanhal, but again, this is an area the record companies haven't got to... and may not. Ah, well...

[DavidW]

Well Mr Snipper unlike orchestral works, chamber works require all players to be playing almost all of the time, which is pretty exhausting.  Mozart and Beethoven might have stretched some of those works by 10-15 minutes or so, but it stopped by then for the most part.

I despise your labeling Haydn's music as businesslike.

[snyprrr]

Point one: interesting about the timings/playing!

Point two: actually, I wouldn't have used that term, but I was reading the liner notes to this Kraus disc, where, in the spirit of hero worship, Kraus went to Haydn expecting Haydn, the genius, to be all romantic philosophizing, etc., and was disappointed in "the maestro's business-like attitude, openly declared, towards composing. Young and romantic Kraus... had presumably believed that Haydn, the Genius, would be above such mundane things and would, instead, disseminate philosophical precepts on life and music."

And, as everyone keeps reminding me concerning classical vs. romantic, that ultimately these guys were trying to make a living.

I'll slightly amend, saying, all business is not bad! However, Haydn's "cool" emotions post-Sturm&Drang (not business-like THERE!!!) do, to me, illicit a cool, businesslike manner, but please don't confuse that with "pencil pusher." Either way, I do understand how that word might offend. Point taken. However, sometimes I might think Haydn is a bit too "professional." Sometimes I like a bit of...mmm...

[snyprrr]

I wish Supraphon/Panton would issue a box set of all their Stamic SQ recordings, including Vanhal, Kozeluh, Vranicky, Myslivecek, Gyrowitz, Klusak, and Rosler (who is Rosetti?), and what ever else they may have. That'd be pretty sweet.

[Herman]

I'll go as far to say that Mozart's SQs sound like they're from another planet altogether. K387 seems to come out of nowhere. Nobody was writing half-hour SQs but him (after Haydn Op.20), a feat not taken up with regularity until middle-period LvB. As far as I know, 59/1 is the first "epic" SQ. Please, please let me know any others. I know that later Haydn gets a bit more expansive.

Mozart C major Quintet, K 515 is very expansive. BTW listening to Haydn contemporaries as a way to figure out how music got to LvB is something a lot of people have been very busy with in the past, and it's an approach we seem to have left behind at last.

One thing I noticed about Haydn @Opp.50-64 is that he actually begins to "sound like everyone else," or everyone at the time is just sucking off the same teat.

This observation is based on listening to 30 second snippets on amazon?

[/quote]

[Herman]

Well Mr Snipper unlike orchestral works, chamber works require all players to be playing almost all of the time, which is pretty exhausting.  Mozart and Beethoven might have stretched some of those works by 10-15 minutes or so, but it stopped by then for the most part.

I despise your labeling Haydn's music as businesslike.

In really good quartet writing there are lots of bars were only three fiddles play, so one of the players can rest his fingers for a couple secs.

[snyprrr]

I was at SilverTrustEditions when I ran across this SQ by Wranitzky/Vranicky for the King of Prussia. I believe it is on some OOP cd on Supraphon/Panton...

but it was one of the most immediately appealing classical era SQs I've heard. I admit that this time it was only four snippets, H!, but I imagine this Op. must be one of THE 6packs! (Op.23, I believe)

You're going to have to listen for yourself, but I do hear a lot of that Mozart influence stuff going on here with the chromatics. I'm not saying nuthin, but hey, check it out!

Also, STE had an early Krommer SQ that reallly had immediate appeal. It does appear more and more that there is a lot of stuff we may never hear.

[snyprrr]

Excuse me, but I thought his thread was about string quartets written before 1800, not quartets written in the 1800s. If the 19th century is in the mix, then the quartets of Louis Spohr should also be considered.  And the 19th century is a time frame rich in string quartets...

We have officially upgraded: all HIP SQs "plus!"

[snyprrr]

That's a good disk. Not only good music, but nice playing from that group. I bought the downloads, thus no liner notes. My loss...

I just listened to this cd. This is some very...mmm...thoughtful,...and complex work. There's a lot going on at any given moment, but everything is handled very well indeed. This is very substantial and attractive music. I'll use the word "sublime."

And keep in mind that some of these SQs may have been written in 1757!

[DavidW]

And keep in mind that some of these SQs may have been written in 1757!

Excuse my ignorance, but what's so special about that year?

[snyprrr]

Supposedly, Haydn wrote the first SQs in 1759, so...

And hey, I'm not one to... but... either way, Richter's SQs are 3 mvmts. as opposed to Haydn's 5 (they were 5, right?)...Richter sounds more mature, to me, than Haydn Op.20, but Haydn is more memorable. I better watch my words 'round these parts, though, haha!!

Either way, unless Richter sounds like Opp. 9/17 of Haydn, then Richter is his own man. It's hard for me not to think that Mozart heard these SQs.

[DavidW]

Oh but they're not string quartets, they are divertimenti written in the roccoco style, am I right?  The first composer to employ a string quartet was Francesco Geminiani in 1732, and they were essentially extended trio sonatas, probably the same as Richter.  Haydn was famous for creating a classical form, that revolutionized harmony.  It's the form of the music that made his string quartets ground breaking, and not the ensemble.

[snyprrr]

I don't think the Richter's are coming off as divertimenti. I think Gurn has this music, maybe he knows better.

I hear what you're saying, but I think the Richter Op.5 is supposed to really be SQs proper. They are quite substantial and highly worked out.

Even the notes seem to be backing them up as legit. And I think Richter IS credited with "creating" this contrapuntal+opera style, which does sound different than Haydn (though I still haven't heard Opp.9/17).

Speculation that some of them were written by 1757 DOES raise the stakes, though, doesn't it? I'm not trying to start a conspiracy theory, but the Richter SQs seem more like SQs proper than Haydn Opp.1-2, which are certainly more in the divertimento "way". Either way, Richter's precede Haydn's Opp.9/17/20, so...

Like I said, I'm not writing a book on this, I'm just sayin...

[DavidW]

And I think Richter IS credited with "creating" this contrapuntal+opera style, which does sound different than Haydn (though I still haven't heard Opp.9/17).

Wrong.  Haydn is rich in counterpoint, that is what makes the High Classical era what it is, it's the fusion of the rococo style with contrapuntal textures that were so en vogue in the baroque era.  You absolutely can not say that Haydn does not sound like that.  That is his legacy.

Richter did not create counterpoint, it is the stamp of the entire baroque era!  What are you talking about!?!  Are you just copying little snippets that you read in liner notes?

[snyprrr]

Are you just copying little snippets that you read in liner notes?

OF COURSE I AM !!!

[snyprrr]

Wrong.  Haydn is rich in counterpoint, that is what makes the High Classical era what it is, it's the fusion of the rococo style with contrapuntal textures that were so en vogue in the baroque era.  You absolutely can not say that Haydn does not sound like that.  That is his legacy.

To me, Op.20 sounds like a final refinement of what I hear on the Richter, but the Richter obliges me to hear Opp.9/17. I don't know (it seems not?) if R & H knew each other, but merely from the evidence of this set (Op.5) I'd say Richter has "the" sound...I don't know how equal or advanced it is from Opp.9/17, but I can imagine it being equal to Op.20, with the bonus of being totally different. I'm just saying that this Richter set sounds pretty mature for 1757-68, considering Op.9 comes out in 1770.

Richter did not create counterpoint, it is the stamp of the entire baroque era!  What are you talking about!?! 

I didn't say Richter created counterpoint , I was pointing out that (as the wonderful notes so eloquently stated ) Richter was right there when they invented CountryRock, um...when the baroque counterpoint and the new "opera" style, like peanut butter and chocolate, came together for the first time, two great tastes, that taste great together.

Either way, I feel like I need to hear Opp.9/17 now (I am curious about that Op.9 d minor quartet).