Das Alban Berg Quartett

[snyprrr]

Haydn: Rider, Emperor
Mozart: "late quartets" (387<)
Schubert: Rosamunde, g minor
Brahms 1-3
Dvorak 13
Berg (2)
Webern (3)
Urbanner 3 (1972)

8 cds/$40

I've been dipping into this for hours now. I'm in total shock. Most of the Mozart is virgin listening. Most of the Brahms. I may never need another...well, I guess I better not say that.

The Berg was a relevatory performance, unlike others I've heard.

Everything's so good I may never get to the Webern!!! This just became one of the, if not the most important sets. Maybe someone else, for whom the shock has worn off, can comment.
I'm reeling.

[Herman]

I'm in total shock. Most of the Mozart is virgin listening. Most of the Brahms.

You're saying this is the first time you're hearing these works? Or the first time you hearing the works by the ABQ?

In case it's the former you've got a lot of catching up to do.

[ChamberNut]

Mozart: "late quartets" (387<)

Most of the Mozart is virgin listening.

The Berg was a relevatory performance, unlike others I've heard.

Snyprrr, I have the Mozart late quartets with ABQ.  Terrific, aren't they?  Very happy to hear you are enjoying them!

[snyprrr]

Yes, I have only listened to the "Diss" SQ and the quintets previously. I can feel all the disapproving looks. What am I going to say? I never got around to it, haha.

But I heard the ABQ were the ones, and I have no way of judging these things by comparison, but judging by what I've heard so far, I certainly won't be looking for companions just yet. Just wondering what difference HIP makes. The sound? I mean, in the playing, are you really going to get more refined than this? These guys are hot! And I must say I enjoy the Mozart over the Haydn. More filigree, more fun, -for the first time I can see what the fuss is over. Just don't look down on me because I didn't go the standard route. If all roads lead to Mozart, well, here I am! In him I can really HEAR Vienna!

Yea, I started with Haydn/Naxos many years ago, and, sorry, Haydn's just not my bag, baby, so I've been working backwards.

Yes, I don't even have the Beethoven SQs . I used to have the Amadeus which I thought were great at the time. Don't know why, but I probably "had" to sell it for $$$ thinking I could get them back at any time.

The emperor has no clothes!

[snyprrr]

I am curious about their Dvorak 13, though. This was the only issue that got lukewarm reviews, and I am NOT familiar with the piece, but when I did a virgin listen last night, I found myself slightly disturbed.

Is it supposed to sound like this? Are these the perfect tempos? Is this a "too Vienna" performance? Maybe Dvorak needs a little messiness or something? I did like the clattery-ness of the last mvmt., though, as if the ABQ could barely keep up with the pace of the music. Here's a piece where I'd have to hear some competition.

But, yea, I'm going to ease into the Mozart. Now I know why men retire into the smoking room!!!

[val]

To me the version of Dvorak's opus 106 by the Berg is extraordinary, the best I ever heard. The same as their versions (both of them) of Alban Berg's quartets.
Regarding Schubert, their first version of the Quartet n. 13 "Rosamonde" and their version of the last two Quartets is also the best, in my opinion.
A deep sound, perfect technique, splendid articulation. It is true, however, that they are much better in the dramatic works than in the most lyrical or elegant ones.
This is the reason why I prefer in Brahms Quartets opus 51/2 and 67 other versions (the Lindsays, the Budapest, the Janacek, the Hollywood Quartet), and the same in Mozart (the Mosaiques or the Amadeus).

[Josquin des Prez]

The Teldec ABQ is among the best quartet playing ever put on record. I don't think it gets better then this. The 70s Tokyo line up is just as good, and very under-rated.

[ChamberNut]

The Teldec ABQ is among the best quartet playing ever put on record. I don't think it gets better then this. The 70s Tokyo line up is just as good, and very under-rated.

Any string quartet works in general, or the whole box set?

[DavidW]

I'm going to shake things up!  I've been listening to Berg Q's teldec recordings of the Brahms quartets today, and I find them dry as a bone.  Don't know what I saw in them back when I bought them.  There is no heart in their performances.  Brahms needs more warmth, more soul.

[Mandryka]

I'm going to shake things up! I've been listening to Berg Q's teldec recordings of the Brahms quartets today, and I find them dry as a bone.  Don't know what I saw in them back when I bought them.  There is no heart in their performances.  Brahms needs more warmth, more soul.

Do you think they are all bad?

The reason I ask is that I really dig their Brahms 3.

Who do you go to for the Brahms Quartets?

I like the Dvorak -- I prefer them to the Vlach, which is the only other record I have.

And I also like their late Mozart a lot. In fact I don't think I have heard better

The Teldec ABQ is among the best quartet playing ever put on record. I don't think it gets better then this. The 70s Tokyo line up is just as good, and very under-rated.

That's an interesting comment.

I remember hearing the Tokyo Quartet play in London in the 70s and I was knocked out -- they played some beautiful Schubert.

Then years later I bought my first and only  Tokyo recording -- The Bartok Quartets -- and I was totally disappointed. I never listen to it now -- if I want to hear Bartok I go to the 60s Juilliards.

But which Tokyo recordings do you recommend?

[DavidW]

I like them in Dvorak, but I think that Dvorak is more of a heart-on-sleeve composer, don't really have to work at bringing passion to such passionate music.  I feel like the passion is submerged in the Brahms quartets, hiding under the surface, and ABQ does nothing to drag it up to the top.

I hadn't played around with multiple recordings in Brahms Quartets for years, I was kind of thinking about going back to give Amadeus a fresh listen.

[ChamberNut]

I hadn't played around with multiple recordings in Brahms Quartets for years, I was kind of thinking about going back to give Amadeus a fresh listen.

They get better better with every listen.

[DavidW]

They get better better with every listen.

ABQ or Amadeus?

[ChamberNut]

ABQ or Amadeus?

Amadeus Qt.  It took awhile for me to get used to the tone in that set, but it's grown on me over the last few years.

I do have the late Mozart quartets by ABQ and really enjoy those.

[snyprrr]

dry as a bone.  Brahms needs more warmth, more soul.

Listening to No.3 right now.

I thought the point in Brahms SQs was that they were "difficult" in the "you-have-to-play-them-right-or-they-will-gum-up" way, so that clarifying structure and texture were paramount? I didn't think these SQs were supposed to be Brahms' most "feeling" pieces, that they were supposed to be "serious" additions to the canon, and because they were not Brahms' most appealing works, they were supposed to lack "warmth"?

I was listening to the LaSalle/DG, and, though they had fire and blood and guts, they typical DG chamber sound made everything sound a bit fierce. You certainly can't level any refinement issues against the ABQ.

Compared to the LaSalle, the ABQ take those lightning runs in No.3 much smoother, bolder, and more intense. I simply found the ABQ "tight" and "clean"... perhaps that does translate into "dry", I don't know. Do I dare say Brahms wrote dry SQs?

Again, competition isn't all that... available!, is it? Perhaps the Amadeus works better than LaSalle. What about Melos? Italians? Cleveland? NewBudapest? If the Tokyo did a set, maybe they deliver the requisite warmth? Hmmm...

[snyprrr]

Dear Teldec ABQ Box:

Will you marry me? You are so fine... your Mozart, your Brahms,...ah, the Berg! I love the way you crinkle your Schubert at me ! The way you woke up Haydn for me. I'm even getting used to your funky Dvorak. Oh, ABQ Teldec Box, you're the mostest. I love you more than any box set ever, honestly!

[DavidW]

I thought the point in Brahms SQs was that they were "difficult" in the "you-have-to-play-them-right-or-they-will-gum-up" way, so that clarifying structure and texture were paramount? I didn't think these SQs were supposed to be Brahms' most "feeling" pieces, that they were supposed to be "serious" additions to the canon, and because they were not Brahms' most appealing works, they were supposed to lack "warmth"?

Are you Paulb, did you change your handle?  Well anyway whoever you are Mr. Snipper I don't think Brahms has written anything that lacked warmth.  In the right hands Brahms string quartets can be as passionate and fiery as his piano quartets.

[DavidW]

Amadeus Qt.  It took awhile for me to get used to the tone in that set, but it's grown on me over the last few years.

I do have the late Mozart quartets by ABQ and really enjoy those.

ABQ's Mozart recordings are pretty good but my favorite are the Italians.  They play so well that they even make the early quartets engaging.

[ChamberNut]

Are you Paulb, did you change your handle?  Well anyway whoever you are Mr. Snipper I don't think Brahms has written anything that lacked warmth.  In the right hands Brahms string quartets can be as passionate and fiery as his piano quartets.

I really don't think so David.  Otherwise his obsession would not be of chamber music (particularly string quartets), but with Petersson and Schnittke. 

[DavidW]

I really don't think so David.  Otherwise his obsession would not be of chamber music (particularly string quartets), but with Petersson and Schnittke. 

And he doesn't talk about clips!