the Bartok String Quartets 1-6 taste test ...

[Scion7]

I've got two sets of these, and a digital copy of #3 & #4 by the Emerson Quartet in 320kps mp3.
Most musicologists rate the Bartok string quartets as the most important since Beethoven - and I would agree (not that there are many fine quartets by other composers post-Beethoven - Schubert, Brahms, Shostakovich, the Second Vienese School, etc.)

So let's take the Julliard (1966) vinyl LP  vs.  New Budapest (1992) CD "taste test" -

Front cover:
                AS ALWAYS, CLICK THE PIC TO ENLARGE
The striking font-imagery of the German CBS 1973-edition box set easily blows away the Hyperion 1996-edition of their CD set.

Back cover:

Again, no contest - the teutonic majesty of the Julliard crushes the functional Hyperion New Budapest.

Opening the sets up:


I would say about a tie here - the large format of the LP may give a nod to the Julliard, but the CD can't help it, and Hyperion's looks good.

The descriptive notes:

The Julliard, no question.  The Hyperion notes are very informative and well-written, but the large-scale graphics of the LP set dominate.

Furry critter attraction:   my kat liked to rub on the LP box when it was sitting up against the stereo entertainment center more often than
                                    trying to paw the CD jewelcase for a chin rub - so the Julliard wins here, too

Sound - the Julliard sounded fantastic when first played those 33 years ago, and except for just a few pops on Side 4 that I did to it, still sounds great -
            but so does the CD, so I'll call this one a tie.

Resale value - HA!  Are you kidding me?   

I play the New Budapest Qt Hyperion CD in the car, and the second-recording Julliard CBS LP in the house.


Memory lane (Hugh) -  :

     from Gramophone, May 1966
It must be more than ten years since the Juilliard Quartet recorded the Bartok Quartets for Philips, three records which I remember buying at the time and which formed my introduction to these six works. An excellent introduction it was too. The set has long been deleted, and was never available in stereo, so this new 1966 one, the first disc of which has arrived for review, is most welcome.
And now here's the beginning of yet another set. Choice will be hard to make: there's an embarrassment of it. But if you're willing to pay the full price, decision will probably be between the Hungarians and the Juilliards, for only these two are available in stereo. So far as playing goes the Hungarians have what one might call a built-in advantage, because the idiomatic nature of Bartok's melody writing—and also of some of his effects—is obviously closer to them than to the Americans. One can make too much of the point that only Hungarians can play Hungarian music, but the vividness of the Hungarian Quartet's performances does suggest that those nuances of melodic and rhythmic accentuation that Bartok could never notate absolutely precisely are things it's most helpful to have, as it were, in the blood.
But it must be recalled that it was with their recordings of the Bartok quartets that the Juilliard team really established their reputation—in this country, at least —and though they have changed two of their members since then (second violin and 'cello) they do still play Bartok magnificently. I thought the 'cellist made a disappointingly small, rather tight sound in his solo passages in the introduction to the finale of the first quartet, though he certainly shows a sense of the music's drama here; but one might say that none of the players, save perhaps the violist, impresses much as a soloist and it is, of course, as a team that the Juilliards excel. As before, their collective blend, intonation, rhythm, and the power of their attack, are quite superb. Notable too is the brilliant sound they make, though one might criticize them for favouring so constantly intense a tone—this does become a little wearying, I think, and generally I could wish for more tonal variety.     ~EG

      from Gramophone, December 1993
A journey that begins among the dank mists of late romanticism and ends in a mood of troubled calm, harbouring—midway—some of this century's most terse and belligerent music. Bartok's Third and Fourth Quartets are masterpieces of concision, crafted with a sure sense of symmetry yet charged with a steely passion. Their demands are exacting, their tone uncompromising—more so, in fact than the versicoloured Fifth Quartet, where every movement, even sub-section therein, is precisely timed. "Twenty-seven minutes, thirty-nine seconds" is the Fifth Quartet's prescribed duration (there are no less than 16 timed sub-sections in the finale alone), a sprightly alternative to the New Budapest Quartet's generous 3237". Should that matter? We know that Bartok himself was apt to bend the rules (and we have his recordings to prove it), but that was in music he played himself and could subtly 're-invent' for each performance. The six quartets are more meticulously tooled, their four-part textures timed and coloured with an ear for even the most minute effect. And when it comes to Bartok's sound-world, with its slithery sulponticellos and tactile pizzicatos, the New Budapesters have us reaching for our backscratchers. No, the trouble isn't with sonority, but with a tendency to blunt the music's sharper contours.
The First Quartet's agitatos are not so much ignored as under-interpreted, while Bartok's double fortes seem reluctant to punch. Again, in the Second Quartet, the second movement would have benefited from greater thrust, although its muted, featherlightpreslissimo section is very effective and the eerie sotto voce writing in the last movement, powerfully atmospheric. The Third Quartet goes fairly well, but after an assertive start, the Second Part's Allegro suffers a slight drop in tension (023") and the Allegro mo/to coda hasn't the cathartic impact that the Veghs or Juilliards (CBS, 3/70, 4/70 and 5/70—nla) achieve. Much the same applies to the Fourth, where the Allegro molto's lacerating sforzandos go for little, although the Allegretto pizzicato has more tonal body than on most rival recordings. The Fifth Quartet finds us edging nearer 'late' Bartok (try 414" into the Adagio rnolto for unmistakable premonitions of the Third Piano Concerto), yet the first movement raises some strenuous alarms--too strenuous, alas, for the New Budapesters, who momentarily lose focus at around bar 110 (350" into track 7, disc two). The Al/a bulgarese scherzo is tame, but the two slow movements (the one ingeniously mirroring the other) sound suitably nocturnal. The heart-rending Sixth Quartet is performed with far greater confidence, yet why play down those humorous glissandos at bar 58 in the Marcia (240")? Compare the Veghs at this point, who can't fail to raise a smile.
Production values are high throughout, with superb sound, and excellent documentation by Robert Matthew-Walker. But heard next to the resilient, Gramophone Award-winning Emersons and, more particularly, the wildly spontaneous Véghs, the New Budapest Quartet sound rather too cautious. Although sympathetic to the cause, they fail to clinch the tougher moments—a challenge that their best rivals rise to, and none more so than the Juilliard Quartet, thrice recorded and still not available on CD.     ~ RC

[Bulldog]

I've got two sets of these, and a digital copy of #3 & #4 by the Emerson Quartet in 320kps mp3.
Most musicologists rate the Bartok string quartets as the most important since Beethoven -

That's an interesting claim.  I'm not saying you're wrong or that I disagree, but how do you know it to be an accurate statment?

[Scion7]

Several music books that I have, various reviews over the years, statements from several recording artists, my music professor in college, etc.
Not saying there aren't revisionists out there now.   And personally, I haven't heard anyone else break as much new ground in the string quartet as Bartok since good ol' Ludwig van.

[Scion7]

I suppose the same metric that music critics have used for over two centuries?
How else would, say, Beethoven's Ninth be rated as more important than others?

P.S. Elliott Carter?  Really??  Virtually unknown to the public at large.  On this one Bartok comes out ahead, whatever one's personal tastes are.

[DavidW]

I personally place Beethoven and Bartok on the top tier of string quartets... that is my personal pantheon.

As for the recordings the Juilliard Quartet set is amazing, absolutely intense powerhouse playing... but... I prefer the Takacs Quartet.   You should check their set out Scion7.

[Scion7]

Yes, I have heard theirs and the Tokyo Qt's - nice stuff indeed.
But unless someone wants to trade me for the New Budapest, I have adopted a discipline to really REALLY curtail my spending on tunes - I've got mucho thousands of greenbacks invested already and I have to HALT.  Lol.

[DavidW]

Have you checked out the cdcdcd thread?   I think you'll fit right in!

[Scion7]

?  Link?

Search engine brings several posts with the term but no explanation of what it is, except by inference.

[DavidW]

Enjoy

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,15426.0.html