Haydn SQ Blind Listening Impressions, Spoilers

[Josquin des Prez]

So how do i participate in this game? I don't see any links to those samples anywhere.

[Que]

So how do i participate in this game? I don't see any links to those samples anywhere.

PM DavidW - he will PM the links to you.

Q

[DavidW]

Yup I've PMd you the links now.

[Gurn Blanston]

OK, my Group B favorites, most favorite first;

   
• 12
• 04
• 05
• 07
• 02
• 09
• 08
• 06
• 10
• 11
• 03

Tempo was an issue for the lower scorers, and to some extent I missed out on the humor I was hoping to hear in this lovely minuet. #12 had what I was hoping for, as did #4.

[Josquin des Prez]

Ok, i'm done with group A. As expected, 4 wins out in the end, but i've always been a big fan of this recording so no surprises here. Recognized who they were instantly, and i have an hunch they are going to win on group B as well.

As for the rest:

2) Didn't like it. The intonation is all wrong for one, which is amusing considering how much energy they put into embellishing some of the details (where they should be doing other things). I find this performance a bit sour and ultimately kinda boring.

3) This one seems exceedingly rushed by comparison, and there's no joy anywhere in this effort, just a need to get things done. There doesn't seem to be a lot of communication among the players as well. Also is it me or they sound out of tune?

5) Ok, this ensemble is a lot more focused then the first two. The musicians actually seem to be in tune with each other, but the music seems disjointed for some reason. It just doesn't flow as effortlessly as it should. I think they often just get distracted by the smaller details.

6) This one is actually pretty good. The musicians seem able to bring out a lot of hidden detail. Still, the music doesn't flow in this one either, there is no forward movements, no momentum. I think its because the musicians don't allow the music to breath out, everything just seems so tidy and under control, its comes out sort of "clipped off". No edges or contours to be found here.

7) I find this to be actually somewhat of a bad recording. The sound quality makes the music sound distant and detached, and so does the overall playing to be frank. Its a pity because the performance is actually pretty good. They tend to pretty things up a little too much for my taste but they do bring out a lot interesting detail.

8 ) Ok, they get a lot of things right. The detail is good, the music actually seems to be moving in a continuous forward motion, doesn't sound as disjointed as some of the other recordings, despite the fact the pacing is somewhat even and often deliberate. Ok, maybe a bit too deliberate.

9) Ok, its number 3 all over again, except this time the music seems to be in a different key as well, for some reason.

10) Another rushed recording, but at least they sound in tune.

11) Lots of good detail and you can tell the musicians are very good, but the pacing is all wrong. They also seem to be confusing violence for intensity.

12) This is Haydn, right? Wouldn't be able to tell judging by this performance. Sounds more like Mozart, and not in a good way, since it is a misconception that Mozart ought to sound like this. A lot of great detail and the playing is perfectly in focus, i just don't like this approach at all. I actually find it unnerving after a while.

So, as i said, number 4 wins out in the end. They get everything right. The detail is great without sounding overtly technical. Intonation is perfect, the instruments blend perfectly together without obscuring each other. The music is full of all wonderful quirks and turns but not once you get the impression they have to mess with the pacing to get that out. Indeed, the pacing is what makes this recording so good. Everything is perfect, the timing, the momentum, you actually feel grabbed by the music and it never lets you go. Unlike the other recordings, you actually feel frustrated that the music brakes off all of a sudden. So much so i pulled out my own copy of the recording and listened to the entire quartet. Heh.

[DavidW]

Thanks JdP, could you rank them from greatest to least?

[Que]

Group B

2. Mmmhh. OK, I guess. Doesn't do much for me, a bit bland & anemic.

3. Slow and stately - it seems it can get worse... Boring, boring.

4. Better tempo-wise! It sounds it a bit more lifely, but then it slowly fades away.... Still not the Haydn I know. Old fashioned phrasing

5. First one that is above average! Nice nuanced phrasing and nice up-tempo when needed. This actually goes somewhere.

6. Middle of the road. Don't like the overall sound of the ensemble.

7. This one sounds nice, subtle. Fortunately they speed up halfway as well. Still a bit too careful and polite. But good.

8. Apart from the oddly distant recording this doesn't do it for me. Plain and forgettable.

9. Slow and brooding - old fashioned.

10. Refined and sublte playing. Needs a little kick though.

11. Not bad, not bad. Nice but needs more fire. Technically good and detailed playing.

12. Easily the favourite! The first one - of both groups (!) that I really like. Phrasing, tempo and rhythm is perfect. Haleluja!

So: the winner is no. 12. Then (in that order): no. 5, no. 4, no. 7, no, 11, and then the rest. No really bad ones this time - just a lot walking on the middle of the road.

Q

[Gurn Blanston]

Group A

I'm sure we all have a feeling how this should sound, and so one compares that model to each of the samples and comes out with the choice that is nearest his personal ideal. For me, that ideal should be a strong and vital pulse in the cello to open the work. Without that, whatever else follows is hard pressed to make up the difference. Tempo is the key factor, and articulation. YMMV, of course. 

   
• 2 - The tempo and ensemble are close to ideal for me. The downside is that the recording seems muffled, which takes a lot of the edge off from it. The edge is important.
• 4 - This version is nearly perfect. Clearly an older recording, but it has the features that I look for. I particularly like the way the 2nd violin takes over the cello part when it comes to him. No lagging in the tempo, it's a perfect handoff.
• 6 - This one is nearly as good as #4. The tempo of the cello is not as consistent (it should be), sounds like he is speeding up. Overall a bit more subdued than #4, but I liked it.
• 7 - I would really have liked to hear the cello more up front in this recording, once the entire ensemble plays, the cello seems to get lost a bit. However, I like the playing throughout.
• 11 - Playing is good, better than the recording. Like the previous, the cello gets lost. This shouldn't happen, the cello is the main instrument in this movement, and that isn't by accident. It was composed for the King of Prussia, a devoted cellist.
• 9 - I felt that the tempo was too fast in this version. Sounds like the players are on the edge of losing it a bit. Some of the notes are getting lost. Which is a shame, really, because I like the sound overall.
• 10 - Another version that is a tad too fast. I really did like the recording mix though, the inner voices actually were very clear and it was nice to hear what they had to say for a change!
• 8 - Here, the tempo slows down again. The cello seems tentative rather than assertive. I had a hard time coming up with what I got from this; it seems like it is hard work for them to play it. Where's the joy?
• 12 - I had much the same impression of this one. The 1st violin is like a Border Collie; the flock mills around until he shows up, and then they are like 'Thank God, the Border Collie is here!'.   
• 5 - The basic concept of the opening is wrong. There is no articulation in the cello, rather it is a sort of rolling slur. But what is he slurring? It is individual notes! After the intro though,  I liked what they were doing. It was a sort of love/hate thing at the start though.
• 3 - Whoa! Can we get done soon enough? I didn't like this at all. All character goes by the wayside at this speed. It isn't as though they couldn't play the notes, it was more like my ears couldn't keep up with them.

Well, my standards only apply to myself, how lucky you all are! 

[DavidW]

I will post the two ensembles that were only in one group each and won't be included in the final rankings for the sake of fairness.

The Buchberger Quartet appeared only in group A as #3.  By far they were the least popular ensemble as they were rushed to the point of being unmusical. 


A surprise victor, the Schuppanzigh Quartet appeared only in group B as #12 but swept away the competition, narrowly defeating the ultimate champion!  If they were included in group A they might have won this competition.  I know nothing of this ensemble, I've never heard of them before, and I leave it to Gurn (who gave me this track) to talk about the ensemble.  The dance like tempo, perfect phrasing and raw power makes this a recording to not miss.
[asin]B001NG3QBA[/asin]

[Gurn Blanston]

Well, I'm delighted that the Schuppanzigh's won their Group. I have been touting this group for a long time, it's a pity they are not better known. There are two names that PI people will recognize; Anton Steck is 1st Violin, he is in my top 3 fiddlers working today. He kills in Vivaldi, and I have him right up through Schubert (with Robert Hill). The other is Christian Gooses, a very fine violist. He and Steck also do a great job on the 6 Duos for Violin & Viola by Haydn. The quartet have several nice disks, including  Brunetti and two disks by Ries. So they play out of the mainstream music, but they play it very well.

[DavidW]

The losers (don't kill the messenger, you said it not me!):

10.  The Festetics Quartet (#9 in group A, #6 in group B) is too rushed in group A, suffers from poor phrasing and intonation from the violin, while also sounding frankly mediocre to yield much interest.  It should be noted that this ensemble still performed significantly better than the Buchbergers.



9. The Salomon Quartet (#2 in group A, #8 in group B) suffers from sounding bland, with poor intonation and tempo, and poor sound quality on top of it.


8. The Tatrai Quartet (#6 in group A, #9 in group B) which was simply too slow and not dynamic enough.

[DavidW]

The middle:

7. Nothing screams middle of the road like the Kodaly Quartet (#8 in group A, #3 in group B) which is too slow, plodding but with elegant playing.
[asin]B000009OM8[/asin]

6. The Auryn Quartet (#12 in group A, #7 in group B) is too slow and fussy, and while they played with a slightly better sense of tempo in group B, the reverbant sound was really not helping them shake their overly polite approach.
[asin]B002UCTAZW[/asin]

5. The Lindsays (#10 in group A, #2 in group B) made a very strong positive impression in group A as sounding balanced with excellently judged tempos, phrasing, everything just coming together to give the champions a run for their money.  Unfortunately the way they handled themselves in group B was as poor as the former was strong.  Competent yet so bland and anemic that it was one of the worst performers in group B.  Thus the Lindsays offer consistent polish, but uneven inspiration.
[asin]B000001HOT[/asin]

4. The Nomos Quartet (#5 in group A, #5 in group B) made a poor impression in group A with an overly fussy performance lacking in momentum.  They really made up for it though in group B with excellently judged phrasing and swift tempo, they like the Schuppanzigh barely out performed the champion.  However their hit and miss quality and overly warm acoustic still puts them in the middle list.

[Madiel]

HA! I liked the Festetics better than anyone else did. TWICE! 

[DavidW]

The better recordings:

3. The Amati Quartet (#11 in group A and #11 in group B) is a surprising winner (never heard of them before, Gurn gave me their tracks), performing strongly in both groups.  In group A it was characterized as Beethovenian and overly intense, in group B they took an understated approach.  While only winning the adoration of one, the Amati Quartet never the less won consistent favor from all.


2. The Angeles Quartet (#7 in group A and #10 in group B) offers very refined yet emotional performances with well judged dance like tempo and excellent phrasing.  Unfortunately the poor distant acoustic comprises their performances.  Still the listeners found the performances rewarding despite the poor sound quality.
[asin]B007CW2FGG[/asin]

[DavidW]

The best: The Tokyo Quartet

This recording has won consistent high praise from seasoned, discerning collectors among most forums.  It has been out of print for many years but it's legacy endures.  The Tokyo Quartet (#4 in group A, #4 in group B) performs with joy, wit, emotional depth, with perfectly judged tempos, phrasing, articulation.  They find the soul of Haydn, while still keeping the wit.  The Tokyo Quartet play vivaciously while still sounding refined, elegant, graceful.  They understand and revel in the balance it takes to perform Haydn better than any other in this listening contest.  They were and still are the kings of the Op 50 String Quartets. 0:)


You may purchase it from Amazon Marketplace or reissued on Arkivmusic.

Thank you all for participating in this blind listening.

[Madiel]

And thank you David for organising it!

I had better get over my mixed feelings from the Tokyo in Group B and accept their interpretative decisions, because their Group A was simply marvellous.

[DavidW]

Your welcome Orfeo, I hope that this experience really opened your eyes and heart to these fine string quartets.  They are in my opinion the greatest string quartets of the classical era.

[Madiel]

Your welcome Orfeo, I hope that this experience really opened your eyes and heart to these fine string quartets.  They are in my opinion the greatest string quartets of the classical era.

Hmm, well yes, already a big Haydn fan, but...

...to be honest, now I'm darn worried about the fact that I know and love Op.71, 74 and 76 thanks to the Kodaly! I think their reviews for those later quartets were stronger than for the earlier ones, but still... I didn't exactly compliment the two Kodaly selections from op.50.

Knowledge is a dangerous thing, David. 

[DavidW]

Soon Orfeo you will have to post on the cdcdcd thread!

[madaboutmahler]

Thank you so much for this, David. I was so pleased to see that the top 3 was my own personal 3 favourites, just in reverse order! I shall definitely try and purchase these in the future.