Started by BachQ, April 12, 2007, 05:11:55 AM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: snyprrr on October 03, 2009, 11:15:57 AMI've been listening SSs SQs courtesy of the Miami SQ on Conifer. I'd been waiting a while to get to know these two (I'd actually been interested in this issue when it first came out in 1992. Saint-Saens, with the Faure?,...who couldn't go for that combo?!!), and I had dipped into them via the SilverTrustEditions, but now I sat back, and...Whaaa???... well, honestly, these are some fairly anonymous SQs. I'm almost thinking Spohr here, updated slightly. There's nothing offensive, and unlike Franck, or Deb/Rav, or any other French SQ from the 20th century (@), these two are more in the old fashioned "classical music" mold of just straight up SQs.My first reaction was that I'd like to hear another version. Though the Miami come fairly well recommended, I just sensed that there could be more sumptousness in these pieces. The notes say that Faure commented that SS was "not successful" in his SQ endeavor, and, I can't vouch for what he was talking about, but, yes, ultimately these two SQs might just leave a slight bit to be desired. On the other hand, in a spectacularly A+ rendition, these two might take on a totally different life. They certainly seem to be able to withstand a more vigourously Romantic approach, with silkier smoother sound, than they get here. Perhaps had the Cleveland Quartet...I remember Gurn was thinking that these two might be "right up my alley." Mmmm, perhaps, but based now on full listenings, they have gone quite quickly into the wallpaper part of the collection. As far as I know, they are the available versions:Quatour Viotti/EratoMiami Quartet/ConiferMedici/KochEquinox SQ/??? (this one has gotten some good reviews)and, I think that that's it. Does anyone have any compares?I'll be honest. I'm listening to No.2 (1919) right now, and I'm having no problems with it. It's just nice, unobtrusive classical style SQ playing, in a very smooth, vanilla coating,... a touch on the sweet side, but not too much,... nothing really memorable, but very easy on the ears. Still, the Spohr comparison seems to stick for me.The first SQ (1899) might be a bit more of its time (though still very old fashioned), but No.2 definitely is the laaast word on the 19th century, so out of place does it seem in 1919. Maybe Saint-Saens and Glazunov, then, are the last of the last?I have enjoyed SS's late wind sonatas (and I'm familiar with the war horses), but I feel as though my interest in this composer has seen its last day. Here's to the old poofter, ha! Poor guy...ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz....zzzz....zzzz...
Quote from: snyprrr on October 07, 2009, 10:12:21 AMI still don't know how much I'm enjoying these SQs.
Quote from: snyprrr on October 07, 2009, 10:12:21 AMI still don't know how much I'm enjoying these SQs. No one has any opinion?
Quote from: ChamberNut on October 07, 2009, 11:20:03 AMRevised stats for Snyprrr:The Great and Well Loved Romantic Era String QuartetsLike - 9Dislike - 9740.9241% likes
Quote from: DavidW on October 07, 2009, 11:53:44 AMWe should make gmg cards like baseball cards!
Quote from: snyprrr on October 09, 2009, 08:42:13 AMok, DavidW and Chambernut:How do YOooU rate Saint-Saens SQs? Do the themes bounce through your head after only the first listen? Do their rhythmic elan whisk you off your feet? Do they make good wallpaper?Don't blame me just because music died for 75 years!
Quote from: snyprrr on September 27, 2010, 07:20:34 AMAnyone have opinions of the PIANO QUARTET? Or, what's yer fav SS chamber work? Some have liked the Clarinet Sonata the best.
Quote from: Mirror Image on September 29, 2010, 04:45:02 PMOn most days, Saint-Saens bores the living hell out of me, but I do enjoy his Piano Concertos and Danse Macabre. Other than that, he's mostly fluff to me.
Page created in 0.098 seconds with 24 queries.