Listening order for Beethoven's String Quartets (a follow up thread)

[marvinbrown]

  This is a follow up thread to the one I previously posted regarding recommendations for a COMPLETE recording of Beethoven's masterpieces (the string quartets) .  Since then I have acquired the Alban Berg set and tonight I shall start exploring these works which are unfamiliar to me.  Although I pay very little attention to pecking order with many composers when it comes to hearing their works, I find that Beethoven is an exception to this rule- I like to hear how Beethoven "revolutionizes" music taking it from the Classical era and pushing it into the early romantic era (eg. the piano sonatas, symphonies, piano concertos all share these traits).  My intent to is to get the most out of these recordings- doubtfull it would happen on first hearing but - here is my proposed listening order:

  1) Op.18 No.3
  2) Op.18 No.1
  3) Op.18 No.2
  4) Op.18 No.5
  5) Op.18 No.4
  6) Op.18 No.6
  7) Op.59 No.1
  8 ) Op.59 No.2
  9) Op.59 No.3
10) Op.74
11) Op.95
12) Op.127
13) Op.132
14) Op.130
15) Op.133
16) Op.131
and finally  17) Op. 135

  Questions: Is this pecking order meaningless? or do I stand to gain better understanding of these works by following this systematic listening pattern?  What should I look out for?

  marvin

[George]

How did you come up with the order?

I suggest just starting with the earliest Op. and working forward: Op. 18, #1; #2, #3 etc..

This is how I like to listen to any box set, as I like to hear the evolution of the composers work, at least the first time through. 

[marvinbrown]

How did you come up with the order?

I suggest just starting with the earliest Op. and working forward: Op. 18, #1; #2, #3 etc..

This is how I like to listen to any box set, as I like to hear the evolution of the composers work, at least the first time through. 

  Hello, George, that is the chronoligical order (based on dates) that Beethoven composed these works.  I never really understood why the sequence of 1, 2, 3.... did not correspond to the actual sequence dates of composition.

  marvin

[George]

  Hello, George, that is the chronoligical order (based on dates) that Beethoven composed these works.  I never really understood why the sequence of 1, 2, 3.... did not correspond to the actual sequence dates of composition.

  marvin

I've read that he was proudest of #2, that's why it was put first in the Opus. 

[Gabriel]

In my experience, it was easier to enjoy from the beginning the late string quartets. Then I began to explore the earlier ones. But it depends on taste; and it's not sure that listening to them in the composition order will inevitably show you an evolution in all cases. In a same group of compositions (v. gr., op. 18) you will find different problems, and different solutions. The same for the other "groups": I wouldn't say that op. 135 is more complex than op. 130, but it is sure that comparing both will lead you to discover new treasures, and comparing them with earlier groups will certainly show you (in this case it works) an evolution of Beethoven's art.

Beethoven's late string quartets are a formidable example of the struggle of the composers of the late classical period to open new ways for music. Some other examples are almost forgotten because the composers have been neglected for many years: it's the case of Rejcha, with his wind quintets and his bizarre keyboard fugues (among other strange works), or Cherubini with his late vocal works and his group of string quartets.

[George]

  Hello, George, that is the chronoligical order (based on dates) that Beethoven composed these works. 

In that case, it sounds like a splendid idea!   

[BachQ]

Live life on the edge: go for a random ordering .........






You know you want to .........

[hornteacher]

I started with the Op 18 just sampling tracks and stopping on the one that caught my attention the most.  As it happens, it was #4.

[Kullervo]

Rasumovskys first.

[Topaz]

I started with the Op 18 just sampling tracks and stopping on the one that caught my attention the most.  As it happens, it was #4.

I did something similar and finished up with the following "shorter version" of Beethoven's SQs for a "quick fix":

Op  Movement
18/2 - 2
18/3 - 2
18/6 - 1
59/1 - 1
59/2 - 2
74 - 3
127 - 1
130 - 4
131 - 2 & 4
132 - 2
133 - all

[marvinbrown]

  I see from all your posts that there really is no consesus on this issue...just about everything under the sun was proposed.  Two things I found interesting though....listen to what appeals to me the most first and according to D minor be daring (mix things up).....I have decided to do away with the chronological order. I'll start with op.18 no.1 though then jump to some of the middle quartets then a few of the late quartets  then back to the middle and so on. To each his own. Let the adventure begin......

  marvin   

[Bonehelm]

Save the best for last!! op.131, that is.

[Holden]

I started with Op 18 (any of them will do) and then moved on to the Razumovsky's. I didn't go any further until I really knew these works very well.

[Mozart]

Start with op 74, the first mov is awesome.

[marvinbrown]

Start with op 74, the first mov is awesome.

  Last night I started listened to Op.18 No.1, No.2 and No.3.  Of the 3 I found No.3 and No.2 to be the most appealing.  Tonight I'll jump pass the last 3 Op.18s (No.4-6) and into Op.74 as you suggest and Op.95 and Op.127.  I shall leave Op.131 to the end as per Bonehelm recommendation and see what happens.


  marvin

[Mozart]

So how did it go?

[marvinbrown]

So how did it go?

  Very well.  I responded better to these last 3 (Op.74, 95, and 127) than Op.18.  I think I got used to the form and structure of these string quartets after hearing Op.18 which made listening to Op.74 Op.95 and Op.127 easier.  You were right, Op.74 "Harp" is wonderfull, especially the slow opening movement.  These peices are far more emotional than the first quartets (Op.18 1-3).  Tonight I'll finish up the last Op.18 quartets (4-6) and hopefully get to the Op.59 "Rasumovsky", leaving the late quartets for Thrus/Friday.  From what I have read "Rasumovsky" is supposed to be  one of the major highlights of the string quartets!!!


  marvin

[George]

  Very well.  I responded better to these last 3 (Op.74, 95, and 127) than Op.18.  I think I got used to the form and structure of these string quartets after hearing Op.18 which made listening to Op.74 Op.95 and Op.127 easier.  You were right, Op.74 "Harp" is wonderfull, especially the slow opening movement.  These peices are far more emotional than the first quartets (Op.18 1-3).  Tonight I'll finish up the last Op.18 quartets (4-6) and hopefully get to the Op.59 "Rasumovsky", leaving the late quartets for Thrus/Friday.  From what I have read "Rasumovsky" is supposed to be  one of the major highlights of the string quartets!!!


  marvin

You're in for a treat!

Glad to hear you are enjoying your SQ!!! 

[lisa needs braces]

The opus 18 is sublime and somewhat underappreciated due to the latter offerings. That's a shame--they are great works and the perfect introduction to Beethoven's output in this medium.

My set also contains the Opus 29 string quintet, another gem.

[marvinbrown]

The opus 18 is sublime and somewhat underappreciated due to the latter offerings. That's a shame--they are great works and the perfect introduction to Beethoven's output in this medium.

My set also contains the Opus 29 string quintet, another gem.

  Have no fears -abe- I usually relisten to all my cds (I only have about 400) multiple times.  I will go back to these early quartets and do another sweep.  I am new to these works and to chamber music in general, there is plenty of room for further appreciation of these works.

  marvin