Blind Comparison: Schubert String Quintet D. 956 / Op. 163

[Pat B]

Group A. I have notes but don't have time to edit them into something readable. Sorry.

Favorite listed first.

A3
A4
A2
A7
A1
A8
A6
A5

[Brahmsian]

Group A. I have notes but don't have time to edit them into something readable. Sorry.

Favorite listed first.

A3
A4
A2
A7
A1
A8
A6
A5

  I seem to be the oddball in this group. 

[Pat B]

  I seem to be the oddball in this group. 

Don't worry. In the Waldstein comparison I put Biss first and Serkin 1975 in the bottom half. I knew Biss was unconventional and not for everybody, but I did not expect Serkin to coast easily to victory. (I'm using the names retroactively.)

[Jo498]

Now B, only very brief remarks. I did not have leisure for extended comparisons (basically two runs through and some spotlighting). I do not bother with hiding as almost all the votes should be in by now.

Yeah B2 more flowing tempo; dramatic, big, bold, maybe slightly over the top, but exciting. Less fond of the 2nd theme, which feels a little to hectic/tense ++
Yeah B7 Quite dramatic, strong contrasts, engaging interpretation
Yeah B6 big sound, big contrasts, very soft and melancholy cello theme. Transparency quite good. This is quite interesting, although could do with a little more drive.
Yeah B1 both mellow and melancholy, good with inner/subordinate voices; overall a little too slow and not dramatic enough, but interesting, +
Yeah B8 almost orchestral, huge and reverbrant sound, maybe a cheap thrill, but overall quite impressive.

Meh B3 nice presence of lower/inner voices, but not very dramatic or contrastful, not bad, but not very engaging either-
Meh B4 slowish, but considerably more contrast/drama than in B3, still not that extraordinary
Meh B5 older mono? recording, somewhat harsh sound, also not very special IMO.


Thanks for the organization! I am looking forward to the revelation of the "losers"

[Jo498]

On another (more spoilery  ) note, unless one of the remaining voters manages to score an upset, it looks like we will be bidding a sad farewell to two of the most famous Adagios on record quite soon.

I was not aware that there are recordings especially famous for their adagios... In any case I am very excited about revelations and wonder if one of the 16 I listened to is actually on my shelves (about a dozen, but I did not recognize any... which does not mean a lot...)

[amw]

Thanks for the last minute votes Pat B and Jo498! Confirmed eliminated in group A are A6 and A8 (with a tie for sixth between A1 and A2), confirmed eliminated in group B are B1, B4 and B6.

Due to the tie (which prior to Pat B's vote was a tie between A1 and A6...) and the relatively small number of participants I've decided to reorganise the Scherzi into three groups of seven recordings each. Thus, 11 recordings will be eliminated.

A3, B2, B7, C3, D2, and D3 have yet to receive any "meh" or "nay" votes, with B2, B7 and D3 receiving two distinction awards each.

Expect results in about 4 hours once I get back from work, and Groups E, F or G to be in your PM inboxes shortly after that

[Jay F]

Thanks for the last minute votes Pat B and Jo498! Confirmed eliminated in group A are A6 and A8 (with a tie for sixth between A1 and A2), confirmed eliminated in group B are B1, B4 and B6.

Due to the tie (which prior to Pat B's vote was a tie between A1 and A6...) and the relatively small number of participants I've decided to reorganise the Scherzi into three groups of seven recordings each. Thus, 11 recordings will be eliminated.

A3, B2, B7, C3, D2, and D3 have yet to receive any "meh" or "nay" votes, with B2, B7 and D3 receiving two distinction awards each.

Expect results in about 4 hours once I get back from work, and Groups E, F or G to be in your PM inboxes shortly after that

Thanks, amw.

[Cato]

Thanks for the last minute votes Pat B and Jo498! Confirmed eliminated in group A are A6 and A8 (with a tie for sixth between A1 and A2), confirmed eliminated in group B are B1, B4 and B6.

Due to the tie (which prior to Pat B's vote was a tie between A1 and A6...) and the relatively small number of participants I've decided to reorganise the Scherzi into three groups of seven recordings each. Thus, 11 recordings will be eliminated.

A3, B2, B7, C3, D2, and D3 have yet to receive any "meh" or "nay" votes, with B2, B7 and D3 receiving two distinction awards each.

Expect results in about 4 hours once I get back from work, and Groups E, F or G to be in your PM inboxes shortly after that

Many thanks for your efforts!

I have always found the second movement rather enigmatic, and even arcane. Its mysterious subtleties can sabotage some players: so this will be an interesting test!

[amw]

Round 1 Results

Group A

Group A was, in short, a murderfest. Every recording received at least a "like", and every recording (except one, A3) also received at least one "meh" or worse. Inevitably, the recordings to be eliminated would be someone's favourites. But that could be true of every group here, I think.

#8 - A8

You said:
"thin sounding, dynamics are on a high treble, not enough of the low registers"
"quite contrastful, dramatic beginning [...] this is one of the more intense readings"
"The contrast between the higher pitched and lower pitched lines is quite striking. There is perhaps a bit too much accent from the upper line, but the bite is quite effective."
"Papery recorded sound, thin and harsh, with lots of breathing [...] the Big Tune is just too fast for me"

A decent send-off—with mixed praise and criticism (usually of the sound quality)—for the
[asin]B008FEHZA6[/asin]
Alban Berg Quartett
Heinrich Schiff (vc)

One of the first digital recordings, and many people's reference, fallen at the first gate. Much of the intensity, as well as the balance problems and absence of repeats in a medium that held more than enough storage space to allow for them, can be attributed to the leadership of first violin Günter Pichler, who sped through the recording session (he was due to travel to Salzburg the same day for a beard trim) and criticised the new digital medium as "never being able to replace the LP". "I think there is a world market for maybe five of these 'compact discs'," he was reported as saying. Furthermore, his insistence on hogging the microphone (EMI's second microphone was in the shop at the time) disaffected Valentin Erben and Heinrich Schiff that they later recorded their own versions of the Quintet with different ensembles, although without ever successfully dislodging the ABQ from the repertoire. (This comparison is, of course, another story! 0:) )

#7 - A6

You said:
"I can't quite put my finger on what is bothering me here [...] Tempo may also be too rigid at times. Despite all this, the playing is quite good."
"very "warm" and full/fuzzy "orchestral" sound [...] this feels emotionally rather neutral."
"overall excellent, clear recording, sound and great overall dynamics"
"not sending me as much. More contrast!"

It was
[asin]B004PGNV24[/asin]
Quatuor Sine Nomine
François Guye (vc)

The Quartet With No Name, with its trademark ten-gallon hats and six-shooters, has become a familiar sight to the denizens of the tiny Western French one-horse towns their stagecoach passes through. While their grizzled faces may be forbidding, they command respect for their innumerable victories in violin, viola and cello duels against young up-and-comers. Here they team up with old cowpuncher François Guye to deliver a warm, full-bodied rendition of the Quintet which really comes into its own in the 16 1/2 minute Adagio (which, sadly, you will not be able to hear).

The rest:
#5 (tie) A1 = A2
#4 A5
#2 (tie) A4 = A7
#1 A3

Group B

Group B's results, by contrast were very clear-cut. Two of its recordings received multiple distinctions, one failed to get above a "meh" and the rest lay somewhere in between. Even Jo498's late enthusiasm for our #7 and #6 was not enough to lift them above the competition. Bribery? Corruption? Electoral fraud? You decide!

#8 - B4

You said:
"middle-aged recording? just undistinguished."
"Balance is off"
"slowish, but considerably more contrast/drama than in B3, still not that extraordinary"

The recording no one liked was
[asin]B00078VYKK[/asin]
Nomos Quartett
Klaus Kämper (vc)

Perhaps it's inevitable that recordings never before discussed on GMG are going to get the short end of the stick (though a few here disprove that). This live recording, featuring a Hannover-based ensemble that seems to have sworn off studio recordings in recent years, appeared to attract no controversy except over whether it should be voted "meh" or "thumbs down". Let's leave it behind.

#7 - B1

You said:
"Tempos all over the place."
"alternately tentative and assertive"
"both mellow and melancholy, good with inner/subordinate voices; overall a little too slow and not dramatic enough"

It was
[asin]B0000026G8[/asin]
Juilliard Quartet
Bernard Greenhouse (vc)
(1986)

The second recording of the Schubert Quintet by these forces. The first is generally better received, due to its passionate undercurrents of being recorded at the height of the clandestine love affair between Bernard Greenhouse and Robert Mann. By the time this second interpretation was recorded, they had been reduced to clandestinely arguing over whose turn it was to do the washing-up and take out the rubbish. However, it was the only one I was able to locate (the first one remains unreleased on CD to this day) and has received its fair share of praise, notably from Amazon's tireless Discophage.

#6 - B6

You said:
"meh, not bad"
"mm. 33 and on (loud section with descending 8th note figures by violins and viola) sounds too choppy, too prickly.  Pizzicato C's by 2nd cello in mm. 93 and on are way out of tune."
"big sound, big contrasts, very soft and melancholy cello theme. Transparency quite good. This is quite interesting, although could do with a little more drive."

It was
[asin]B0000030Q8[/asin]
Lindsay Quartet
Douglas Cummings (vc)

Remarkable for their acute musical instincts and utter lack of technique, the Lindsays have always attracted their fair number of admirers and detractors. I knew this would be a controversial recording. I didn't expect it to receive three out of four "meh" votes, though. My sources have not yet been able to verify if the ensemble's consistent wide vibrato is due to their fingers trembling in ecstasy, although it is known that after committing the Adagio of this recording to disc, Peter Cropper lay on the floor of King's College Chapel weeping for three days straight.

(This remains one of the most famous Adagios on record, by the way, in part due to its extreme length—one of the two slowest interpretations ever recorded. It's worth a listen even if you were only "meh" about the first movement)

The rest:

#5 B3
#4 B5
#3 B8
#2 B2
#1 B7

Group C

Whereas the other groups have a clear separation between the highest rated recordings and the rest (A3, B2, B7, D2 and D3 being well ahead of the rest of their groups), the C group has bunched up towards the top. Not so much that there's a tie in the upper ranks, but a single "distinction" from another voter could easily push the #4, 3 or 2 to the top. Group C also has the widest spread of distinctions with five recordings receiving one. And there were only four voters. Very sneaky, Jeffrey Smith.

#8 - C8

You said:
"I find little to comment upon. A Meh"
"The violist seems a little bored with his part starting at 4:20, but this is middle-of-the-road and perfectly acceptable."

Damned with faint praise was
[asin]B000N4SJKG[/asin]
Melos Quartett Stuttgart
Mstislav Rostropovich (vc)

Mstislav Rostropovich's second recording of D956 was an extraordinary affair. As recounted in his autobiography, he was on his way to the recording studio to play something innocuous when a black van screeched up and four men in black coats seized him and his cello and manhandled him into the back seat. At first he was confident, believing they were merely KGB assassins who had been sent after him and whom he could easily dispatch with his mixed martial arts abilities. But confidence swiftly turned to terror as he realised this was the feared Melos Quartett of Stuttgart, and they were planning to record Schubert. The deep, over-prominent cello pizzicati throughout the recording can only be interpreted as a cry for help. When he was rescued by the brave American boys of the Emerson Quartet, confiscated documents revealed plans in collaboration with Dr. Josef Böseklaue, head of D.G., for at least five albums, one of which may have involved Schoenberg.

#7 - C2

You said:
"I dislike the sound of the ensemble [...] The violins can be kinda ugly when they play the Big Tune"
"Thinner sound, but great musicality, first violin makes me listen & hear nice details"

It was
[asin]B00000E3ZV[/asin]
Amadeus Quartett
William Pleeth (vc)
(1965)

Once again a group that recorded the Schubert Quintet twice with the same line-up, the Amadeus Quartet—like the Lindsays above—has its fervent admirers and its passionate detractors. That came through somewhat more clearly here—two yea votes (one a distinction) and two nay votes among four voters. Unlike the Lindsays, much of that controversy surrounds its first violinist, Norbert Brainin, and his uncalled-for intimacy with other members of the quartet: engaging them in conversation on non-musical topics and even once staying in the same hotel as the second violinist (though he later assured the press it was an accident). His admirers feel that mutual noncommunication is no way to run a coherent ensemble, while his detractors argue that he is going against the true spirit of the Amadeus Quartet.

#6 - C1

You said:
"Overall, well-paced and dynamic, good feel for the piece, but not ideal. [...]  I like the general contour of the performance, but the first violinist is a little tart in places I hadn't noticed before. The close miking limits the dynamic range."
"Nothing much to say"
+ a yea vote from GSMoeller

It was
[asin]B0097LP1HK[/asin]
Takács Quartet
Ralph Kirshbaum (vc)

A recording people liked, as it turned out; just not enough. Pressed hard by Hyperion to record as much standard repertoire as they can while they're still at their peak, the Takács Quartet, when interviewed, couldn't even remember making this recording. "The Schubert Quintet?" asked Edward Dunsinberre nervously, chewing on the end of his bow. "Did we play that? Geraldine, I don't think we played that yet." Geraldine Walther agreed, saying, "Oh yeah, I think we did do that... with Miklós Perenyi, right? Or Danjulo Ishizaka? I'm pretty sure it was Danjulo... look, ask me later, I have two more Tchaikovsky quartets to memorise by Wednesday." Only András Fejér could offer some enlightenment, saying, "Ki vagy te, és hogyan kerültél be a házamba?"

The rest:

#5 C5
#4 C4
#3 C7
#2 C6
#1 C3

Group D

With the widest difference between D2, D3 and the rest, Group D has clear front-runners but no clear last-place finishers. Only one recording was able to earn a "nay" vote and several "meh+" votes nonetheless allowed it to finish in the positive numbers.

#8 - D7

You said:
"Seems a bit too staccato/cut off/long pauses at times and very bass heavy. [...] there are often moments when the sound of a particular instrument struck me as ugly. This one nearly gives me a headache."
"The amount of vibrato is low at times, giving the performance a somewhat "raw" edge.  Clarity was not bad, and the dynamic range was good."

It was
[asin]B001VLGMFE[/asin]
Quatuor Festetics
Wieland Kuijken (vc)

One of three recordings I currently know about of the Schubert Quintet on period instruments, the Festetics Quartet deliberately chose a mellower, more lyrical approach than their distinguished predecessors at the Smithsonian Institution, and a distinctly more in tune approach than their equally distinguished successors at Skálholt (featuring Jaap Schröder and Bruno Cocset), due to Wieland Kuijken's scholarly dispute with the claim that the Hellmesberger Quartet (which premiered D956 in around 1850) played in just intonation. However, HIP purists have criticised this recording harshly due to the instrumentalists' bows being made out of wood from a different region of Europe than that which German and Austrian bow-makers would have used in the early 19th century. The dispute has yet to be resolved.

#7 - D4

You said:
"A "delicate" sound throughout, seemingly slower than the others so far [...] There is a limited dynamic range, but the voices are quite clear throughout."
"Too static. It is like they are playing most of it within mp to mf, which makes it lacking in dynamic range. So I don't like it, but the playing is still pretty good."

It was
[asin]B000UNBQUU[/asin]
Arthur Grumiaux, Arpad Gérecz (vn)
Max Lesueur (va)
Paul Szabo, Philippe Mermoud (vc)

The main criticism of this recording (limited dynamic range) may have something to do with the engineering, as similar complaints were made about another recording from the same label. This recording also has the distinction of having never been mentioned on GMG in any capacity, positive or negative. And not much else, it seems. Who even are all these people? "Philippe Mermaid" doesn't sound like a real person! Come on.

#6 - D5

You said:
"Also a more restrained version [...] just too slow (at least it feels slow) at times."
"Again, a delicate sound, but this time things are slower, and I am not sure that is a good idea"

It was
[asin]B00000270P[/asin]
Pamela Frank, Felix Galimir (vn)
Steven Tenenbom (va)
Peter Wiley, Julia Lichten (vc)

mc ukrneal's ears do not deceive him, this is in fact the slowest version of the Allegro ma non troppo on record, largely because the musicians maintain the slow tempo of the start throughout instead of speeding up every time the music gets louder. (They don't actually slow down anywhere—the tempo is almost metronomic.) Picture Schubert conducted by Celibidache, if Celibidache were a young, attractive woman instead of a funny-looking old guy. One of my personal favourites, but evidently GMG collectively prefers to keep things moving.

The rest:

#5 D1
#4 D6
#3 D8
#2 D2
#1 D3

[/hr]
that took longer than I expected. Links coming soon, if you don't have one by tomorrow morning let me know

[Pat B]

Love your write-ups. The story about Rostropovich is wonderful. I am skeptical, however, that A8 was recorded in the past 50 years.

[mc ukrneal]

Informative AND entertaining! Great job!

[Jo498]

Thanks very much! So far no huge embarrassments for me. While I did not recognize the ABQ/Schiff which is the recording I "grew up" with, what I wrote about it roughly corresponds to what I would write from memory, although the sound seemed even worse. Still, it is an intense and dramatic reading, apart from the vinyl A7? the most intense in group A for me (the best thing may be the main sections of the scherzo where they really dig in).

Of the other ones revealed so far, I only have the Marlboro (but only since last year and probably not listened to more than once), which is a dark horse candidate in some circles. The second Juilliard/Greenhouse and Melos/Rostro have been on my list to maybe buy, but I remember not having been too fond of the latter when I heard it many years ago at a friend's (too fat and orchestral sounding).

I am surprised that I found a Juilliard recording too mellow, though...

[amw]

I am skeptical, however, that A8 was recorded in the past 50 years.

It is certainly an old recording. Perhaps it might have sounded better if it were not recorded in a cave, or if the Neolithic peoples of 1982 had had the workmanship to build instruments of materials other than stone. (Also bear in mind that all of these recordings have been downsampled to 320kbps MP3) However its intensity, and beardfulness, cannot be denied, except by ChamberNut apparently.

Round 2 links have been sent out—I've inevitably missed someone, so if you wanted one and didn't get one drop me a PM.

Of the other ones revealed so far, I only have the Marlboro (but only since last year and probably not listened to more than once), which is a dark horse candidate in some circles.

I'd put the Marlboro in my personal top five, but I can totally see why it would get eliminated. Very slow first movement, slow but restrained adagio, the fastest "Andante sostenuto" ever recorded (except Jascha Heifetz's), and full of all sorts of other details Pamela and the Frankfurters pulled out of the texture that one might never notice otherwise. (And it's live; some people can hear crickets in the background, apparently. My equipment's not that good.) Like many of the recordings I like it can easily be criticised as "eccentric" or "mannered".

Interestingly, most of the other slow-ish recordings (Juilliard, Melos, Lindsay) have also been eliminated, whereas the fastest recordings are not only still in the game but have received some of the highest ratings. I wonder if that trend will go anywhere.

[Jo498]

Just a question to the new samples: You took the remaining interpretations from the first round and re-shuffled them? Or will I (with group E) only get some survivors from C and D?
Sorry, but it's my first time of such an elaborate blind listening...

[amw]

Just a question to the new samples: You took the remaining interpretations from the first round and re-shuffled them? Or will I (with group E) only get some survivors from C and D?
Sorry, but it's my first time of such an elaborate blind listening...

Yes, all the interpretations have been shuffled. Each new group contains samples from all four groups in the previous round.

[Jo498]

With my listening I clearly recognized a trend to favor "cheap thrills" over the aspects that might recommend slower recordings.

I will certainly re-listen to the Marlboro; I do not remember crickets, but there is a low frequency hum clearly audible when listening through headphones. A friend checked several discs and it seems to be a fault/feature of the recording. But it will probably not bother when listening through speakers.

There is a similar dark horse for the G major quartet with Kremer, Ma etc., also live from the '80ties (CBS) with a very slow first movement. You should try this one, unless you know it already.

[aukhawk]

Great results amw - thankyou so much, and worth the wait!  Some big first-fence fallers there.  (I think the Bergs, as well as suffering from 'early digital' syndrome, seems to have deteriorated through subsequent remasterings.)

... with B2, B7 and D3 receiving two distinction awards each.

Funnily enough, ever since my Group B vote on page 1, I've been regretting not promoting B2 to a 'thumbs-up'.  I also wanted to upgrade B5 and B4 - but I could see, after the 2nd vote, that none of that would alter the outcome.

[PS - on board with Grp F - thanks

[amw]

With my listening I clearly recognized a trend to favor "cheap thrills" over the aspects that might recommend slower recordings.

Looking over my favourites list I seem to be clearly biased in favour of extreme tempi. Two of the fastest Prestos, one of the fastest Andante sostenutos, one of the fastest Allegrettos, the slowest Adagio and the slowest and fastest Allegro ma non troppos (4 minute differential) are all on it. Revisiting two of the most favoured "normal" tempo ones (B7 and D3) hasn't yet improved their standings in my personal rating, but perhaps commenters in the next round will pique my interest further.

There is a similar dark horse for the G major quartet with Kremer, Ma etc., also live from the '80ties (CBS) with a very slow first movement. You should try this one, unless you know it already.

I actually haven't as my D887 needs have been so far fulfilled by the faster, almost half-crazed approach of the Hagen Quartet on DG. (now out-of-print I think) A Celi D887 sounds interesting though. I've heard one Kremer/Ma collaboration featuring Shostakovich 15 and a duo by Gubaidulina which I can't remember a single note of. I think it was pretty good.

[Jo498]

With "my listening" above, I was mainly referring to the blind listening of the expositions, not to my general approach when listening to music (although I might go for "cheap thrills" there as well). This slowly unfolding music can seem somewhat too slow in such a comparison, so I assume that this may be factor.

Of the ones I know, Heifetz et al. is the fastest everywhere, often by a considerably margin, if I remember correctly (except maybe Scherzo/Trio). I find it interesting, but not really a favorite.

[amw]

I'm not sure Heifetz is that much faster than average in the Allegro and Scherzo, he simply omits all the repeats and speeds up with every crescendo. That, combined with the thin sound, Heifetz being Heifetz and an absurdly rushed Adagio made me dislike the recording when I sampled it, apart from the Allegretto. It's rare that I can actually dislike a recording of the Schubert Quintet.

(I don't know why, I seem to like super fast, super intense Allegrettos... my overall favourite in that movement is a live recording by the Petersen Quartett and Alban Gerhardt, very different from their studio outing, 8:25 from first note to last. Heifetz at 7:47 might be a bit too rushed though no less intense)