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

[amw]

Thanks for all the votes people!

I'm half considering making a "bonus group" with some of the rejected Adagios just for comparison, since people are getting pretty into this.

[Jay F]

Thanks for all the votes people!

I'm half considering making a "bonus group" with some of the rejected Adagios just for comparison, since people are getting pretty into this.

I'd rather move on to the next movement. It's been three months and I'm rather eager to find out which versions I've liked, and buy the ones I don't already have (I only have two).

[TheGSMoeller]

Getting my votes in tonight!

For me, the slower the Adagio, the better. Not saying it's the correct way, just my style. I like it to float in air rather than walk, The Lindsay's were perfect at this movement, too bad they have left the building already. With that said I was automatically attracted to J1 due to its length. I think I know who it is, but I may be wrong, either way it's full of emotion and expertly performed. J2 is a little too quick for my taste, but when the performers play so well together as they do here, and take advantage of their pacing choice then tempo can take a backseat. It also may the best recorded of the four. Now J3 is not only too fast, but lacking the feeling put forth from the previous two. Now I definitely know who J4 is, I own this disc and I've listened to it, maybe twice, maybe once and a half, not very exciting. I recognize the nervous-sounding violin in the opening. How did J4 make it this far?  (don't answer, I probably scored it high in a previous round  )

J1 & J2 Big Yay! 

J3 & J4 Big Nay 

[amw]

I'd rather move on to the next movement. It's been three months and I'm rather eager to find out which versions I've liked, and buy the ones I don't already have (I only have two).

The 'bonus round' would probably take place after the comparison was over, if I do decide to do it.

Thanks GSM!

[amw]

How did J4 make it this far?  (don't answer, I probably scored it high in a previous round

no comment

[TheGSMoeller]

no comment

I knew it!!! 

...it's the beauty of the BC.

[Brian]

I should, uh, do this soon. Sorry!! I am still committed!!

[Jo498]

Votes for group H, I guess I could do at least one more group till the end of the month.

I did not dislike any of them, but two seem ahead of the others and I put them in an order.

H2 middle section could maybe more explosive, but they are extremely convincing at the close and than the A' part, very hushed, with the violin figurations not sounding like an adornment, but disturbed and "pleading" ++
H4 very good, more intense than "dreamy", good contrasts, maybe a little too assertive in the third part ++
H1 rather slow, big sound, very beautiful, altogether maybe a little too "comfortable", not melancholy enough +
H3 the slowest of the bunch, a little too much vibrato, especially the first violin a little mannered. The middle section sounds more resignative than explosive. I like their A' (3rd) section. Altogether I like this somewhat less than the others, but still +

[Brian]

Doing Group I today, send me another and I'll do it tomorrow!

I1. Sadface. I like the idea of this tempo. It makes me wistful about the rejected possibility of someone like Diotima/Gastinel being in this round. We voters were so cruel and misguided. The sound doesn't bother me (I like those snaps, crackles, and pops!) but, unlike the first few voters, the trio section does bother me. Contrast contrast contrast!

I2. Pizzicato cello is near-silent. After I1, this feels dangerously, absurdly fast. What sinks this for me is the soft, "nice" touch they give the central section. Why do the violins, in particular, insist on making this eruption sound so cutesy? The cellos and viola seem to be doing a passionate job but the violinists make this music sound like, instead of a cry of despair, a cry of being on Ambien.

I3. Ugh. This is ... okay. We voters really blew it. This is disappointing. None of these first three should be finalists. I think we probably eliminated the most deserving finalists. Ugh. On second listen, this recording is not bad at all! In fact, it's pretty good! I like the inner detail to the outburst, and how vulnerable the violin is after the central section; I like the group's basic tempo choices. Limited dynamic range, possibly a 30-40 year old recording, is the biggest negative I have. Changing my vote to yes.

I4. Meh. Send me another group. I reject all of these. This one is acceptable at least. We the voters have collectively and completely failed in earlier rounds. This is saddening. A little on the fast side, and the closing section is not always as hushed and still as it should be, but actually this isn't so bad either. Older recording has held up well. Good playing by all five people.

I3
I4
none
I1, I2

[aukhawk]

Quick - send Brian Group H before he cuts his own throat!

[Brian]

I received Group H.

H1. Ahhh after 12 seconds I can already tell this is muuuuuuuuch better!!!! Extraordinary light touch at the beginning, so soft and sensitive, but with emotion nevertheless. The central section erupts! Oops, I had the volume turned way down for the first part, maybe that accounts for some of my comments. If anything, some of the violin pizzicato notes near the end are kinda ugly. But a huge improvement over everything in Group I.

H2. This is also good, and I think overall a little less so than H1? The central section is a little less tense. Overall ensemble playing totally superb.

H3. Yikes, unsteady intonation from the first violin, really brutal around 1:25-1:33. Too bad: I really like the intense cello sound in the central section, and in general I like the performance, but can't handle that first violin. Things get way better as the performance goes along. A little slow without being as fascinating as H1. Lots of breathing.

H4. Whoa! Faster. There is something yearning and regretful about the first violinist's phrasing of his/her melody, however. Does not float in a heavenly way, but is an interesting alternative. Central section nearly fits my ideal conception, perhaps a little too brusque but incredible power on display. Real agony here. The final section, given context, does not feel as cool or fast as the first part did. Not ideal, but excellent.

H1, H4
H2
H3
none

[Brian]

I've realized that my negative experiences with I1 and I2 colored my reactions to I3 and I4; I am now listening to I3 and I4 again. New comments and a new vote will appear in my post above.

[amw]

Cool, thanks.

Just a question for everyone here—how many Quintets do you want to listen to for the final round? 5? 6? 3? Some other number?

[Jay F]

Cool, thanks.

Just a question for everyone here—how many Quintets do you want to listen to for the final round? 5? 6? 3? Some other number?

Are we going to listen to the entire quintet now instead of just the last movement? How many do you have left, i.e., that have not been disqualified?

[amw]

It would be the entire quintet. My initial plan was to choose two from each group, so 6 finalists altogether—and this works somewhat nicely as there are 5 recordings that have been leading in votes since the beginning, plus room for one wildcard—but might be too much listening.

Only three recordings from the current round are definitely disqualified, as of yet.

[mc ukrneal]

I think 5 is ideal. Six starts to be a lot and it can require more comparative listening as it gets harder to remember who was what. Three is too few.

[Brian]

Cool, thanks.

Just a question for everyone here—how many Quintets do you want to listen to for the final round? 5? 6? 3? Some other number?

Send me group J and I will tell you. 

[Jo498]

5 and 6 is both o.k., I think. While I agree that the whole is going to be some "work" for comparative listening and I'd prefer fewer, 6 seems to be manageable. How many did we start with? 28?

[amw]

32.

I'm leaning towards 5 anyway, as one of our consistent high scorers may well be displaced (letting a wild card in). But I don't know which one, yet. Need more group H voters for that. >.>

[Jo498]

I could vote again for H! AFAIK at least three of them might be worth to be advanced to the final round...