The String Quartet Game (Final Round)

[springrite]

The key point being that the game is about the preferences of people who actually show up.

Now, ain't that the truth.

This is just for entertainment, and entertainment for the few who bothers.

I did not participate and, when I thought about participating half way through, I could see that it was entirely pointless.

Have fun, boys.

[Baron Scarpia]

I find the sound quality ok but not outstanding. I have the Schoenberg/Chandos so I will try that next.

Listened to the Schoenberg recording of Zemlinsky SQ2, as a comparison with the LaSalle. I am starting to get a better appreciation of the music by hearing an alternate performance. I can't say I clearly prefer one or the other on the basis of performance or sound. It is dense music, and not the sort of thing I normally can digest after just a couple of listenings.

[San Antone]

Listened to the Schoenberg recording of Zemlinsky SQ2, as a comparison with the LaSalle. I am starting to get a better appreciation of the music by hearing an alternate performance. I can't say I clearly prefer one or the other on the basis of performance or sound. It is dense music, and not the sort of thing I normally can digest after just a couple of listenings.

I have the Artis Quartett Wien doing Zemlinsky/1&2.  I may try another recording, but then again, this one suits me fine.  In fact, the Artis series of string quartets by Zemlinksy, Wellesz, Weigl and Webern are all excellent, imo.  But I agree with you that it is dense music.

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

i think it's understandable to be vocal about someone's favourite string quartets or some highly revered string quartets to not make the list. It's a silly thing to bring up because of the nature of this game, but I think it's an understandable point of curiosity more than anything else.

What I don't understand is......if anyone says bad stuff about quartets that actually made the top 20? What? Like, as if they might even be complaining that people like certain pieces of music? Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding some of the posts I've read....but that seems like a bizarre thing for some to point out. 

[Sammy]

This is just for entertainment, and entertainment for the few who bothers.

I did not participate and, when I thought about participating half way through, I could see that it was entirely pointless.

Understood - entertainment is pointless. 

[schnittkease]

I hosted another string quartets game back in October; here were the results:

1. Bartók: String Quartet #4, Sz. 91
2. Beethoven: String Quartet #14 in C-sharp minor, op. 131
3. Schubert: String Quartet #15 in G, D. 887
4. Janáček: String Quartet #2 "Intimate Letters"
5. Beethoven: String Quartet #13 in B-flat, op. 130
6. Beethoven: String Quartet #15 in A minor, op. 132
7. Ravel: String Quartet in F
8. Bartók: String Quartet #3, Sz. 85
9. Debussy: String Quartet in G minor, L 85
10. Dvořák: String Quartet #13 in G, op. 106

Schubert did a lot better in this one, and I'm glad to see the appearance of Kurtág!

[Sammy]

I hosted another string quartets game back in October; here were the results:

1. Bartók: String Quartet #4, Sz. 91
2. Beethoven: String Quartet #14 in C-sharp minor, op. 131
3. Schubert: String Quartet #15 in G, D. 887
4. Janáček: String Quartet #2 "Intimate Letters"
5. Beethoven: String Quartet #13 in B-flat, op. 130
6. Beethoven: String Quartet #15 in A minor, op. 132
7. Ravel: String Quartet in F
8. Bartók: String Quartet #3, Sz. 85
9. Debussy: String Quartet in G minor, L 85
10. Dvořák: String Quartet #13 in G, op. 106

Schubert did a lot better in this one, and I'm glad to see the appearance of Kurtág!

How did you handle the lists where members did not rank their submissions?

[schnittkease]

How did you handle the lists where members did not rank their submissions?

In those cases, each work got 5.5 points - the total amount of points to allocate (10+9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1) / # of works; an average.

[Sammy]

In those cases, each work got 5.5 points - the total amount of points to allocate (10+9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1) / # of works; an average.

Thanks for the reply - good way to go.