12 great string quartets????

[The new erato]

As usual, this thread develops into a competition about who like the most eclectic stuff.

I'm a dead bore, my list would be mainly Beethoven, Bartok, Shostakovich and Schubert's final quartet.

That's doesn't mean there isn't lots of wortwhile, fine and deserving stuff out there.

7. Melartin 2nd

Now THAT I would like to hear. Is this available on disc?

[Carolus]

I've Melartin's 4 SQ. First 3 by the Meta 4 Quartet.

[abidoful]

 
MELARTIN 2nd SQ (in g-minor)
"Now THAT I would like to hear. Is this available on disc?"

Yeah, a nice disc. A complete recording of the four SQts by Erkki Melartin (1875-1937) played by two finnish young string quartet groups, MELARTIN; STRING QUARTETS; META4 QUARTET; MELARTIN QUARTET (2 discs FI PK3 000 01-10, FI-PK3 03000 11-18, VIRTUOSI/KUHMO OY)you can by it at lest from the finnish music-store called FUGA (wwww.fuga.fi).

[The new erato]

Thanks!

[Sergeant Rock]

Haydn F minor Op.20/5
Haydn D minor Op.76/2
Haydn G major Op.77/1
Beethoven #13 B flat Op.130
Beethoven #16 F major Op.135
Schubert #13 A minor
Ravel F major
Schönberg #2 Op.10
Syzmanowski #2
Shostakovich #7 F sharp minor
Bloch #1
Britten #3

Sarge

[Fëanor]

As usual, this thread develops into a competition about who like the most eclectic stuff.

I'm a dead bore, my list would be mainly Beethoven, Bartok, Shostakovich and Schubert's final quartet.

...

Yes, those guys still rule.  But a big part of the reason for a post like this is to raise new stuff.  I, for one, hadn't heard of Melartin or Väinö before now.

For exotic choices I nowadays include George Crumb's Black Angels and, perhpaps, Wolfgang Rihm's String Quartet No. 4.  And I still insist on at least one from among Elliott Carter's five SQs.

[Fëanor]

Haydn F minor Op.20/5
Haydn D minor Op.76/2
Haydn G major Op.77/1
Beethoven #13 B flat Op.130
Beethoven #16 F major Op.135
Schubert #13 A minor
Ravel F major
Schönberg #2 Op.10
Syzmanowski #2
Shostakovich #7 F sharp minor
Bloch #1
Britten #3

Sarge

A great, if somewhat conventional list, Sarge.

In particular, I love Shostakovich' No. 7.  I don't have a copy of the Bloch, but I'll keep an eye out for it.

[Dax]

11. Väinö Raitio

Now that I would like to hear.



I do strongly recommend this CD of Skalkottas's 3rd and 4th quartets. It would no doubt be seen as unwise to make what many would view as an exaggerated claim for the 4th quartet (indeed, I wonder how many members of this board have actually heard it?), but I'm going ahead nonetheless. I'd previously heard a broadcast about 40 years ago and rediscovered it a couple of years back. The following is what I posted on a now defunct message board at that time.


The 4th Quartet is thought to have been composed over a period of about a month or so (April) in 1940: not bad going considering that 3 movements (+ a couple of variations from movement 2) are fast - or rather very fast, that's about 38 minutes music and 89 pages of published score. The 32 piano pieces (c.90 minutes) took Skalkottas a similar amount of composition time later the same year.

There seems to be very little written about this work beyond commentary on its length and hints regarding a "legendary" repution. Indeed, the sleeve-note isn't that useful beyond general formal aspects and the notion that the 1st movement is formally a "trial run" for The return of Ulysses.  No doubt the world hasn't got to grips with the work as yet - I believe the first performance only happened in 1969 (by the Parrinen quartet) and there have probably been very few (if any?) outings since, apart presumably from the New Hellenic Quartet, who made this recording.

A simple description would suggest something pretty traditional: -
Movement 1 - Sonata form - Allegro molto vivace
Movement 2 - Theme and 6 variations with Coda
Movement 3 - Scherzo + Trio - Presto
Movement 4 - Rondo - Allegro giusto (e ben ritmato)
whereas the reality is something quite untraditional, uncompromising and out of the ordinary. There's a huge range of colour and playing techniques, and a level of difficulty both for the ensemble and the individual players that is quite breathtaking. Having followed it through with the score, I'm bemused at how the players actually managed to play some of it - the 3rd movement in particular - and that's absolutely electrifying.

Take the first movement: even at dotted crotchet = 90-100 (say - which is somewhat  less than indicated) there's a goodly amount of semiquavers which have to be played 9 or 10 to the second. On top of which there's a fair amount of double-stopping in each movement, let alone an occasional fondness for 12-note chords throughout. Let's not even think about the intonation difficulties. I imagine the writing is as idiomatic as you would expect from a composer who was once a virtuoso violinist and experienced quartet player. But the 1st violin part in particular still looks horrifying in every movement and is seldom short of many leger lines for long. (The New Hellenic's 1st violinist is Georgios Demertzis who has recorded other Skalkottas pieces for BIS, most notably the violin concerto).
Even the Theme and Variations has its whirlwind moments and it never feels genuinely slow. At 15 minutes it's the longest movement and the scale of the variations (there are only 6 plus a Coda) are reminiscent of a similar strategy in the orchestral Largo Simfonico from the 2nd Symphonic Suite. The 4th Variation turned out to be a bit of a surprise, containing as it does clear references (motivic, rhythmic and textural) to the 3rd movement of Hindemith's 5th Kammermusik - the one featuring solo viola. A playful bit of memory at work here: the rest of the quartet as a whole contains virtually nothing reminiscent of even the fierce moments of, say, Bartok or Schoenberg's quartets. No doubt the sleeve-note is accurate in its confident assertion that the Scherzo is modelled on the symphonic scherzos of Bruckner and Dvorak, but that statement seems laughably irrelevant for the moment from where I'm sitting.
I'm no expert on 20th century string quartets, but this is surely one of the major achievements in the medium and one you're least likely to hear. Get a taste from from the clips below. I was impressed by the 3rd Quartet. This one's almost unbelievable.

EDIT - can't find the clips apart from these brief ones.
http://www.emusic.com/album/Nikos-Skalkottas-SKALKOTTAS-String-Quartets-Nos-3-and-4-MP3-Download/10888365.html

[Sergeant Rock]

A great, if somewhat conventional list, Sarge.

I own and enjoy quite a few quartets that are off the beaten path (for example, the Pfitzner quartets that I discovered recently), but yeah, there aren't many that would knock out my "conventional" favorites. Magnard and Schmidt come close, though.

Sarge

[The new erato]

I own and enjoy quite a few quartets that are off the beaten path (for example, the Pfitzner quartets that I discovered recently), but yeah, there aren't many that would knock out my "conventional" favorites. Magnard and Schmidt come close, though.

Sarge

Bloch no 1 and Britten no 3 would figure on my list as well, despite mye previous post. In fact they were among my premium choices when posting on "10 quartets you need to hear" on a Norwegian site.

[greg]

Beethoven #16 F major Op.135
Schönberg #2 Op.10

Nice choices... though for the moment, I'd put the Beethoven op.131 on there, too (i don't think i made a list).

[GKC]

Kind of surprised  no-one has mentioned the Tchaikovsky no. 1.

Hard to choose just 12. My favorite Haydn quartet is the last one I listened to.

[abidoful]

Kind of surprised  no-one has mentioned the Tchaikovsky no. 1.

ouch----how could I forget Pjotr Iljits?!?  Not the first, but the third one (in e flat minor)-  that has to be on my list   So long, the early Sibelius quartett off you go-----------

[snyprrr]

1. Xenakis Tetras
2. Holliger (1973)
3. Dutilleux Ainsi la Nuit
4. Janacek 1&2
5. Haydn Op.20 No.5 in f minor
6. Eybler Op.1 No.2(?) in c minor
7. Villa-Lobos No.5
8. Hiller No.6
9. Ch. Jones No.6
10. Glass No.5
11. Sessions No.2/Carter No.1
12.



Halffter No.3
Marcos No.3 Anatomia fractal de los angeles
Boucourechliev No.3
Busoni No.2
Pfitzner Nos. 2&3, Hindemith No.5 (6)- the first one in Eb
Lekeu Molto adagio
Britten No.3/Arnold No.2
Shostakovich 6,7,11,&15
Bartok No.3
Schullhoff 1&2/Haas-Krasa (Decca)
Martin (1965)

...and on and on it goes...

[Fëanor]

1. Xenakis Tetras
2. Holliger (1973)
3. Dutilleux Ainsi la Nuit
4. Janacek 1&2
5. Haydn Op.20 No.5 in f minor
6. Eybler Op.1 No.2(?) in c minor
7. Villa-Lobos No.5
8. Hiller No.6
9. Ch. Jones No.6
10. Glass No.5
11. Sessions No.2/Carter No.1
12.



Halffter No.3
Marcos No.3 Anatomia fractal de los angeles
Boucourechliev No.3
Busoni No.2
Pfitzner Nos. 2&3, Hindemith No.5 (6)- the first one in Eb
Lekeu Molto adagio
Britten No.3/Arnold No.2
Shostakovich 6,7,11,&15
Bartok No.3
Schullhoff 1&2/Haas-Krasa (Decca)
Martin (1965)

...and on and on it goes...

Fascinating list! Thanks.

I've got plenty of listening to do to catch up, but that's good thing.

[snyprrr]

And,... I decided on Razumovsky No.3!

[Daverz]

No love for the Prokofiev quartets?  Maybe they're not "great", whatever that means.

Also, only one mention of the Smetana quartets, very great works indeed IMO.

I'm just getting to know the Vainberg cycle.  It seems these can't come in far behind the Shostakovich quartets, if behind at all.  The composers had a sort of friendly quartet competition going.

[The new erato]

No love for the Prokofiev quartets?  Maybe they're not "great", whatever that means.

Entertaining and earfriendly quartets, though hardly personal and devastating enough to qualify as great.

Also, only one mention of the Smetana quartets, very great works indeed IMO.

They are great indeed, though personally I'm not much into the national romantic period. They are devastatating and personal, to reflect my previous comment.

I'm just getting to know the Vainberg cycle.  It seems these can't come in far behind the Shostakovich quartets, if behind at all.  The composers had a sort of friendly quartet competition going.

Very fine and interesting works, but personally I don't find them quite on the level of Shostakovich, not as original and personally involving I think.

[DavidW]

though hardly personal and devastating enough to qualify as great.

What does that have to do with greatness?  Nothing.

[The new erato]

What does that have to do with greatness?  Nothing.

I can see that and I probably should have put more time into finding the right words to express what I meant. Though a discussion about what constitutes greatness is a recurring theme on this board...

Let me rephrase. They don't convey enough of a personal message, expressive need on behalf of their composer, and original writing to convince me of their greatness.