12 great string quartets????

Started by Fëanor, October 28, 2007, 10:39:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

snyprrr

I agree that the Prokofiev are unfairly criticized. And, I would argue that just by using those Kardashian (?) mountain melodies in the one quartet, Prokofiev has succeeded in profundity. Not that he himself, perhaps, felt the burning turmoil within himself to produce such ravishing melodic figures (that also appear in Myaskovsky's No.7,... this was the year that the composers famously vacationed there), but, he simply transcribed the pain of those peoples. So, my point is, is that the HUMAN profundity comes through, as I think it does in every stereotypically 'beautiful' passage of any music anywhere, because, I believe, the deepest feelings need the simplest melodies. Is this fair?

When does surface beauty actually equal depth of meaning? We know that just because a woman is beautiful does not mean that she is good. But, sometimes, cannot the two actually happen together,...or, is that the eternal 'striving for'?

Brahmsian

Gosh, I absolutely adore the two Prokofiev string quartets, and think they are absolutely marvelous!  I just wish he had written more of them!!  :)

The new erato

Quote from: snyprrr on May 24, 2010, 08:00:30 AM
I agree that the Prokofiev are unfairly criticized.
Saying they're not great is not harsh criticism. How much music is great ?

DavidW

Quote from: erato on May 24, 2010, 09:29:32 AM
Saying they're not great is not harsh criticism. How much music is great ?

This is coming from the person that mentioned Bloch, Hindemith, and Enescu. >:D 

The new erato

Quote from: DavidW on May 24, 2010, 09:53:20 AM
This is coming from the person that mentioned Bloch, Hindemith, and Enescu. >:D
Not Enescu I think. But the other two has written at least one great quartet each.

karlhenning

Quote from: Brahmsian on May 24, 2010, 09:19:59 AM
Gosh, I absolutely adore the two Prokofiev string quartets, and think they are absolutely marvelous!  I just wish he had written more of them!!  :)

Ditto.

DavidW

Quote from: erato on May 24, 2010, 09:54:35 AM
Not Enescu I think.

But you did--
Quote from: erato on October 28, 2007, 01:55:43 PM
Bloch nr 1 and Hindemith 4 & 5 should be mentioned. As well as Enescus 2.

Yeah I know that was two years old, but still it's still amusing to point it out. ;D

Look if you were mentioning Bartok, Beethoven, Haydn, Shostakovich that caliber of obviously extraordinary SQs I think there would be no problem.  When you denigrate Prokofiev to elevate some works that are well frankly esoteric in comparison, it makes me wonder where is this coming from?

If you have such low standards, I think that you could acknowledge the quality of Prokofiev's SQs even if you don't personally like them. :)

The new erato

Quote from: DavidW on May 24, 2010, 10:01:12 AM
If you have such low standards, I think that you could acknowledge the quality of Prokofiev's SQs even if you don't personally like them. :)
Quote from: erato on May 24, 2010, 12:30:24 AM
Entertaining and earfriendly quartets,

To quote you:
Quote from: DavidW on May 24, 2010, 10:01:12 AM
it makes me wonder where is this coming from?

In my book Entertaining and earfriendly are praise. In whose book aint' it so?


DavidW

Quote from: erato on May 24, 2010, 10:14:49 AM
In my book Entertaining and earfriendly are praise. In whose book aint' it so?

I believe there is an expression for such faint praise. ;D

The new erato

Perhaps. While beeing a great admirer of Prokofiev, I don't think the quartets achievs the same level of originality as his best ballets (which are stunning), his best couple symphonies, the piano sonata no 8 or his best operas (I'm particularly fond of the Fiery Angel). His best chamber work is IMO the brilliant flute sonata.

greg

They're "great," but not geniuuuuuuuuuuuuusssssssssss....  ;)

DavidW

#91
Quote from: Greg on May 24, 2010, 04:31:00 PM
They're "great," but not geniuuuuuuuuuuuuusssssssssss....  ;)

That's JdP's cue. ;D

snyprrr

Quote from: Greg on May 24, 2010, 04:31:00 PM
They're "great," but not geniuuuuuuuuuuuuusssssssssss....  ;)

Yes!

Comparatively (Russian SQs), Mossolov No.1 would be the 'genius' quartet of the bunch, though...

I might be the kind of person who place Shostakovich No.7 in the 'genius' category, only because I think it's a stroke of genius anytime someone comes up with a catchy melody that gets stuck in my head! Hence, those luscious melodies in Prokofiev No.2 could actually be,...

...genius...
Tawk amongst yourselves.

WI Dan

Twelve of my favorite string quartets, as of today:

Haydn .......... Op. 20, No. 4
Haydn .......... Op. 76, No. 2  "Fifths"
Haydn .......... Op. 76, No. 5  "Largo"
Mozart ......... K. 421
Mozart ......... K. 465  "Dissonant"
Beethoven ... Op. 59, No. 3
Beethoven ... Op. 130  (with "Grosse Fuge")
Beethoven ... Op. 132
Schubert ...... D.810  "Death and the Maiden"
Dvorak ......... Op. 96  "American"
Ravel ............ F major
Debussy ....... G minor

I've been an active "classical" listener for only ~ 2.5 years, so almost everything is exotic material, to me.  Love these lists!

Fëanor

Quote from: Dan on May 26, 2010, 02:26:31 AM
Twelve of my favorite string quartets, as of today:

Haydn .......... Op. 20, No. 4
Haydn .......... Op. 76, No. 2  "Fifths"
Haydn .......... Op. 76, No. 5  "Largo"
Mozart ......... K. 421
Mozart ......... K. 465  "Dissonant"
Beethoven ... Op. 59, No. 3
Beethoven ... Op. 130  (with "Grosse Fuge")
Beethoven ... Op. 132
Schubert ...... D.810  "Death and the Maiden"
Dvorak ......... Op. 96  "American"
Ravel ............ F major
Debussy ....... G minor

I've been an active "classical" listener for only ~ 2.5 years, so almost everything is exotic material, to me.  Love these lists!
Dan, obviously you're a great Classical Era lover -- not that there's anything wrong with that.  Personally I never have been able to get a real handle on the Grosse Fugue dispite many attempts.

Maybe it's time for me to update my original list a bit ...

       
  • Mozart: No.19, K.465 "Dissonance" (1785)
  • Haydn: No.62, Op.76/3 "Emperor" (1796)
  • Beethoven: No.7, Op.59/1 "Rasumovsky" (1806)
  • Schubert: No.14, D.810 "Death and the Maiden" (1824)
  • Beethoven: No.14, Op.131 (1826)
  • Borodin: No.2 (1881)
  • Dvorak: No.6, Op.12 "American" (1893)
  • Janácek: No.1 "Kruetzer Sonata" (1923)
  • Bartók: No.4 (1928)
  • Carter: No.2 (1959)
  • Shostakovich: No.8, Op.110 (1960)
  • Alwyn: No.2 "Spring Waters" (1975)
OK, so our preferences evolve, right?  In place of the deletions (which I still love), I'll substitute in my top dozen ...

       
  • Debussy: Op.10 (1893)
  • Revel: F major (1903)
  • Shostakovich: No. 7 (1960)

snyprrr

Quote from: Feanor on May 26, 2010, 04:50:59 AM
Dan, obviously you're a great Classical Era lover -- not that there's anything wrong with that.  Personally I never have been able to get a real handle on the Grosse Fugue dispite many attempts.

Maybe it's time for me to update my original list a bit ...

       
  • Mozart: No.19, K.465 "Dissonance" (1785)
  • Haydn: No.62, Op.76/3 "Emperor" (1796)
  • Beethoven: No.7, Op.59/1 "Rasumovsky" (1806)
  • Schubert: No.14, D.810 "Death and the Maiden" (1824)
  • Beethoven: No.14, Op.131 (1826)
  • Borodin: No.2 (1881)
  • Dvorak: No.6, Op.12 "American" (1893)
  • Janácek: No.1 "Kruetzer Sonata" (1923)
  • Bartók: No.4 (1928)
  • Carter: No.2 (1959)
  • Shostakovich: No.8, Op.110 (1960)
  • Alwyn: No.2 "Spring Waters" (1975)
OK, so our preferences evolve, right?  In place of the deletions (which I still love), I'll substitute in my top dozen ...

       
  • Debussy: Op.10 (1893)
  • Revel: F major (1903)
  • Shostakovich: No. 7 (1960)

Weren't you the one I was talking to about Alwyn No.2, last year? I remember not getting it. Maybe it's time for an Arnold, Alwyn, Rawsthorne re-listen. I still like Arnold No.2. Rawsthorne is pretty thorny, though, not over so.

Fëanor

Quote from: snyprrr on May 26, 2010, 05:39:44 AM
Weren't you the one I was talking to about Alwyn No.2, last year? I remember not getting it. Maybe it's time for an Arnold, Alwyn, Rawsthorne re-listen. I still like Arnold No.2. Rawsthorne is pretty thorny, though, not over so.
Yes, I was takling about Alywn a while back and, indeed, his 2nd is still a favourite with me though no longer necessarily in the top dozen.  I very much like Arnold's 2nd too.  I have yet to hear any Rawsthorne, unfortunately.

WI Dan

Quote from: Feanor on May 26, 2010, 04:50:59 AM
Dan, obviously you're a great Classical Era lover -- not that there's anything wrong with that.  Personally I never have been able to get a real handle on the Grosse Fugue dispite many attempts.
It didn't "click" immediately for me, either, but now I dig it.

Have you seen the movie, Copying Beethoven?  They used that music to great effect, I thought.  Whenever I hear the Grosse Fugue, these days, I think of the very lovely, but worried, Miss Anna Holtz, travelling through the Austrian countryside on a stagecoach, on her way to see her dear friend, Beethoven, for the last time.  There's a bit more to it, but I don't want to ruin it for you, in case you haven't seen the movie.

QuoteOK, so our preferences evolve, right?  In place of the deletions (which I still love), I'll substitute in my top dozen ...

       
  • Debussy: Op.10 (1893)
  • Revel: F major (1903)
  • Shostakovich: No. 7 (1960)
I first heard the string quartets of Debussy and Ravel just about a month ago.  Otherwise, there would have been two more "classical era" quartets on my list, above, ... not that there's anything wrong with that. 

Fëanor

Quote from: Dan on May 26, 2010, 01:53:29 PM
...
Have you seen the movie, Copying Beethoven?  They used that music to great effect, I thought.  Whenever I hear the Grosse Fugue, these days, I think of the very lovely, but worried, Miss Anna Holtz, travelling through the Austrian countryside on a stagecoach, on her way to see her dear friend, Beethoven, for the last time.  There's a bit more to it, but I don't want to ruin it for you, in case you haven't seen the movie.
Thanks for the tip: I haven't seen the movie.

Quote from: Dan on May 26, 2010, 01:53:29 PMI first heard the string quartets of Debussy and Ravel just about a month ago.  Otherwise, there would have been two more "classical era" quartets on my list, above, ... not that there's anything wrong with that. 
I'm not a particular fan of either Debussy or Revel, but their string quartets are great.  Perhaps because they each only wrote the one quartet, they put special effort into it to show what they could do.  In any case both were very successful.

just Jeff

Interesting thead that I have not yet read all of.

But I thought I would mention that this beautiful set:

BELA BARTOK (1881-1945)
The String Quartets No. 1-6 - Vegh Quartet
TELEFUNKEN 6.35023 Teldec 1972 "Grand Prix du disque"


pictured here:

http://tinyurl.com/yj2xl5n

http://tinyurl.com/y8s8dcy

is still not out on CD to the best I know.  How odd that a top rated recording would fall between the cracks like this.  An older Vegh recording in Mono has appeared, but the stereo recordings are MIA on CD.  I may have to do my own CDs from vinyl, unless anyone can confirm a CD set somewhere.
20th Century Music - Ecrater Storefront:
http://20thcenturymusic.ecrater.com/