Haydn's Haus

[Biffo]

The idea was to recreate with the original listener heard, bad acoustic or not.

In other words a gimmick.

[Madiel]

In other words a gimmick.

Absolutely. And of course, one that doesn't want you to consider whether Haydn ever said to anyone, or muttered under his breath, "I wish we had a better hall".

[Gurn Blanston]

+ 1.

Besides, the ambiance of the room back then meant not only the room itself and its acoustics, but also the audience in the room and their behaviour during performance. Recreating the room only does not give the full experience. 

You seem to be expecting an awful lot from a CD.

[Gurn Blanston]

Absolutely. And of course, one that doesn't want you to consider whether Haydn ever said to anyone, or muttered under his breath, "I wish we had a better hall".

Well, he probably had the best hall in Europe, so I doubt he did.

[Florestan]

The idea was to recreate with the original listener heard, bad acoustic or not.

This recreation is impossible because the original listeners heard the work in the context of its performance, ie not only the room's acoustics but also the additional input from the audience (coughs, talks, glasses being passed to, or taken from, them etc etc etc). The idea that a listener back then had any notion of listening alone to a piece of music played to perfection in a perfect acoustics is an anachronism. We will never ever be able to hear what the original listeners heard.

[JBS]

Berlin's aim was to recreate the actual acoustics so if the original room had bad acoustics then the perfect acoustics would be bad acoustics. And for at least a couple of CDs in the set, the idea was with to recreate what Haydn was playing for himself in his own parlor or what the original dedicatee what's playing for themselves in their own drawing room.

[Gurn Blanston]

This recreation is impossible because the original listeners heard the work in the context of its performance, ie not only the room's acoustics but also the additional input from the audience (coughs, talks, glasses being passed to, or taken from, them etc etc etc). The idea that a listener back then had any notion of listening alone to a piece of music played to perfection in a perfect acoustics is an anachronism. We will never ever be able to hear what the original listeners heard.

You really seem to have some serious hangups about ambient noise. So, let me ask you this: does the ambient noise have to be on the CD for it to count, or can it be my wife telling me about her day while I'm trying to listen to the music? Or for that matter, I tend to pass gas quite a bit, whether music is playing or not.   You've been pulling out this same tired old argument for the 15 years that I have known you. In that time, I have happily listened to thousands of realizations of music with little or no concern about coughing or sneezing or farting. Mainly, I love the sound of the instruments, which no number of anachronistic notions is going to change.

[Karl Henning]

This recreation is impossible because the original listeners heard the work in the context of its performance, ie not only the room's acoustics but also the additional input from the audience (coughs, talks, glasses being passed to, or taken from, them etc etc etc). The idea that a listener back then had any notion of listening alone to a piece of music played to perfection in a perfect acoustics is an anachronism. We will never ever be able to hear what the original listeners heard.

In part incorrect because many of the sonatas were composed for domestic "non-concert" use. Remember that writing a Sonata so that it rumbles to the back of a grand space is a Beethovenian anachronism.

[Florestan]

to recreate what Haydn was playing for himself in his own parlor or what the original dedicatee what's playing for themselves in their own drawing room.

Still unattainable because Beghin is not Haydn nor the original dedicatee of any given sonata. What he achieves is himself playing, but that is what each and every performer achieves, HIP or not: herself/himself playing.

There is no way out from subjectivity when it comes to performing a piece of music and no amount of gimmickry will change that.

[Florestan]

You really seem to have some serious hangups about ambient noise.

I bring it on only when someone claims that they recreate exactly what listeners back then heard.

[Florestan]

In part incorrect because many of the sonatas were composed for domestic "non-concert" use.

True but see my reply to JBS above.

[calyptorhynchus]

Oh, you're all being very harsh about the Beghin project! I've listened to two of the disks now and they are excellent, I would recommend them, they are great in every way.

My only scepticism was thinking about the cost of a team of three going round the different rooms, then transporting various instruments to Canada, setting up a sound studio in Montreal, all the time and equipment there versus Beghin going to each room with the instrument, spending some days or weeks practising then getting a sound team in for the actual takes. Perhaps the rooms weren't available for long enough for his practising.

I suppose also that having done this exercise the techniques and programming would be available to recreate the acoustics of rooms that are no longer extant, so long as there are measurements and detailed enough descriptions available.

[calyptorhynchus]

does the ambient noise have to be on the CD for it to count, or can it be my wife telling me about her day while I'm trying to listen to the music? ....

Oh Gurn, you should really pause at those moments 

[Wakefield]

This recreation is impossible because the original listeners heard the work in the context of its performance, ie not only the room's acoustics but also the additional input from the audience (coughs, talks, glasses being passed to, or taken from, them etc etc etc). The idea that a listener back then had any notion of listening alone to a piece of music played to perfection in a perfect acoustics is an anachronism. We will never ever be able to hear what the original listeners heard.

You're getting short in scope, Andrei. History is impossible too because we will never understand the facts as our ancestors did. Any attempt of rebuilding the past is a perfect anachronism. The same idea, but beautifully expressed, can be found in "Pierre Menard, Author of Don Quixote," by Jorge Luis Borges. 

[Madiel]

I'm sure this has been covered a dozen times before, but tired brain is just going to ask...

One of the things on my to-do list is to collect more string quartets, especially all the sets of 6.

I have the Kodaly quartet already in opp. 64, 71/74 and 76. Double ups are not fatal in this instance, but I'm also perfectly happy collecting other quartets in opus blocks rather than in one go.

So my focus is on (deep breath) opp.9, 17, 20, 33, 50 and 54/55.

Liked recordings? Disliked recordings?

Note: I lean modern but period is okay in this circumstance. Except the London Haydn Quartet on Hyperion, they sound freaking awful. 

[Karl Henning]

I'm sure this has been covered a dozen times before, but tired brain is just going to ask...

One of the things on my to-do list is to collect more string quartets, especially all the sets of 6.

I have the Kodaly quartet already in opp. 64, 71/74 and 76. Double ups are not fatal in this instance, but I'm also perfectly happy collecting other quartets in opus blocks rather than in one go.

So my focus is on (deep breath) opp.9, 17, 20, 33, 50 and 54/55.

Liked recordings? Disliked recordings?

Note: I lean modern but period is okay in this circumstance. Except the London Haydn Quartet on Hyperion, they sound freaking awful. 

The Quatuor Mosaïque may be my favorite in the Opp. 20 & 33

[aukhawk]

Chiaroscuro Quartet for. Op.20

[Jo498]

I'm sure this has been covered a dozen times before, but tired brain is just going to ask...

So my focus is on (deep breath) opp.9, 17, 20, 33, 50 and 54/55.

Liked recordings? Disliked recordings?

Note: I lean modern but period is okay in this circumstance. Except the London Haydn Quartet on Hyperion, they sound freaking awful.

I have not heard any of the London Haydn Q but I had the impression that they were highly regarded among the period instrument recordings. Among other period ensembles he Mosaiques sound warmer but they only did opp. 20 and 33 of the above. op.50 is one of the best of the Festetics, I found their op.20 disappointing and have not heard their op.33. Their op.54/55 is a mixed bag but last time I checked I was somewhat positively surprised. Their op.9/17 was the only period instruments game in town when I got them 10-12 years ago. If you generally are not too fond of period instruments I somewhat hesitate to recommend the Festetics.

Modern instruments
for separate op. 9 and 17 (and everything else) there is basically Tatrai, Kodaly and Auryn. I don't know if the Buchberger (Brilliant) is still findable separately. You know the general style of the Kodaly, IMO reliable but often a bit staid.
The Auryn are very good in very good sound (and probably expensive) but I think they can also be a bit too well behaved. The Tatrai are supposedly very uneven (I have only heard their op.20 and 76 as they are apparently the best one) and comparably old-fashioned (recorded between mid 60s and late 70s or early 80s). The Buchberger are enthusiastic but rather rough and ready (if findable maybe so cheap that it will be worth a try).

you get far more choices for opp.20 and 33. I like the Hagen in op.20 (and this was before their "mannered" period) but many find them "cold", Tatrai for "old world charm). There is a newish highly regarded one by Doric/Chandos I have not heard but this is probably a very good available and affordable choice
op.33, Cuarteto Casals is on modern instruments but very lean and brilliant. Very impressive but sometimes a bit too intense, especially for these mostly short and humorous pieces. And no op.42 as filler (a cool little piece that gets often overlooked).

op.50 Amati/Divox (two discs, probably expensive) I have never heard the "classic" Tokyo (DG), Nomos/cpo is good enough but fairly dry.

op.54 Juilliard (but this is only in one of their boxes, I fear), Endellion/Virgin would do in a pinch or probably Kodaly (have not heard the latter)
op.55 Panocha/Supraphon

[JBS]

I was going to suggest that Quarteto Casals but the Amazon US price is over $250.

My favorite MI recordings are the Jerusalem Quartet, but they only did selected quartets and not whole opera, and Takacs, but they seem only to have done the later sets, not the ones you are looking at now.

So I would plump for the Kodalys.

[mc ukrneal]

I'm sure this has been covered a dozen times before, but tired brain is just going to ask...

One of the things on my to-do list is to collect more string quartets, especially all the sets of 6.

I have the Kodaly quartet already in opp. 64, 71/74 and 76. Double ups are not fatal in this instance, but I'm also perfectly happy collecting other quartets in opus blocks rather than in one go.

So my focus is on (deep breath) opp.9, 17, 20, 33, 50 and 54/55.

Liked recordings? Disliked recordings?

Note: I lean modern but period is okay in this circumstance. Except the London Haydn Quartet on Hyperion, they sound freaking awful. 

I have never gone opus by opus, but overall I really like the Angeles and Tatrai. Angeles can be gotten in a box, though possible to stream as well I would assume. Not sure of availability of either these days.