Haydn's Haus

[Jo498]

Have the Fine Arts recordings (AFAIS opp.50,64,74,76) ever been on CD or download? I only see LPs of them...

[Gurn Blanston]

I am a LHQ partisan, although one of very few on here. They're popular among other musicians I know, and not very popular among non-musician classical listeners. No idea why. We've been over this I think though.

Right now I'm listening to the Kodály and Fine Arts Quartets in op. 50 no. 3, and liking both of them a lot, even if intonation is at times sketchy. (But then I also have and like the Lindsay Quartet non-integral—only op. 20 thru 77—which has the same problem.) Haydn is largely indestructible, I guess.

I may explore the Fine Arts recordings a bit more just out of curiosity.

I almost never comment on recordings because like or not like is far too subjective.  Also.  I don't listen to MI  recordings so I don't have an opinion.  I do have every PI recording ever made though,  AFAIK, so I do have a basis to choose from.  My first choice is Festetics, their total ambiance is right in my ideal. LHQ is my second choice.  When they started with Op. 9, I felt they were too stiff and formal,  they sounded like a typical MI band.  But by the time they got to Op. 20 they got it figured out and have been great ever since. 

Most of my favorite disks for casual listening,  which is really more representative of real life,  are the non- opus number based groupings by the Schoppanzigh quartet,  or the Amsterdam quartet.  Since no one here appears to know the Salomon quartet I won't  bring them up,  but some of their renditions are among my favorites,  like their Op. 50...

🤠😎

[Madiel]

To be clear, it was in op.9 that I found the LHQ awful. They were less egregious in later samples, though still not really to my taste.

[amw]

Have the Fine Arts recordings (AFAIS opp.50,64,74,76) ever been on CD or download? I only see LPs of them...

They recorded everything from op. 1 to 103 which are currently available as lossless download from Qobuz, Presto and a few other sites.

These versions of the recordings do sound a bit shrill though, which I wasn't sure whether was a fault with the ensemble or with the recording quality. I gave up around Op. 54.

I almost never comment on recordings because like or not like is far too subjective.  Also.  I don't listen to MI  recordings so I don't have an opinion.  I do have every PI recording ever made though,  AFAIK, so I do have a basis to choose from.  My first choice is Festetics, their total ambiance is right in my ideal. LHQ is my second choice.  When they started with Op. 9, I felt they were too stiff and formal,  they sounded like a typical MI band.  But by the time they got to Op. 20 they got it figured out and have been great ever since. 

Most of my favorite disks for casual listening,  which is really more representative of real life,  are the non- opus number based groupings by the Schoppanzigh quartet,  or the Amsterdam quartet.  Since no one here appears to know the Salomon quartet I won't  bring them up,  but some of their renditions are among my favorites,  like their Op. 50...

🤠😎

The LHQ recordings of the early quartets, op. 9, 17 and 20 (and 33 to some extent), are very strict in their classicising interpretations, which is apparently intentional and based on the editions they're using (which also suggest that Haydn wanted slower tempi, among other things—another common objection to their playing). I will agree that the most essential aspects of their recordings for me, which is the sense of exploration and fun and improvisation and being carried away by the music at the cost of some technical security, don't really pop up until around op. 33 or thereabouts. To be clear, this is an impression and probably intentional—they are, presumably, capable of playing the music completely straight, any unevenness in the playing does seem like a true aesthetic choice—but I understand why people don't like them, at the same time. For Op. 9 and 17 I did also invest in the Festetics as alternatives, which are probably more appealing to most people (and which I admittedly listen to more often).

I'm not a fan of either the Schuppanzigh or the Salomon Quartets in Haydn, for the same reason I'm not a fan of the Tátrais: intonation issues, particularly in the higher register, which for me are also worsened by the specific historically informed pitch the two first ensembles choose. People do also criticise the LHQ on intonation grounds but for whatever reason they strike me as intonation-perfect given a non-equal-tempered, non-A440 pitch space, whereas the Salomons don't, and I have no data to back up exactly why that is. I guess it does all come down to taste and, in my case, synaesthesia.

[Florestan]

FWIW, I have four complete sets (Aeolian, Angeles, Kodaly and Buchberger) and one incomplete one (Mosaiques). I've never listened to any one of them in their entirety, let alone made any A/B/C/D/E comparison --- first, I have no time for that, second I have no technical knowledge for that and last but not least I have no interest for that. My favorite set is whatever set I listen to at any given time.

With that caveat in mind, I venture to say that imho Haydn's entire body of SQs might not the finest ever penned --- there is strong competition from Mozart and Beethoven --- but it's certainly the largest body of fine and very fine SQs ever penned. (Ditto for his symphonies, piano sonatas and piano trios).

[staxomega]

My favorite set is whatever set I listen to at any given time.

This is my impression as well, it seems like the quality of Haydn SQ recordings seem to be pretty high. Of all the recordings I've bought over the years I don't find myself wanting to compare them but just enjoy them instead. With that said I have only heard some of the more controversial ones like LHQ in passing and couldn't speak about them. After my big exploration of cycles I hadn't heard a couple of years ago, and playing Auryn Quartet now ~3.5 times the way through these have now become my default go to replacing Festetics.

On the other hand with Beethoven, Shostakovich, Bartok, Schoenberg SQs I find there is a large variability in quality of interpretations.

[DavidW]

and playing Auryn Quartet now ~3.5 times the way through these have now become my default go to replacing Festetics.

Yeah the Auryn Quartet are really superb.  They can find so much nuance and color that others miss.  They have such perfect tempos, neither fever pitched nor draggy.  I just relistened to their Op 20 string quartets and wow that performance is just so good!

[calyptorhynchus]

Are the Auryn PI?

[DavidW]

Are the Auryn PI?

Nope!  Not at all!

[staxomega]

Yeah the Auryn Quartet are really superb.  They can find so much nuance and color that others miss.  They have such perfect tempos, neither fever pitched nor draggy.  I just relistened to their Op 20 string quartets and wow that performance is just so good!

My general impression of the cycle as a whole is it's a balanced cycle like Festetics, but Auryn just had a bit "more" like that color you mention.

Are the Auryn PI?

Modern instruments, but they are clearly informed performances. 

[Madiel]

I think the Auryn are going to edge out the Petersen as my op.1 choice. But they're both really good.

[Madiel]

Question: who actually has op.2 available as a discrete set, or coupled just with op.1?

There don't seem to be that many cases of op.2 being available on its own or in a small collection, rather than a box of complete quartets.

I know about the Auryn, the Buchbergers (opp.1&2 together), the Tatrai (opp.1, 2, 42 and 103), the Kodaly once you put a few single discs together... and I think that's all the ones I'm aware of.

[DavidW]

[Jo498]

That's about it, I believe, except for some from the 1960s, mostly vinyl only, such as Schneider, Dekany, Fine Arts (the Vox series was combined of several ensembles)
There are only 4 quartets left as 2 works have been eliminated from op.2 for not being originally for string quartet, the Kodaly put these two together with the inauthentic op.3 and they have also been recorded as sextet versions for horns.
It's quite surprising that there is the separate op.1 with Petersen. Since op.1+2 have been re-sorted as "early divertimenti" with the "real quartets" only beginning with op.9 both Festetics and London Haydn Q have ignored them.

[Madiel]

This always puzzles me... are they doing them as an orchestra?

EDIT: Yes, yes they are. I found it on Idagio. About 10 seconds of the absolutely leaden "Presto" of op.1/1 was enough.

[Karl Henning]

This always puzzles me... are they doing them as an orchestra?

EDIT: Yes, yes they are. I found it on Idagio. About 10 seconds of the absolutely leaden "Presto" of op.1/1 was enough.

Ugh!

[Valentino]

I inherited a Karajan Schöpfung on LP some time ago. I'm rather ambivalent to Karajan; too many recordings carpet bombing the market. So I just shelved it.
Took it out yesterday. Oh, this is good i thought! Looked at the credits: Janowitz, FiDi, Wunderlich etc. So there. A Karajan jewel.

[DavidW]

Yes I managed to find the worst Haydn recording ever!  Go me!

I think even Gurn never asked for Op 1-2 SQs rearranged for orchestra and played laboriously.

[Florestan]

I inherited a Karajan Schöpfung on LP some time ago. I'm rather ambivalent to Karajan; too many recordings carpet bombing the market. So I just shelved it.
Took it out yesterday. Oh, this is good i thought! Looked at the credits: Janowitz, FiDi, Wunderlich etc. So there. A Karajan jewel.

The best Creation ever recorded.

[Gurn Blanston]

Yes I managed to find the worst Haydn recording ever!  Go me!

I think even Gurn never asked for Op 1-2 SQs rearranged for orchestra and played laboriously.

Yeah,   I have that set,  meh.  Since there are no PI recording of these works except for a superb single by
Piccolo Concerto Wien,  I use the Buchbergers, which happily turns out to  be one of the best opuses of their cycle.

🤠😎