Shostakovich String Quartets

[snyprrr]

Thanks! What has changed?

On that last point, I absolutely agree!

I just think the younger generation might not have the right concept of these works- they NEED grit- modern groups are trying to be as scrubbed as possible (the Bikini Wax Theory). You really don't want the Midori String Quartet playing these, do you? I'd rather have a bunch of ex-military alcoholics playing Shostakovich?

[Brahmsian]

I just think the younger generation might not have the right concept of these works- they NEED grit- modern groups are trying to be as scrubbed as possible (the Bikini Wax Theory). You really don't want the Midori String Quartet playing these, do you? I'd rather have a bunch of ex-military alcoholics playing Shostakovich?

  Good one, Snypps!!! 

[Karl Henning]

I don't buy "too perfect" as negative criticism.

[Karl Henning]

Nor do I think any composer's music is well served by a bunch of oldsters with the shakes

[snyprrr]

Nor do I think any composer's music is well served by a bunch of oldsters with the shakes

Oh, trust me, they can handle their liquor- makes 'em play better donchakno!

And yes, sometimes 'perfection'- scrubbed, clean tone, unnaturally tight ensemble, bla bla- IS NOT Perfection. Witness how the Borodin are known for not being afraid of 'low' playing, bringing out the 'gypsy',... find me (oh that dreaded word) "authenticity" in the Debussy, Rubio, Danel,....

now, some haaave said that the Mandelring do some great stuff (14th?)- but they have also been accused of being too clean for ole Shosty. No one is accusing the Borodin of being ... can we just call it "being too clinical"?



btw- could you listen to the Emerson 6th for me? How delicate are they; or, are they rough with it? The samples said they really had this one. I will concede that the Emerson speak to me in, at least, 6-11/12- which, incidentally, would be "that" phase of Shosty's writing that seems to be the one most people do well in (because the music is so so tight here (7-11)).--- even though, some just don't get the feral quality of the rhythmic stabs- at least the Emerson have the balls to not be too nice with DSCH.


Karl, how are you on the Fitzzies? Their 'Lento' in 6 was so long that it sapped the tension right out of the music- but I've heard other movements where they are much more excited.


Do you have a  favourite 6th?


Which is your least fav DSCH SQ? (if none, I'm going to assume you mean No.1)

[snyprrr]

Borodin Recording Dates

Could someone pleeease- who either has the BMG or 'bovine' Cycles- give us the recording dates for this cycle? And which are 'live'? The best I have so far:

1978-79: 1, 15, 7??, 8

1981-82: 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 9 (9 is 'live' Sept. 27, 1981)

1983?: 2, 4

1984?: 3, 5



Anyone?

(frankly, Beethoven and Taneyev dates would be nice too, maybe even Shostakovich?)

[George]

Borodin Recording Dates

Could someone pleeease- who either has the BMG or 'bovine' Cycles- give us the recording dates for this cycle? And which are 'live'? The best I have so far:

1978-79: 1, 15, 7??, 8

1981-82: 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 9 (9 is 'live' Sept. 27, 1981)

1983?: 2, 4

1984?: 3, 5



Anyone?

(frankly, Beethoven and Taneyev dates would be nice too, maybe even Shostakovich?)

1 - 1978
2 - 1982
3 - 1983
4 - 1982
5 - 1983
6 - 1981 September 27 (live)
7 - 1981
8 - 1978
9 - 1981 September 27 (live)
10 - 1981
11 - 1981
12 - 1981
13 - 1981
14 - 1981
15 - 1978
Quintet - 1983 September 5-6 (live)
Two Pieces for Octet - 1964

[snyprrr]

1 - 1978
2 - 1982
3 - 1983
4 - 1982
5 - 1983
6 - 1981 September 27 (live)
7 - 1981
8 - 1978
9 - 1981 September 27 (live)
10 - 1981
11 - 1981
12 - 1981
13 - 1981
14 - 1981
15 - 1978
Quintet - 1983 September 5-6 (live)
Two Pieces for Octet - 1964

oh thank you that is SOOO interesting!!

10-14 DO seem to have the 'best sound', no?


I just got the 8-10 on BMG, very interesting sound differences- but, to be honest, as I remember it I prefer the old EMI "sound" to this Remastered sound- I can hear the "bubble of perfection" surrounding the Original Recording. I mean, it's VERRRY GOOD as it is- but, the point is, THAT 1981 VINTAGE seems to been the Borodin's high point?

I can tell you that No.8 on this BMG (1978) has a little bit more rare sound- though it's still pretty up-front. Comparing with the Virgin- wow!!- not much difference at all- 1978 gets it a little more on edge, but the Virgin really sounds just as good- though, I CAN NOW HEAR THAT "METALLIC EDGE" in the violins 'above the stave'- you'll hear it in comparison.

Does the 'bovine'Box have the same Remastering or what? I kind of miss that old EMI disc...



SQs 9-10 are proving very tough nuts for "snyprrr's Perfect Version"- Borodin/Chandos looks to be the wildest, with that Taneyev I haven't heard, and the Beethoven is quite pert indeed- leaving this 1981 'live' performance the most 'Beautiful' of the early Masters (didn't compare Fitzzies here    ).



Weller and Beethoven and Borodin/Chandos may have the edge on Borodin1981 in Op.118. For the last movement, you reeeally want to try to keep it under 9 minutes, to get that 'bounce' going. The slower versions (10 minutes) don't really get it going.







Hey George- what do you think are the best recordings of that '80s Cycle? I thought the 'live' 9 (and by assumption, the 6th also) was pretty good, though I really never expect any coughing in a Shosty Quartet Experience. For that alone I kind of have to seek elsewhere.

[George]

oh thank you that is SOOO interesting!!

You're welcome!

Hey George- what do you think are the best recordings of that '80s Cycle? I thought the 'live' 9 (and by assumption, the 6th also) was pretty good, though I really never expect any coughing in a Shosty Quartet Experience. For that alone I kind of have to seek elsewhere.

In that 80s cycle, the ones I best know are 14 and 15, as I tend to reach for the Chandos for the rest.

I do want to hear the piano quintet again, though, not just because my favorite pianist is at the keyboard, but also because I havent heard it in awhile.

[snyprrr]

IMO the 'big' Shostakovich finales benefit from some time being taken. The Taneyevs take 5:25 up to the big slowdown, so there's about 2 min 20 of roughly Andante in the middle there. Don't know how others compare.

Timings! Though I think most of these are rather standard, compared to some of the tempi they adopt in 'standard rep'—the most obvious standouts being the first movement of No. 5, finale of No. 3, and all of No. 13.

1: 4:43 / 4:34 / 1:58 / 3:03
2: 8:15 / 10:39 / 6:21 / 10:54
3: 7:03 / 4:30 / 3:44 / 5:36 / 10:41
4: 3:26 / 6:41 / 4:03 / 8:19
5: 12:00 / 9:06 / 10:56
6: 7:00 / 5:00 / 4:53 / 8:29
7: 3:10 / 3:49 / 5:42
8: 4:30 / 2:45 / 4:32 / 4:43 / 3:13
9: 4:05 / 3:40 / 4:01 / 3:27 / 10:18
10: 3:57 / 4:18 / 6:16 / 9:05
11: 1:55 / 2:33 / 1:32 / 1:21/ 0:59 / 4:38 / 3:16
12: 6:11 / 18:25
13: 15:22
14: 8:23 / 9:20 / 8:42
15: 11:35 / 6:21 / 2:00 / 4:34 / 5:01 / 6:28

Actually, the Taneyev do shave off at least a few more seconds in just about every movement. Still, they seem to hold back a little more in 9 than Beethoven and Borodin/Chandos- which may be a good thing: those two are pretty down and dirty. But, all three/four seem to be about the best on the market. The newer bands just won't play these pieces quick quick quick like they should be. No.9's 4th movement should be around 3:40... and only a few go there... 4:40 is just too much for a "breathing" movement. The Brodsky are a tad fast at 2:36!!  Right around 3:30, the "breathing" motion sets in, but it gets "winded" at about 4:15.

I'm starting to get a handle on 9 and 10... yaaay!!



btw- when were recording dates for Taneyev??? pleeez

[snyprrr]

You're welcome!

In that 80s cycle, the ones I best know are 14 and 15, as I tend to reach for the Chandos for the rest.

I do want to hear the piano quintet again, though, not just because my favorite pianist is at the keyboard, but also because I havent heard it in awhile.

Well, 14 and 15 come from different vintages (1981, 1978 resp.), so, can you hear any tonal change in the venue/ ambience/ warth- coolness? I would imagine that 14 will "sound" just a little bit better than 15.


what are the "Chandos years" if I may? What's your take on the sound quality there? It seems to be about on par with the Beethoven set...?!....!?

[snyprrr]

I'm on one... final... push... towards the finish line...


                   ... whew....


                                                5-6

                                                                      9-10

                                                                                                  11-12


It's ALMOST like Rocket Science!

[amw]

btw- when were recording dates for Taneyev??? pleeez

June 1968 - 3
November 1971 - 4
December 1974 - 15
April 1975 - 6, 14
November 1977 - 7, 8
March 1978 - 1, 2, 5, 9-13

[snyprrr]

June 1968 - 3
November 1971 - 4
December 1974 - 15
April 1975 - 6, 14
November 1977 - 7, 8
March 1978 - 1, 2, 5, 9-13

Fascinating, captain!  I can't believe I've reduced my life to date speculating.

Again, do you hear the differences? That's really quite a span of years.

[Karl Henning]

[...] I can't believe I've reduced my life to date speculating.

To me it seems like nine weeks and five days.

[snyprrr]

To me it seems like nine weeks and five days.

So, if Shosty was an atheist, and all the greatest performances are by probable atheists, how can one possibly "see God" whilst listening here? Aren't our searches for transcendence fruitless here since no one involved knew His Mind?




btw- Emerson miiight actually get First Prize in No.9.

[NorthNYMark]

To me it seems like nine weeks and five days.

LOL! 

[snyprrr]

No. 9 Op.117: 'Adagio' No.1

This slow movement plaint makes precious little sense to me at the moment. It has that one "barb note" in the rhythm that seems to throw everything off. Timings range from 3:18 (Beethoven) to 6:01 (Borodin1967). I have

4:21 Brodsky

4:22 St.Petersburg

5:06 Borodin1981

5:36 Sorrel

None satisfy me. I long to hear either of the extremes, for the melodic cells seem to want o either be quite quick or hyper-slow. The St. Petersburg seem to pull things around more to my liking, making it sound somewhat normal. Is this just a rarified, Faure-like piece that shouldn't be scrutinized to harshly?- it sure does somewhat sound like a Fauresque mood, eh?

The Borodin1981'live' just seem to perhaps drag it out at 5:06- their 1967 recording takes 6:01! The Sorrel, at 5:36, either needed to go even slower still, because here they seem to inhabit that no-man's-land of rhythmic amorphousness. Sure, the "clouds" sound sumptuous in their Chandos guise, but there is absolutely no tension. It just goes nowhere for me, even dipping the dynamics to near inaudibility to induce snooziness.

Here are some of the winners:

3:18 Beethoven
3:40 Taneyev
3:47 Emerson
3:50 Manhatten
3:58 Eder

[snyprrr]

1 - 1978
2 - 1982
3 - 1983
4 - 1982
5 - 1983
6 - 1981 September 27 (live)
7 - 1981
8 - 1978
9 - 1981 September 27 (live)
10 - 1981
11 - 1981
12 - 1981
13 - 1981
14 - 1981
15 - 1978
Quintet - 1983 September 5-6 (live)
Two Pieces for Octet - 1964

1981 was definitely the best vintage for the Borodin. On the BMG 8/9/10, 8-1978 sounded allright (though the Virgin remake is virtually the same performance in somewhat better (though not perfect) sound), the studio 10-1981 had that vintage sound; the 'live' 9-1981 generally had fair sound- sometimes a cough- but I do miss the studio sound here. The 'live' 6th, however, has a warmth to the performance that makes the 'live' acoustics sound like 'A Christmas Carol'.

The Borodin did NOT have the most consistently engineered recordings.

[George]

1981 was definitely the best vintage for the Borodin. On the BMG 8/9/10, 8-1978 sounded allright (though the Virgin remake is virtually the same performance in somewhat better (though not perfect) sound), the studio 10-1981 had that vintage sound; the 'live' 9-1981 generally had fair sound- sometimes a cough- but I do miss the studio sound here. The 'live' 6th, however, has a warmth to the performance that makes the 'live' acoustics sound like 'A Christmas Carol'.

The Borodin did NOT have the most consistently engineered recordings.

When the performance is good enough, I forget about the sound.