Shostakovich String Quartets

[snyprrr]

1 - Borodin'95
     St. Petersburg/SONY
     Emerson
     Sorrel
     Alexander
     Brodsky
     Fitzwilliam
     Taneyev'66 'live'
     Borodin'67


2 - Verlaine
     Zapolski
     Georgian State
     Borodin'95
     Brodsky
     Sorrel
     St. Petersburg/Hyperion
     St. Petersburg/SONY                         
     Moyzes
     Emerson
     Eder
     Borodin'67
     Borodin'83
     Alexander

3 - Glinka'77 'live'
     Borodin'95
     Borodin'67
     Acies
     St. Petersburg/SONY
     Brodsky
     Georgian State
     Allegri
     Orlando
     Amati
     Eder
     St.Lawrence
     St.Petersburg/Hyperion
     Borodin'84
     Taneyev'66 'live'
     Hagen
     Emerson
     Alexander
     Cailin
     Philharmonia/Thorofon
     Sorrel
     Beethoven 'Premiere Recording'

4 - Moyzes
      Kreutzer
      Manhattan                               
      Brodsky
      St. Peterdburg/SONY
      Sorrel
      Taneyev'72
      Taneyev'63 'live'
      Borodin'67
      Alexander
      Emerson
      St.Petersburg/Hyperion

5 - Atrium 'live'
     Acies
     Eder
     Emerson
     Manhattan
    Brodsky                                           
     Sorrel
     St. Petersburg/SONY
     St. Petersburg/Hyperion
     Borodin'83
     Brodsky
     Alexander
     Borodin'67

6 - St.Petersburg/Hyperion
     Manhattan
     Brodsky                                       
     Borodin'81 'live'
     Borodin'67
     Emerson
     Sorrel
     Orlando
     Alexander


7 - St. Petersburg/SONY
     Borodin'67
     Hagen
     St. Petersburg/Hyperion
     Kreutzer
     Manhattan
     Brodsky                                       
     Borodin'83
     Borodin'95
     St.Lawrence
     Emerson
     Amati
     Sorrel
     Alexander
     Philharmonia

8 - Sorrel
     Borodin'67
     St. Petersburg/Hyperion
     Borodin'95
     Manhattan
     Brodsky
     St.Lawrence
     Hagen
     Kreutzer
     Aviv
     Borodin'78
     Emerson
     Medici

9 - Gosteleradio
     Aviv
     Borodin'81 'live'
     Borodin'67
     Brodsky                                          
     St. Petersburg/Hyperion
     Emerson
     Manhattan
     Sorrel

10 - Borodin'67
       Brodsky
       Kopelman
       St. Petersburg/Hyperion                                                                                     
       Borodin'81
       Manhattan
       Sorrel
       Emerson

11 - Vogler                                   
       Brodsky
       St.Petersburg/Hyperion
       Borodin'81
       Borodin'67
       Emerson
       Sorrel

12 -  Sorrel                                                                                            (Taneyev)
     Shostakovich                                                                                               (Debussy)
       Borodin'83
       Borodin'95                                   
       Amati
      Brodsky
       St. Petersburg/Hyperion
       Emerson
       Eder
     Philharmonia
       Borodin'67
       

13 - Kremer/Lockenhaus Edition-ECM
       Sorrel
       St.Petersburg
       Shostakovich
       Brodsky                                                                                                      (Aviv)
       Emerson
       Borodin'67
       Borodin'81
     

14 - Kremer/Lockenhaus Edition-ECM                                                                (Taneyev)
      Shostakovich                                   
      Brodsky
      Sorrel
      Emerson
      St.Petersburg/Hyperion                                                                                (Mandelring)
      Borodin'81

15 - Kagan-Zhislin-Bashmet-Gutman 'live'''82
       Borodin'95
       Eder
       Brodsky
       Sorrel     
       St.Petersburg/Hyperion                                                                                        Beethoven
       Kremer-Daniels-Kashkashian-Ma/SONY                                                       (Mandelring)

[Karl Henning]

AND YES, THE EMERSON ARE JUST A BIT TOO MUCH FRENETIC IN 142 'ALLEGRETTO' OPENING, AAAHHHH!!!!! THEY NEED TO CHILL JUST A LITTLE BIT.

Wimp.

[snyprrr]

Wimp.

Shill

[Karl Henning]

Hah!

[snyprrr]

 




Yes, that felt good, eh? ... tee hee... ...


So, I got stuck on Op.110 today- the Sorrel just outdo everyone,- the Aviv is an exciting 'live' performance,- but the Sorrel just turn this into MovieMusic of CinemaScope epic intimacy. Highlights include the "stabs"- those crucial stabs that some make sound wimpy, here they sound like demonic cat's claws, bear claws,- Kreutzer carries this violence-  another highlight is the 7 minute 4th, the longest ever by far, and Symphonic for that,; the Sorrel also have the literally best sound-to-performance ratio out there in this one piece (their 13, also).

The Kronos samples reminded me... no, they didn't, but, the samples came out ahead in my (post-2000) survey. The Pacifica and Mandlring scored high, too. The Rasumowsky also had an interesting take. Frankly, I listened to a lot 5 hours ago and now things are fuzzy... but a lot of typical recording just don't get 110, it seems.

I have Borodins'78 & '90, and, neither one really does it for me, but maybe it's the sound in both cases? The Eder had quite I weak one, I thought.



THERE!! 
night

(see, i wasn't going to let you turn this into another One Word Post Thread )

[Karl Henning]

No?

[aukhawk]

(see, i wasn't going to let you turn this into another One Word Post Thread )

Sorrels.  Op 110.  Yeah.

[snyprrr]

Sorrels.  Op 110.  Yeah.

No one else even tries to come close!

1) The 1st mvmt. enjoys being stretched to its limit, which appears to be @5:30- and i don't see anyone (outside of the transcription) passing the 5 minute mark.

2) The 'Allegro molto' seems to clock in at 2:41 FOR EVERYONE!! The Manhattan have the actual quickest timing at 2:36, buuut, those who fill it out some add an extra weight that the speed demons miss.

3) 3rd mvmt. seems to bloom the slower one takes it. At 4:00, it appears a bit fast; at 4:40, just about right. Not too much divergence here.

4) 4th mvmt.- usually clocks in at under 5 minutes, I believe. The Sorrel take 7 minutes, and, frankly, I don't know why no one else dares- it surely is the right way to go here. The Sorrel surely have the most Epic 4th!

5) 5th mvmt.- whether one takes 3:30, or 5:30, it doesn't seem to matter- most do well here

6) the Sorrel are given a CinemaScope acoustic- so many others sound thin, and 'string quartet-ish'; the Sorrel sound as big as the transcription! Only the St.Petersburg/Hyperion have a similarly large/epic acoustic, but I'm not so sure how they manage the music (reviews haven't been fawning here).


So many 110s seem to fall in the "projection" department, I think. I don't even know what i meant by that! But, why are there so many failed 110s? I can't find one other that I really WANT to listen to- the Sorrel I WANT to listen to!! The other best 110 I've heard is the 'live' Beethoven from like 1960 proper, maybe it's the Premiere? The Borodin 'live' from 1962 didn't move me at all compared with that Beethoven performance.

[snyprrr]

The Eder String Quartet (Naxos)


How do you all feel about the Eder? They seem to want to be compared with the 80s Borodin and the Shostakovich; but one might think that the Eder would lose consistently to those two.

The Borodin are somewhat in a 'Romantic' class by themselves, so, let's just compare the Shostakovich with the Eder. In case after case, the Shostakovich always seem to edge out the Eder in terms of sound and timbre- they just have a brighter recording; the Eder's Naxos sound does have a 'deadness' (more bland than anything- nothing special) to it (that works in the sombre later works, but perhaps takes away from the brightness of the earlier works?).

The Eder are at least as volatile as their fellows, and, their interpretations do match up nicely with their more high profile rivals. Had they had superior sound, the Eder might be taken more seriously. But, let me stress that they ARE a valid consideration for certain works: they have a blisteringly fast 5th, a "storybook" 11th, and thought provoking 14ths and 15ths. They do very well in the extended endings of 3-6, and 9-10.

I can't tell if they have ANY in the Top3-5, so, they may yet be just superfluous, but I do go to they when I'm comparing, and they can always make one listen. Still, I don't know how to recommend their set: the drabbish sound does make one think of those old MarcoPolo discs, that "cheap Slavic sound", so, I tend to think of this set as a "time/place" kind of thing- I don't find them revelatory, or essential. I wonder if they will eventually "make the cut"?

What do you think?

[snyprrr]

Wimp.

The Emerson Have Landed

First up is either 3 or 7... giddy... woo hoo!!...

[snyprrr]

The Emerson Have Landed

First up is either 3 or 7... giddy... woo hoo!!...

7, 1, and 3 all excellent,... now on 2, also excellent,... great viola sound!... best Op.73 by far, but still not perfect... no, they definitely command authority over their prey...

[snyprrr]

7, 1, and 3 all excellent,... now on 2, also excellent,... great viola sound!... best Op.73 by far, but still not perfect... no, they definitely command authority over their prey...

...9,... this, i recall, was one of the best of the Cycle, but, after so much research, today, I heard it in a different light. See, here is where you can see the Emerson's limitations: though everything is played with an alloyed sheen, there were things missing which had heard either with the Brodsky or St.Petersburg- both have more biting attacks in the faster movements. And, their Finale wasn't as together as some of these studio renderings. Anyway, the Emerson's 9th is still in the Top3-5, no matter: it is surely the most immediate I've heard; they pare both 'Adagios' down to the flowing mercury- frankly

I THINK THE ST,PETERSBURG MIGHT BE EVEN BETTER.


...10... I had canned their 10 from the samples, but when I heard it today, I was mightily impressed. Only in the 'Allegro molto' do they yield in frisson to the likes of the Brodsky, who I think may have the absolute best that I've heard. Otherwise, the Emerson have the more immediate impact due to the close mic-ing. Still, it's certainly a huge reading, very good lads!


...11... compared to my fav Vogler/RCA, frankly, somewhat identical, though, the Vogler have monster sound to spare and play like the ABQ. The Emerson's DG sound gives them the usual fat sound, but otherwise the RCA recording trumps the DG in presence and clarity and warmth and wattage. I will give the nod to the Vogler for an 'underdog' vote, but otherwise they are fairly equal (RCA sound is sota).

...12... against the Amati/Divox. Mmmm,... I want to give the Amati, again, extra 'underdog' points, but, again, both performances are exemplary, with the Divox sound being sota and very warm and bloom-y,... again, the Emerson are in-your-face. The Emerson can't take anything away from the Amati, but the former, due to the aggressive DG recording, might have an edge.


...14... this is the first one where the Emerson's steely approach yields an unsatisfactory response from moi. 14 has been a baby of mine here lately, and I demand a more feminine, and, or, dead approach. The Emerson just don't let up at all,... just listen to the Kremer for The Revelation,... but, the Sorrel have a verrry good 14, perhaps a Sleeper (hands down over their rivals the St.P).



Emerson Trademarks:

1) In-You-Face DG 'live' recording, with the viola first, cello last (though, the cello cuts when needed)

2) Steely, ultra high gloss sheen in the overall ensemble

3) Somewhat frenetic playing at points (though, surprisingly, some are even more)

4) Unanimity of Expression

5) Generally Quickest Readings ( though- Taneyev and Beethoven too)

6) some emotional content successfully rendered matter-of-fact (they're so good that even when they "just play" they do well)

7)surprisingly Romantic at points (Op68 'Romance')

8)NOT the Last Word in much- but no one comes close to their Op.73, no one has duplicated their scheme...

[snyprrr]

No.14 Op.142 (1973)

Borodin'83
Shostakovich
Eder
Emerson
Brodsky
Kremer/ECM
St.Petersburg
Sorrel
(Hagen)- not available at time of Review


As you know, Op.142 has been one that I've been having a hard time finding appropriate documents of. Sure, I'm being picky, BUT, as I went about last night comparing, I found my dilemma was compounded. Let's set the scene: the early Beethoven 14 has never gotten much respect (though, I welcome any divergence of opinion here), the Original Borodin never recorded it,... and, for this Reviewer at least, the Taneyev seem impossible to find anywhere for any reason. I don't know that anyone has ever touted the Fitzwilliam in Op.142, but I surely welcome any insight on their performance.

That leaves the grouping above that I Reviewed, and the newer crop of recordings that I didn't have current access to (Danel, Debussy, Rasumowsky, Alexander, Pacifica, Mandelring). So, the group I Reviewed I would consider the 'Second Wave of DSCH SQ Recoridngs' (like the 'Second Wave of British Metal'), leading up to the watershed Emerson Cycle (the only one missing is the Hagen).

Well, I'm no less be-fluxed than before my listening. I'm somewhat disappointed in all my options, but, I think I can convey to you how the recordings fall into categories. OK, here goes....


I. 'Allegretto' (8:05 (Emerson) - 9:14 (Cavani))

Again, the Emerson can off somewhat steely in the 1st. Though their DG sound exposes every line, and they play perfectly, and all that good stuff, all others were simply on the same playing level, and some had more soulfulness. WARNING: Is there a bizarre edit/goof at :26 into this movement?- it's that first big swell, and it sounds like an edit; the Sorrel also have this bizarre feature at this exact point.

The Borodin'82 (their only Op.142) is firstly distinguished by its acoustic, which renders the proceedings lightly sentimental for this listener. Against all-comers, this particular recording might only be bested by the Taneyev, whom I have not heard but am quite expectant of. Of all the others, the Borodin here give us a beautiful Old World reading. Of course, it's Romantic, so, it's bloated, but the Borodin are the ones to do it!

The Shostakovich may have the most presence, and may be preferred, but there are some idiosyncratic things here that I'm not too sure about. At least, their cello sound has more bite than afforded the Emerson here. The Eder also have a great up-front recording, but with their usual, drab, treble-less Naxos sound (though, for the 14th it actually works towards the dead mood).

For me, the Brodsky seem to hit everything better- only the Emerson have such an up-front recording; here, the Brodsky are recessed just a bit. Kremer, being 'live', has the most recessed recording, but that matters not: his rendering is one of the most natural and also adds in an extra edge of what is to come.

The Sorrel, bar the odd opening edit/jolt (@26secs.), have one of the very very best- and they pull out all stops and yet sound natural- LadyFingers really make their mark on this piece! I'm putting the St.Petersburg at the bottom of this pile, but it is really only because the competition is so stiff. Their trademark sound works ok for this music, but i'm not wholly convinced and would need further listening. They still sound like a HIP group to me sometimes, which only works on certain DSCH.

I have not heard the Hagen, but the samples make me think it would have to yield to either the Sorrel or Brodsky. Some say they are as good as the Emerson, but more musical; some say their cellist plays too matter-of-fact. I welcome any thoughts here.

Many of the newer DDD Cycles also have good openers, especially the Pacifica and the Mandelring, but the Danel stood out as perhaps the 'worst' of all, being the least natural of the bunch.


'Adagio' - not reviewed because of tempo


'Allegretto- Poco meno mosso- A Tempo- Adagio'

The Sorrel astonish with their quick tempo, and the Chandos sound highlights the excitement. No one comes close to them, even though their timing isn't the quickest. Kremer has the longest, but, frankly, I really haven't heard a bad finale here. Perhaps, again, I'd put the St.Petersburg at the bottom, but only because everyone else is so good. The Emerson's 'live' sound here is not as 3D as others, but it is up-front and immediate.

The Shostakovich and Eder both have strong showings, with the former having the more open recording. Again, the Borodin are strong, though the tonal refinement of the DDD crowd is not here.

I'd also like to call out the Mandelring here as having the most delicate I've heard of the samples. (Sarge?)

[snyprrr]

What's the good word?

I'm now verrry interested in the Mandelring Cycle,...




RubioI
RubioII
Debussy
Danel
Rasumowsky
Alexander

Pacifica
Mandelring


This is where we're at in the confusion... aye, that's a lot of Cycles,... only to grow,...

[snyprrr]

Yes, I've overdone it a bit here,... getting burned out on DSCH SQs,... getting the Emerson was like 'Jumping the Shark',... I've eaten so much it's coming back up my throat,... this has been verrry expensive, ouch,...

Any suggestions as to what an appropriate tonic for too much DSCH would be? I'd almost go for LaMonte Young's String Trio (BASED ON HIGH TENSION WIRES) but I do know better...

a head cleaning (snippy... STOP!!!!!!!!)

[snyprrr]

...9,... this, i recall, was one of the best of the Cycle, but, after so much research, today, I heard it in a different light. See, here is where you can see the Emerson's limitations: though everything is played with an alloyed sheen, there were things missing which had heard either with the Brodsky or St.Petersburg- both have more biting attacks in the faster movements. And, their Finale wasn't as together as some of these studio renderings. Anyway, the Emerson's 9th is still in the Top3-5, no matter: it is surely the most immediate I've heard; they pare both 'Adagios' down to the flowing mercury- frankly

I THINK THE ST,PETERSBURG MIGHT BE EVEN BETTER.


...10... I had canned their 10 from the samples, but when I heard it today, I was mightily impressed. Only in the 'Allegro molto' do they yield in frisson to the likes of the Brodsky, who I think may have the absolute best that I've heard. Otherwise, the Emerson have the more immediate impact due to the close mic-ing. Still, it's certainly a huge reading, very good lads!


...11... compared to my fav Vogler/RCA, frankly, somewhat identical, though, the Vogler have monster sound to spare and play like the ABQ. The Emerson's DG sound gives them the usual fat sound, but otherwise the RCA recording trumps the DG in presence and clarity and warmth and wattage. I will give the nod to the Vogler for an 'underdog' vote, but otherwise they are fairly equal (RCA sound is sota).

...12... against the Amati/Divox. Mmmm,... I want to give the Amati, again, extra 'underdog' points, but, again, both performances are exemplary, with the Divox sound being sota and very warm and bloom-y,... again, the Emerson are in-your-face. The Emerson can't take anything away from the Amati, but the former, due to the aggressive DG recording, might have an edge.


...14... this is the first one where the Emerson's steely approach yields an unsatisfactory response from moi. 14 has been a baby of mine here lately, and I demand a more feminine, and, or, dead approach. The Emerson just don't let up at all,... just listen to the Kremer for The Revelation,... but, the Sorrel have a verrry good 14, perhaps a Sleeper (hands down over their rivals the St.P).

...13... after Kremer's 22 minute wonder, and the otherwordly St.Petersburg and Brodsky and Sorrel Top Choices, we have the Emerson, who many have said that 13 is the best of their Cycle. Well, yes, it's as good as the others, but, it's too "human" for me after hearing the St.p and Brodsky, and even the Sorrel. Each one of them do as well as the Emerson, but I think they all have an extra element missing from the Emerson. But these are minor points- it's a fine fine reading, but, those others ARE more "terrifying" as everyone likes to say. So, I put it at the bottom of the Best List, but, it's still there!!

I also like the Shostakovich here; perhaps the Borodin are too human? I know of no other transformative(?) performances/ transcendent???

[snyprrr]

No.5 Op.93

Atrium
Acies
(Navarra)

Here are two extremely extremely strong 5ths, with a thought provoking third recording which comes with Ravel. The former two are both powerhouse performances of DSCH's most knotty sonata-form. Indeed, the Acies are overpowering here. They are given a rather large acoustic as compared to the Atrium's more closely mic'd 'live' recording, and the venue amplifies the group's tremendous tuttis of everything going on at once.

I have yet to compare, but, as you know, I was searching for substitutes for my beloved Manhattan, and these two really blow most of the competition out of the water. I also just got the Eder here, and although they too have a high energy performance (one of the quickest), their Naxos sound is its usual drab self in this piece which needs all the harmonics present; and, their vengeance isn't as complete as the other two mentioned above- they are always willing to give you beef, but don't scream like the others. Perhaps the Brodsky are my least favourite here.

I now have the richest cache of Op.93s to compare with, and I hope one day to get this all under my belt, but, for the time being, I'm beginning to unlock its knots.

btw- the Rubio have an exceptionally long slow movement here,- the 'Sanderling Effect' if you will- that elevates their reading...

[snyprrr]

Rubio String Quartet

Vol.1 1/4/8 (Globe 1996)
Vol.2 7/9/12 (Globe 1997)
Vol.3 3/15 (Globe 1998)

Complete String Quartets 1-15 (Brilliant 2002)


I'm simply doing this to show in our faces that the Rubio do actually have two separate Cycles (one, a 1/2 Cycle). This was confusing me for a while, and I have not been able to find samples for the Brilliant Box anywhere- but there are a couple of single CDs from the Box, such as their 1/14/15. It is clear that their two 15s have different timings, and it's clear from the packaging on both that the recording dates are different.

So, what distinguishes the Rubio? First, what seems from the samples to be a slightly tighter, drier acoustic- "pristine", perhaps,... in a Denon way maybe? Second, they are named after the late English string maker Rubio, so, their "holiness" is fairly well complete, with bowing and instrument sound and style all combining to form one of the "cleanest" corporate styles. I keep thinking of Inbal's Shostakvich Cycle, how these Denon recordings sound so clean, matching Inbal's style there.

So, we have a lot of good things already, without even considering the interpretations. One thing I think I noticed is that they don't reach any spastic heights/depths of delirium such as others may have plumbed. So they're definitely in the Fourth Wave of DSCH SQ Cycles, which includes the Debussy, Alexander, Rasumovsky, and Danel. I like to separate the Pacifica and Mandelring, but, ultimately, they all belong to the same grouping (though, the Mandelring may represent a newer innovation?). It's hard to say how they distinguish themselves in this crowd, since many here are known for their "less-than-brutal" Shostakovich- meant presumably as a cut against, perhaps, the Borodin?

Anyhow, all the Rubio samples I've heard have been pleasant but not really ear catching. Their one astonishing moment is in Op.93, No.5, where they take the slow movement a minute slower than the already slow Manhattan, and make new music altogether! I have heard of no other radical departures, but, no one's talking about the Rubio. Who's the expert here?

[snyprrr]

Some?  Who's smoother?  And don't say the Manhattan - they're just more boring.

I certainly agree with the benefits of choice; my personal first choice is the Danel.

Do you still feel this way? 'splain...


This Thread started in '07, when the Rasumowsky and Alexander and Danel and Jerusalem and Aviv came out- though, most of these Cycles hadn't made it here yet. I can see where the Danel would have been HotHouseFlowers back then, but, now with the Pacifica and Mandelring, the Danel do seem to occupy the room of 'Least Passionate'? (and perhaps that's not the best description)


(staving off DSCH burnout right now)

[snyprrr]

A couple positive mentions about the Rubio set makes me have to blurt out: it's too smoothed over!  The set is OK, but it just doesn't ignite.

Yes, that's what I've been hearing. You just can't play this music unless, perhaps, you HAVE SUFFERED ENOUGH? I just can't stand "technically perfect/emotionally lacking" DSCH! I WANT to hear "awful" sounds in 8 and 13, and 11 and 12,... and 9 and 10,...

I want to hear what I want to hear in 4 and 6- beautyBeautyBEAUTY-

I want the Extreme of Interpretaion in 7 (3:11, 2:45, 5:20)- if this piece hit 12 minutes... (of course, you are allowed to totally exaggerate the slow mvmt., like the Kreutzer taking SIX MINUTES!!)

I want an 8 minutes 'Moderato' finale to No.3...

I want I want I want