Shostakovich String Quartets

[Madiel]

I'm thinking a lot of the Emerson's finales are taken way too quickly,- Op.73- Op.118... no breathing room at all. Come on, karl, we all know that the Emerson's approach is ultimately flawed in The Big Picture sense-

a) not Russian

b) playing even the most human of the SQs as "Abstract Music"

c)


well,- of course, their Abstract approach works great with the actual Abstract Music - 5... 7... 11... 12...13.... however, their final to No.4 contains the least amount of humanity than in all the others combined!


Frankly, this "didn't hear the Fittzies until now" thing has even opened my eyes wider to the Emerson's approach. I can't believe how good the Fittzies are in comparison to the jet set group- aaand they sound so human- however, they have what it takes to make the Abstract works work, also. For me, it's hands down

Fittzies > Emerson

I haven't heard the Emersons, but somewhere I read a review (the Penguin CD guide maybe?) that had exactly that kind of reaction - that the Emersons were jet set, too slick.

Also, I got the Fitzwilliams when it was an orange cover.

[George]

The Emersons, Pacificas & Mandelrings . . . hard to pick one favorite from among them, Ray. 

Never ask a Libra to pick a favorite. 

[Brahmsian]

Op.110

And it end...

YES, SO, THE FITTZIES DELIVERED ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL OP.110s of all time

Sorry, I am impressed. The Fittzies are a thing that makes you go, Hmmmm.

Yes, the Fitzwilliam's do deliver an extraordinary performance for the famous Op. 110.  It was a total jaw dropper, the first time I heard their performance of Op. 110

[Brahmsian]

WORST THING ABOUT THE FITTZIES SO FAR--- the CD Box cover.... oy, please re-issue, ack.... if the cover were irressasstatable this set would be even more in demand.

Hah!!    I actually like this understated, seemingly bland cover.  The black, beige and white work for me. 

[Karl Henning]

Never ask a Libra to pick a favorite. 

Surgically done!  Happy Friday, George!

[Karl Henning]

I haven't heard the Emersons, but somewhere I read a review (the Penguin CD guide maybe?) that had exactly that kind of reaction - that the Emersons were jet set, too slick.

I've read that (or a variation on it) about various recordings by the Emersons.  But when I listen to the performances, I find them engaging, well-prepared, and always musical.  Generally, exciting.  So, I've learnt to take "jet set, too slick" as code for "they don't like it"   

[Karl Henning]

[ Cross-post ]

Just me & the jet-setters:

Дмитрий Дмитриевич [ Dmitri Dmitriyevich (Shostakovich) ]
Струнный квартет № 2 Ля мажор, соч. 68 [ String Quartet № 2 in A, Opus 68 ] (1944)
The Emerson String Quartet

[asin]B000F3T7RE[/asin]

Now (for instance) in the Recitative & Romance, I hear warmth & intensity;  a wonderful tension between the chaste accompagnando instruments and the both passionate and tender soloist in the foreground;  there are drama and contrast in this performance, and I do not find anything remotely "slick" about it.

[Brahmsian]

I feel a poll coming soon.  What are your "pick up to three" favourite Shostakovich string quartet cycles? 

[Karl Henning]

I feel a poll coming soon.  What are your "pick up to three" favourite Shostakovich string quartet cycles? 

The Five Shostakovich Cycles to Rule Them ALL . . . ? 

[George]

I feel a poll coming soon.  What are your "pick up to three" favourite Shostakovich string quartet cycles? 

I only need Borodin I. (And Borodin II's 14 and 15, missing from Borodin I.)

[snyprrr]

Yes, the Fitzwilliam's do deliver an extraordinary performance for the famous Op. 110.  It was a total jaw dropper, the first time I heard their performance of Op. 110

No.9

For some reason, this work has emerged as The Salamander of the bunch. I hae a feeling we agree that there is something 'extra' in this work that gives it an extra sense of the inscrutable - not to mention that it just seems to slip through the cracks-

So, I thought here the Fittzies merely sounded as good as they do, without offering any special effect- which, frankly, abound in this work. It's a good, standard operations version, but, the Brodsky, the 'live' Aviv, the Gosteleradio, the St.Petersburg, the Emerson, - all bring so much more frisson to this work- along with the 'live' Borodin'81- and, I hear, the Taneyev.

However, the PIZZ are wonderful, the cello is still the most etched of any I've heard (the viola is quite syrupy, too)

ex.- the finale is no where near the octane of all the above performances.




No.14 Op.142

I've been on a 14 kick lately, so, here we go....


WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HIT THE BUTTON NOW!!!!!!!

I'm in awe here,- this is a GREEEAT 14th... clap clap clap!!!!!

The 1st is taken very slowly, but with such lightness as to not lumber the rhythm. This 1st sounds more like what I imagine than any I can think of- what a unique approach!

The slow mvmt. - wow, you can hear the notes on the page,- etched- the duo is so etched- I keep hearing that quality in the cello

The finale is of the slower variety- very very nicely done.


Oh,... ahhhh,... I wasn't expecting such a good 14th,... such a quality going on here... must hear the Taneyev now-- anyone???-


Yes, the Fittzies have really impressed in the later works so far- only 12, 13, and 15 left...

[snyprrr]

[ Cross-post ]

Now (for instance) in the Recitative & Romance, I hear warmth & intensity;  a wonderful tension between the chaste accompagnando instruments and the both passionate and tender soloist in the foreground;  there are drama and contrast in this performance, and I do not find anything remotely "slick" about it.

Now, now,... as you'll recall, Op.68 was one that we all agreed the Emerson excelled at- none of their stereotypical practices appear in this work.

But, don't you think the final to Op.73 is just even a slight hair breathless? the finale to No.4 slightly less than idiomatic? the 8th just a little matter-of-fact? the finale to No.14, again, just a little less than charming?

charm, Karl, that's what they sometimes seem to lack- also, that home-cooked-meal feeling that one gets from a slavic performance...

not a criticism, just a fact 0:)

[snyprrr]

And My Thread Rules the Roost Again,... bwahahahaha!! (cue Charlton Heston laughing)

[Madiel]

Interesting that you think the finale of no.9 is low octane. I really enjoy the finale and its weight (but then I don't know any other version).

[snyprrr]

Interesting that you think the finale of no.9 is low octane. I really enjoy the finale and its weight (but then I don't know any other version).

The Brodsky, Aviv, and Gosteleradio (clocking in at an astonishing 8:56!) play the finale as fast as the Fittzies play the 'Allegro molto' of Op.110, meaning, you WILL be totally blown away. Now, don't get me wrong, as Iwas listening to the Fittzies' Op.117 finale, and hearing it be of the slower variety, I still recognize that they aaalways imbue whatever they're doing with a certain amount of grit. Still, I'm finding Op.117 to be an interpretive quandary for many- there's just so many personal touches one can add.

[snyprrr]

No.9

For some reason, this work has emerged as The Salamander of the bunch. I hae a feeling we agree that there is something 'extra' in this work that gives it an extra sense of the inscrutable - not to mention that it just seems to slip through the cracks-

So, I thought here the Fittzies merely sounded as good as they do, without offering any special effect- which, frankly, abound in this work. It's a good, standard operations version, but, the Brodsky, the 'live' Aviv, the Gosteleradio, the St.Petersburg, the Emerson, - all bring so much more frisson to this work- along with the 'live' Borodin'81- and, I hear, the Taneyev.

However, the PIZZ are wonderful, the cello is still the most etched of any I've heard (the viola is quite syrupy, too)

ex.- the finale is no where near the octane of all the above performances.




No.14 Op.142

I've been on a 14 kick lately, so, here we go....


WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HIT THE BUTTON NOW!!!!!!!

I'm in awe here,- this is a GREEEAT 14th... clap clap clap!!!!!

The 1st is taken very slowly, but with such lightness as to not lumber the rhythm. This 1st sounds more like what I imagine than any I can think of- what a unique approach!

The slow mvmt. - wow, you can hear the notes on the page,- etched- the duo is so etched- I keep hearing that quality in the cello

The finale is of the slower variety- very very nicely done.


Oh,... ahhhh,... I wasn't expecting such a good 14th,... such a quality going on here... must hear the Taneyev now-- anyone???-


Yes, the Fittzies have really impressed in the later works so far- only 12, 13, and 15 left...

Wrapping up this grand introduction to the Fittzies Cycle:

No.12

OK,- ... wait,... does it really begin in near silence? Yes,... the opening cello line is taken almost off-stagem and then, slowly, the volume rises. I almost dismissed this out-of-hand, but had to re-listen a few times, and, lo, the Fittzies have come up with a major coup, doing things no one else has even dreamed of! These guys are really impressing me with their ideas )or, are the really DSCH's ideas?).

The 1st is taken quite slow, almost as slow as the Shostakovich, and almost just as grand. All is so well here,- including, again, that etched cello line, the creepy ensemble, the dynamics. I have to rank this as one of the very very best, though the Shostakovich are so wonderfully ethereal (probably their single greatest achievement, imo). The Fittzies are, though, without a doubt much more interesting than the Borodin here, as well as much of the competition. This is special.

So, what of the 2nd movement?

It's slow, but, again, the Fittzie never flag, even with slow tempi. Their deliberateness gives this long movement an architecture that may be missing from some of the more breathless renditions.

Frankly, without belaboring detail, this is the finest 'Early Masters' 12 I've heard (though i wait to hear the Taneyev). They havve no qualms about the piece, and give---- I had given this work to the Sorrel's absolutely over-the-top awesomeness, but the Fittzies sound like they are RIGHT THERE... it's wonderfully creepy!!


No.13

I didn't make it far into this one before I turned it off. I heard too many others at this point, wasn't expecting much, and didn't get it. Perhaps I'll try again, but, out of the 'Early Masters', only the Shostakovich can at least make me come back for a return listen (the Borodin are notorious for being too "human" in both of their versions). I just didn't hear enough death in the opening to go on.


No.15

Well, this is the last one, and not one I was particularly caring to hear, BUUUT the Fittzies deliver a Top5 performance, imo, at least. They don't slow the proceedings down, like the Borodin'96 or the Kagan group, but they manage to, perhaps, give the 'saddest' account. It's not creepy, it's sad/. The Beethoven are a little more creepy. But, here, I think, the dialogue between Composer and Performer yielded some insights that I may not have heard in others. Only, perhaps, the balance in the 'Nocturne' I have heard better delineation- the Fittzies have been one of the most X-ray recordings I've heard, but in certain places they muddy up the waters a little, and here the great accompanying figure is a little too much behind the lead (in others, it can be the other way around- some get the balance perfect)- I have yet to find my Most Satisfying 'Nocturne').

So, surprise, I enjoyed No.15 for a change- it's just not my fav to listen to, perhaps it's the structure, perhaps I don't get parts, perhaps it's the interpretations. I dunno...


But, I could throw out most modern versions of No.15 at this point..... whoops, typing fingers are going quickly, gotta go......

[Madiel]

Wrapping up this grand introduction to the Fittzies Cycle:

No.12

OK,- ... wait,... does it really begin in near silence? Yes,... the opening cello line is taken almost off-stagem and then, slowly, the volume rises. I almost dismissed this out-of-hand, but had to re-listen a few times, and, lo, the Fittzies have come up with a major coup, doing things no one else has even dreamed of! These guys are really impressing me with their ideas )or, are the really DSCH's ideas?).

The 1st is taken quite slow, almost as slow as the Shostakovich, and almost just as grand. All is so well here,- including, again, that etched cello line, the creepy ensemble, the dynamics. I have to rank this as one of the very very best, though the Shostakovich are so wonderfully ethereal (probably their single greatest achievement, imo). The Fittzies are, though, without a doubt much more interesting than the Borodin here, as well as much of the competition. This is special.

So, what of the 2nd movement?

It's slow, but, again, the Fittzie never flag, even with slow tempi. Their deliberateness gives this long movement an architecture that may be missing from some of the more breathless renditions.

Frankly, without belaboring detail, this is the finest 'Early Masters' 12 I've heard (though i wait to hear the Taneyev). They havve no qualms about the piece, and give---- I had given this work to the Sorrel's absolutely over-the-top awesomeness, but the Fittzies sound like they are RIGHT THERE... it's wonderfully creepy!!

I love no.12, it's one of my favourites, and I think that yes, a sense of architecture is a big part of why I love it.

[snyprrr]

I'm in.   

what happened?


So, I just want to sum up my Fitzwilliam Adventure:

WINNERS:

2, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15

LOSERS:

13, maybe 6, maybe 3, maybe 9

NO REAL OPINION:

1, 7, maybe 3, 6, 9,... maybe 4



10-12 & 14 are the absolute standouts, all vying for at least a Top3 showing. I might have to throw 8 in there too.

7 was, frankly, pretty perfect,  but, still, sounded like a lot of other perfect versions, so, I can't really pick anything out to recommend it above any other. 2, also, is extremely good, but here, I think, there is more to recommend.

4, 6, 9, & 15 were all good in their own way, but have infinitely more competition, and none can really be considered a Top3 (though, 15 comes really close).

I don't know anyone who really cares about 1, but, it has a quite slow 1st, which may deflate it somewhat. Otherwise, it's as good as many.

There. THE LAW HAS SPOKEN!

[snyprrr]

UPDATED TODAY

[snyprrr]

UPDATED TODAY

Page32