GMG Classical Music Forum

I christen thee the great and everlasting STRING QUARTET THREAD.
From this day forward you will be the noblest and most enduring thread on GMG, beloved by all, I command it!

Since there is no possible way to pull this off, I will simply list my absolute favorite SQs and hopefully the variety will generate some interest. Of course, some of my favs may be yours too (there ARE masterpieces for a reason, no?), but I would rather have this freewheeling than to degenerate into a Haydn/Mozart/LvB/Bartok fest.
So, here goes:

Beethoven "late quartets" vs. Spohr
Lekeu Molto Adagio~ (Tchai-mvmtBb)
Borodin No.1

(Busoni/Wolf)
Schoenberg No.1 Op.7/String Trio
Webern 6 Bagatelles
Berg Op.3

Debussy/Ravel

Sibelius Voces Intimae

Haas 1-2
Janacek 1-2
Schullhoff 1-2
Hindemith in Eb 5-6
Szymanowski 1-2
Prokofiev 1-2

Rainier
Bartok 3
Villa-Lobos 5
Bloch 1
Linde

(Frank Martin (1967))

Shostakovich (4-5), (6), 7*, (9), 11*, (12-14), 15*
Britten 3

Carter 1
Sessions 2
Babbitt 3-4
Hiller 6...(at this point,anyone with a "6" or "7"!)

Boulez Livre pour quatour

Berio Sincronie, Notturno, Glossa
Ligeti 2

Holliger (1973)

Dutilleux Ainsi la Nuit

Haubenstock-Ramati in memoriam kristi zimerl
Halffter 3
Nono Fragment-Stille. An Diotima
Xenakis Tetras
Sciarrino 6 quartetti brevi
all Ruzicka
Zorn Dean Man, ...memento mori...
Estrada ishi ioni

Henze 4-5
Schnittke 4
Rihm 3-8

Dillon 2
Hersant 2?
Boucourechliev 3
Grosskopf 1
Nishimura 3 Avian
Norgard 10

Harrison String Quartet Set
Glass 5
Nyman 1
Feldman 1
Saariaho Nymphea w/electronics

I certainly haven't heard it all. We'll see how it goes. I might have to modify later. But remember, this is the world famous STRING QUARTET THREAD, where we're always looking for another hidden masterpiece!

Hindemith string quartets are quite a serious gap in my listening yet.

Hindemith SQs seperate nicely into 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 (not counting No0-5-6 are the ones I referred to).

Krenek, also!

Toch, Wellesz, Weigl, Zeisl, Hartmann, Schmidt, Eisler, and Weill round out the top 10 German-ish composers of SQs during the war years.

Pfitzner gets special mention, too, for his valedectory No.3.

You appear to be missing the Goldschmidt quartets, of which the second is the finest piece that was composed in 1936 (how's that for a controversial statement!). The third and fourth are also very fine.

Recording info for the more obscure stuff would be appreciated as I'm a string quartet slut myself (having just ordered the Boris Tchaikovsky from Northern Flowers and Lars-Erik Larsson from Dapbne). What about that Bo Linde for instance?

Linde is in storage. I believe it's a Caprice, but it comes with Wiren 3&4 and Bortz No.3. All the composers have different performers, the Wiren being the great Fresk Quartet (of which I have their Sibelius/Sallinen, and some of the Rosenberg box). The Wiren No.3 is a gem of a "Swedish" quartet, somewhat like Villa-Lobos' No.5. The Linde is one of the most inevitable things I've ever heard. Perfection.

My collection isn't handy, but I'll answer as I can.

It's good to see Bloch 1 on your list.

Sarge

Martinu.

Haas.

Zemlinsky.

Mozart.

Brahms.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on May 05, 2009, 03:48:36 AM
It's good to see Bloch 1 on your list.

Sarge

On the lines of a musician's musician, that string quartet may well be writer's Bloch.

Guido-(or anyone)
I was checking Goldschmidt, the Largo cds and the Decca. It seems all 4 SQs are available, and cheap. Which might be the absolute best one to try out?

Best of '36 IS saying something bold!

Quote from: snyprrr on May 05, 2009, 10:26:15 PM
Guido-(or anyone)
I was checking Goldschmidt, the Largo cds and the Decca. It seems all 4 SQs are available, and cheap. Which might be the absolute best one to try out?

Best of '36 IS saying something bold!

No.2 first definitely - I adore it - especially the amazing Passacaglia slow movement. Being a jew, he had to leave Germany in the 1935, and this was the first piece he wrote when coming to England. He had had a great career as an emerging composer in Germany but was subsequently almost completely ignored in England, until the 80s when his music was rediscovered by Simon Rattle and others, and luckily the by now very old composer was able to witness his music's renaissance and he began to compose again after a 25 year hiatus. He died in 1996 after Yo-Yo Ma played his cello concerto in New York and both his operas had been staged - it is wonderful and moving for me to see his work recognised before he died - so many composers didn't have this luxury. String quartet no.3 and 4 date from this late period, his style having changed little since the 50s, so was outdated, but the quality remains. His chamber masterpiece is certainly the second quartet, but these later two are also mighty fine. This is tough, contrapuntal music, but it is tonal and under all the barb lies a romantic core and harmony which occassionally pokes through like glorious islands of light.

As to the claim of it being "the best of 1936", it's actually not my claim, but Norman Lebrecht's who brefriended the composer in his later years. Just out of interest, what other great compositions were written in 1936?

Quote from: Guido on May 06, 2009, 04:11:23 PM
As to the claim of it being "the best of 1936", it's actually not my claim, but Norman Lebrecht's who brefriended the composer in his later years. Just out of interest, what other great compositions were written in 1936?

Sorry to butt in - Wikipedia is useful for such questions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_in_music#Classical_music

Quote from: Lethe on May 06, 2009, 04:19:28 PM
Sorry to butt in - Wikipedia is useful for such questions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_in_music#Classical_music

I tried to find an article like that, but couldn't locate one. Cheers! On that list the only works I like as much as the Goldschmidt is Shostakovich's Symphony no.4 and Barber's Symphony no.1 (and the adagio for strings op.11!). Oh and the Prokovief pieces. I think it deserves to be be mentioned in the same breath in its more modest way. It's a fantastic score.

Nice thread. Nice thread title too. ;D

Some of my favorites not on your list are:
Bryars 2
Gorecki 2
Pawel Szymanski 5 pieces
Pawel Szymanski 2 pieces

I'm sure I'm forgetting something...

Never heard Nyman 1. I have 2, 3 and 4. Wouldn't recommend them to anyone. ;D But Nyman is a hit and miss composer for me - who knows, maybe SQ 1 is the 1 I'm looking for... 0:)

Quote from: Maciek on May 06, 2009, 04:39:34 PM
Nice thread. Nice thread title too. ;D

Some of my favorites not on your list are:
Bryars 2
Gorecki 2
Pawel Szymanski 5 pieces
Pawel Szymanski 2 pieces

I'm sure I'm forgetting something...

Never heard Nyman 1. I have 2, 3 and 4. Wouldn't recommend them to anyone. ;D But Nyman is a hit and miss composer for me - who knows, maybe SQ 1 is the 1 I'm looking for... 0:)

haven't heard any of 'em. The Bryars especially intrigues me... What's the Gorecki like?

Quote from: Guido on May 06, 2009, 04:24:56 PM
I tried to find an article like that, but couldn't locate one. Cheers! On that list the only works I like as much as the Goldschmidt is Shostakovich's Symphony no.4 and Barber's Symphony no.1 (and the adagio for strings op.11!). Oh and the Prokovief pieces. I think it deserves to be be mentioned in the same breath in its more modest way. It's a fantastic score.

And by all means; don't forget stuff like "A Fine Romance" by Fred Astaire - I'm a sucker for stuff like that.

Thanks all for indulging my deliciousness...

1936:

Bax 3
Cowell 3-4
Honegger 2-3
Krenek 6                ...spirit of Berg...
Schoenberg 4
Zemlinsky 4
Maconchy 2
Sessions 1

Just for starters that's pretty good competition (that's almost like someone's own Top10!!!), but keep in mind that Bartok, Bridge, Webern, and many others, would put their final SQ thoughts on paper all before @1939. ALL the heavy duty SQs came out of this period.

Special Honors to Sessions 1, which I didn't expect to draw me in with its morbid expressionism. Reminds me of Pettersson's Cto1 for Violin and SQ.I love that piece;many others don't.

Quote from: Guido on May 06, 2009, 05:12:07 PM
haven't heard any of 'em. The Bryars especially intrigues me... What's the Gorecki like?

I'd like to, if I may. Nyman 1 IS the one Maciek...yup, recommended by no less than the Arditti's rep. list. I'll be honest: can't stand Nyman or Glass, but Kronos Plays Philip Glass is just one of my fav cds period, and when I grudgingly got the Nyman, I was really really surprised by SQ1. It's minimalism is that early rough and gruff kind, totally fake but totally convincing, like an SQ "Sgt. Pepper". Nyman 2 sounds like a raga; SQ3 more conventionally soundtrackish.

The only reason I got the Nyman was to keep Bryars company. I have the Balanescu SQ/Argo on both, plus Volans. This is the triumv...how do you say?...of "British" minimalism.

Bryars usually starts off mellow, then the minimal rythmn thing comes in until the end, which goes back to the top mellow. Bryars SQs 1-2 are the best of this kind of stuff. All 3 composers make a great retrospective.

Szymanski 5 Pieces were on Brodsky SQ's "Lament"? What are they like?


Guido (or Maciek), I don't know if you want to hear my opinion of Gorecki's SQs, any of them, I'm sorry, but I have to just say it:

The discordant, simple Bartokian grinding on the repetitve Shostakovich like rythmns, the really long slow movements with repetitive melodies...I'm sorry, I can barely take SQ1 (@15min), but 2-3,... 3 lasting 50min. Please tell me his melodies aren't rudimentary. In No.3's first slow mvmt, please tell me you hear "Hark the Herald Angel Sing." When I first made myself listen through all 50 min. of No.3 (same length as Schoenberg and Bloch's masterpieces), I was angry at Gorecki, an unexplainable feeling of being cheated by the composer who wooed me with Sym3. To me, they ALL sound like Shostakovich SQ8, musically one of my least fav SQs ever. Seriously.
I wish I could point to an SQ, and say, here, look, this composer did it the right way; but, is Gorecki really just slumming Shosty, or am I missing masterpiece theater? Gorecki's SQ's make me feel judgmental and uncomfortable discussing with fans onboard, but I can't deny my reaction. Please, someone put me straight.

Maciek, do you have a Top10 of obscure Polish SQs (no Pender,Luto, Bacew). And why not Bacewicz SQ4 on your list? I know you have the Zielinski (is that right?).

Please read my virgin listening review of Pijper's SQs 1-5 on the Dutch Composers thread.

Szymanski's 5 pieces if definitely a neglected late 20th century masterpiece, no doubt about it. The playing on Lament is a bit saccharine but very fine nonetheless (it may be the other pieces on that disc that make me perceive it that way). There's another one on EMI (EMI Poland, to be exact), played by the Silesians, perhaps a bit more "intellectual". I prefer the latter but it's probably a matter of taste.

Actually, as far as Bacewicz is concerned, the 7th is my favorite. But I really like all the ones I've heard. I think it's Adrian Thomas who says that from no. 3 on her cycle is one of the most substantial 20th century quartet cycles written by a composer other than Bartok.

Interesting what you say about Gorecki and Shostakovich, though I don't really hear it that way. To me, Gorecki is very firmly rooted in the 1950s avantgarde - he just takes a step in a very different direction to all the others. But what he does is in a way a consequence of avantgarde thinking (which was, in some respects, very minimalistic). And yes, the melodies are rudimentary, that's part of the point. Have you heard any of his avantgarde-period music? That may make it easier to understand what he's doing. I usually don't really think of Gorecki's melodies as melodies but rather as sort formal building blocks. The music is stripped down to the bare, "formal" essentials. It's a sort of (deliberately) "empty" (or "emptied") form. Though perhaps in some piece (and that would include the 3rd quartet) melody does come into it, at least a bit. But then that's where I start to like it a bit less. I don't know, maybe to appreciate the Gorecki quartets you need to know the music he is quoting? Waclaw of Szamotuly, gorale folk music, Szymanowski etc. Though I can see Szymanowski is on your list, so it's probably not helping. Or maybe you're listening to the wrong performance? The old Silesians recording on Olympia is unsurpassable (only includes nos 1 and 2) but I don't think Kronos do a bad job, so it's probably not that either. Odd, though, that you enjoy Glass and Bryars, whose quartets are very similar to Gorecki's 3rd, I think, even if they arrived there from a completely different direction. Oh, well, there are lots of people around who don't like Gorecki, I think the fans (including myself) can easily live with that. ;D (BTW, do you know the 2nd Symphony or the Harpsichord Cto?)

I do like the harpsicord cto.
I suppose, for me, a lot of modern Polish, Baltic, Czech, etc., music has a post-DSCH, bitter, grey, rainy, "iron curtain" sound that I can only take when I "need" that kind of stuff. Could you say that the Gorecki SQs could be counted as Penderecki SQs if he had written some during his "morbid Romantic" 1976-1982 phase? Please check the Penderecki thread for my last post. I have a question you could answer. Post-1980 Halffter I have the same problem with. I'll go to the library today and get the Gorecki again.

Just ordered Mossolov/Roslavets/Knipper SQs...$6!!!

Maciek - thanks for the description of the Gorecki SQs. It is very contrary to my previous opinion of them, which were that they were nice, but (especially the second) very melodically simplistic and lacking interest. I'll see if I can listen to them with fresh ears sometime. I was certainly listening to them as "neo accessible" music rather than avant-garde.

I am listening to Gorecki 1, Already It Is Dusk.
I'm in the middle "allegro deciso". Ahhh...I can only hear a note so many times!!!  It's on purpose, right?  I understand if he's making a political statement.
It's almost over now, fading out on the cantus...
All of a sudden it seems very short slow/fast/slow SQ. But it's the non-melodies coupled with the hammering ostinatos that drive me up the wall.

Gorecki No.2 Quasi una Fantasia starts off ominous.
It's the fourth time through, and that endless single note cello ostinato...this reminds me of 1970s Penderecki with a hint of 80s Halffter, no? True minimalism.
I'm in the march now. Very DSCH8. Is that a Bartok/Janacek melody fleeting by? I guess it's the endless single note 1-2 1-2 bass. This kind of thing, for me, sounds better with guitars and drums (heavy metal), and maybe that's what I object to: David Harrington, in his zeal to bring SQ music to the masses, enlists Gorecki to write a "heavy metal" Shostakovich SQ so that really really cool people can like SQs too. I'm just not sure Vasks, Gubaidulina, Gorecki, and Kancheli, or even Schnittke for that matter (well,ok), have successfully transfered the DSCH "mantle". I guess I question the depth of their spirituality, the "holy" in the minimalism. I get the sense that they operate in 2 modes:

A) long slow meditative hymns
B) variations on the Shosty parody "death march."

Well, I'm almost at the end. Track 5, at @4:30, Philip Glass actually pops in for a moment! Why is there no rythmic variation at all, always 1-2 1-2? I think someone asked why I liked the Glass and Bryars SQs since I can't stand them. Whatever Glass' merits, I just find that Kronos disc easy on the ears. Gorecki kind of does the same thing, but so aggressively brutal that my ears cry out. Maybe the Olympia disc's sound and performance give a different perspective. You must admit it is cruel or brutal of Gorecki to hammer the audience like that if he's doing it on purpose, which he must be. Forgive me for wearing the subject out, but I know some composers despise their audience and want to inflict pain upon them (not saying Gorecki...or Cage). Either way, I will surely be listening to it more in the coming week.

EMI Poland? Ah, drool... :)

The Olympia recording is definitely more brutal (that's what I like about it), so it probably won't work for you either. I admire your perseverance but I think you really shouldn't torture yourself like this. You clearly don't like the music, why bother with it? ;D

Nevertheless, I'll add some more thoughts. For the sake of idle chat.

The ostinatos come from folk music, at least that's how I hear it. As do the constantly appearing fifths. You will find similiar things (though less pronounced) in Szymanowski's Harnasie (the repetitive violin motives). And in goral music itself, of course. As for other quotations, the 1st SQ uses music from Waclaw of Szamotuly's motet in the canons that come at the beginning. According to Thomas, in the 2nd SQ there's (developed) material from Chopin's Polonaise in D Minor, as well as the refrence to Silent Night and something Gorecki calls "Beethovenian chords". There are quotations in the 3rd Quartet as well (Szymanowski's 2nd SQ, Schubert's Death and the Maiden and I think I hear a bit from Beethoven at one point but haven't found any written confirmation of this).

I still think the link to Shostakovich is tenuous at best (I don't hear it at all! :o but I'll listen again). Shostakovich had extremely little or no influence on Polish composers, especially those of Gorecki's generation. The only notable exception I can think of is Krzysztof Meyer, and even there it's rather difficult to pin it down.

My way of tracing the link between Gorecki's avantgardism and his minimalism goes along the following route. First there are pieces like Scontri or the Genesis cycle. The notation looks like Penderecki and the link here is strong because, frankly, Penderecki's music from the 1950s-60s is extremely simple. I mean, there are only so many nuances you can notate using a black smudge over the staves or a series of triangles pointing in various directions. So it's usually a series of very simple orchestral "sounds", lined up in a given order. And I think even at that point Gorecki is a bit simpler than Penderecki (and definitely much simpler than composers such as Serocki or Schaeffer who were closer to British complexity). What he does next is he takes it even further, in pieces such as Refrain or the earlier Musiquettes, by deliberately stripping the music of variety. So a whole piece can be build up of only two or three contrasting "sounds", lined up in one order or another, with (sometimes) slight dynamic variations. And then, around Musiquette IV (probably earlier, I don't know his output that well), he adds obsessive, repetitive rhythmic patterns. Add to that the element of a very simple, rudimentary melody (which really doesn't function as a melody, since it's rarely developed in any significant way; it's just a snippet repeated over and over, then suddenly abandoned, then it returns in the same form, etc. etc.) and you've got the formula of the 3rd Symphony and other "later" pieces (the rhythms are slow but they're there). (BTW, all this is a purely musical development. There's no "spiritual" background, I don't think.)

That's my way of looking at it but it may be flawed, since, as I say, I don't know every piece he composed and even of the ones I do know I only know a few well. Plus I may be listening the wrong way.

BTW, you can't underestimate the significance of folk music either. The 2nd mvt of the Harpsichord Concerto is a variation on the Krzesany dance and all the basic elements of that dance are there (or so I've heard, I don't really know that much about the dance myself).

Very often Gorecki's "melodies" are variations or quotations of snippets taken from music by other composers. Which proves again that they are meant to be rudimentary, they are not the "meat" of the piece.

I think I've written more on the Szymanski EMI disc in the Szymanski thread. (On this board or the old one.)

Oh, dear, look at the time! I've got work to do! :o

Less often mentioned SQ's that are favourites of mine are:

• William Alwyn: No. 2 "Spring Waters"
• György Ligeti:  No. 1 "Métamorphoses nocturnes"

Maciek, your response drove me into a blind rage ;D.

 ;D ;D

Quote from: Feanor on May 08, 2009, 05:52:22 AM

• William Alwyn: No. 2 "Spring Waters"

I have been trying to get someone to comment on the Alwyn and Arnold SQs for some time. I think "Spring Waters" has made it on a few lists, and I'm really thinking about buying out the Maggini discography!

Rawsthorne is the dark horse. Last on the list are Maconchy and Frankel (though, with him, I'd probably go back to the Clarinet Qnt.).

I used to have have a lot of British SQs: Simpson, Bliss, Delius, Howells, V-W No.1, Bridge No.3, Tippett 1-4, maybe some others, but I could never find the "English Pastoral" SQ (Moeran?). All I have left is Vaughn-Williams No.2 and Britten 2-3. I was going to start again where I left off, and the Arnold and Alwyn are at the top of the list (I'm not looking for pastoral anymore: Finzi didn't really write an SQ). I'm hoping their latter SQs live up to their rep., broody and a little gritty, which I believe they will; but Rawsthorne keeps nagging, too.

How about the Maggini, huh?
Anyone have any experience with Davies' Naxos Quartets 1-10? I have only heard bad things.

Quote from: snyprrr on May 08, 2009, 12:39:45 PM
I have been trying to get someone to comment on the Alwyn and Arnold SQs for some time. I think "Spring Waters" has made it on a few lists, and I'm really thinking about buying out the Maggini discography!
...
How about the Maggini, huh?
Anyone have any experience with Davies' Naxos Quartets 1-10? I have only heard bad things.

I recently acquired both the Alwyn and Arnold by Maggini.  I'm still coming to terms with the Arnold which are new to me.  But I highly recommend the Alwyn which are, IMO, a bit of a step up from the Rasumovsky version that I had earlier.

Quote from: Maciek on May 08, 2009, 05:42:39 AM
As for other quotations, the 1st SQ uses music from Waclaw of Szamotuly's motet in the canons that come at the beginning.

Since this is a staple of Polish Renaissance music, there have to be recordings available for free out there but I just can't find them today (totally forgot about YouTube, which should have been my first stop! :o). FWIW, there are quite a few commercial recordings available.

Quote from: snyprrr on May 08, 2009, 12:39:45 PM...

How about the Maggini, huh?
Anyone have any experience with Davies' Naxos Quartets 1-10? I have only heard bad things.

I have Naxos Quartets 1 - 4 and enjoy them once in a while.  I wouldn't say they are "bad" in any sense, although it's not a high priority for me to get Nos. 5 - 10 which are now all available.

I'm wondering if someone here bought MY COPY! (which I had reserved for myself!) of Maconchy's SQs 5-8 that I found on Amazon...for $1.99!!! $1.99, when the rest were going for $40+. Ohhh...ah, well Betty, maybe some day... :'( :'( :'(

hrrumph!

So I ordered the Arnold and Alwyn SQs on Naxos/Maggini instead. Just God's way of redirecting my buying, I guess,haha (yea, right- just MY way of avoiding the pain of loss!)..

Quote from: snyprrr on May 11, 2009, 01:20:06 PM
So I ordered the Arnold and Alwyn SQs on Naxos/Maggini instead. Just God's way of redirecting my buying, I guess,haha (yea, right- just MY way of avoiding the pain of loss!)..

Well, with benefit of hindsight on my part, I'd say that Arnold and Alwyn are the better choice than Davies' Naxos Quartets.  The Alwyn album is a clear winner, IMO.  I'm listening to the Arnold right now and enjoying them although it's only my 2nd or 3rd listening.

I just got Roslavets/Mossolov/Knipper SQs on ArteNova. The Borodins play R+M w/Schnittke No.1, but this was only $3!

I'm saving the Mossolov for after dinner. The Roslavets No.1 and No.3 (as with most of his other output...other SQs are MIA) strike me as fin d'siecle?, slightly decaying Bergian decadence, slightly more creepy, but slightly more polite, too. Both are single mvmts of @10min. Both are atonal, and as such remind me of Valen and Pijper and Berg. They are seperated by ten years which allows you to hear Roslavets' congealing style. Oh, did I mention Scriabin? There's certainly nothing overtly Russian here, but the "politeness" suggests a Russian conservatism to me. Maybe there is a slight northern tinge, maybe it's my vivid imagination. Chromatic motives up and down mixed with a droopy/soaring/fleeting melodic world totally bespeak the early 20th century. Ultimately, they sound conservative to today's ears (unlike Stravinsky's contemporaneous "3 Pieces"), very nostalgic (maybe THAT's the Russian I hear). Someone also said they heard a bit of late Frank Bridge, but the closest thing is Berg's Op.3.

The Knipper No.3 comes from the other end of the spectrum, 1974. The differing recording venue reminds me of those tight airless VoxBox SQs "Old World Composers in the New World." This music is slightly attractive, being built on folk material which at moments really gives a sense of the vastness of the motherland. Though not as attractive as Prokofiev's and Myaskovsky's forays into "Kardashian"? territory, or Bartok's, Knipper's SQ is like a tiny painting. It's four mvmts last only 10min. I detect teensy evidence of "futurist/mechanistic" pulses in the background, but only for time effect. Mostly everything is fiddle music. There is something American here in the still passages.
This is desk drawer music, extremely intimate and dare I say highly nostalgic in the Russian tradition, written by an old man, in whom I hear not bitterness but resignation (perhaps too strong a word), no, longing for utopia. At 10min, a perfect postcard.

Getting ready to sink my teeth into the Mossolov. hmmm...what of Lourie's SQs 1-3 on ASV? Anyone? I hear No.1 (1914) is pretty out there. And that WOULD complete the survey of early modern Russian SQs, no?

A totally virgin listen to Mossolov's No.1.(1927).
Well, first off I was completely "mis"-appointed: it sounded almost nothing as I had imagined.

25min: 4 mvmts, the first of which lasts 15min (this I knew).

"Creepy" isn't the right word. Pre-historic heavy metal? It's like kindergarten autopsy/lobotomized Penderecki? Either way, it's one of the most disturbingly disjointed amalgams of Frankenstonian Berlin decadence I've heard. But very dry and clean...this killer knows his anatomy and how not to make a mess as he's making his monster. I do hate saying "horror movie music", and it's not, because that kind of music never rises to this level. No, this would be a pretty awesome horror movie. Tenderness of the Wolves, perhaps.

It starts off in unique fashion, and then settles between lullaby brooding and vicious attacks. This SQ seems slightly less-than-human, very manufactured (hence the futurism). The famous motor rhythms aren't really what I'd imagined, though...ha, there's even a little cello tapping...there's a lot of starting and stopping, things cut and pasted in collage fashion.

I had really built this SQ up in my mind as some kind of out of the blue miracle, but the reality of it leaves me with the same gritty feeling I get after listening to Scelsi No.1. It does slightly leave the impression of madness, though I assume it is on purpose. I hear short-circuiting robots dancing with ghosts? It was inevitable that I was going to hear an SQ like this one day. Had it been written in 1983 I would hate it, so does that make it a masterpiece? Haha...it just has an inevitability about it that is very creepy conceptually.

Musty and antisceptic at the same time! Very disturbing.

snyprrr, you're on quite the SQ rampage:  good for you!  0:)

Don't know if whether you are already aware of them, but I recently discovered the following:

Henri-Joseph Rigel (1741-1799): Quatuors dialogués, Opus 10

These are really spritely and engaging quartets.

I just received The Alban Berg Quartet Complete Teldec Recordings Box (8cd/$40). Haydn, Mozart, Schubert, Brahms, Dvorak, Berg, Webern, Urbanner. This will be my first serious study of all the late Mozart and Brahms 1-3. Oh boy, yum yum...fetch my bathrobe!

Party in the jacuzzi :D!!!

A few hours later and words cannot express...everything is the best that it is. I'm listening to Brahms No.2 in a minor right now...
:o is the only smiley face that comes close...the ABQ is shockingly great, I don't know what else to say. Can I get a witness???

Quote from: Feanor on May 11, 2009, 03:32:57 PM
The Alwyn album is a clear winner, IMO.  I'm listening to the Arnold right now and enjoying them although it's only my 2nd or 3rd listening.

I just had virgin listenings of the Arnold No.2 and Alwyn No.2 "Spring Waters." My reaction was the opposite of Feanor's! (see beginning of discussion) The Alwyn started in Szymanowski/misterioso territory and I thought remained very enigmatic throughout... and meaty. It will take a few listens. (plus I could have used a smidge more acoustics for both cds)

The Arnold I thought was an instant classic, so passionate and lyrical and strangely formed. The slow movement I found truly exceptional. The scherzo was unique. Everything seemed to come straight from the heart of a grieving father.

Both of these SQs are known for their "darkness", but it is a very peculiar twilight darkness...bittersweet (though difficult here and there), and though neither had the kind "misterioso" that opens the last mvmt. of Britten's No.3, both were more personal, and perhaps more human. All three point to an interesting thing happening with British SQs in the mid 70s. The end of the empire.

Again today, totally impressed by Arnold 1-2 + Phantasy.

Quote from: snyprrr on May 20, 2009, 09:04:19 PM
I just had virgin listenings of the Arnold No.2 and Alwyn No.2 "Spring Waters." My reaction was the opposite of Feanor's! (see beginning of discussion) The Alwyn started in Szymanowski/misterioso territory and I thought remained very enigmatic throughout... and meaty. It will take a few listens. (plus I could have used a smidge more acoustics for both cds)

The Arnold I thought was an instant classic, so passionate and lyrical and strangely formed. The slow movement I found truly exceptional. The scherzo was unique. Everything seemed to come straight from the heart of a grieving father.

Both of these SQs are known for their "darkness", but it is a very peculiar twilight darkness...bittersweet (though difficult here and there), and though neither had the kind "misterioso" that opens the last mvmt. of Britten's No.3, both were more personal, and perhaps more human. All three point to an interesting thing happening with British SQs in the mid 70s. The end of the empire.

snyprr, well I listen once again the Arnold No. 2, (really only the 3rd time I've heard it), and also the Alwyn No. 2.  For a start let me say that you have typified these quartets very accurately, i.e. "Both of these SQs are known for their "darkness", but it is a very peculiar twilight darkness...". Brilliantly well put.

There is no questioning the merit of the Arnold No.2; the slow movement certainly is outstanding as you mention.  Nevertheless the I still prefer the Alwyn No. 2; that is likely just my disposition.  I will say I find the Alwyn more unified and coherent from movement to movement: are the same themes or variations used more repeatedly? (I don't read or play music so I might have this all wrong.)  BTW, I like the Alwyn's 2nd movement, the Allegro sherzano in particular.

For good measure and balance I also listen to Britten's No. 2, Szymanowski's No. 1, Ligeti's No. 1 & 2.  It's just me no doubt, but I don't fine Szymanowki or the 3rd movement of Britten's particularly "misterioso".  That descriptor I would reserve for Ligeti's No. 2 among this bunch.  As a matter of fact the one  I enjoyed most today was Ligiti's No. 1:  another dark one, perhaps a bit darker still, even tormented.

Quote from: Lethe on May 06, 2009, 04:19:28 PM
Sorry to butt in - Wikipedia is useful for such questions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_in_music#Classical_music

Wow, 1936 was an awesome year for music! :o

Quote from: Feanor on May 21, 2009, 04:16:46 PM
It's just me no doubt, but I don't fine Szymanowki or the 3rd movement of Britten's particularly "misterioso".

The Alwyn/Szymanowski moment is the VERY beginning of Alwyn No.2, the sort of "rocking" motion, that seems to be the same kind of thing that starts off "one" of the Szymanowski SQs (I can't remember which one. If you listened to No.1, try No.2...but it's just the very beginning). And the "misterioso" is the beginning of the last mvmt of Britten's No.3. Yea, no mystery in Britten's No.2.

I have just heard Hugo Wolf's SQ (1879-84) for the first time.

4 mvmts=@42min

Which was the first, best, or otherwise the succession of SQs after Beethoven, as per modernity? I argue for the highly charged and visionary Romantic canon:

"late Beethoven"

Wolf
Busoni No.2

Schoenberg No.1 Op.7

Berg Op.3

Webern...

In other words, the first "modern" SQ (w/Brahms and Dvorak, et al, the more conservative)after LvB is either Wolf, Busoni No.2, or Schoenberg No.1. In either case, this Wolf SQ (LaSalle DG) reminds me of Ives? It, more so than any other tortured artist SQ of the romantic era, really seems to have been "written with a pencil," so etched in dark brown, green, and black hues its fevered artist's madness. Maybe a little red too!
I mean, it has that hyper romantic condition, but it's happening for the very first time to Wolf... sonata rules fail under Wolf's wanderingly jaunty and incisively moody agenda. Van Gogh's SQ!
It wasn't premiered until 1903, which makes me wonder what impact it had on Schoenberg's Op.7...hmmm...

Calling it LvB's Op.127 in Eb on absinthe might not be far off.

Quote from: snyprrr on May 22, 2009, 03:27:18 PM
The Alwyn/Szymanowski moment is the VERY beginning of Alwyn No.2, the sort of "rocking" motion, that seems to be the same kind of thing that starts off "one" of the Szymanowski SQs (I can't remember which one. If you listened to No.1, try No.2...but it's just the very beginning). And the "misterioso" is the beginning of the last mvmt of Britten's No.3. Yea, no mystery in Britten's No.2.

But incidentally, when I said I listened to Britten's No. 2 it was a typo, in fact it was No. 3 I was referrring to.

Quote from: snyprrr on May 24, 2009, 05:20:43 PM
I have just heard Hugo Wolf's SQ (1879-84) for the first time.
...

I'll look forward to hearing Busconi, (2nd, 1880 per AMG, if I got that right), and Wolf, (completed 1884 per AMG).  I haven't heard them yet.

People better informed than me might agree with your assessment of their modernity, but it's certain that Beethoven's late quartets sound well ahead of their time.

IVES NO. 2!

Just listened to Brahms No.3 in Bb Op.67 for the very first time (ABQ). I guess I thought it was going to be slightly in Brahms' autumnal vein (I don't know why), but the opening mvmt. caught me off guard, and when the solo violin starts streaking around like some awesome electric guitar solo (sorry, it does remind me of rock stars) this mvmt really burns down the house! Most awesome solo I think I've heard in SQ form. And I think the slow mvmt might be the most straightforwardly beautiful. Brahms' harmonies seem "straight up" to me (like Bach), but with a polished sheen...every note perfectly placed...the slow mvmt has an orchestral writing I haven't heard before.

The last two mvmts defied expectations again, and the SQ does NOT end in what I would think is typical SQ fashion. Some of the variations of the last mvmt get into "lullaby" territory, and the SQ ends fairly peacefully, unlike any SQ I know. This SQ sounded a lot different to me than Brahms furst two SQs: it DOES have a sauve, "modern" (though still conservative) feel to it, sleek, classic lines, like the uber-quartet, like the most expensive car. The first mvmt is by far the most dramatic, and the next three...oh, it's all just Germania! Ah!

The absolute perfection of Brahms' last quartet seems to highlight for me all the more the manic, utterly "Romanic" (I always like the word "gothic" in the Poe-ish sense) waywardness and hair trigger moodiness of Wolf's SQ.

I also have been hearing the ABQ's version of Dvorak No.13 in G, a big big work, but I find some disturbing things about it. Apparently this is the only recording by the ABQ that has garnered some criticism. They play "perfectly", full throttle and even a wee wee "brutal", but I don't know if it's them or something about the music, but I've had more of a hard time liking Dvorak 13-14 than I thought I would have. Early Dvorak (1, 2-4, 5-8, 9-11) is a closed book. Aren't the options few?

Quote from: Joe Barron on May 25, 2009, 12:29:53 PM
IVES NO. 2!

I comment on Ives' No. 2 recently that I found it grating and just couldn't get into it.  (I'll try and try again from time to time.)

I'm a musical illiterate and generally miss the redeeming subtlties, but Ives is a composer I just don't get.  His works leave me dissatisfied with what I hear or worse.  His works I've heard seem like gratuitiously discordant pastiches.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 04, 2009, 03:19:06 AM
Hindemith string quartets are quite a serious gap in my listening yet.

Now that hit my curiosity radar.  I will have to check these out.

Quote from: Feanor on May 26, 2009, 06:42:06 AM
I comment on Ives' No. 2 recently that I found it grating and just couldn't get into it.  (I'll try and try again from time to time.)

I'm a musical illiterate and generally miss the redeeming subtlties, but Ives is a composer I just don't get.  His works leave me dissatisfied with what I hear or worse.  His works I've heard seem like gratuitiously discordant pastiches.

Astonishing. I genuinely find his music to be one of the most moving, beautiful, subtle and satisfying body of works by any composer of any period. I'm thankful almost every day that I discovered it. My advice: keep trying!

Quote from: Guido on May 26, 2009, 10:44:32 AM
Astonishing. I genuinely find his music to be one of the most moving, beautiful, subtle and satisfying body of works by any composer of any period. I'm thankful almost every day that I discovered it. My advice: keep trying!

I knew there was a reason I've always liked Guido.

The finale of the second is, to my ear, one of the most sublime moments in all of music. The gratuitously discordant pastiche, if that's what you want to call it, occurs mostly in the second movement, although I find that too engaging: raucous and spirited and actually funny. Interestingly, Jan swafford, Ives's most sympathetic  biographer, says he doesn't care for the SQ2. He finds it too angry and diffuse, although he does add that the finale more or less redeems everything that has gone before. In other words, without the finale, it would be nothing. I think he's full of it, but that's my own prejudice. Part of Swafford's agenda in "A Life With Music" was, I think, to rebrand Ives from the father of modernism to the grandfather of postmodernism. In this view, his dissonances, tone clusters and polyrhythms are less important than his attempt to unify of popular and high art, and he assumes a greater spiritual affinity with the likes of William Bolcom than with Elliott Carter. The SQ2 is too recalcitrantly "modern" to advance the program.

Quote from: Joe Barron on May 26, 2009, 07:27:32 PM
I knew there was a reason I've always liked Guido.

The finale of the second is, to my ear, one of the most sublime moments in all of music. The gratuitously discordant pastiche, if that's what you want to call it, occurs mostly in the second movement, although I find that too engaging: raucous and spirited and actually funny. Interestingly, Jan swafford, Ives's most sympathetic  biographer, says he doesn't care for the SQ2. He finds it too angry and diffuse, although he does add that the finale more or less redeems everything that has gone before. In other words, without the finale, it would be nothing. I think he's full of it, but that's my own prejudice. Part of Swafford's agenda in "A Life With Music" was, I think, to rebrand Ives from the father of modernism to the grandfather of postmodernism. In this view, his dissonances, tone clusters and polyrhythms are less important than his attempt to unify of popular and high art, and he assumes a greater spiritual affinity with the likes of William Bolcom than with Elliott Carter. The SQ2 is too recalcitrantly "modern" to advance the program.

That's a fascinating take Joe, and one which I agree with - this is exactly what Swafford tries to do, and he makes a most compelling case for it. It would be a severe disservise to Ives to summarise his achievement as just an innovator - these things are always at the service of a higher ideal and concept in his music.

With regards to the second movement - I absolutely love it (predictably) - but even the bits where he's trying to parody the 'old girls' and 'pansies' (depicted by the character of Rollo(?)) I find breathlessly beautiful - but just as good are the fantastically discordent and searingly intense outcrys that usually follow them. But I do wonder whether the 'nice' bits are just too lovely for his parody to fully work - i.e. maybe they should be more twee and crass... Of course it has to work as abstract music too, and this must be the first time that anyone's arguing that music is too beautiful!

ok...BEST versions of Ives on record? Anyone have more than 5 versions?

There's a recording of No.2 tuned to just temperment, or something like that? It's on a microtonal cd with Partch, etc...???

The Concord SQ/Nonesuch isn't on cd, is it?

Quote from: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 04:57:58 PM
ok...BEST versions of Ives on record? Anyone have more than 5 versions?

There's a recording of No.2 tuned to just temperment, or something like that? It's on a microtonal cd with Partch, etc...???

The Concord SQ/Nonesuch isn't on cd, is it?

Wow, never heard of that one - sounds interesting!

Quote from: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 04:57:58 PM
ok...BEST versions of Ives on record? Anyone have more than 5 versions?

There's a recording of No.2 tuned to just temperment, or something like that? It's on a microtonal cd with Partch, etc...???

The Concord SQ/Nonesuch isn't on cd, is it?

I'll take that bet: I've got the Kohon, Juilliard, Concord, Lydian, Leipzig and Blair --- first three on LP, last three on CD. I also had the Cleveland but dumped it. It wasn't very good, imo, taking the last movement too fast.  The Concord recording, the best, in my estimation, is not available on CD. A Juilliard CD surfaced and disappeared in short order. That is also a great performance. The ones readily available on CD (Lydian leipzig Blair) are all good, though. I'd go with the Leipzig, on MD&G. Very fine performance, and the CD includes not only the two numbered SQs, but several smaller pieces as well. I have a soft spot in my heart for the Kohon, since it's the first Ives recording I ever owned. I'm not sure if it's on CD. There is a recording of the second on the same CD  (http://www.amazon.com/Chamber-Michiyo-Suzuki/dp/B000AA4KXI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1243619191&sr=1-1) as pieces by Partch and Harrison, but i am not familiar with it. I'd love to hear it, though, if it is, as you say, justly intoned.

Guido, I answered your last post on the Ives thread.

Oops, forgot: I also have the Emerson version.

Yeah, it's a good one, too.

I'm sorry, but after a while, it's hard to draw fine distinctions between so many different versions.  :-\

Try the 3 Schumann quartets op 41, which IMO are the best of the Romantic era

I have the Eroica recording, which is well done but don't really have anything to compare it to

Quote from: bwv 1080 on May 29, 2009, 10:24:53 AM
Try the 3 Schumann quartets op 41, which IMO are the best of the Romantic era

I have the Eroica recording, which is well done but don't really have anything to compare it to

Another option is the Fine Arts Quartet recording on Naxos.

Quote from: ' on May 29, 2009, 12:43:24 PM
You don't need to look too hard to see that the affinity Ives shares with  Bolcom (and a lot of others, e.g., Zappa) that isn't shared with Carter.

Answered in the Ives thread.

Hey, snyprr,

Got this one?  The compser is Christos Hatzis (http://christos%20hatzis) (b.1953).

The SQ No. 1 is kind of weird with voice and train sounds.  I like the No. 2 is a bit more to my taste; it has flavours of the composer's native country, Greece.

Quote from: bwv 1080 on May 29, 2009, 10:24:53 AM
Try the 3 Schumann quartets op 41, which IMO are the best of the Romantic era

I have the Eroica recording, which is well done but don't really have anything to compare it to

I like Eroica in 1st and 2nd but their 3rd strikes me as plodding and dull. My favorites when comes to Schumann quartets are without any doubt Zehetmair Quartett (1st & 3rd on ECM) and Hagen Quartett (on two separate DG discs with Quintet).

Quote from: Feanor on May 29, 2009, 03:22:57 PM
Hey, snyprr,

Got this one?  The compser is Christos Hatzis (http://christos%20hatzis) (b.1953).

The SQ No. 1 is kind of weird with voice and train sounds.  I like the No. 2 is a bit more to my taste; it has flavours of the composer's native country, Greece.

I didn't know who you were talking about until the pic downloaded (turtle dail up!!!). I remember reading about it. If this computer thing wasn't stuck in 1984 I'd be listening to a whooole lot more stuff lately (including all the files nice people here have been sending- please keep it up, I'll get to a good computer one day!).

I'm practically engaged to this ABQ Teldec box. :-* :-* :-* Along w/library boxes, this is the first time I've wallowed only in the "classics" (H M S B). However, without hearing a note, I've already taken a liking to Krommer, Spohr, Cherubini, Boccherini, Onslow,... and my favorite darkhorse Albrechtsberger ( ???)who? They all wrote lotttz of SQs.

Even also, you have Eybler, Rejcha, Danzi, Forster, Wranitzky, Pleyel, Gyrowitz...most all of whom seem to have written over 20 SQs each, and worked between the deaths of Mozart and LvB.

And bringing up the rear we have Myslivecek with 2 sets (1780-82), Kozeluch, and finally rounding off this Top Ten...Vanhal with numerous sets during Mozart's time.

I think on Amazon at least, these SQs are not served well at all. I believe I saw 3 Krommer world premieres coming out this month, and THAT cd I'm already raving about, though I've not heard note one of Krommer's music ever!

I think there are only a few compilation cds of the Czech SQs (must be on Supraphon), and a few of the scattered others on CPO, and no more than three of Boccherini... I don't know.

I do believe Cherubini and Spohr are amply represented, though.

These are ALL the prolific SQ composers I know of through the classical era. Everyone else seems to have one or two sets and then poof! I'd be surprised to see if you're gonna pull something out of your hat. I predict the Krommer will be an instant classic. Let's see.

I'm starting to find the history of SQs quite extraordinary. From Haydn Op.20 onward, SQs pour forth by the hundreds and hundreds until only the death of LvB begins to peeter them out. After the death of Haydn, and leading up to LvB's death (1812-1828) seems to be a special time. In my index (old), 1828 was the first year an SQ wasn't written since 1766, almost 60 years of endless SQs!!

In the beginning was Haydn AND Boccherini, Haydn AND Boccherini, always, so, from its beginnings with two fathers (the only time in history that that's been a good thing!), the SQ has been bred for diversity and adaptability, an excellent laboratory, able to tackle anything thrown at it.

Is it not the 250th anniversary of the SQ? (1759-2009)

Just to keep the festivities going:


I begin by mentioning JS Bach's "The Art of Fugue" as technically the first SQ ever, though just for fun! I haven't heard the Emersons, but I can imagine their high powered New York approach working well with this kind of music.

The 2009 "season" has settled into "back to basics" approach for me. It's been so many years since I listened to the "classics", and what with the current Mozart craze ::) here at GMG, I have decided to get my PhD (pile it higher and deeper) in SQs right here in this very forum!


I have just heard the late Mozart SQs, all for the first time; I'm sure to hear LvB's Op.18 all for the first time in the near future; and, I'm giving Haydn one last run for the money (always had problems with his SQs).

But, because of the current "unknown classical era composers" rage that's sweeping the country :P, I have made it a point to uncover as many hidden masterpieces as possible from the classical era. So far, I have a roster of about 20 composers to choose from (all who appear to have written beaucoup SQs). Though I haven't heard note one from any of them (unless anonymously on the radio), I already have some favorites for exploring: Krommer, Vanhal, Kraus, Cherubini, Spohr, etc.

Along with the "back to basics" approach, I will be continuing to shore up the 20th century, though, it appears I am definitely down to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rank. Names like Husa, Gerhard, and Blacher come to mind. And I will HAVE to be sure to institute  tough new standards when accepting any new SQ written after 1976-84: I've neither the time, moneies, nor inclination to run an orphanage for bad SQs (sorry Kronos!). Thomas Ades will be the "last" composer I contract to listen for, and already $8 seems too much for just one SQ. And if Kronos and Arditti continue on their current paths, I should have no problem resisting their charms for a good long while to come.

So, let the ribbons be broken, let the parades begin, and let us truly celebrate this 250th year of the String Quartet by listening heartily and reflecting deeply upon what lies beneath as well as to the surface attractions that initially appealled to our hearing. Bon sons!


Let the Helikopter Quartet begin!!! ::)What if it crashed??? :-X

I'm sooo excited! My own little festival... sailing weather...ah!!...

Tippett 1-3, anyone?

Quote from: snyprrr on June 06, 2009, 11:01:06 AM
I'm sooo excited! My own little festival... sailing weather...ah!!...

Tippett 1-3, anyone?

Yeah, not bad. Worth a listen though not in my top 20.

Quote from: snyprrr on June 06, 2009, 10:03:17 AM
I begin by mentioning JS Bach's "The Art of Fugue" as technically the first SQ ever

But... wait... doesn't that invalidate the... the 250th anniversary festivities? I mean it would have to be the 259th anniversary instead... Who will compensate for the flyers, program notes, posters, etc. etc. already arrived from the printer's?! >:(

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! 0:)

This week's festivities begin with a Beethoven Op.18 poll in the "Recordings" room of GMG. Please one and all are welcome.

Our week of festivities has already yielded the World Premiere of the Beethoven Op.18 SQs here at the SQ Thread ::). Surely the 30 year old's set of 6 SQs is an auspicious debut.

I am quite tempted to start a favorite "set" poll!,incl. Boccherini!

OK, so,... 3 years later!! :o,... and apparently the GMG String Quartet Festival is OVER!! :'( Well, I hope not.

I certainly have moved on since the heady days of 2009, but, recently, I've had to come full circle, and so, I am revisiting some, and meeting others for the first time.

Currently, I'm listening the the String Quartet No.3 (1983; CRI) by Richard Wilson, which was recommended for its concluding Elegy, starting now. The first two movements seriously suffered from 'A Serialist Composer Living in 1983' Syndrome, and was replete with hysterical, Schoenbergian outbursts of caterwauling and grating... basically, it should have been on that Emerson SQ cd 'American Contemporaries', which is, basically, a compendium of 'things snyprrr doesn't like in his SQs'. The Muir SQ, mostly known for the Romantic Classics, play with the utmost intensity and passion, but, I feel the emotions expressed in the music sound like... uh,... nevermind, I think you already know what it sounds like: Wernick, Starer, ad infinitum.

Sure, I can dote on a grating, '70s styled serialist work (besides Carter No.3 (1971), Donald Harris is one I don't mind (CRI; on YouTube)). But, here I am, in the midst of this Elegy, and, it's still pretty grating,... I'm going to call the whole thing angst-y Abstract Expressionism,... American Academic Schoenberg,... very typical of the decade.

Next up we have Howard Boatwright's 1972 String Quartet No.2, also on CRI. This guy comes with more of a Hindemithian pedigree, sooo,... I shall return...

Fully three and a half years later. (Just saying.)

Anyway, a bunch of us are partying with the Shostakovich quartets; please be welcome.

Quote from: karlhenning on December 12, 2012, 09:24:23 AM
Fully three and a half years later. (Just saying.)

Anyway, a bunch of us are partying with the Shostakovich quartets; please be welcome.

I just can't listen to them anymore. It's like the 'Freebird Syndrome': I can play them in my head at will (yea,... right ::)), so, I need to watch it, or it'll be like THAT song that gets stuck in your head. Still, here's my 2 cents:

No. 6 (most beautiful slow movement)

Nos. 4-5 (I will ONLY hear the Manhattan SQ here, just my thing,... just this one disc)

Nos. 7 & 11 (I think most of us agree that these two are the shizzle!)

No.9 (for over-the-top, all pistons firing)

No.15 (out of the final, Late Works, stage, this is the one for me. Perhaps it is the similarity to 11? 7/11/15 would be a good disc)


That leaves 1-3 (love No.1) and 8 & 10, none of which I really care for (though, I'd pick 10 out of that bunch). For some reason I really can't stand No.8.

Quote from: snyprrr on December 12, 2012, 09:21:36 AM
Next up we have Howard Boatwright's 1972 String Quartet No.2, also on CRI. This guy comes with more of a Hindemithian pedigree, sooo,... I shall return...

haha, ok, right from the very first notes it's obvious there's a personal Hindemith connection here! It's also a bit angst-y. I'd call this 1972 piece a '1958' vintage. Perhaps '30s-era Hindemith (the wilder one) as seen through the later Hindemith's technique? It's not grating like the Wilson, but I may end up giving it a 'Slightly Dreary and Angst-y Neo-Classic' label. OH! Thsis is fun, haha!! ;) These two SQs might swear me off CRI for a while, haha, though, there's PLENTY of Academic Serialism to be had for sure! I'm thinking Donald Harris, Brian Fennelly, Martin Boykan, Martin Bresnick... we are definitely not in Kansas anymore! 8)

Laderman SQ No.6/ Schickele SQ No.1 "American Dreams" (Audubon SQ; RCA)


I really enjoyed the Schickele, a nice, woody SQ, just what the doctor ordered. It's just what you would expect, and doesn't disappoint. The Laderman is very much like the other serialist works I mentioned, but, a little more chipper and a little less angst-y.

You know, it occurs to me that you would probably be able to enjoy quite a lot more music if you could get the serial=angst equation out of your head.

"But that's what I hear!" I can hear you saying.

No, that's what you think. And your thinking affects how and what you hear.

My evidence for that conclusion? That I can listen to any old serial piece without hearing or feeling any angst at all.

As for "grating," I'm pretty sure that's a code word for "what I don't like." But what if those sounds were indeed likeable? (They are liked, by other listeners. That much is clear.) Of course, you may never like them. There are lots of things I don't like, either. And possibly never will. But I don't try to expand my dislikes into some politically, morally, spiritually, culturally, intellectually comprehensive view of a world in unstoppable and terminal decay.

Again, if you can stop doing that, you will find that so so SO much more music is enjoyable and worthwhile, really you will.

I sometimes think that he essentially lives for the hand-wringing.

Quote from: some guy on December 13, 2012, 12:32:28 PM
You know, it occurs to me that you would probably be able to enjoy quite a lot more music if you could get the serial=angst equation out of your head.

"But that's what I hear!" I can hear you saying.

No, that's what you think. And your thinking affects how and what you hear.

My evidence for that conclusion? That I can listen to any old serial piece without hearing or feeling any angst at all.

As for "grating," I'm pretty sure that's a code word for "what I don't like." But what if those sounds were indeed likeable? (They are liked, by other listeners. That much is clear.) Of course, you may never like them. There are lots of things I don't like, either. And possibly never will. But I don't try to expand my dislikes into some politically, morally, spiritually, culturally, intellectually comprehensive view of a world in unstoppable and terminal decay.

Again, if you can stop doing that, you will find that so so SO much more music is enjoyable and worthwhile, really you will.

So, you have the Richard Wilson disc on CRI? Hey, at the price available, I'LL BUY you a copy! Seriously, don't we have to both have heard it to converse over it? As if not ONE? :o 'Serialist American University Composer from the '70s' lives up to the former criticisms? COME ON! ::)

Humor me and tell me ONE COMPOSER you won't defend. I'm just not going to get into a 'breathing is music' discussion, aye. :-[


Seriously, the Wilson SQ was talked up a bit (where ever I was on the net), and I WAS looking forward to it, but, hey, it lived up to NO expectations. There was NOTHING really of interest (WHAT is interest, you say?,... you know when you're missing it). And... you KNOW what I mean by 'hysterical, angst-y minor 2nds and diminished 5ths',... I mean, wasn't Abstract Expressionism SUPPOSED to sound angst-y? Wasn't that the point, to show extremes of emotion?

Seriously, I will buy you the Wilson disc, just so we can both have heard the same thing. I AM ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that it won't become a great favorite of yours. Why won't you respect my ears, and applaud me for digging into... of all things... the dreary old CRI/NewWorld catalog, which, probably more than any single source, has more of this type of anonymous, grimy '70s 'University Music' than anyone. I HAVE found music that I would recommend heartily (Charles Jones SQ No.6, a perfect 'Bartok 3'), so, please, why won't you just, with humor, accept my 'reviews'? I mean, WHO ELSE in the universe cares soooooooooo much as to 'waste' their $$$ on such an endeavor as the CRI/NewWorld catalog simply to unearth Masterpieces for YOU'RE future enjoyment. All I do, I do for YOU!! :-*,.. the endless seeker/searcher,... so that you won't have to. I'm just doing a community service.

The fact is is there IS much more poop in the world than diamonds. THAT'S what makes diamonds so cool, their rarity. So to with Absolute Ultimate Genius (ok, ok, JdP ::)). Why do you chastise me for picking through the corpses to see if anything of value has been lost? I am constantly working hard to uncover any lost masterpieces (the Charles Jones being one of my prizes), not buying the things I probably should, simply to uncover the unknown. So, is there any surprise that there's some poop in the pile? I mean, EVERYTHING can't be diamonds, right? Something has to suck in order for something else to blow.

Quote from: karlhenning on December 13, 2012, 01:17:34 PM
I sometimes think that he essentially lives for the hand-wringing.

No, I essentially live to uncover the Lost Masterpiece!! 8)


Both of you, get the Richard Wilson disc and the Charles Jones disc, and THEN the three of us can actually TALK ABOUT THE MUSIC, instead of you guys ASSUMING that I'm just being a cheeky prick. You can't reeeeally believe that I would seriously DROP THE DUCATS for music I ALREADY KNOW I'm going to 'not respond to',... in THIS market?????? Come on guys, WHO ELSE... in the UNIVERSE... is doing the community service I am doing here? I'm telling you you don't HAVE to get the Richard Wilson disc because I already have, and, applied the 'Cumulative GMG Conviction Meter' (meaning, I think of ALL of you, and calculate how many of you would respond to it), and found it LACKING. YES, I DIDN'T LET THE DISC INTO snypRRR's HEAVEN. I'M JUST A MEANY!! :P Boo hoo, snyprrr is like Jehovah, declaring the good from the evil, waaah, someone stop him.

Seriously, if I was God, I'd make you all have to spend eternity with that LaMonte Young oscillator. >:D I mean, you guys seem to think all 'music' is valid, so, why shouldn't you all then spend eternity in the 'discarded music room' of heaven?

In other words, if everyone is 'saved' in the end, then you guys can hang in the room in heaven that houses Pol Pot, Idi Amin, and the rest of the equally 'saved' monsters.

Don't criticize me simply for using my God-given discretion. SG, I'm sure that if we hung out for the afternoon, I'm suuuure we could come up with a listening regiment that would bring us closer together instead of farther apart.

Just keep in mind: I'M the one that took the time with Richard Wilson. And, as is my wont, I listened with YOU GUYS in mind. "How can I be of service to Karl and SG? I know, I'll warn them against this new disc. Oh, they'll be so thankful, knowing that I spared them a lost hour (you won't either get the time back that it took to read this awful Post, haha,... goytha!! ;D).

ahhh, so misunderstood :'(...

Thanks for taking one for the team, little fella!

OK, everyone. What you are about to read is longer and less humorous than Karl's post. Inferior in every way. But still, it might be of some use anyway, even in its prolixity and gravity. Well, see for yourselves. :)

snyprrr, of course we probably like some of the same things and dislike some of the same things. The odds are pretty good. And Richard Wilson might be one of those we agree on. (That's one of the few CRI discs I've never heard.) But what would that prove? Where we differ is somewhere else than on individual composers or particular styles, somewhere much more general and much more fundamental.

And that is that the conclusions you draw for yourself have any validity for anyone else.

Quote from: snyprrr on December 14, 2012, 08:57:37 AM
Why won't you respect my ears, and applaud me for digging into... of all things... the dreary old CRI/NewWorld catalog, which, probably more than any single source, has more of this type of anonymous, grimy '70s 'University Music' than anyone. I HAVE found music that I would recommend heartily (Charles Jones SQ No.6, a perfect 'Bartok 3'), so, please, why won't you just, with humor, accept my 'reviews'? I mean, WHO ELSE in the universe cares soooooooooo much as to 'waste' their $$$ on such an endeavor as the CRI/NewWorld catalog simply to unearth Masterpieces for YOU'RE future enjoyment. All I do, I do for YOU!! :-*,.. the endless seeker/searcher,... so that you won't have to. I'm just doing a community service.

The ears I use to listen to music are my ears, not yours. I know that the bulk of posters to music threads want someone else to winnow for them, either a large group of anonymous (and deceased) winnowers (referred to by such phrases as "the test of time" or "general consensus") or fellow posters.

I'm not one of those. I'm interested in what people like and dislike, but not for the purposes of guiding my own listening, not unless I really know and trust a person's tastes and even then only for exploring things I might not have thought about, certainly not for shutting off opportunities before I've even had them! No I'd much rather spend my own money and my own time to explore what I don't already like, not to try to find things similar to what I already know I like.

Respecting or disrespecting your ears is not germane. And I don't do either. I listen only with my own ears. My advice to you was based on what I saw as a handicap you were putting in front of yourself. That getting rid of that handicap would open things up for you. Not respect or disrespect, but a general suggestion as to how to enjoy more things. 

Quote from: snyprrr on December 14, 2012, 08:57:37 AMThe fact is is there IS much more poop in the world than diamonds. THAT'S what makes diamonds so cool, their rarity. So to with Absolute Ultimate Genius (ok, ok, JdP ::)). Why do you chastise me for picking through the corpses to see if anything of value has been lost? I am constantly working hard to uncover any lost masterpieces (the Charles Jones being one of my prizes), not buying the things I probably should, simply to uncover the unknown. So, is there any surprise that there's some poop in the pile? I mean, EVERYTHING can't be diamonds, right? Something has to suck in order for something else to blow.

This is not at all how I view the world. The world I perceive has much more variety in it, for one. Diamonds and garnets and gold and aluminum and trees and formica and toasters and cars and cities and meadows and people and birds and animals and and and and and. And one thing I've noticed about music anyway is that there's someone somewhere who likes any given thing that I dislike. Herbert Howe, for instance, who's right at the bottom of my list, and at the bottom of practically everyone else's list as well. But practically is not all. And there are some people who quite like Herbert Howe's music. Fabian Mueller's another. Why would I want to dissuade anyone from listening to their music, however? That's not who I am at all. I'm all about encouraging people to listen to more things, not shutting themselves off, not turning over the whole winnowing process to others--indeed, not making a big deal about winnowing at all. Of course there are things that I will dislike. Of course there are things that I will never like. It ain't no thing. It's the same for everyone.

You live to uncover the lost masterpiece; I live to listen to things I don't yet enjoy.

I ran across a quote several years ago that expresses my own orientation perfectly. It's by Morton Feldman: Down with masterpieces, up with art.

You're not misunderstood at all. You are very well understood. I just reject your world view is all.

I like it.

 ;D 8)

Quote from: some guy on December 14, 2012, 10:56:51 AM
;D 8)

I'm prescribing a steady diet of Spohr and Glazunov for you!! :P

Of course there's an infinite variety of serialist musics,... NOT!! You lost me at 'toasters'. ???

Surely you are much more critical when dispensing with your hard earned $$$ than you make out? Could there be a REASON why Wilson's is one of the few CRI you haven't heard?


I guess my 'thing' with you is that you seem to come off to me as if there's all the time in the world to explore every nook and cranny of.. everything... I mean, don't you HAVE to be discriminating when faced with such a mountain of choices? Don't you have to 'learn from others' mistakes' so that you don't 'waste' time on rabbit holes that won't ultimately yield true rewards?

This is how I do it: I just ran across the Stephen Demski disc on CRI. Looks interesting,... but... is it? No samples. Could I possibly, innocently, ask you what you 'think'? Isn't that allowed? And, would you simply 'make' me have to find out for myself, or, would you either warn me or recommend me? I mean, why do I sound like such a Scrooge in your estimation? I simply want to maximize every last ounce of allowable pleasure, so why should I be led to anything less than The Cream. Again, there can't be good if there's no evil, otherwise all things are equal,... and, dare I say, Richard Wilson is no Anton Webern. RW's music comes off as PURE EVIL when compared to the similar works by AW. There HAS to be some... something... here!! Discretion.

Richard Wilson, if you're dead, please forgive me for using your tiny little corner of a musical world as a whipping post for my point. Surely, if we had a long conversation, you would confess that you were caught up in serialist fever, and if you had it to do again you would have gone your own way.

Which brings me to this new point: that, most of the Academic Serialist Composers only were such because of FEAR of being laughed at for not writing 'god's music'. How many WOULD have pulled a George Rochberg if they had only had the GUTS? Where were the Ruggles and Ives personas outside of the US University Universe? A whole generation of Composers ended up writing serialist against their will (height of arrogance alert!!!).


I could SAY I'M EVERYTHING YOU SAY ABOUT YOURSELF.  (whhoops caps)... I listen for new stuff I don't like YET. It's just that there is a heaping helping of my drug of choice involved: disappointment. You're never disappointed?? I feel like you've taken the 'breathing is music' side, and, like Obama, you've gotten everyone to go along with this, while I sit here like a republican wondering wtf just happened. I mean,... LaMonte Young's oscillator,... seriously???? It's how I feel in the face of the "any Mozart now played instantly becomes a Cage piece". I feel criminality here.

Frankly, as I continue this, all I can think of is libtard college professors spewing their musical social justice theories. "Breathing IS music"





Richard Wilson isn't even a real Composer name. COME ON!!!!!



ahhhh, I know your plan... you're trying to wear me down..... won't......uhhhh........happen.......SPLAT!!! Just admit that I'm right and we can settle this like men.

James to the rescue!! MY HERO!!! :P

Well, two things going on here, one a legitimate part of the conversation, one not.

For the first, we have a choice between listening for yourself and letting others decide for you what's good and worthy. Of course that's oversimpified. Of course one listens to one's friends and even to one's enemies. My point about all that was that taking suggestions for what to listen to are more useful than taking suggestions for what not to listen to. The first gives you options; the second closes things off. Philosophically, anyway. All this kerfluffle about Wilson, for instance, makes me want to listen to him now!!

For the second, we have taking sides. The music isn't important, the conversation isn't important, only which side you're on is important. The people who agree with you are good; the people who disagree with you are bad. And the commonest tactics here are the ad hominem and the straw man. Very tiresome, of course, but "Oh, well." None of us has to be here. So it's a huge improvement over the kindergarten squabbles it resembles.

Quote from: some guy on December 14, 2012, 04:27:18 PM
All this kerfluffle about Wilson, for instance, makes me want to listen to him now!!

Quote from: James on December 14, 2012, 04:39:11 PM
just an observation

OK guys, let's have one new String Quartet from each of you, perhaps something you've discovered recently that we can debut here and check out or talk about. I guess my choice has, err hmm, already been made.

Perhaps I made too much of a stink over that Wilson, someguy. It really is just mediocre serialist university music from 1982, not a particularly good vintage. Frankly, after I take one more listen, I'll be glad to send you both the Wilson and the Boatwright. Seriously! PM me if you're interested.

I AM interested in the Paul Cooper cd of String Quartets on CRI. He's another one exclusive to the label that I know nothing about, but the samples promised some mystery. Ugh, but it was available for pennies, and now it's up to $6,... SIX DOLLARS!! :o


So, with all our squabbles aside, what SQs have you been enjoying lately?

Quote from: snyprrr on December 14, 2012, 10:27:56 PM
OK guys, let's have one new String Quartet from each of you, perhaps something you've discovered recently that we can debut here and check out or talk about. I guess my choice has, err hmm, already been made.
...
So, with all our squabbles aside, what SQs have you been enjoying lately?

Huh??  One SQ?  Well I've listened to a lot of Shostakich, but the one that stick out which isn't new to me but which I hadn't listened to in a few months, is ...

Leoš Janáček: String Quartet No. 1, Kreutzer Sonata

In this instance by the Skampa Quartet.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41QIY3YjO%2BL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

Yeah, following me around in every thread making snippy little personal attacks of me does take up a lot of your time, doesn't it? And energy, I'm sure. You must be exhausted.

You have a little rest now. Listen to some music, maybe. That'll calm you. Make sure it's great music, though!! Board-certified, grade A. Otherwise, you'll just be crabby again.

Sh sh sh. Sleep. Sleep little grasshopper....

Quote from: James on December 15, 2012, 05:59:00 AM
snyprrr .. see the what are you listening to thread? ..

Quote from: some guy on December 15, 2012, 06:21:28 AM
Make sure it's great music, though!!

MAKE NICE AND GIVE ME SOME SQs!!!! :o :o :o

James, if you don't give me an SQ, I'm going to have to assume that you chose a Cage work. someguy, if you don't give me one, I'm going to assume you chose Stockhausen. :P

We can continue the 'fun' later; now it's time for String Quartets! ;) 8)


Surely both of you can agree that Dutilleux's Ainsi la Nuit is one of the most beautiful modern expressions in any combination? Really, when I think about the last... 40!!! years (wow, the '70s ARE receding!!), this one still pops up as waaay more delicate than most things you here.


I can't think of an SQ 2009-12. Maybe Norgard?

Quote from: Fëanor on December 15, 2012, 05:03:32 AM
Huh??  One SQ?  Well I've listened to a lot of Shostakich, but the one that stick out which isn't new to me but which I hadn't listened to in a few months, is ...

Leoš Janáček: String Quartet No. 1, Kreutzer Sonata

In this instance by the Skampa Quartet.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41QIY3YjO%2BL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

I hear that's the new recording of choice. Great piece, glad you like it!

Quote from: snyprrr on December 15, 2012, 03:28:13 PM
I hear that's the new recording of choice. Great piece, glad you like it!

+1
And no. 2 is even better!
I've only compared the recordings from Spotify, but the Skampa recording is really great, as is the Janacek Quartet of no. 2 (on DGG)

Anyone have the Harald Saeverud SQs? Jon Liefs? Jan Carlsson?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHXlghS88kY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHXlghS88kY)

i think he wrote 5 or 6 string quartets? maybe 7?

if you can find them all, anyway

Quote from: snyprrr on December 16, 2012, 08:07:43 AM
Anyone have the Harald Saeverud SQs? Jon Liefs? Jan Carlsson?

2 out of 3 ain't bad. Yes, yes and no.

How's things in your end of the String Quartet pool? I was looking over some notes, and this is what I have to ponder before me:

Holliger 2 (ECM 2cd w/LvB, Bruckner, & Hartmann)

Lachenmann 1-3 (take your pick of JACK, Arditti, or Stadler)
Sciarrino 1-8 (Kairos/Prometeo)

Rihm 11 (Wergo) ... others...

Feldman 2 (Mode or HatHut)
Ferneyhough (Neos... or is it Aeon???)

Harvey
Dusapin
Ruzicka

Birtwistle
Hosokawa (Wergo)
Nancarrow (Wergo)
Rouse


These are just the most obvious catch-ups for me. I'd be tempted to get all three Lachenmann's, but, ha, yea... that's not going to happen, is it? I consider Holliger, Lachenmann, and Sciarrino to be in the same boat, but, again, that's getting expensive. And who knows what astounding package is coming our way in the future?... I mean, that Ferneyhough set is like the grail here, is it no? mm, slake...

We have entered a time when a lot of the old Arditti discs are starting to become quite rare. How long will this Golden Age last?