This is an edit of the original post. It is my attempt to keep track of pre-1800 SQs as they are available on cd. HIP and Modern styles don't matter here, since the field is scare enough as it is. Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven are not included, so, any additions are welcome.
Boccherini: CPO (Op.2, Op.32/4-6, Op.33, Opp. 39/41, Op.58)
Dynamic (Op.8, Op.52, , )
Apponyi Qrt. various
Biondi & Co. (3?)
Esterhazy Qrt. Op.32
Naxos Op.32
Peterson Qrt. various
You can't get everything B wrote for SQ, but, you probably wouldn't want to, because about half of them are actually quartettini. The way you can tell is, six real quartets usually take two cds, quartettinis, one. All of B's important opera are represented, from the first, Op.2, to the last, Op.58 (plus the two he wrote in 1804), Op.32 being the most popular. Opp. 2 & 8 are considered quartetti proper, and, after that, Opp. 24, 32, 39, 41, 54, 58, and the two last SQs (I believe left somewhat unfinished), Op.64.
Dittersdorf: There are 3 actual surveys of his 6 SQs!, and a couple of individual works on OPPs (one coupled with Mozart).
Vanhal: (2) OOP/$$$ Stamic
Kozeluch: (2) OOP/$$$ Stamic (both)
Gyrowetz: (1; Hyperion/Salomon Qrt.) OOP/$$$
Wranitzky: (3+2) OOP/$$$ Op.16 1-6, Op.23 4-6, plus Op.16/6 on one Panton disc, and 16/5 on a another.
Myslivecek: (only one single SQ) OOP/$$$
Pleyel (3): one Stamic (Op.11), one Naxos set (Op.1), plus, Pleyel's last quartet opus from @1805, Op.11, on Hungaroton.
Albrechtsberger (1) Hungaroton
Krommer (2) both cds released 2009, second is the same group as the Albrechtsberger. Also, there are single Krommer SQs on two separate Panton OOPs.
Forster (0)
Rejcha (0; post-1800)
Danzi (0; post-1800)
Gassmann: (1) OOP Gassmann's set is one of the earliest, written in 1768. This cd has an Amazon address, but no cd.
Richter (1+1) 3 SQs on Alpha-Prod., and one on Panton.
Kraus (3+1) Two recent HIP cds, and one Swedish Lysell disc. The single g minor is coupled with the Flute Quintet on another disc.
Gretry (3) Actually three different versions of Op.3!
Gossec (1+?) Op.14 with flute instead of violin, and Op.15. Also, one SQ on Koch.
Viotti (2) Op.3 (Talent), and three mystery quartets on Dynamic.
Eybler (1) Op.1 (3)
Vachon 3 SQs with Jadin (ASV), and one or two with Cambini and Saint-George.
Saint-George (2+2) His 2nd and 3rd Books of SQs are available, and one with Cambini and Vachon, and one on Koch with the Joachim Qrt.
Cambini (2+2) 6 SQs on 2 cds on Stradivarius, and one each, I believe, on the two previously mentioned cds.
Sammartini (?) There is a disc on Stradivarius of "Quintets & Quartets", but I don't know if they're for strings.
Jadin (3) 3 SQs on ASV, 2 with the QM, and one with the Joachim on Koch (f minor).
Dussek (1) 1805, 3 SQs
Rosetti (1) CPO (6)
Rosler (1) Stamic
Klusak (1) Stamic
Canales (?) 3 SQs available as a download from Amazon. I don't know this guy, but it looks interesting.
Spech (1) I think this Festetics disc is of pre-1800 music, but I don't know.
Grill (1) 6 SQs I know nothing about.
Sacchini (1) 6 SQs I know nothing about.
Zmeskall (1) LvB era
Fesca (1) LvB era
Rolla (1) 3 SQs I know nothing about.
Brunetti (1) CPO
Ryba (1) Naxos
Michael Haydn (1) Sonare Qrt. on Claves
Abel/Shields/Wesley/Marsh/Webbe "SQ in 18th cent. England" Salomon/Hyperion
JC Bach I think there is an SQ hidden on some mix cd somewhere on Amazon.
I'm leaving with Schubert, and Donizetti, and Onslow, etc., to focus on pre-1800, but, of course, most anyone up to Mendelsshon aught to be included, or,...whatever! ha!
This was last updated Dec. 13, 2009.
Speaking of Jadin, just which Jadin did you have in mind? Hyacinthe or Louis-Emmanuel? There are at least 3 string quartets written by Louis-Emmanuel, but I believe they were written later in the 19th century. Hyacinthe wrote, I believe, 15 or 16 before his premature death of TB. Both their father and uncle were also composers but I'm not sure if either of them wrote string quartets too.
Quote from: Bunny on June 16, 2009, 02:13:20 PM
Speaking of Jadin, just which Jadin did you have in mind? Hyacinthe or Louis-Emmanuel? There are at least 3 string quartets written by Louis-Emmanuel, but I believe they were written later in the 19th century. Hyacinthe wrote, I believe, 15 or 16 before his premature death of TB. Both their father and uncle were also composers but I'm not sure if either of them wrote string quartets too.
There is one Mosaiques that has both H & L-E, and there is one ASV disc with Hyacinthe (I believe) and Vachon. There are some great reviews of these on Amazon which should arouse interest.
I hope I didn't appear to be cheeky with this thread. OF COURSE my pocketbook is happy that affairs are so slim, but my SQ indexes indicate that there may be quite a few "g minor"-type SQ masterpieces yet to be unearthed out there.
Albrechtsberger is my candidate for Most Neglected SQ Master. Has ANYONE heard that Hungaroton recording?
Again, that Krommer disc was getting some great reviews here in another thread.
Looking through Groves at the library:
Joseph Bologne, the Chevalier de Sain-George, the mulatto violin master, surfaces as quite the dashing figure. I'm really curious about his 3rd book of SQs, Op.14 (@1887).
Also, Viotti, another violin virtuoso, has an interesting set of 6 SQs, Op.3 (written about the same time).
But, as I went through a final sweep of available cds, I was even more shocked that there were so many huge gaps. Except for one OOP Kozeluch/Stamic recording of 1891 SQs, there is NOTHING between Haydn's Op.50 and Beethoven's Op.18.
NOTHING, except for Eybler's Op.1 (3 SQs) and Boccherini's late Op.58 (1798). NOTHING!
Franz Xaver Richter wrote 6 SQs which were published in the 1770s as Op.5, and which, according to the status quo were conceived around 1768, but there appears to be some kind of evidence that they were started in the late 1750s, so you know what that means! ;D
Quote from: snyprrr on June 17, 2009, 10:25:03 PM
so you know what that means! ;D
That they were actually Haydn's first works in the genre? :)
BTW, the French label Alpha has issued a recording of (the first half of) this collection which is IMO quite nice and available :)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41FCRJQ2W1L._SS400_.jpg)
There are also the six quartets of Maddalena Lombardini Sirmen (1869). These are relatively light and playful in style, using experimental forms where no standards existed.
Quote from: masolino on June 18, 2009, 02:47:54 AM
That they were actually Haydn's first works in the genre? :)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41FCRJQ2W1L._SS400_.jpg)
;D, teehee!
Has anyone heard the Pleyel Op.2 SQs on Naxos?
Quote from: masolino on June 18, 2009, 02:47:54 AM
That they were actually Haydn's first works in the genre? :)
BTW, the French label Alpha has issued a recording of (the first half of) this collection which is IMO quite nice and available :)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41FCRJQ2W1L._SS400_.jpg)
That's a good disk. Not only good music, but nice playing from that group. I bought the downloads, thus no liner notes. My loss... :(
8)
Quote from: snyprrr on June 18, 2009, 09:42:50 AM
Has anyone heard the Pleyel Op.2 SQs on Naxos?
I have the disk with the first 3 on it. Pleyel (a student of Haydn) is like... Haydn Lite. These are very well written (and played here), but not really intricate or deep. No jokes or trickery, but good entertainment. :)
8)
Got Dittersdorf CPO w/2Qrts-2Qnts:
My first reaction was that I couldn't tell the dif between Ditters or Haydn (or anyone for that matter), but the more I listened, the more it became plain that Ditters was pretty straight forward. I was comparing with Haydn Op.33.
Where Haydn seems a little more...mm...flowery, Ditters seemed to eschew frills. At first I thought Ditters was "deficient" in memorable material, but the closer I listened, I heard snippets of recognizablely Haydnesque melody. Still, the dif is pretty small. Perhaps if the recordings had had similar acoustics, the dif would be even less. Ditters seems to stay "major" more than Haydn, though.
Ditters seems also to have a little Mozart in the dangling chromatics, so maybe he is somewhere in the middle. Perhaps Pleyel is the composer he is most in competition with here.
Ditters seems to have thought quite highly of himself... and his SQs. What I heard was pretty typical. There is nothing like the "Fifths" SQ, or anything really remotely famous sounding...oh, except for the variations finale that literally sounds like "Hello Muddah". Cute.
Perhaps Ditters was more in line with what was actually popular in the day, rather than storming the Bastille.
Nice, typical, non offensive "classical" music.
A little curious: when were the SQs composed?
The almost all-knowing doesn't provide any info. on this, but it does make a reference to the all-star quartet:
QuoteIn circa 1774, Haydn, Dittersdorf, Mozart and Vanhal played String Quartets together. Haydn and Dittersdorf played the violins; Mozart, the viola; and Vanhal; the cello. The recorder of this event, the composer and tenor Michael Kelly, stated that they played well but not outstanding together, but the image of four of the great composers of the time all joined in common music making is still one of the classic images of the Classical era.
I believe Ditters' SQs were written in 1788, published Jan.'89.
@1784-89-91 there is a lot of SQ activity. Haydn began again (Op.50) after a hiatus, Boccherini began (OP.39) again after a hiatus. Pleyel was coming on strong. Saint-George and Viotti brought out their last offerings. Gyrowitz and Wranitzky began their ouvres. And Dittersdorf wrote his. There might be some others too.
Between Mozart's death and LvB's Op.18 (1791-1800) there is a lot of activity, but the recordings available are pretty much limited to Haydn and one Boccherini set (Op.58) and one Eybler set (Op.1).
It's interesting how MOST of the composers then did NOT stick to Haydn's 4 mvmt. structure, opting for the 3 mvmts adopted by Boccherini. The SQs still all round out to about 20min no matter what form is used.
Thanks, snyprrr.
ah, someone finally spelled snyprrr right! My hero! ;D
Excuse me, but I thought his thread was about string quartets written before 1800, not quartets written in the 1800s. If the 19th century is in the mix, then the quartets of Louis Spohr should also be considered. And the 19th century is a time frame rich in string quartets...
I believe we have as yet not mentioned any SQs 1800+ ??? :-[ ;D!
It would be niiice to include Spohr, but then I'd have to include Schubert, and then, who knows? :o Please keep your question in mind, and maybe we can get there later. I was thinking of this thread more as a laboratory culminating in LvB's Op.18 (1800), and working backwards towards the first works by Richter, Haydn, and Boccherini.
There's so much meat between 1750s-1800 that desperately needs to be brought to light. I too have a special place for Spohr (I think I actually started a "Spohr SQ" thread: feel free to revive that. I would like someone to talk to about his SQs!).
But here I'd like to concentrate on that which leads up to LvB. I'm still trying to figure out which Haydn SQ LvB was studying for his Op.18 (I am led to believe that it was only one,but which one?).
Joseph Martin Kraus/Lysell Qrt. (Musica Sveciae)
Four major key SQs, only one with 4 mvmts. Very Mozartean, friendly and warm. SQ No.5 is played with HIP instruments, though the players' style does not sound different. Check Kraus thread.
I'm getting to that point where just about anything I would be interested in this area is going to start costing the big $$$. I'm trying to slowly back out of this before I run out of gas money.
I'm interested in the French and their contribution to the origins of the SQ: Gossec, Gretry, Vachon, Davaux, Saint-Georges. Which one of these composers would be most worthy of my attention?
Gretry: Six SQs Op.3 (1761-65; 1773)/ KochSchwann-"Haydn Quartett"
wellwellwell... you classical era guys keep telling me I'm not going to get what I'm looking for in this era, ah, but here was a perfect example. Just sample the opening Larghetto of the SQ No.6 in c minor: I seriously haven't heard this style yet in my classical survey. This is exactly what I was talking about. It almost reminds me of Finzi, ha, but not quite!
I was very hesitant about this music, but from the very first note it was a tonic in the midst of my "HaydnPleyelMozartBoccherini" slog. This is certainly not Haydnesque SQ writing. It's all very light (no mvmt. really lasts longer than 4mins.), but the melodic appeal is right there. Right there. Haydn could develop all day long if he had Gretry's melodic appeal.
I've heard that the new version of these SQs (within the last year or two)... sucks. The reviewer (Arkivmusic) said the recording (and possibly the playing) were not "so." However, this Koch 1991 release is "so," and I find it just simply, as they say, delightful. I got mine for $9.99. I think there's one or two more cheap copies on Amazon before they get to be $100!
You want... you need... you get!
It will be interesting to compare this with the Gossec Op.15.
Well, I'm at the $$$ crossroads. Every purchase hereafter will have to be done carefully.
Richter Op.5 vs Albrechtsberger Op.7
Whom will I love more?
Well, I'm slowly coming to the realization, for good or no, that Haydn is pretty much the man here, with Mozart the clear exception.
It's just that everyone is infused with Haydn, or Haydn's style is infused with everyone. However, Haydn seems to have "phases," some of which I like better than others (early/late vs. middle). In a way, I still find Haydn quite businesslike, which sometimes brings me down, considering he is the best going.
I'll go as far to say that Mozart's SQs sound like they're from another planet altogether. K387 seems to come out of nowhere. Nobody was writing half-hour SQs but him (after Haydn Op.20), a feat not taken up with regularity until middle-period LvB. As far as I know, 59/1 is the first "epic" SQ. Please, please let me know any others. I know that later Haydn gets a bit more expansive.
One thing I noticed about Haydn @Opp.50-64 is that he actually begins to "sound like everyone else," or everyone at the time is just sucking off the same teat. Regardless of Haydn utilizing 4 mvmts. as opposed to every else's 3, during this time, everyone except Mozart was writing 15-19min. SQs, as if by consensus a quarter hour SQ had been deemed the standard. Perhaps this is what was "commercial?"
Speaking of which, it appears that Pleyel and Dittersdorf might be trying to out do one another at one point. Both have a very extrovert, "populist," mercantile sound, Pleyel especially in his "Prussian" SQs. All this seems to come together in the late 1780s, leading up to Mozart's death, after which it appears "The Song Remains the Same" until Beethoven's Op.18 (1800).
I will have to complete my Haydn survey, and I would like to try one more Boccherini, but I really would like to try some others, such as Vanhal, but again, this is an area the record companies haven't got to... and may not. Ah, well...
Well Mr Snipper unlike orchestral works, chamber works require all players to be playing almost all of the time, which is pretty exhausting. Mozart and Beethoven might have stretched some of those works by 10-15 minutes or so, but it stopped by then for the most part.
I despise your labeling Haydn's music as businesslike.
Point one: interesting about the timings/playing!
Point two: actually, I wouldn't have used that term, but I was reading the liner notes to this Kraus disc, where, in the spirit of hero worship, Kraus went to Haydn expecting Haydn, the genius, to be all romantic philosophizing, etc., and was disappointed in "the maestro's business-like attitude, openly declared, towards composing. Young and romantic Kraus... had presumably believed that Haydn, the Genius, would be above such mundane things and would, instead, disseminate philosophical precepts on life and music."
And, as everyone keeps reminding me concerning classical vs. romantic, that ultimately these guys were trying to make a living.
I'll slightly amend, saying, all business is not bad! However, Haydn's "cool" emotions post-Sturm&Drang (not business-like THERE!!!) do, to me, illicit a cool, businesslike manner, but please don't confuse that with "pencil pusher." Either way, I do understand how that word might offend. Point taken. However, sometimes I might think Haydn is a bit too "professional." Sometimes I like a bit of...mmm...
I wish Supraphon/Panton would issue a box set of all their Stamic SQ recordings, including Vanhal, Kozeluh, Vranicky, Myslivecek, Gyrowitz, Klusak, and Rosler (who is Rosetti?), and what ever else they may have. That'd be pretty sweet.
Quote from: snyprrr on July 08, 2009, 08:01:39 PM
I'll go as far to say that Mozart's SQs sound like they're from another planet altogether. K387 seems to come out of nowhere. Nobody was writing half-hour SQs but him (after Haydn Op.20), a feat not taken up with regularity until middle-period LvB. As far as I know, 59/1 is the first "epic" SQ. Please, please let me know any others. I know that later Haydn gets a bit more expansive.
Mozart C major Quintet, K 515 is very expansive. BTW listening to Haydn contemporaries as a way to figure out how music got to LvB is something a lot of people have been very busy with in the past, and it's an approach we seem to have left behind at last.
Quote from: snyprrr on July 08, 2009, 08:01:39 PMOne thing I noticed about Haydn @Opp.50-64 is that he actually begins to "sound like everyone else," or everyone at the time is just sucking off the same teat.
This observation is based on listening to 30 second snippets on amazon?
[/quote]
Quote from: DavidW on July 09, 2009, 04:35:37 AM
Well Mr Snipper unlike orchestral works, chamber works require all players to be playing almost all of the time, which is pretty exhausting. Mozart and Beethoven might have stretched some of those works by 10-15 minutes or so, but it stopped by then for the most part.
I despise your labeling Haydn's music as businesslike.
In really good quartet writing there are lots of bars were only three fiddles play, so one of the players can rest his fingers for a couple secs.
I was at SilverTrustEditions when I ran across this SQ by Wranitzky/Vranicky for the King of Prussia. I believe it is on some OOP cd on Supraphon/Panton...
but it was one of the most immediately appealing classical era SQs I've heard. I admit that this time it was only four snippets, H!, but I imagine this Op. must be one of THE 6packs! (Op.23, I believe)
You're going to have to listen for yourself, but I do hear a lot of that Mozart influence stuff going on here with the chromatics. I'm not saying nuthin, but hey, check it out!
Also, STE had an early Krommer SQ that reallly had immediate appeal. It does appear more and more that there is a lot of stuff we may never hear.
Quote from: Bunny on June 20, 2009, 08:22:04 AM
Excuse me, but I thought his thread was about string quartets written before 1800, not quartets written in the 1800s. If the 19th century is in the mix, then the quartets of Louis Spohr should also be considered. And the 19th century is a time frame rich in string quartets...
We have officially upgraded: all HIP SQs "plus!"
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 18, 2009, 09:47:42 AM
That's a good disk. Not only good music, but nice playing from that group. I bought the downloads, thus no liner notes. My loss... :(
8)
I just listened to this cd. This is some very...mmm...thoughtful,...and complex work. There's a lot going on at any given moment, but everything is handled very well indeed. This is very substantial and attractive music. I'll use the word "sublime."
And keep in mind that some of these SQs may have been written in 1757!
Quote from: snyprrr on July 20, 2009, 06:44:27 PM
And keep in mind that some of these SQs may have been written in 1757!
Excuse my ignorance, but what's so special about that year? ???
Supposedly, Haydn wrote the first SQs in 1759, so...
And hey, I'm not one to... but... either way, Richter's SQs are 3 mvmts. as opposed to Haydn's 5 (they were 5, right?)...Richter sounds more mature, to me, than Haydn Op.20, but Haydn is more memorable. I better watch my words 'round these parts, though, haha!!
Either way, unless Richter sounds like Opp. 9/17 of Haydn, then Richter is his own man. It's hard for me not to think that Mozart heard these SQs.
Oh but they're not string quartets, they are divertimenti written in the roccoco style, am I right? The first composer to employ a string quartet was Francesco Geminiani in 1732, and they were essentially extended trio sonatas, probably the same as Richter. Haydn was famous for creating a classical form, that revolutionized harmony. It's the form of the music that made his string quartets ground breaking, and not the ensemble. :)
I don't think the Richter's are coming off as divertimenti. I think Gurn has this music, maybe he knows better.
I hear what you're saying, but I think the Richter Op.5 is supposed to really be SQs proper. They are quite substantial and highly worked out.
Even the notes seem to be backing them up as legit. And I think Richter IS credited with "creating" this contrapuntal+opera style, which does sound different than Haydn (though I still haven't heard Opp.9/17).
Speculation that some of them were written by 1757 DOES raise the stakes, though, doesn't it? I'm not trying to start a conspiracy theory, but the Richter SQs seem more like SQs proper than Haydn Opp.1-2, which are certainly more in the divertimento "way". Either way, Richter's precede Haydn's Opp.9/17/20, so...
Like I said, I'm not writing a book on this, I'm just sayin...
Quote from: snyprrr on July 22, 2009, 11:08:27 AM
And I think Richter IS credited with "creating" this contrapuntal+opera style, which does sound different than Haydn (though I still haven't heard Opp.9/17).
Wrong. Haydn is rich in counterpoint, that is what makes the High Classical era what it is, it's the fusion of the rococo style with contrapuntal textures that were so en vogue in the baroque era. You absolutely can not say that Haydn does not sound like that. That is his legacy.
Richter did not create counterpoint, it is the stamp of the entire baroque era! What are you talking about!?! Are you just copying little snippets that you read in liner notes?
Quote from: DavidW on July 22, 2009, 11:52:14 AMAre you just copying little snippets that you read in liner notes?
OF COURSE I AM ;D!!!
Quote from: DavidW on July 22, 2009, 11:52:14 AM
Wrong. Haydn is rich in counterpoint, that is what makes the High Classical era what it is, it's the fusion of the rococo style with contrapuntal textures that were so en vogue in the baroque era. You absolutely can not say that Haydn does not sound like that. That is his legacy.
To me, Op.20 sounds like a final refinement of what I hear on the Richter, but the Richter obliges me to hear Opp.9/17. I don't know (it seems not?) if R & H knew each other, but merely from the evidence of this set (Op.5) I'd say Richter has "the" sound...I don't know how equal or advanced it is from Opp.9/17, but I can imagine it being equal to Op.20, with the bonus of being totally different. I'm just saying that this Richter set sounds pretty mature for 1757-68, considering Op.9 comes out in 1770.
Quote from: DavidW on July 22, 2009, 11:52:14 AMRichter did not create counterpoint, it is the stamp of the entire baroque era! What are you talking about!?!
I didn't say Richter created counterpoint ::), I was pointing out that (as the wonderful notes so eloquently stated ;D) Richter was right there when they invented CountryRock, um...when the baroque counterpoint and the new "opera" style, like peanut butter and chocolate, came together for the first time, two great tastes, that taste great together.
Either way, I feel like I need to hear Opp.9/17 now (I am curious about that Op.9 d minor quartet).
Quote from: snyprrr on July 20, 2009, 06:44:27 PM
And keep in mind that some of these SQs may have been written in 1757!
Oddly, I get a date of 1768. But no matter, they may have been composed well before their publishing date. In any case, if Haydn heard them at all (unlikely, I think, given their remoteness from each other) it wouldn't have been before he was up to Op 9... :)
Very nice works though, no doubt about it.
8)
It has been suggested that the SQs were written by 1757.
That's the only date given. Strange, that seems like such a long time to have them in storage? ???
Richter was a bass singer, and I think that really informs the four parts in his SQs. The viola is like a constant presence, and there is much a'soloin' goin' on!
Richter ist der Dichter, ja!
I'm having trouble believing your claim that he is a visionary of the modern string quartet. As I said before, I bet it's closer to rococo style. Well I have not heard these works yet, but I have found the following interesting comment on the classics today review.
"All are based essentially on conservative models reliant on well-worn contrapuntal techniques instilled early on by Richter's teacher Johann Fux."
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=10145 (http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=10145)
I understand if you are exaggerating because you want to feel that you have unearthed a forgotten masterpiece, that you are a discoverer of great treasure, but I for one would appreciate more detail about the music that you are praising so highly.
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on July 22, 2009, 06:49:33 PM
Very nice works though, no doubt about it.
Verrry niiice...no doubt! ;D
Jadin/Vachon SQs-Razumovsky Qrt. (ASV):
Jadin got such raves from a particular Amazon reviewer that I bit. Apparently, Jadin's Op.2 No.1 has been recorded 3 times, its fame resting on the intro which sounds a lottt like the "Dissonance" SQ. It starts of exactly, with the same steady cello beat. From there, though, it progresses into just a really nice SQ.
Op.1 No.3, in f minor, is quite a standout. As the reviewer stated, the unison menuet is very special, sounding like a cousin of the "witch's menuet."
Both of these SQs are in 4 mvmts. The third Jadin SQ (Op.4 No.1) is only in 2. In D major, this SQ is obviously more bouncy.
The two Vachon SQs are in 3 mvmts. and have the typically light concertante sound of many of this era's SQs. The first, in g minor, was attractive enough, but no great shakes. I'll have to compare with the Gretry Op.3.
Overall, I think the reviewer built these pieces up pretty well. Of course, my expectations were tweaked, but I'm not really disappointed.
The Vachon SQs are from 1772, the Jadin from 1796-98. I would say that the Jadin are equal to any pre LvB SQ (or even) and anyone with an interest should try him out.
I'm not sure about the Mosaiques HM disc with Jadin, and a later SQ by his brother, but the QM also play the Op.2/1 ("Dissonance") along with one other Jadin SQ (so far, 4 out of 12 recorded...and according to the reviewer (and my own ears) Jadin was quite a talent).
There is also one other compilation disc (Jadin, Saint-Georges, Gossec, and Cambini) with the Op.2/1, but I believe the rest of the pieces are available elsewhere.
I am having to begin closing down my classical era survey due to the skyrocketing price of what is left: all the Supraphon/Panton StamicSQ cds (Vanhal, Wranitzky, Kozeluh, etc...) are either OOP or ridiculously priced ($99 for Vanhal). Albrechtsberger, Eybler, and Krommer are the last on the list.
According to my index, there aren't really any other composers with SQs in the pre-1800 era. So,...is this it?
Thankfully, OCD hasn't totally taken over, as I've been trying to back out of this "research" project without getting too much stuff that I may grow tired of, which hasn't really happened yet. If anyone has any hidden gems that they know of, please regale us, but, at this time, it looks like the origins of the modern SQ have been pretty well looked into.
I begrudgingly accept that Haydn appears to be the man here, but I'm not declining credit to Richter, Mozart, and Kraus, who have shown originality apart from Haydn, and Boccherini, whose very unique sound also stands apart from the pack.
It's going to take a while to absorb all this, but hey, that's what the rest of life is for, no?
Cheers. :)
So are you going to explore the non-SQ side of the classical era next? :)
9 ;D
250 Years of the String Quartet!!
Ah, my Summer Festival of String Quartets, in this year of SQ Festivities, is in full swing! The Haydn Project has been a resounding success, and the Obscure Composers Exhibit has had premieres by Kraus, Richter, Pleyel, and Dittersdorf. Also, the Boccherini Booth has been the sleeper of the season!
It is quite summery here this year, very festive, which has made it very easy for me to pretend, haha! One of the glories of classical era music is that you get to play it in the daytime, and everything I've been listening to just seems to have the summer sun in it... uh, except Schubert! Schubert has been the ugly duckling of the Festival, but, since we play all through the night, we have found a place for him as well!
As the festivities proceed into autumn, we have reserved Schubert and Beethoven, Onslow, Spohr, and Burgmuller, Schumann... and maybe, just maybe even some Mendelssohn. Of course, the final, "autumnal" phase will be given over to Brahms and Dvorak, aaaand...
...the final weekend will be devoted to the final flowering of the Romantic SQ. Already scheduled will be Wolf and Busoni, and if time permits, we will have one final seminar featuring Schoenberg Opp.7/10, Berg Op.3, and Webern's comparable works.
Bartok will kick off the Winter Season! Happy 250th, SQs!! Cheers!!!
250 Years of the String Quartet!!
I had a test today. Just by coincidence ::) I got into the car as an SQ was starting on the radio, and lasted my whole drive.
Well, it was minor-ish, ok, but I couldn't place it. It definitely had some Beethoven influence, but then I certainly heard a bit that sounded just like Haydn, but it couldn't be Haydn or Beethoven 'cause I knew all their stuff...
And the slow mvmt I didn't really recognize, but then the "menuet" I said, Aha!, I KNOW I've heard that before. And then the finale was a romp in the minor that also sounded very familiar.
So here I was, totally stumped. Who could it be if it wasn't Haydn or LvB? I mean, I was even familiar with the music, and I knew it had to be pre-1810, but... I... just couldn't.
It was LvB Op.18/4 in c minor!
And I was just scourging myself! Of course... but because I must've missed the 1st mvmt I couldn't place it! And I also have been neglecting 18/4 in favor of SQs that aren't so immediately recognizable to me yet; but!, I was shown a thing or two!
At least I knew that I knew it! Ha, had to be there, I guess, but, pretty funny still.
The Emerson was playing, and I must say I didn't really go for their performance: it was a little "too" something, but I just can't place it (maybe it was the 21st century "gloss"? maybe the intensity level?). A great compare, though.
Funny thing I also tuned in half way through a performance on the old radio yesterday, and even though I had not heard it in years I immediately recognized it as one of Bach's partitas for solo violin, and I turned out to be right.
Moral of the story? Snips you need to listen more than once to music before judging it. You should look back on my thread on how many listens to get to know a piece. It reveals that nearly everyone here listens to a piece at least several times. Any classical era string quartet aficionado would be able to pick up on the Op. 18 #4 immediately. If you listen to the music more, you are also more likely to start to "get it" and deepen your appreciation.
Think about it. :)
It's just that I've been repeatedly listening to the SQs that I DON'T really like, to get to know them better, at the expense of those which I know I already have affinity for (hey, who doesn't like an SQ in c minor? ;D). Keep in mind, I DID know that I knew the piece, (and that there was an LvB influence) but, yea, I haven't listened to 18/4 recently, trying rather to get a grip on Nos. 2,5,6. I thought that this "radio test" was just God's way of showing me where I'm at. I must admit, it was quite exciting racking my brain during that ride: of course, in the end, it was the SQ that it HAD to be. There was no other LvB/Haydn sounding minor key SQ to choose from. I just thought I knew 18/4 better than I did.
Oh, trust me, I've been endlessly pouring over these 20 odd cds that I have aquired since May; but, I do doubt that the radio will play some really obscure Haydn SQ. I do tend to "save" popular pieces (like 18/4) for later whilst I try to become familiar with the more obscure pieces (right now: Haydn Op.50). Obviously, "someone" was telling me that I should also attend to the more "popular" pieces since it was shown that I wasn't all THAT familiar with it! Of course, if I had heard any other Op.18 without the 1st mvmt, I probably would have been at a loss. The only thing I had to go on here was the fact of the minor mode key. Forgive me, but as far as ClassicalEra SQs go, I have a real hard time telling them apart from just a menuet & finale. So many of them doooooo seem to shoot their wad on the 1st, or slow, mvmt. I'm always grateful when the composer puts a little added something into the menuet or finale to make them really stand out (obvious example: Haydn Op.76/2 "Fifths").
I've some recommendations to you. Listen one before lunch and other after dinner, every day, and your health will be better:
Saint-Saëns - Wilhelm Stenhammar - Franck - Karl Goldmark -
Glazunov - Taneyev - Rimsky-Korsakoff - Enescu - Bliss - Alf Hurum -
Leo Weiner - Kodaly - Bridge - Vaugham-Williams - Kreisler - Verdi -
Gounod - Miaskovsky - Arriaga - Catoire - Paul Juon - Dohnanyi -
Moeran - Grechaninoff....... ;)
Here's a find...
"The String Quartet in 18th Century England" by the SalomonSQ on Hyperion, a cd I'm sure a few of us have here at GMG... at least Gurn MUST have it??? It's currently unavailable on Amazon, but I got it for $7 on Ebay...yaaay!!!
Crl F. Abel/ Op.8, No.5 in A Major:
I didn't kw Abel counted as British! Bach wrote his cello suites for Abel's father, and Abel and JC Bach were childhood friends.
Abel's SQ is the most baroque sounding piece on this cd, though it reminds me, in its utter simplicity, Dittersdorf. It's charming enough... I mean, who cares?, haha... it was written in 1769, making it one of the earliest SQs I've heard. It's no where near Richter it terms of anything, but...eh, it's charming enough.
William Shield/Op.3, No.6 in c minor:
This one starts off in nice dramatic fashion. Perhaps a touch of Haydn Op.20, with a smidge of Op.33... this SQ is a success to my ears, one of the few minor key SQs of the era (1782). There are a lot of things going on here that are pretty striking for the time. I'll even say that's it's fairly individual. I'm not sure you could peg it for Haydn. Hmmm...
John Marsh/SQ in Bb Major (after Haydn's Op.1/No.1)
A serenade in five mvmts... I haven't heard the Haydn lately, but this one can hold my interest... fairly speaking. It doesn't sound in the least baroque, and has a nice major/minor back and forth, and some nice minor key rhythmic play in the last two mvmts. Written in 1772.
Samuel Webbe/ Variations in A on 'Adeste Fudeles'
"Oh Come All Ye Faithful" for SQ! I was a bit taken aback when the variations began (after the opening). Things get pretty thick in here, and it almost reminded me of something that Schnittke would do (no, not THAT out there, but still a bit disconcerting!). I'm not sure if I find this wholly successful, but it's fun to hear. This has the subtitle "...after the manner of Haydn's Celebrated Hymn to the Emperor" (Haydn's is better :o)
Samuel Wesley/SQ in Eb Major
Well, this is the "rocker" of the bunch. Presumeably? written in 1800, this SQ sounds very advanced for an Englishman of his generation. I would grant it LvB Op.18 status, at least. From the first, Beethovenian, opening, this one goes a'swayin hither and yon, very manly. The first mvmt. last 12mins.!, the next two only a few mins. each. I just say that it became an instant hit to my ears... like I said, the same kind of vigor I found in LvB's Op.18, though I think I prefer this. The notes make even greater claims as to its vision, though I can't tell if they believe it was written in 1800, or 1820. The earlier, the better, I would say... if it was written in 1800, it would be quite the masterpiece. If from 1820, it might be on a par with late Krommer? It most certainly has a very strong profile, either way.
So... a very great album in my estimation, Vol.34 in Hyperion's "English Orpheus" series. I hadn't heard the Salomon til now, and they certainly take the HIP approach very delicately. No vinegar, no overt HIPisms... they sound very natural, the only HIP giveaways could be the slightly stringy/metallic "boing" that happens every now and then (in the good way, of course!)... meaning, there's a bit of tang, but nothing bizarre sounding. Compared to the Mosaiques' sound, the Salomon sound a bit more natural to my ears, not so "symphonic." So, come one and all... one of the most successful HIP SQ recordings I've heard... and the music is uniformly pretty great.
Franz Anton Rosler/Antonio Rosetti Op.6 1-6
Arioso Quartett/CPO
Someone earlier somewhere said they fell asleep to these. Already I feel as though I have to defend Rosetti as one would Ditters. From all the CE (Classical Era) SQ composers I've heard so far, Rosetti is quite one of the most instantly melodic, in a way any 20th century person can understand. His SQs are more instantly appealing than similar works by Boccherini, Pleyel, Ditters, and even Haydn (if prettiness were an issue).
CPO seem to have cornered a niche market in SQs written @1787. What makes all the above mentioned composers' SQs so interesting at this time is that their styles are all starting to meld into the new meta-style, so there is a lot of similarity between them here.
Rosetti worked for the prince of Wallerstein, in the Bavarian-Swabian border area of Ries, and this music does have a fairy tale castle in the forest originality to it, that perhaps some of the more cosmopolitan composers of the second tier have lacked (Ditters, Pleyel). Originally, I had no expectations for this cd, but then I secretly fantasized that it might be something highly unusual, and hey!, I am very graciously surprised! It almost reminds me of someone like Francaix doing a "nostalgic' piece, it's that harmonious to modern ears. Very neo-classical, indeed.
Uh, yea, I don't know if that's because this very un-HIP group plays with such passion and excitement?!? Sometimes you can never tell with these groups until you hear the cd, and there are so many variants in the HIP ladder, but they are definitely not playing in the HIP style. Personally, I think this music sounds just so with this group's treatment.
btw- Rosetti uses the three mvmt. structure in all but one SQ, which is in four mvmts. No SQ lasts longer than 13mins.
I would recommend this as someone's only Classical Era SQ cd consideration, it's that attractive to any and all tastes, I think. Music for a wintry wonderland of fantasy!
Gossec Op.15 1-6
Quatour Ad Fontes/Alpha
This comes from the same company that put out that great Richter SQ disc, and this one, too, shot right up there in terms of overall production. Not knowing what to expect with six two-mvmt. works, I was greeted with what is the most baroque sounding SQ music so far. There is a special, spicy mix, however, of all kinds of exotic influences here, and the thing really comes of as some of the finest "World Music" I've ever heard, totally authentic, so to speak, haha.
The very HIP Ad Fontes play this beautifully flowering music crisply and with authority. The music is full of incident. and exhibits a prismic change of mood, as if flowing down a French river. All the first mvmts. are longer and more worked out. Baroque sequences rub shoulders with brief Strum-and-Drangish unisons, and then into a dance, andthen an aside, into more Haydnesque moments, and then back to... and so on, very much like rafting down a river with different views. In a way, this reminds me of Malipiero's constant re-supply of themes.
This music sounds as different from Haydn as Richter does, and also from each other. This is certainly some of the most inventive and eclectic music I've heard in ANY early music/world music format. It sounds the most courtly, public, entertaining disposition of any HIP type SQ music so far, with the Richter as a great compare. The notes say that some of this music is similar to Haydn Opp. 9/17, though, of course, spun differently. And, it's French,... and it sounds it!
This is just the kind of cd I think SonicMan would like,...1772, a little bit of all worlds. I almost feel as though it sounds like Revolutionary War Music!, it does almost sound American, haha!
I don't know, with music this eclectic, charming, and multiflavoured, my powers of description fail me. It's just happy and fun music,...string quartet music, at that!, though really, the quality of the music is what I hear.
The recording has a pleasing ambience. The quartet is captured perfectly. All around, this is one of my great finds on this pre-1800 expedition down the river SQandanandu! This record does feel like findingsome kind of exotic treasure chest of delights, haha! Arrr, maties!
Also, this disc makes me feel like I must get the Art of Fugue next. Emerson, or Julliard?
Viotti Op.3 1-6:
Wow, this is the WorldPremieRerecording of these works, by the "Arte de Suono" Quartet on the Talent label.
Viotti is Paganini's teacher?, I thought?, but, either way, he's the violin virtuoso who wowed Marie Antionette, and narrowly escaped with his own head (come to think of it, didn't Joseph Bologne de Saint-George also have to weave around events?). He's mostly known for his 29 Violin Concertos (rec. 22-23), but also wrote,... no the booklet says @11 sets, but I only know of 3 sets of string quartets. Op.1 & Op.3 were written @1785 (my index is unclear, and the notes to this cd suck). My index also indicates a set of three SQs written @1817 (again, my index is unclear). There is another cd on the Dynamic label, of three SQs, but they don't match the key sigs, so I have no idea what's going on there, but will have to check with Dynamic.
Well, so, the music:
Viotti writes here in two and three mvmts., in A, C, F, Eb, Eb, Eb (yes, that's three Ebs in a row!). From the first notes, I was taken with Viotti's originality. Now, I've been studying very hard since May, and have sampled about 21 pre-1800 SQ composers, and I must say that hearing Viotti now (as opposed to earlier, perhaps) shows him to have what appears as a style all to his own, which, at the same time, sounds very familiar, though utterly distinct from Haydn and Boccherini.
Viotti doesn't sound like other Frenchmen, like Grety or Gossec, because, a) almost 15 years seperates them, and b) Viotti's not French, though, for the time when he was hot, he was the sound of Paris. Saint-George's Op.14 is supposed to have come out the same year as Viotti's Op.3, and it would be interesting to compare the two virtuosos' sets. Vachon and Davaux were also still writing SQs at the turn of 1789, and Jadin's more forward looking Haydnesque SQs were still about seven years away, so, this is the alternative SQ scene in France as it appeared exactly opposite of Haydn & co.
But Viotti's album just sounds so unique. It's not as ultra virtuostic as I had been led to believe, and neither is it a violin concerto with string trio accompanyment. These are thoroughly crafted for all four parts, and they are epitomes of conversation. Viotti's themes seem to come and go, and there just seems to be a sheer amount of evnt going on: everything seems quite festive. Viotti weaves major and minor together at will, and appears to have a completely unique melodic sensibility (must be the Italian?). There are some excitingly dramatic unison passages which came as a complete surprise and joy.
After 1 1/2 listens, it's not the individual SQs one likes, but one wants to listen through to all of them. The are infectous and chipper, and have this hint of gothic nobility and intrigue, as if it were the soundtrack of the French revolution, because it was! Barry Lyndon, indeed!
Seeing as I got the last cheap copy on Amazon, I hate giving this such a high recommend, but someone else out there has to be a witness here. This has instantly become one of my favorites.
This album was produced in 1992, and this is the group's debut, and it appears there was great care in the preparation. Lead violin Lola Bobesco is perfectly insinuated into the mix, and frankly, the band plays as one, though in a very friendly and open style. And this is were I make the "they're not HIP" but where else am I going to post this? Yea, they're not HIP to my ears, but they seem to play as naturally as anything, and convey the trilly excitement to a Tee. To my ears intonation and ensemble are fine. The recording is a touch distant, but is fine. It's the notes that suck. They say nothing about date of composition, or nuthin!
Honestly, I got this because Gurn had no Viotti in his library and I wanted to be da man, haha, but I tell ya, this was quite a refreshing voice in this endless pre-1800 quest I've been on since May. Yea, Viotti's not Mozart, that I can tell ya. Viotti sounds like no one else I've heard so far, yet he has "the" sound. Perhaps Viotti is the classic example of the French SQ? I feel like I could go on about this. This is some really really good stuff. I don't even know what style you would call it. I guess Viotti invented it?
Anyhow, HIGHEST RECOMMENDATION!!
I just revamped the Original Post to try to include ALL HIP/pre-1800 SQs available on cd. What did I miss? Anyone?
As the season for record collecting draws to a close, I sit back and reflect upon the year's discoveries. At this time last year, I had bought two, "final" cds, because of my unemployment. They were Schoenberg SQ No.1 and the Holliger of 1973.
1750-1875 is approx. the time period I have dreaded the most, but, thanks to the education I have been getting lately, I've seen that the period I really detest is 1826-99, haha. Anyhow, I had no idea I was to embark on this pre-1800 deep dive research session.
I've reached the place where I've got a lock on the Mozart and Beethoven, I've got a hold and a handle on the Haydn, and I have sampled 19 other composers, all but two writing before the death of Mozart. Many of the cds that are left (all of the Panton discs of Wranitzky, Kozeluh, and Vanhal) are ranged verrry expensively, or, they are just hopelessly OOP (Gassmann). That's convenient for me, seeing as I'm trying to crawl out of this rabbitt hole before the whole thing caves in on me! Currently, I like to think that I have every SQ Composer available on cd between 1768 and 1788, haha, except of course those are either in CD Heaven or will eventually make it into the Family. I feel as long as I don't go too beyond my absorption rate (which I'm at now), I won't tire.
The fact is, there's not that much more readily available other than the stray CPO disc, and new stuff from NAXOS. The fact that I'm not really talking about HIP playing in general here indicates the glacial pace of new releases (which, again, is great for the imagination, and pocketbook).
Mozart has proved the most complex and yielding to absorption, along with Haydn's Op.50. Most everything else has been instantly appealing. No one is left out of the rotation.
I got two interesting books from the library:
The String Quartet: From It's Beginnings to Franz Schubert/ Wulf Konold (1980)
The String Quartet: A History/ Paul Griffiths (1983)
The Griffiths' book contains the mystery index I've been using all these years,... so that's where I got it, haha!
What's really interesting is the state of HIPness research in the early '80s, as concerning these two books. In the "Recordings" section, haha, I'm sure you'd all have a good laugh. I think there is one LP by the Schaffer of various composers, but it really is amazing that all that we have now, which, I suppose, isn't much, has come to us only in the last 20 years or so.
I suppose if you look at the dates for a lot of your old Salomon and Mosaiques and Jaap, you see that the boom started in the very late '80s, early '90s.
The other book, though sporting an impressive bibliography, says not much more than you can get at GMG with a bit of prodding. It makes me wonder how we all here seem to be a quantum leap from these guys in 1980 in terms of simply being able to hear stuff. Still, Haydn & Mozart still figure out front, no matter how you slice it.
ooo, I'm tired, not making sense,....zzzzzz,....goodnight
(Apologies for being so out of date.)
Beecke, Zimmerman, Rigel, Titz, Lombardini...
I've had a stab at this subject myself: http://thesavagebreast.blogspot.com/ (http://thesavagebreast.blogspot.com/)
Quote from: snyprrr on June 16, 2009, 09:12:32 AM
This is an edit of the original post. It is my attempt to keep track of pre-1800 SQs as they are available on cd. HIP and Modern styles don't matter here, since the field is scare enough as it is. Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven are not included, so, any additions are welcome.
Boccherini: CPO (Op.2, Op.32/4-6, Op.33, Opp. 39/41, Op.58)
Dynamic (Op.8, Op.52, , )
Apponyi Qrt. various
Biondi & Co. (3?)
Esterhazy Qrt. Op.32
Naxos Op.32
Peterson Qrt. various
You can't get everything B wrote for SQ, but, you probably wouldn't want to, because about half of them are actually quartettini. The way you can tell is, six real quartets usually take two cds, quartettinis, one. All of B's important opera are represented, from the first, Op.2, to the last, Op.58 (plus the two he wrote in 1804), Op.32 being the most popular. Opp. 2 & 8 are considered quartetti proper, and, after that, Opp. 24, 32, 39, 41, 54, 58, and the two last SQs (I believe left somewhat unfinished), Op.64.
Dittersdorf: There are 3 actual surveys of his 6 SQs!, and a couple of individual works on OPPs (one coupled with Mozart).
Vanhal: (2) OOP/$$$ Stamic
Kozeluch: (2) OOP/$$$ Stamic (both)
Gyrowetz: (1; Hyperion/Salomon Qrt.) OOP/$$$
Wranitzky: (3+2) OOP/$$$ Op.16 1-6, Op.23 4-6, plus Op.16/6 on one Panton disc, and 16/5 on a another.
Myslivecek: (only one single SQ) OOP/$$$
Pleyel (3): one Stamic (Op.11), one Naxos set (Op.1), plus, Pleyel's last quartet opus from @1805, Op.11, on Hungaroton.
Albrechtsberger (1) Hungaroton
Krommer (2) both cds released 2009, second is the same group as the Albrechtsberger. Also, there are single Krommer SQs on two separate Panton OOPs.
Forster (0)
Rejcha (0; post-1800)
Danzi (0; post-1800)
Gassmann: (1) OOP Gassmann's set is one of the earliest, written in 1768. This cd has an Amazon address, but no cd.
Richter (1+1) 3 SQs on Alpha-Prod., and one on Panton.
Kraus (3+1) Two recent HIP cds, and one Swedish Lysell disc. The single g minor is coupled with the Flute Quintet on another disc.
Gretry (3) Actually three different versions of Op.3!
Gossec (1+?) Op.14 with flute instead of violin, and Op.15. Also, one SQ on Koch.
Viotti (2) Op.3 (Talent), and three mystery quartets on Dynamic.
Eybler (1) Op.1 (3)
Vachon 3 SQs with Jadin (ASV), and one or two with Cambini and Saint-George.
Saint-George (2+2) His 2nd and 3rd Books of SQs are available, and one with Cambini and Vachon, and one on Koch with the Joachim Qrt.
Cambini (2+2) 6 SQs on 2 cds on Stradivarius, and one each, I believe, on the two previously mentioned cds.
Sammartini (?) There is a disc on Stradivarius of "Quintets & Quartets", but I don't know if they're for strings.
Jadin (3) 3 SQs on ASV, 2 with the QM, and one with the Joachim on Koch (f minor).
Dussek (1) 1805, 3 SQs
Rosetti (1) CPO (6)
Rosler (1) Stamic
Klusak (1) Stamic
Canales (?) 3 SQs available as a download from Amazon. I don't know this guy, but it looks interesting.
Spech (1) I think this Festetics disc is of pre-1800 music, but I don't know.
Grill (1) 6 SQs I know nothing about.
Sacchini (1) 6 SQs I know nothing about.
Zmeskall (1) LvB era
Fesca (1) LvB era
Rolla (1) 3 SQs I know nothing about.
Brunetti (1) CPO
Ryba (1) Naxos
Michael Haydn (1) Sonare Qrt. on Claves
Abel/Shields/Wesley/Marsh/Webbe "SQ in 18th cent. England" Salomon/Hyperion
JC Bach I think there is an SQ hidden on some mix cd somewhere on Amazon.
I'm leaving with Schubert, and Donizetti, and Onslow, etc., to focus on pre-1800, but, of course, most anyone up to Mendelsshon aught to be included, or,...whatever! ha!
This was last updated Dec. 13, 2009.
Quote from: chasman on February 18, 2011, 06:26:13 AM
(Apologies for being so out of date.)
Beecke, Zimmerman, Rigel, Titz, Lombardini...
I've had a stab at this subject myself: http://thesavagebreast.blogspot.com/ (http://thesavagebreast.blogspot.com/)
Hey! Let's talk HIP SQs!
I haven't bought one since we were going hot'n'heavy last year; was recently listening to the Albrectsberger (Hungaroton) and JM Kraus (this stuff is really nice).
Since then, there is another Albrectsberger cd on Hungaroton (Authentic Quartet, again). This one, however, has lots of short Preludes&Fugues, and not the more substantial four mvmt Haydn-type that graced the earlier cd.
I can't speak to HIPness, I'm afraid. Haydn drew me to the form and I went looking for anything in a SQ that promised to be "what he said", like his. I was disappointed, intrigued and challenged by how hard it is to find 18c SQs, thought there'd be scads of them, but there aren't.
My ear channels them into 2 broad categories:
1. Wiener, sophisticated and ambitious, given to a certain edginess - whoever isn't in category 2.
2. Francais, decorative, satisfied to be pretty - Haydn prior to opus 9, Gossec, Gretry, Zimmerman, Rigel, Boccherini (as a rule), Boulogne, Lombardini, Rosetti, Hoffmeister. (And I refuse to denigrate these - nothing wrong with pretty.)
No grand claims here, these are my impressions.
The Titz set on Profil is outstanding, and HIP I believe. Other standouts are Eybler on Analekta and Wolfl on Caro Mitis.
Recommendations illustrated:
(http://content.answcdn.com/main/content/img/amg/classical_albums/cov200/cm300/m351/m35155buz0t.jpg)
(http://i43.tower.com/images/mm113720202/anton-ferdinand-titz-string-quartets-for-imperial-court-hoffmeister-quartet-cd-cover-art.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51CexAHKlTL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://cdn.classicsonline.com/images/cds/A29914.gif)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tL5cAJY_8Ag/S9iSq6I6YoI/AAAAAAAAAQ0/wlEZfG2m2Eg/s320/Wolfl+2.jpg)
Quote from: chasman on February 19, 2011, 03:39:02 AM
Recommendations illustrated:
(http://content.answcdn.com/main/content/img/amg/classical_albums/cov200/cm300/m351/m35155buz0t.jpg)
(http://i43.tower.com/images/mm113720202/anton-ferdinand-titz-string-quartets-for-imperial-court-hoffmeister-quartet-cd-cover-art.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51CexAHKlTL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://cdn.classicsonline.com/images/cds/A29914.gif)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tL5cAJY_8Ag/S9iSq6I6YoI/AAAAAAAAAQ0/wlEZfG2m2Eg/s320/Wolfl+2.jpg)
I have the Eybler. It may be the single best pre-1800 SQ disc out there, IMHO. The minor key SQ seems to prefigure the 'witch's meneut' of Haydn's 'Fifths' SQ. In another place, Eybler coaxes out what sounds like Irish Music. Albrechtsberger said Eybler was the Greatest Genius next to Mozard.
Quote from: chasman on February 19, 2011, 03:23:17 AM
I can't speak to HIPness, I'm afraid. Haydn drew me to the form and I went looking for anything in a SQ that promised to be "what he said", like his. I was disappointed, intrigued and challenged by how hard it is to find 18c SQs, thought there'd be scads of them, but there aren't.
My ear channels them into 2 broad categories:
1. Wiener, sophisticated and ambitious, given to a certain edginess - whoever isn't in category 2.
2. Francais, decorative, satisfied to be pretty - Haydn prior to opus 9, Gossec, Gretry, Zimmerman, Rigel, Boccherini (as a rule), Boulogne, Lombardini, Rosetti, Hoffmeister. (And I refuse to denigrate these - nothing wrong with pretty.)
No grand claims here, these are my impressions.
The Titz set on Profil is outstanding, and HIP I believe. Other standouts are Eybler on Analekta and Wolfl on Caro Mitis.
btw- a couple of new names to look up. Thanks! ;)
Zimmerman:
(http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/t_200/naxos8553952.jpg)
Rigel:
(http://image.allmusic.com/00/acg/cov200/cm200/m202/m20227lkpnl.jpg)
Lombardini-Sirmen, a real actual woman:
(http://www.calarecords.com/us/acatalog/l_CACD1019.jpg)
bump
The 6 quartets by Richter ( + a 7th) have been recorded a few years ago by the Casal Quartett (not to be confused with the Cuatuor Casals). (The Rincontro disc on Alpha with the first 3 remained alone).
They put the dubious 1757 on the Cover and titled the set "Genesis". The problem is that the 1757 is a dubious date based on a single recollection of Dittersdorf (or some other guy). The pieces were published around 1768 and it was not that common to publish so long after the composition. In any case, Richter's works are considerably more elaborate than Haydn's opp. 1+2 divertimenti. They are probably also less violin-dominated and more polyphonic than most of Haydn's op. 9+17 (but I'd say the latter are more "modern" and adventurous in other ways). After all Richter was a generation older than Haydn and well known for his polyphonic skills, so it is only to be expected that Richter's music has more "learned" passages.
It is a worthwhile set, I'd say.
More high classical and mostly "lighter" but also worth the modest price are 3 quartets by Hoffmeister (played on modern instruments) by a youngish Israeli quartet
[asin]B00IO56TSU[/asin] [asin]B0000BX5KE[/asin]
Quote from: Jo498 on July 28, 2017, 01:13:00 PM
The 6 quartets by Richter ( + a 7th) have been recorded a few years ago by the Casal Quartett (not to be confused with the Cuatuor Casals). (The Rincontro disc on Alpha with the first 3 remained alone).
They put the dubious 1757 on the Cover and titled the set "Genesis". The problem is that the 1757 is a dubious date based on a single recollection of Dittersdorf (or some other guy). The pieces were published around 1768 and it was not that common to publish so long after the composition. In any case, Richter's works are considerably more elaborate than Haydn's opp. 1+2 divertimenti. They are probably also less violin-dominated and more polyphonic than most of Haydn's op. 9+17 (but I'd say the latter are more "modern" and adventurous in other ways). After all Richter was a generation older than Haydn and well known for his polyphonic skills, so it is only to be expected that Richter's music has more "learned" passages.
It is a worthwhile set, I'd say.
More high classical and mostly "lighter" but also worth the modest price are 3 quartets by Hoffmeister (played on modern instruments) by a youngish Israeli quartet
[asin]B00IO56TSU[/asin] [asin]B0000BX5KE[/asin]
Ah, a Richter follow up disc, I'll have to check! thx