GMG Classical Music Forum

I voted for piano quintet. This combination can produce a full-bodied, almost orchestral sound and, in many cases, can become the equivalent of a piano concerto with reduced orchestration. There's also countless great works written for this combination (see my post in the "Top 10 Quintets" thread).

Accordion, cello, saxophone and mandolin.

I don't know of any pieces written for that particular combination, but it would certainly sound pretty cool! :P

Those 88 keys, baby.

Double bass has to be grouped with the viola?  I am so offended :P 

I like String Quartet the best

Quote from: amw on October 06, 2013, 02:51:25 PM
Accordion, cello, saxophone and mandolin.

I don't know of any pieces written for that particular combination, but it would certainly sound pretty cool! :P

Someone should ask Karl (karlhenning), GMG's composer-in-residence, to compose a piece for that combination! A little folk music here, a little jazz there, and with some classical underpinnings....that would be awesome! 8)

Quote from: PaulR on October 06, 2013, 02:54:39 PM
Double bass has to be grouped with the viola?  I am so offended :P 

Isn't it always? After all, they're the two oddballs of the string family. :P

just because the bass is from a different family, has two different standard tunings, two different bows doesn't make us oddballs  :'(

I'll say string quartets.  However, I really love the combination of the string trio (violin, viola and cello), and wish there were a lot more compositions written for that combination.  Seems to force the composer to give more of an equal voice to the viola and cello.

Quote from: PaulR on October 06, 2013, 02:59:27 PM
just because the bass is from a different family, has two different standard tunings, two different bows doesn't make us oddballs  :'(

Don't cry, Paul. You're a bassist, after all! 8)

String Quartet. Don't think there is any need to clarify.

Quote from: kyjo on October 06, 2013, 02:41:38 PM
I voted for piano quintet. This combination can produce a full-bodied, almost orchestral sound....

That's why I'll take it down by 2 and vote for the piano trio.

Quote from: kyjo on October 06, 2013, 02:41:38 PM
I voted for piano quintet. This combination can produce a full-bodied, almost orchestral sound and, in many cases, can become the equivalent of a piano concerto with reduced orchestration.

Same vote here and for the same reason.

I went violin and piano.

String Quartet.

For me, piano quintet.

For my wife Vanessa, piano quartet.

For Kimi, violin and piano.

Piano Trio, but wind ensembles are at the top as well in any grouping.

It really depends. Just for the sake of this poll, I'm going to vote for Piano Quintet, but I love so many combinations with piano. One of my favorite chamber works is Schnittke's Hymns and it uses such an unusual lineup: bassoon, cello, double bass, harp, harpsichord, timpani, and tubular bells. Another favorite work by Martinu called Chamber Music No. 1 uses clarinet, violin, viola, cello, harp & piano, which is a lovely combination.

I was split between string quartet and piano quintet.  I like the sound of the latter better, but the great artistic statement that the composer has to make is usually made in the string quartet, so that is where I cast my vote.

Please, don't laugh at this question:  Are there any 'string quartets' for violin, viola, cello and double bass?

Is there such a thing, would it work?  :blank:

Or string quartet for 2 double basses, 1 cello and viola.  That would be so deep....but weird.  ;D

Quote from: ChamberNut on October 07, 2013, 04:18:51 AM
Please, don't laugh at this question:  Are there any 'string quartets' for violin, viola, cello and double bass?

Is there such a thing, would it work?  :blank:

There are the Hoffmeister Double Bass Quartets, 4 of them I think.

Quote from: ChamberNut on October 07, 2013, 04:18:51 AM
Please, don't laugh at this question:  Are there any 'string quartets' for violin, viola, cello and double bass?

Is there such a thing, would it work?  :blank:

From wikipedia:

QuoteSince there is no established instrumental ensemble that includes the double bass, its use in chamber music has not been as exhaustive as the literature for ensembles such as the string quartet or piano trio. Despite this, there is a substantial number of chamber works that incorporate the double bass in both small and large ensembles.

There is a small body of works written for piano quintet with the instrumentation of piano, violin, viola, cello, and double bass. The most famous is Franz Schubert's Piano Quintet in A major, known as "The Trout Quintet" for its set of variations in the fourth movement of Schubert's Die Forelle. Other works for this instrumentation written from roughly the same period include those by Johann Nepomuk Hummel, George Onslow, Jan Ladislav Dussek, Louise Farrenc, Ferdinand Ries, Franz Limmer, Johann Baptist Cramer, and Hermann Goetz. Later composers who wrote chamber works for this quintet include Ralph Vaughan Williams, Colin Matthews, Jon Deak, Frank Proto, and John Woolrich. Slightly larger sextets written for piano, string quartet, and double bass have been written by Felix Mendelssohn, Mikhail Glinka, Richard Wernick, and Charles Ives.

In the genre of string quintets, there are a few works for string quartet with double bass. Antonín Dvořák's String Quintet in G major, Op.77 and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Serenade in G major, K.525 ("Eine kleine Nachtmusik") are the most popular pieces in this repertoire, along with works by Darius Milhaud, Luigi Boccherini (3 quintets), Harold Shapero, and Paul Hindemith.

Slightly smaller string works with the double bass include six string sonatas by Gioachino Rossini, for two violins, cello, and double bass written at the age of twelve over the course of three days in 1804. These remain his most famous instrumental works and have also been adapted for wind quartet. Franz Anton Hoffmeister wrote four String Quartets for Solo Double Bass, Violin, Viola, and Cello in D Major. Frank Proto has written a Trio for Violin, Viola and Double Bass (1974), 2 Duos for Violin and Double Bass (1967 and 2005), and The Games of October for Oboe/English Horn and Double Bass (1991).

Larger works that incorporate the double bass include Beethoven's Septet in E-flat major, Op.20, one of his most famous pieces during his lifetime, which consists of clarinet, horn, bassoon, violin, viola, cello, and bass. When the clarinetist Ferdinand Troyer commissioned a work from Franz Schubert for similar forces, he added one more violin for his Octet in F major, D.803. Paul Hindemith used the same instrumentation as Schubert for his own Octet. In the realm of even larger works, Mozart included the double bass in addition to 12 wind instruments for his "Gran Partita" Serenade, K.361 and Martinů used the double bass in his nonet for wind quintet, violin, viola, cello and double bass.

Other examples of chamber works that use the double bass in mixed ensembles include Serge Prokofiev's Quintet in G minor, Op.39 for oboe, clarinet, violin, viola, and double bass; Erwin Schulhoff's Concertino for flute/piccolo, viola, and double bass; Frank Proto's Afro-American Fragments for bass clarinet, cello, double bass and narrator and Sextet for clarinet and strings; Fred Lerdahl's Waltzes for violin, viola, cello, and double bass; Mohammed Fairouz's Litany for double bass and wind quartet; Mario Davidovsky's Festino for guitar, viola, cello, and double bass; and Iannis Xenakis's Morsima-Amorsima for piano, violin, cello, and double bass. There are also new music ensembles that utilize the double bass such as Time for Three and PROJECT Trio.

Quote from: DavidW on October 07, 2013, 04:16:36 AM
I was split between string quartet and piano quintet.  I like the sound of the latter better, but the great artistic statement that the composer has to make is usually made in the string quartet, so that is where I cast my vote.

David, this isn't about which form is the "greatest", this is about which is your favorite. You should've voted for piano quintet, since you like the sound of it better!

Violin and Piano.  That old goat Brahms was good at that sort of thing.   :blank:

Hey, maybe it just is flute and clarinet . . . .

Quote from: kyjo on October 07, 2013, 11:00:15 AM
. . . You should've voted for piano quintet, since you like the sound of it better!

Maybe there are other things he likes better about the SQ  :)

Quote from: Batty on October 06, 2013, 06:18:47 PM
I went violin and piano.

+ 1.

Violin is heart-on-sleeve in a popular, democratic manner......

Piano is heart-on-sleeve in an aristocratic, elitist manner...

Put them together: dynamite!

Quote from: Florestan on October 07, 2013, 11:13:49 AM
+ 1.

Violin is heart-on-sleeve in a popular, democratic manner......

Piano is heart-on-sleeve in an aristocratic, elitist manner...

You've totally lost me with these comments...

Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 07, 2013, 11:15:33 AM
You've totally lost me with these comments...

Violin is sentimentally sentimental, piano is sentimentally cerebral: Paganini vs Beethoven; Tchaikovsky's VC  vs Schumann's PC  --- does it make more sense to you now?  :D

Quote from: Scots John on October 07, 2013, 11:02:19 AM
Violin and Piano.

That is also my first choice, although any chamber combination that includes piano is fine by me. Cello and piano would be my second choice.

Quote from: Florestan on October 07, 2013, 11:13:49 AM
Violin is heart-on-sleeve in a popular, democratic manner......

Piano is heart-on-sleeve in an aristocratic, elitist manner...

Put them together: dynamite!

Nicely put.  8)

Quote from: Florestan on October 07, 2013, 11:35:04 AM
Violin is sentimentally sentimental, piano is sentimentally cerebral: Paganini vs Beethoven; Tchaikovsky's VC  vs Schumann's PC  --- does it make more sense to you now?  :D

Not really, but I'll take your word on it! :)

The violin is the the tenor in an opera, usually have more passion and sentiment than sense. The cello is like the fatherly baritone.

Well, too much stereotyping, but this reminds me of Russell's sketch: Now comes the tenor and, because he is a tenor, you know he has an abundance of passion and hardly any sense and essentially brainless...

Quote from: kyjo on October 07, 2013, 11:00:15 AM
David, this isn't about which form is the "greatest", this is about which is your favorite. You should've voted for piano quintet, since you like the sound of it better!

I stand by my vote.  Due to the greatness of the string quartets I've heard, I end up enjoying it more than the piano quintet despite liking the sound of the quintet better.

Quote from: karlhenning on October 07, 2013, 11:08:22 AM
Maybe there are other things he likes better about the SQ  :)

The harmony of the quartet, the role that each player has is as good as a rock band.  It's classic.   8)

Quote from: DavidW on October 07, 2013, 04:31:06 PM
The harmony of the quartet, the role that each player has is as good as a rock band.  It's classic.   8)

DavidW's features listening to Shostakovitch String Quartet no. 8 in C minor, opus 110

(http://blogs.elcomercio.com.pe/elclubdeloinsolito/22556X~KISS-Gene-Simmons-Posters.jpg)

:D ;)

Yes Shostakovich's 8th is so metal!! 8)

I like piano in chamber music. Piano quintet is my favorite formation. 

Quote from: DavidW on October 07, 2013, 04:16:36 AM
I was split between string quartet and piano quintet.

If we only had the option to vote for "banana" (banana split).

Quote from: DavidW on October 07, 2013, 04:16:36 AMI like the sound of the latter better, but the great artistic statement that the composer has to make is usually made in the string quartet, so that is where I cast my vote.

For me this "greatest artistic statements for string quartet" -assertion is an urban myth. Much more music is composed for string quartet than piano quintet so of course there are more string quartet masterpieces. This is because string quartets are common music groups which means better changes to get your music played.

Fauré and Elgar are two examples of piano quintet(s) showing greater artistic statement than string quartet.

Quote from: 71 dB on October 08, 2013, 07:43:17 AM
For me this "greatest artistic statements for string quartet" -assertion is an urban myth. Much more music is composed for string quartet than piano quintet so of course there are more string quartet masterpieces. This is because string quartets are common music groups which means better changes to get your music played. quartet.

One of the reasons this is no "urban myth," is that many of the composers who have left a significant string quartet legacy (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Dvorák, Bartók, Schoenberg, Martinu, Shostakovich, Carter, Wuorinen--too long and too significant a list to shake off as a "myth") worked in the genre over the course of long, fruitful careers. The series of quartets serve as something of a musical diary, reflecting a rich and ongoing journey.

But even apart from that general argument for the significance of the medium for each composer... Haydn's Der Greis, Mozart's Haydn quartets, Beethoven's "muß es sein?," the soprano in the Schoenberg second quartet, the mesto framework of the Bartók sixth quartet, the elegiac adagios of the Shostakovich fifteenth: claiming that these are not intentional artistic statements is not an opinion: it's delusional.

Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly enough. Of course string quartets are artistical statements, but so are piano quintets, piano trios (Haydn composed a lot of those too!) etc. I gave examples of two composer's whose piano quartets are better than string quartets.

Quote from: karlhenning on October 08, 2013, 10:26:16 AM
One of the reasons this is no "urban myth," is that many of the composers who have left a significant string quartet legacy (Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Dvorák, Bartók, Schoenberg, Martinu, Shostakovich, Carter, Wuorinen--too long and too significant a list to shake off as a "myth") worked in the genre over the course of long, fruitful careers. The series of quartets serve as something of a musical diary, reflecting a rich and ongoing journey.

But even apart from that general argument for the significance of the medium for each composer... Haydn's Der Greis, Mozart's Haydn quartets, Beethoven's "muß es sein?," the soprano in the Schoenberg second quartet, the mesto framework of the Bartók sixth quartet, the elegiac adagios of the Shostakovich fifteenth: claiming that these are not intentional artistic statements is not an opinion: it's delusional.

And then there are also Schubert's 14th & 15th, Brahms, Smetana, Sibelius, Debussy, Ravel, Janacek's two, Szymanowski's two, Berg, Dutilleux, for example. It's pretty obvious that no other chamber group has so much great music.

I'm still saying it's a myth. I don't think composers decided to create lesser music when they composed for other combinations than for string quartet. My opinion is that composers put a lot of effort down when composing say piano quintets.

I think adding a piano with string instruments expands timbral space so that the expression takes another "form" but nevertheless the average quality of the music is the same. For every piano quintet we have perhaps 20 string quartets, so of course there are 20 string quartet masterpieces for every piano quintet masterpiece!

Beethoven, Mozart and Haydn all wrote tons of string quartets but none of them wrote "real" piano quintets for string quartet and piano. Boccherini wrote several piano quintets before 1800 but it wasn't until the 19th century and romantism when that chamber combination became popular. So, if our perspective is limited to the second half of the 18th century and early 19th century then yes, string quartet rules over other combinations, together with piano trio that is...  :P

Well, every "standard" chamber combination is different, and has to be handled differently.

String quartets have the most history, and there are a lot of string quartets around, so you have a better chance of getting a string quartet played. It's also a pretty well balanced ensemble, one that neither has too many instruments to pick out the individual lines nor too few to make it difficult to employ traditional harmony or contrasts of texture. String quartets are, I think, not that hard to write, apart from the psychological weight upon every composer from Brahms onwards (as a result, string quartets often tend to be very serious). String quintets are basically amplified quartets, with corn syrup added; I like the two cellos version the most, since that way you can have at least one cello playing in its brightest, A-string register for the whole piece ;) String sextets have an autumnal warmth brought on by the soft carpet of middle- to lower-register instruments and are probably my favourite of the standard chamber combinations. String trios, by contrast, are hard to write and even harder to not have all three instruments playing for the whole time. They present an interesting challenge and one I recommend to all aspiring composers.

Piano trios are weirdly balanced, a relic of instruments and social situations that don't exist anymore. The original piano trio was an amplified piano—the weaker pianos of the day improved from having their bass note doubled by a cello and the accompaniment of a violin, and did not overpower the stringed instruments, as they do on modern instruments a good deal of the time. As well, the combination was well suited to domestic music making, which hardly anyone does anymore. The piano quintet emerged as pianos became louder and more powerful, with the increased string complement there to balance out the keyboard, but they do scarcely better on modern instruments, and often create somewhat orchestral timbres that rather defeat the point of chamber music. Piano quintets are probably easier to write than trios or quartets however (a piano sextet, adding double bass, would also be fun to write for, though I don't think it's ever caught on)—the piano quartet, red-headed middle stepchild of the piano chamber music family, in particular can be a singularly awkward ensemble to handle, though you'd never know it from listening to Fauré or Mozart.

Wind quintets (the only really standard wind combination) are a strange hybrid sort of beast, trying to get four different families of instruments to work together—most of them never seem to gel that well, though there's lovely music for the combination it's almost always under 20 minutes. Brass quintets I've never warmed to, or brass chamber music in general, or music for brass band, etc, etc. Similarly, I've never liked saxophone quartets (quintets, trios, etc) that much, though there are a few pieces I'll make exceptions for. Works for solo instrument and piano aren't really chamber music, they're violin/tuba/didjeridu etc music, at least in the libraries I've been to :P

Quote from: amw on October 13, 2013, 01:48:26 AM
Piano trios are weirdly balanced, a relic of instruments and social situations that don't exist anymore.

One can say exactly the same thing about the whole output of Bach, Mozart and Haydn --- but I fail to see any relevance for the actual quality, or enjoyment, of their music; the same goes for piano trios.  ???

Quote from: Florestan on October 13, 2013, 06:50:19 AM
One can say exactly the same thing about the whole output of Bach, Mozart and Haydn --- but I fail to see any relevance for the actual quality, or enjoyment, of their music; the same goes for piano trios.  ???

+1 !

It is almost suggestive that the piano trio be replaced by electric guitar, electric bass guitar, and drums?!  ::)

Quote from: ChamberNut on October 13, 2013, 06:55:10 AM
+1 !

It is almost suggestive that the piano trio be replaced by electric guitar, electric bass guitar, and drums?!  ::)

Yeah, who cares about a relic of instruments and social situations that don't exist anymore when we have rock music!  ::)

amw's post about string instrument combinations without piano or wind instruments is good and thoughful thou.

Quote from: amw on October 13, 2013, 01:48:26 AM
Well, every "standard" chamber combination is different, and has to be handled differently.

String quartets have the most history, and there are a lot of string quartets around, so you have a better chance of getting a string quartet played. It's also a pretty well balanced ensemble, one that neither has too many instruments to pick out the individual lines nor too few to make it difficult to employ traditional harmony or contrasts of texture. String quartets are, I think, not that hard to write, apart from the psychological weight upon every composer from Brahms onwards (as a result, string quartets often tend to be very serious). String quintets are basically amplified quartets, with corn syrup added; I like the two cellos version the most, since that way you can have at least one cello playing in its brightest, A-string register for the whole piece ;) String sextets have an autumnal warmth brought on by the soft carpet of middle- to lower-register instruments and are probably my favourite of the standard chamber combinations. String trios, by contrast, are hard to write and even harder to not have all three instruments playing for the whole time. They present an interesting challenge and one I recommend to all aspiring composers.

Piano trios are weirdly balanced, a relic of instruments and social situations that don't exist anymore. The original piano trio was an amplified piano—the weaker pianos of the day improved from having their bass note doubled by a cello and the accompaniment of a violin, and did not overpower the stringed instruments, as they do on modern instruments a good deal of the time. As well, the combination was well suited to domestic music making, which hardly anyone does anymore. The piano quintet emerged as pianos became louder and more powerful, with the increased string complement there to balance out the keyboard, but they do scarcely better on modern instruments, and often create somewhat orchestral timbres that rather defeat the point of chamber music. Piano quintets are probably easier to write than trios or quartets however (a piano sextet, adding double bass, would also be fun to write for, though I don't think it's ever caught on)—the piano quartet, red-headed middle stepchild of the piano chamber music family, in particular can be a singularly awkward ensemble to handle, though you'd never know it from listening to Fauré or Mozart.

Wind quintets (the only really standard wind combination) are a strange hybrid sort of beast, trying to get four different families of instruments to work together—most of them never seem to gel that well, though there's lovely music for the combination it's almost always under 20 minutes. Brass quintets I've never warmed to, or brass chamber music in general, or music for brass band, etc, etc. Similarly, I've never liked saxophone quartets (quintets, trios, etc) that much, though there are a few pieces I'll make exceptions for. Works for solo instrument and piano aren't really chamber music, they're violin/tuba/didjeridu etc music, at least in the libraries I've been to :P

I struggled in vain to find a single insightful comment in this, whatever it is you have typed in.  :(

Well if we ever wanted strange descriptions of chamber ensembles by quirky metaphors, we have it. :D

Quote from: 71 dB on October 13, 2013, 12:32:31 AM
I'm still saying it's a myth.

No one but yourself can stop yourself from saying anything foolish.

Quote from: Scarpia on October 13, 2013, 07:17:43 AM
I struggled in vain to find a single insightful comment in this, whatever it is you have typed in.  :(

Yes, it's pretty rambly and incoherent isn't it? I may need to restrain myself from posting anything over a couple of lines after 11 PM  :|

I'm having a hard time deciphering exactly what I was trying to say last night, but it's something to do with challenges faced by composers trying to write for certain combinations nowadays, and performers trying to play works written for such combinations in the past... or... something like that. There's lots of great music for piano trio that's well worth playing, but it's not easy to play without running into balance issues (or period performance issues), nor is it necessarily an easy ensemble to write for. If that makes any sense.

Probably any mixed ensemble has such challenges. Of course, composers and performers routinely rise to those challenges

Quote from: karlhenning on October 13, 2013, 06:25:12 PM
No one but yourself can stop yourself from saying anything foolish.

That's right! Some 500 years ago heretics
were silenced by the church for
talking about foolish things like

    "Earth circulates Sun."

Today, the church doesn't have such
power over people

(I don't even belong to the church)

so as you say, no one but myself can stop
myself from saying anything foolish.

...

Religion is something totally irrelevant to this matter.
It should tell you something that Beethoven was afraid of writing string quartets because of the efforts of Haydn and Mozart in the genre, and wrote piano trios, string trios & quintets, cello sonatas, violin sonatasm wind quintets, and piano concertos before publishing his Op. 18 SQ's. The stature of the medium as pretty much the ultimate challenge hasn't diminished after Beethoven wrote his string quartets, either.

That obviously doesn't mean that there aren't great pieces written for other chamber groups, or that a select small number of 'best' chamber works would automatically be just string quartets.
But all those composers listed, after Haydn (and Papa himself, too, after Mozart's quartets) composers have put in extra effort to their works in this medium, and possibly composed only a single work in the medium.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! ;D

(http://shirtoid.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/spanish_inquisition.jpg)

Little did 71 dB know what he was getting into...

Quote from: karlhenning on October 13, 2013, 07:25:09 PM
Probably any mixed ensemble has such challenges. Of course, composers and performers routinely rise to those challenges.

Consider these combinations:

Opus 100 — Angular Whimsies (Heavy Paint Manipulation). Bass clarinet & percussion (vibraphone, bongos).


Opus 98 — Lunar Glare. Clarinet & harpsichord.

Opus 97 — Three for Two. Flute & clarinet.

Opus 97a — Heedless Watermelon. (2009) Viola & violoncello.

Opus 96 — It's all in your head (not that that's a bad place for everything to be). Cello ensemble in four parts.

Opus 95 — stars & guitars.  Bass flute & harp.

Quote from: North Star on October 14, 2013, 07:46:33 AM
...

Religion is something totally irrelevant to this matter.
It should tell you something that Beethoven was afraid of writing string quartets because of the efforts of Haydn and Mozart in the genre, and wrote piano trios, string trios & quintets, cello sonatas, violin sonatasm wind quintets, and piano concertos before publishing his Op. 18 SQ's. The stature of the medium as pretty much the ultimate challenge hasn't diminished after Beethoven wrote his string quartets, either.

That obviously doesn't mean that there aren't great pieces written for other chamber groups, or that a select small number of 'best' chamber works would automatically be just string quartets.
But all those composers listed, after Haydn (and Papa himself, too, after Mozart's quartets) composers have put in extra effort to their works in this medium, and possibly composed only a single work in the medium.

Greetings, fellow myth-monger!  ;D

Quote from: karlhenning on October 14, 2013, 01:15:30 PM
Greetings, fellow myth-monger!  ;D

Here be dragons

In chamber music I especially love the combinations comprising piano; I think I will vote for Piano and Violin.

  It seems I'm the solitary vote for the wind quintet!

  In general, I have a preference for contrasting tone colors versus homogenous "choirs": Debussy's harp trio ( flute - viola - harp ); Brahm's horn trio ( piano - violin - horn ); numerous 20th century arrangements, versus string quartets, brass quintets, even saxophone quartets ( though I love them ).

  The wind quintet is an ungainly combo, but it forces the composer to be very considerate of the balance and tone color of the mix, or write bad music. Choirs are innately more forgiving.

Quote from: Fagotterdämmerung on December 16, 2014, 04:47:34 PM
  It seems I'm the solitary vote for the wind quintet!

  In general, I have a preference for contrasting tone colors versus homogenous "choirs": Debussy's harp trio ( flute - viola - harp ); Brahm's horn trio ( piano - violin - horn ); numerous 20th century arrangements, versus string quartets, brass quintets, even saxophone quartets ( though I love them ).

  The wind quintet is an ungainly combo, but it forces the composer to be very considerate of the balance and tone color of the mix, or write bad music. Choirs are innately more forgiving.

Well, it was a difficult question to have just one answer for!

I love wind music. For me, a wind quintet is like the music of Reicha or Danzi: Flute, Oboe, Clarinet, Horn & Bassoon. However, what you are talking about, which I don't even know how to call properly, is also music of which I am tremendously fond. That is; a solo wind instrument in ensemble with a string trio or quartet. They were huge in the Classic Era, but only relics in the Romantic, with examples like the Brahms Horn Trio and a few others. Also, the Romantics pretty well went to the piano, which the Classicists refrained from (except the ever-venturesome Mozart, of course). Overall, the choices were difficult... :-\

8)

 
  The Reicha quintets are delightful! Those are the type of quintets I had in mind.

  Though I'm not much of a fan of the Classical era musically, I actually quite enjoy the place woodwinds occupied in it i.e. lots of nice chamber ensembles for winds, or winds and strings; concertos for each of the main wind instruments, etc. A solo woodwind with string quartet or trio is quite nice as well, and seems to be making something of a resurgence lately. In general, I'm more fond of the Classical ( and early Romantic - Spohr, Mendelssohn, Weber, etc. ) approach to woodwind writing; they're often a little swamped by the bloated brass of the later Romantic orchestras, not always getting the limelight in the same way.





 

 

Clarinet and almost anything . . . .

Quote from: karlhenning on December 17, 2014, 04:27:57 AM
Clarinet and almost anything . . . .

Sz. 111!!!!! ;D 8)

Wind quintet.  But I beg indulgence for extreme prejudice since I am a woodwind player. :)

Quote from: karlhenning on December 17, 2014, 04:27:57 AM
Clarinet and almost anything . . . .

Inclusive of Birtwistle's work for clarinet and mime?  0:)

One did say almost.  On this in particular, I have not formed an opinion . . .   0:)

Quote from: jochanaan on December 17, 2014, 06:53:56 AM
Wind quintet.  But I beg indulgence for extreme prejudice since I am a woodwind player. :)

And so say (and am) I.

Quote from: karlhenning on December 17, 2014, 04:27:57 AM
Clarinet and almost anything . . . .

Clarinet and Sousaphone?  :D

Maybe . . . .

Clarinet and kazoo?

Quote from: EigenUser on December 17, 2014, 01:14:23 PM
Clarinet and kazoo?

If I make the acquaintance of a kazoo player, I'll make the combination work!