12 great string quartets????

Started by Fëanor, October 28, 2007, 10:39:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dancing Divertimentian

Quote from: just Jeff on June 21, 2010, 01:34:23 AM
BELA BARTOK (1881-1945)
The String Quartets No. 1-6 - Vegh Quartet
TELEFUNKEN 6.35023 Teldec 1972 "Grand Prix du disque"


is still not out on CD to the best I know.  How odd that a top rated recording would fall between the cracks like this.  An older Vegh recording in Mono has appeared, but the stereo recordings are MIA on CD.  I may have to do my own CDs from vinyl, unless anyone can confirm a CD set somewhere.

Here it is on CD, reissued by Naïve:




And yes, quite a nice set!
Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

just Jeff

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on June 28, 2010, 05:41:53 PM
Here it is on CD, reissued by Naïve:




And yes, quite a nice set!

Thanks Dancing Div,  this info is important to me to know.  I guess everything comes out again on CD eventually, even if it comes out way late in the game.  With the sad decline of the CD market, it is making labels dig in harder to find things that have not yet been milked dry in the format already.
20th Century Music - Ecrater Storefront:
http://20thcenturymusic.ecrater.com/

laredo

Quote from: Valentino on December 03, 2009, 12:40:55 PM
Beethoven op. 95. Can't get enough of it. Hagen Quartett is the obvious choice.

Shares disk with D. 887. A cracker.

Fantastic. op. Beethoven's 95 is one of my fav too.

Taneyev

My 12 favorites SQ:
LvB 13Th.
Borodin 1 and 2
Tchaikovsky first
Franck
Ravel
Magnard
Shosta.8Th.
Brahms third
Taneyev 1 and 2
Glazunov third

Fëanor

#104
Well after all this time, it's about time that I revise my list just a little bit, see below.  (The list is in order of composition date, not my preference.)

I'm sure pretty much everyone will agree that one's preferences shift over time because of expanded experience and change of interest.  However I think the modest number of changes I've made indicates the robustness of my orignal choices -- at least that's the way I like to think of it.

       
  • Mozart: No.19, K.465 "Dissonance" (1785)
  • Haydn: No.62, Op.76/3 "Emperor" (1796)
  • Beethoven: No.7, Op.59/1 "Rasumovsky" (1806)
  • Schubert: No.14, D.810 "Death and the Maiden" (1824)
  • Beethoven: No.14, Op.131 (1826)
  • Borodin: No.2 (1881)
  • Dvorak: No.6, Op.12 "American" (1893)
  • Janácek: No.1 "Kruetzer Sonata" (1923)
  • Szymanowski: String Quartet No. 2, Op. 56, M64 (1927)
  • Bartók: No.4 (1928)
  • Carter: No.2 (1959)
  • Shostakovich: No.8, Op.110 (1960)
  • Shostakovich: String Quartet No.7, Op. 108 (1960)
  • Alwyn: No.2 "Spring Waters" (1975)

DavidRoss

op 59 to 135, plus "Death and the Maiden" and Debussy's quartet.
"Maybe the problem most of you have ... is that you're not listening to Barbirolli." ~Sarge

"The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money." ~Margaret Thatcher

Fëanor

Quote from: Feanor on January 08, 2011, 05:53:20 AM
Well after all this time, it's about time that I revise my list just a little bit, see below.  (The list is in order of composition date, not my preference.)
...

       
  • Mozart: No.19, K.465 "Dissonance" (1785)
  • Haydn: No.62, Op.76/3 "Emperor" (1796)
  • Beethoven: No.7, Op.59/1 "Rasumovsky" (1806)
  • Schubert: No.14, D.810 "Death and the Maiden" (1824)
  • Beethoven: No.14, Op.131 (1826)
  • Borodin: No.2 (1881)
  • Dvorak: No.6, Op.12 "American" (1893)
  • Janácek: No.1 "Kruetzer Sonata" (1923)
  • Szymanowski: String Quartet No. 2, Op. 56, M64 (1927)
  • Bartók: No.4 (1928)
  • Carter: No.2 (1959)
  • Shostakovich: String Quartet No.7, Op. 108 (1960)

Well now, if my original request had been for 15 quartets, my list would include in addition...

       
  • Debussy: String Quartet, Op.10 (1883)
  • Ravel: String Quartet in F major (1903)
  • Shostakovich: String Quartet No.8, Op. 110 (1960)
As it is, the Debussy and Ravel are really close vs. the Haydn and Mozart.

abidoful

I don't know the Mozart, Brahms, Shostakovich or Bartok Quartets--so please note that while going through my list :)
- Beethoven:  The Harp, Eflat (op.127), c sharp minor, a-minor (op132)
- Schubert: G-Major (the big one), The Death and the Maiden
- Mendelssohn: a-minor
- Tsaikovski: The Third (in e-flat minor)
- Franck
- Grieg
- Sibelius
- Schönberg: the First (in d-minor, op.7)

Fëanor

Quote from: abidoful on January 09, 2011, 07:53:24 AM
I don't know the Mozart, Brahms, Shostakovich or Bartok Quartets--so please note that while going through my list :)
- Beethoven:  The Harp, Eflat (op.127), c sharp minor, a-minor (op132)
- Schubert: G-Major (the big one), The Death and the Maiden
- Mendelssohn: a-minor
- Tsaikovski: The Third (in e-flat minor)
- Franck
- Grieg
- Sibelius
- Schönberg: the First (in d-minor, op.7)

IMHO, some familiarity with Bartok's and Shostakovich's quartets are indispensible, even if none make it to your final list.

It would be impossible to dispute any of Beethoven's late quartets being on a person's list.  Personally, I chose Op.131 as representative; (reputedly Beethoven's own favorite too).

I'll have to check out the Tchaikovsky's 3rd; I don't have a copy and don't recall ever having heard it.


abidoful

Quote from: Feanor on January 09, 2011, 08:16:30 AM

IMHO, some familiarity with Bartok's and Shostakovich's quartets are indispensible, even if none make it to your final list.

It would be impossible to dispute any of Beethoven's late quartets being on a person's list.  Personally, I chose Op.131 as representative; (reputedly Beethoven's own favorite too).

I'll have to check out the Tchaikovsky's 3rd; I don't have a copy and don't recall ever having heard it.
I have heard some quartets of Bartok (the first) and Shostakovich (can't remember which) but yeah, i know- it's a great gap not to know them.
I really like the Tsaikovski Quartets, and The third is a big Quartet, first movement lasting about 17 minutes and there is IMO a profound slow movement, a funeral march in e-flat minor with a wonderful, absolutely GORGEOUS trio. A soaring melody in G flat. Try the version by the Borodin Quartet. It is a complete recording consisting all the Quartets + the Sextet.

laredo

My favourite string quartet:
Grosse Fuge op. 133
Beethoven op. 131
Beethoven op. 132
Beethoven op. 130
Beethoven op. 127
Beethoven op. 95
Mozart k 387
Mozart k 421
Mozart k 428
Mozart k 464
Beethoven op. 18 n. 2
Schubert D 889

What is certain is that op. 95 by Ludwig van is a Masterpiece.

laredo

Quote from: laredo on January 10, 2011, 04:44:45 AM
My favourite string quartet:
Grosse Fuge op. 133
Beethoven op. 131
Beethoven op. 132
Beethoven op. 130
Beethoven op. 127
Beethoven op. 95
Mozart k 387
Mozart k 421
Mozart k 428
Mozart k 464
Beethoven op. 18 n. 2
Schubert D 889 ops...the Rosamunde quartet is slightly better
....
What is certain is that op. 95 by Ludwig van is a Masterpiece.

Fëanor

Quote from: laredo on January 10, 2011, 04:44:45 AM
My favourite string quartet:
Grosse Fuge op. 133
Beethoven op. 131
Beethoven op. 132
Beethoven op. 130
Beethoven op. 127
Beethoven op. 95
Mozart k 387
Mozart k 421
Mozart k 428
Mozart k 464
Beethoven op. 18 n. 2
Schubert D 889

What is certain is that op. 95 by Ludwig van is a Masterpiece.

What is there to say?  When I proposed that folks nominate 12 great quartets, I meant "great" in the sense of highly listenable, enjoyable, and providing good variety with in the subgenre.  Personally I'm not a musician or musically trained so it would be very presumptuous of me nominate for greatness in terms of the art of composition.

So you can be sure I won't debate the greatness of any of Beethoven mid or late quartets -- well with the exception of Grosse Fuge which has always mistified me, (and which I would put well below, say, Elliott Carter's No. 3, and many, many others in terms of my own interest or enjoyment).

So I would not weight Beethoven so heavily that even his great works would occupy six or more of a top dozen "great" in the sense I meant it.  And as for four Mozart, so much the less so.

Bulldog

Quote from: Feanor on January 10, 2011, 07:33:31 AM
What is there to say?  When I proposed that folks nominate 12 great quartets, I meant "great" in the sense of highly listenable, enjoyable, and providing good variety with in the subgenre.   

But you said none of this in your opening post; all you said was "favorite".

Fëanor

Quote from: Bulldog on January 10, 2011, 08:10:34 AM
But you said none of this in your opening post; all you said was "favorite".

Right you are!  :)  So if you choose to submit a list, please feel free to use whatever criterion or criteria you choose.

Actually, I didn't then or do I now wish to restrict other people; I was only clarifying my personal selection bases.

abidoful

I made this list trying to choose Great String Quartets (that's why I didn't choose Beethoven op.95), presuming it meant a lengthy, big work with lot's of substance.
However, if this would be thread called 12 favourite String Quartets, my list would consist the following works;
- Beethoven: f-minor "Serioso" op.95, E-flat op127, a-minor op132
- Mendelssohn: nr.6 in f-minor
- Schumann: A-Major
- Tchaikowsky: nr.3 in e-flat minor
- Franck
- Faure
- Sibelius
- Melartin: nr.2 in g-minor
- Raitio
- Berg: op.3

Jaakko Keskinen

Difficult, difficult. I am going to say only 1 or 2 works/composer so I can name as many composers as possible. These are not in any particular order:

Beethoven: C sharp minor no.14 op.131
Beethoven: Grosse Fuge B-flat major op.133 (even though originally just finale of op.130, I still count this magnificent work as string quartet)
Mendelssohn: F minor no.6 op.80
Schubert: G major no.15 D887
Brahms: C minor no.1 op.51/1
Brahms: B flat major no.3 op.67
Sibelius: D minor no.4 op.56, also known by the nickname "Voces Intimae"
Dvorak: A flat major no.14 op. 105
Cesar Franck: D major
Verdi: E minor
Mozart: C major no.19 K465 "Dissonance"
Debussy: G minor op.10

"Javert, though frightful, had nothing ignoble about him. Probity, sincerity, candor, conviction, the sense of duty, are things which may become hideous when wrongly directed; but which, even when hideous, remain grand."

- Victor Hugo

abidoful

Quote from: Alberich on January 27, 2011, 03:10:25 AM
Sibelius: D minor no.4 op.56, also known by the nickname "Voces Intimae"
Voces Intimae is actually the  subtitle of op.56 rather than a nickname. And while he wrote 4 quartets in total, plus many other quartet movements, officially has only two. In addition to that one already mentioned,  the one in B-flat op.4. And Sibelius didn't number them. So he didn't talk of the op.56 as his "second (or "fourth") quartet, or the op.4 as his "first".

Fëanor

Quote from: Alberich on January 27, 2011, 03:10:25 AM
Difficult, difficult. I am going to say only 1 or 2 works/composer so I can name as many composers as possible. These are not in any particular order:

Beethoven: C sharp minor no.14 op.131
Beethoven: Grosse Fuge B-flat major op.133 (even though originally just finale of op.130, I still count this magnificent work as string quartet)
Mendelssohn: F minor no.6 op.80
Schubert: G major no.15 D887
Brahms: C minor no.1 op.51/1
Brahms: B flat major no.3 op.67
Sibelius: D minor no.4 op.56, also known by the nickname "Voces Intimae"
Dvorak: A flat major no.14 op. 105
Cesar Franck: D major
Verdi: E minor
Mozart: C major no.19 K465 "Dissonance"
Debussy: G minor op.10
Fine quartets all, but weighted to the Romantic; (not there's anything wrong with the Romanitic).

I also chose to keep it at most two per composer. For Beethoven I selected Op.131 and Op.59 "First Rasumovsky" -- the appeal of Grosse Fuge, Op.133, has always alluded me despite many listenings.

Fëanor

#119
Quote from: abidoful on January 10, 2011, 12:59:28 PM
I made this list trying to choose Great String Quartets (that's why I didn't choose Beethoven op.95), presuming it meant a lengthy, big work with lot's of substance.
...
I ought to have been clear in my OP.  But I think it's great that people should make their choices based on whatever criterion they like, but it is nice too if they stated the criterion.

Are "lengthy, big work with lot's of substance" necessary to greatness?  Is Beethoven's Op.95 too short and/or too lacking in substance, (just wondering)?