# Which Quartet do you Prefer?



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I like both of these. So no hidden agenda here (but you don't have to take my word for it). Just curious to the numbers and general demographic of taste. Simple poll this time, no need for any other options.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

That's a strange option; it's two completely different eras. Haydn was in the era where music was to appeal to the newly rising middle class, so the classical style features more clarity and balance, and it is easier to grasp. Ferneyhough is part of the "new complexity," so the two are coming from different directions. I don't think it is a good indicator of a group's sophistication/level of taste to present those two as the choice.

Personally, I think the Ferneyhough is interesting, but I'm partial to the Haydn quartets because I've studied them and had more exposure to them. I don't even need to listen to the video; I already know how it sounds. So I chose that just by default.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

The Haydn is very repetitive in the second movement, isn't it!


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> The Haydn is very repetitive in the second movement, isn't it!


Maybe, but I think that Haydn laddie shows promise. I would hazard a guess that loads of people will still be listening to his stuff hundreds of years after he composed it.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

wow I just increased Mr F's chances by 12%....


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Mandryka said:


> The Haydn is very repetitive in the second movement, isn't it!


I think you're being funny. But seriously, that is the problem with a theme and variations, especially in the Classical era: you can't really leave home and explore much outside of switching from major to minor; you're pretty much stuck with the structure of the theme you're given.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Manxfeeder said:


> I think you're being funny. But seriously, that is the problem with a theme and variations, especially in the Classical era: you can't really leave home and explore much outside of switching from major to minor; you're pretty much stuck with the structure of the theme you're given.


Yes but you can be quite imaginative with that theme -- think what Mozart does in K491/iii or maybe if you want a quartet K 421/iv

In that quartet, Haydn just repeats it _ad nausiam_ basically.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

Since Haydn is boring as hell to me, I have to pick Ferneyhough.

I'm not really a Ferneyhough fan, but is so much more interesting to me.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

The Haydn is delightful; the other quartet is irritating.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

I voted for Haydn, but had the poll offered any of other C20/21 string quartets (e.g. Carter, Dusapin, Meyer, Bartok, Shostakovich, Villa-Lobos, Wellesz, Krenek, Britten), Haydn would not have gotten my vote. I just don't happen to care for Ferneyhough.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Manxfeeder said:


> That's a strange option; it's two completely different eras. Haydn was in the era where music was to appeal to the newly rising middle class, so the classical style features more clarity and balance, and it is easier to grasp. Ferneyhough is part of the "new complexity," so the two are coming from different directions. I don't think it is a good indicator of a group's sophistication/level of taste to present those two as the choice.
> 
> Personally, I think the Ferneyhough is interesting, but I'm partial to the Haydn quartets because I've studied them and had more exposure to them. I don't even need to listen to the video; I already know how it sounds. So I chose that just by default.


If I chose a Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, or even Bartok quartet, something with more relative complexity and sophistication than purely charming, I could already guess the results. So I picked something relatively less sophisticated, but charming, versus something super-sophisticated (in my view, I know others may not see it that way).


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I don't particularly care for Ferneyhough. Had it been say Gubaidulina, I'd have voted for her. Now it's a no-brainer for Haydn.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

The Ferneyhough reminds me of a description my father used of 'four men trying to saw a fiddle in half!' The Haydn is real music. Terrific!


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I get no kind of enjoyment or interest from the Ferneyhough, I'm afraid.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

No Feldman no vote from me


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Odd that so many in this thread are naming random other modern and contemporary composers. This poll is not classical vs contemporary, it's a specific Haydn quartet vs a specific Ferneyhough quartet.

Haydn for me, though I found both enjoyable (obviously for completely different reasons).


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Haydn, although the Ferneyhough makes for some interesting reading.


----------



## SeptimalTritone (Jul 7, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> Yes but you can be quite imaginative with that theme -- think what Mozart does in K491/iii or maybe if you want a quartet K 421/iv
> 
> In that quartet, Haydn just repeats it _ad nausiam_ basically.


I feel like that movement is successful because it does _not_ vary the basic theme, but only varies and develops the other voices in counterpoint to it - and does it organically and convincingly! The charm is that the movement has the discipline to not vary the main theme, giving it a power and focus.

The issue for me with the Emperor quartet is that the finale is in the tonic minor, which strikes me as more unstable and marked than I would prefer in a classical finale. The usual transition in a minor key movement to the relative major (E flat) strikes me as "who ordered that?" because of the quartet's previous context of C major. Although the finale winds up resolving to the tonic major, the minor key movement feels a bit much. This also happens in the Sunrise quartet finale and possibly (?) other Haydn works, but I cannot say I fully agree. Maybe my ears are off.

I tend to prefer Ferneyhough's earlier works e.g. his Sonatas for String Quartet, Time and Motion Study II, or Lemma Icon Epigram, over this later quartet but still voted for the Ferneyhough.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Yes yes let's just talk about these works as if they're the same kind of music, because we're educated, right?


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

Slam dunk for Haydn. Ferneyhough is ugly, ridiculous _Augenmusik_.


----------



## EmperorOfIceCream (Jan 3, 2020)

I like a lot of music people consider avant garde, but you just can't take Ferneyhough seriously. If most people knew how he composes, he would just be laughed at. For his string trio, he just put a tone row in a computer, made thousands of permutations that are nearly impossible to play, added two small middle sections, and voila he was done.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

EmperorOfIceCream said:


> I like a lot of music people consider avant garde, but you just can't take Ferneyhough seriously. If most people knew how he composes, he would just be laughed at. For his string trio, he just put a tone row in a computer, made thousands of permutations that are nearly impossible to play, added two small middle sections, and voila he was done.


Not that simple. Here is a video. The computer is only doing the tedious work that could be done by hand. He has to put in very specific parameters for not only pitches, but rhythms. Saariaho, Murail, and Lindberg also use the software. The rhythms are done bar by bar, and for each instrument.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

mikeh375 said:


> wow I just increased Mr F's chances by 12%....


Mr Franz Joseph Haydn?



Mandryka said:


> Yes but you can be quite imaginative with that theme -- think what Mozart does in K491/iii or maybe if you want a quartet K 421/iv
> In that quartet, Haydn just repeats it _ad nausiam_ basically.


Can't agree more. I'm just not impressed by the way Joseph handles his variation movements, including his late variations (F minor) for keyboard.



hammeredklavier said:


> I'm also not quite impressed by the way Joseph handles his variation movements where he adds "accompaniment" to the theme in the subsequent passages. They seem kind of "cheap" to me, like the Ole Ole variations from the Neo-romantic composer Richard Kastle's 9th piano concerto, or the God save the king Variations (1829) by Samuel Wesley.





> think what Mozart does in K491/iii or maybe if you want a quartet K 421/iv


and also K.334/ii and K.456/ii

*[ 6:38 ]*


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

I find the Ferneyhough unrelentingly tedious, the Haydn only occasionally so.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

Haydn gets my vote. It's a textbook example of how to write a string quartet (both literally and figuratively) and is a delight to listen to. Even as someone who loves the avant-garde, I couldn't get into the Fenyhough at all. To me, it's a convoluted mess with only the occasional repeated rhythmic figure bearing semblance to an actual development of ideas. I couldn't really even enjoy it as a soundscape either, it doesn't evoke anything for me and I can't really work out the composers intent or what he's trying to say. Pieces like this kind of make me understand why conservative minded posters like DavidA and such hate the avant-garde :lol:


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

This is like comparing water with oil. I have never heard the Ferneyhough, but I voted for the Haydn. In fact, once I heard it live and my perception of this composer changed radically.


----------



## BeatriceB (May 3, 2021)

I prefer the Haydn in this case.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The variation movement is a bit untypical for Haydn in keeping the original melody exactly present in all variations (there might be others but I am not aware of any other example in his works). Supposedly this is "respect for the Emperor". His hymn has to remain intact as cantus firmus in all of the variations.. And classical aesthetics is not in favor of "burying" a cantus firmus as some baroque might do sometimes, after all it is a beautiful melody not some old chorale mainly serving as material for contrapuntal skill.


----------



## cybernaut (Feb 6, 2021)

Bulldog said:


> The Haydn is delightful; the other quartet is irritating.


Yep. And I'll choose delightful over irritating any day of the week, and any hour of the day.


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

GucciManeIsTheNewWebern said:


> Haydn gets my vote. It's a textbook example of how to write a string quartet (both literally and figuratively) and is a delight to listen to. Even as someone who loves the avant-garde, I couldn't get into the Fenyhough at all. To me, it's a convoluted mess with only the occasional repeated rhythmic figure bearing semblance to an actual development of ideas. I couldn't really even enjoy it as a soundscape either, it doesn't evoke anything for me and I can't really work out the composers intent or what he's trying to say. Pieces like this kind of make me understand why conservative minded posters like DavidA and such hate the avant-garde :lol:


My opinion has changed a lot since I made this post. I actually love the Ferneyhough. From my current perspective, I like both the Haydn and the Ferneyhough for different reasons and they're hard to compare.


----------

