# A new TC Top Recommended Lists project?



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

As the year-end draws nearer I am beginning to wonder what to do in my idle hours on these dark evenings.  Apart from all my backlog of work, that is.

I notice that there is no TC Top 50+ list specifically for that rarefied musical art form, the string quartet. There is one list, comprising a total of 50 works, for string ensembles, in which only 33 (Edit: 34. I missed one) quartets are listed, 11 of which date from 1890 or later. This was completed in February 2012. I'd guess that many members who contributed to that have now moved on from TC.

I wondered if there would be any interest in trying to compile a new list, specifically for string quartets? I would be willing to facilitate this given my interest in the string quartet form.

What I had in mind was a parallel process to that used by Pjang23 and arcaneholocaust earlier in the year to compile the Art Song and Chamber Duo lists. There would have to be one modification from the 'House Rules', namely the one which states that 'works must not be categorized in a previous list in order to qualify' since here they could legitimately have appeared in the 'string ensemble' list.

And we might even get some late 20th and 21st century works nominated this time, eh?

I'll be away from October 26 - 31 so I'm posting now to gauge potential involvement. I'd aim to start the actual project in November. _If_ there's sufficient interest, that is.

If there's not, at least I can look myself in the eye and say 'You tried to raise interest in a top string quartet list on TC, old son. You didn't just stand idly by. You didn't. Don't cry. There, there."

T-Vox


----------



## JACE (Jul 18, 2014)

I'd definitely play in that sandbox.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

I'd be interested: but less so if we're just going to go over the Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven stuff. I love those works, but feel I, and I suspect many others, can take those recommendations as read.

For my own interest I'd like it to be "Post-something", or, say, "1900 and after"

Just my two cents worth.


----------



## Guest (Oct 13, 2014)

I too would be interested. SimonNZ's suggestion is something I'm not sure about, though. I guess I'm just not terribly comfortable setting any ole arbitrary point, but modern/contemporary quartets would work, I think. But I'm not 100% sold on either way; people need to get over the initial revulsion at seeing Beethoven works nominated...there's always more items on the list than the top 10 (I am particularly remembering people bashing list threads non-stop before more than 10 items were even solidified...).


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Another possibility would be fifty/one hundred quartets in addition to the thirty-three already listed in the 50 Chamber works list, with no arbitrary date. Taking those 33 as read would throw up more surprises.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

A list of string quartets would be a change from our usual lists in that, as TurnaboutVox said, we have a list which includes string quartets as a subset. We do have a list that includes only modern + contemporary music so placing a cutoff year is not new. 

If people wished to push the list to 100, I think that's doable as well. In general we've started lists with a modest goal for the number of works and, as we neared that number, polled voters about continuing. There certainly are many new members since we did most of the lists so perhaps there would be many new voters.

I think I would be up for almost anything suggested.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

To help us think about how we might want to use / augment / ignore the February 2012 'String Ensembles' list, here are the 34 string quartets listed there. (I must have overlooked one yesterday when I did a quick overview, probably Berg's Lyric Suite). There are 9 'modern' works, 10 if you count the Debussy. There's actually quite a good spread from 1824 to 1928, as you can see, and one outlier, the Shostakovich #8 (which, however iconic, is arguably anachronistic for 1960).

In chronological order:


Mozart - String Quartet No. 19 "Dissonance" (1785)
Haydn - String Quartet op. 76 no. 2 "Fifths" (1797)
Haydn - String Quartet op. 76 no. 3 "Emperor" (1797)
Haydn - String Quartet op. 76 no. 4 "Sunrise" (1797)
Haydn - String Quartet op. 76 no. 5 "Largo" (1797)
Beethoven - String Quartet No. 11 "Serioso" (1811)
Beethoven - String Quartet No. 13 & Grosse Fuge (1825)
Beethoven - String Quartet No. 14 (1826)
Beethoven - String Quartet No. 15 (1825)
Beethoven - String Quartet No. 16 (1826)
Schubert - String Quartet No. 13 "Rosamunde" (1824)
Schubert - String Quartet No. 14 "Death and the Maiden" (1824)
Schubert - String Quartet No. 15 (1826)
Mendelssohn - String Quartet No. 6 (1847)
Bruch - String Quartet No. 2 (1861)
Tchaikovsky - String Quartet No. 1 (1871)
Verdi - String Quartet (1873)
Brahms - String Quartet No. 1 (1873)
Brahms - String Quartet No. 2 (1873)
Brahms - String Quartet No. 3 (1875)
Smetana - String Quartet No. 1 "From My Life" (1876)
Grieg - String Quartet (1878)
Borodin - String Quartet No. 2 (1881)
Dvořák - String Quartet No. 12 "American" (1893)
Debussy - String Quartet (1893)
Ravel - String Quartet (1903)
Schoenberg - String Quartet No. 2 (1908)
Sibelius - String Quartet "Voces intimae" (1909)
Elgar - String Quartet (1918)
Berg - Lyric Suite (1926)
Bartók - String Quartet No. 4 (1927)
Janáček - String Quartet No. 2 "Intimate Letters" (1928)
Schmidt - String Quartet No. 2 (in G: 1929) - assuming this is Franz Schmidt
Shostakovich - String Quartet No. 8 (1960)


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

One thing that should be clarified up front imo is whether this is limited to pure string quartets, or whether an additional sound can be included (thinking of e.g. voice or tape).


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

JACE said:


> I'd definitely play in that sandbox.


+ 1

and I'd prefer to limit the list to pure string quartets. It's one of the very few classic music ensembles being still very vital among modern/contemporary/living composers.


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

Art Rock said:


> One thing that should be clarified up front imo is whether this is limited to pure string quartets, or whether an additional sound can be included (thinking of e.g. voice or tape).


Schönberg No 2 is already on there so I think that Your question is answered with a resounding, Yes!

I'm in, but like Simon I will focus on post 1900 quartets as to make the mix more fertile!

/ptr


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

I remember that on one of these threads I submitted Reich's Different trains (SQ + tape), which was disallowed.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Sure, I'd like to join in too.

Though I can see merits in taking the previously-agreed 33 quartets "as read", I'd be inclined towards starting from scratch. As TurnaboutVox said, there'll be a different set of voters this time and it could be quite a different list.

Perhaps to speed up the process the initial round could involve 20 works rather than the usual 10 - this would take care of the "obvious" ones quickly.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Art Rock said:


> I remember that on one of these threads I submitted Reich's Different trains (SQ + tape), which was disallowed.


I'd certainly be in favour of Different Trains being included.
This is one of those rules that can tie people in knots. I think instinctively we know that string quartet plus tape is not equivalent to string quartet plus piano, so we don't need to be overly strict.


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

I think starting from scratch would be more fun! (No limitations!)

/ptr


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

Nereffid said:


> I'd certainly be in favour of Different Trains being included.
> This is one of those rules that can tie people in knots. I think instinctively we know that string quartet plus tape is not equivalent to string quartet plus piano, so we don't need to be overly strict.


Me to, but I think that the main guiding light should be if the composer called the work "string Quartet" or not (even if it is a titled piece like "Different Trains"), but there will always be borderline works that will be debated! FWIW, SQ + Pi has its on works constellation name "Piano Quintet" that falls outside the quartet sub genre, but if there something like a String Quartet with piano obbligato could in theory be admissible... Another such borderline case could be Allan Pettersson's first Violin Concerto (for Violin and String Quartet)...

/ptr


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

Great idea by Turnabout Vox but already there seems to be a discussion about what constitutes a 'String Quartet'. We do not define Tone Poems as Symphonies so why define a named work for a quartet ensemble as a String Quartet.
For the purposes of this list let Turnabout Vox set the rules as to what he intends as to be allowable in the list, after all it was his idea and a damn good one.


----------



## scratchgolf (Nov 15, 2013)

ptr said:


> I think starting from scratch would be more fun! (No limitations!)
> 
> /ptr


As fun as this might be, I must politely decline. Starting from ptr would be more fun. I'll go 2nd.

And yes. I'm in. I also think modified string quartets should be included, perhaps with the pure forms labeled as such.


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2014)

Polyphemus said:


> Great idea by Turnabout Vox but already there seems to be a discussion about what constitutes a 'String Quartet'. We do not define Tone Poems as Symphonies so why define a named work for a quartet ensemble as a String Quartet.
> For the purposes of this list let Turnabout Vox set the rules as to what he intends as to be allowable in the list, after all it was his idea and a damn good one.


Tone poems are not symphonies because they differ in form and whatnot. A named work for string quartet is, well, a string quartet.


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

Polyphemus said:


> We do not define *Tone Poems* as Symphonies so why define a named work for a quartet ensemble as a String Quartet.


Speaking of tone poems ... this would be something nice to do. Something akin to non-symphonic works for orchestra?

Chamber works with piano would be worth compiling as well.

Differentiating between string quartets and other string ensembles isn't really a big deal imo.


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2014)

Skilmarilion said:


> Speaking of tone poems ... this would be something nice to do. Something akin to non-symphonic works for orchestra?
> 
> Chamber works with piano would be worth compiling as well.
> 
> Differentiating between string quartets and other string ensembles isn't really a big deal imo.


Done, done, and done. Kidding?


----------



## Skilmarilion (Apr 6, 2013)

arcaneholocaust said:


> Done, done, and done. Kidding?


Woops -- I was quickly looking through the compilation list pdf and had completely forgotten that those two had actually been done.

I guess a new string quartet list it will be after all. :-D


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2014)

Skilmarilion said:


> Woops -- I was quickly looking through the compilation list pdf and had completely forgotten that those two had actually been done.
> 
> I guess a new string quartet list it will be after all. :-D


Well, there are a few genres entirely un-represented. Organ works being the first I can think of. But that kind of territory could be difficult to bring in participants.

Or perhaps all concerti not for the standard violin/viola/cello or winds or keyboards? I know we have the harp concerti list, but if you look at the thread that resulted in that list, it's a bit sad, tbh.


----------



## julianoq (Jan 29, 2013)

Why can't we just put more 50 (or even 100) works on the 'String Ensembles' list? The majority of the works there are string quartets anyway, and from what I noticed in the last lists (like chamber duos) once the warhorses are voted more modern works are nominated.


----------



## Guest (Oct 14, 2014)

julianoq said:


> Why can't we just put more 50 (or even 100) works on the 'String Ensembles' list? The majority of the works there are string quartets anyway, and from what I noticed in the last lists (like chamber duos) once the warhorses are voted more modern works are nominated.


This makes the most sense, tbh. Would be the best way to put the warhorses behind us without limiting dates, and string quartets will clearly only dominate more, now that Brahms/Schubert/Dvorak/etcs Quintets/Sextets are out of the way.

Pretty much the only downside to this is that, unless the old thread is still linked somewhere, we don't know a current list of honorable mentions to add to, and that is a popular part of the newer lists.

Might as well do SOMETHING though. I find these lists fun, informative, and they do absolutely zero harm no matter how much the anti-list brigade may gripe.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

Thanks to everyone who has responded so far by posting or 'liking' a post. OK, so it looks as if there is a constituency for this project. I'll try to summarise some of the comments made and ideas put forward so far. For ease of analysis I've separated the comments from their authors and précised them, for which I apologise.

*1) On the question of warhorses*



> Take Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven recommendations as read
> Taking the 34 (in the Top 50 String Ensembles list) as read would throw up more surprises.
> 
> People need to get over the initial revulsion at seeing Beethoven works nominated
> ...


*2) String quartets drawn from which era?*



> "Post-something", e.g. post 1900 quartets to make the mix more fertile!
> Modern/contemporary quartets would work
> 
> I'm not comfortable setting an arbitrary cut-off date
> No limitations! Starting from scratch would be more fun!


Another possibility is:

-The TC Top 50 Recommended Post-Beethoven String Quartets (i.e.1827 onwards)

but this would exclude interesting pre-1827 composers and works, so I also considered:

- The TC Top 50 Recommended String Quartets not written by (the accepted classical era masters) Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (and Schubert?)

The more I think about the complications thrown up by exclusions, the more attractive an open nomination policy seems.

I'm not really drawn to the idea of adding more string quartets to the existing 'Top 50 String Ensembles' list as nominations to that list were for a range of string ensemble genres, and were by a different group of TC members, many long gone from here. Also, as arcaneholocaust reminded us we do not know which works received 'honourable mentions' last time around. I'd prefer to start anew.

*3) Boundaries of the string quartet genre*



> Limit the list to pure string quartets.
> 
> Can an additional sound can be included? (e.g. voice or tape).
> 
> ...


My preference, for what that's worth, is to stick to works that are labelled by the composer as (standard) string quartets (i.e. scored for 2 violins, viola and cello), or are labelled 'xxxx for string quartet', or 'string quartet + xxxx', but in the spirit of TC I think a friendly debate about borderline or contentious works should be a sine qua non of the thread

*4) Nomination and voting process*



> Speed up the process - the initial round could involve 20 works rather than the usual 10 - this would take care of the "obvious" ones quickly.


I hadn't got round to thinking about nomination and voting processes yet, but I'll keep this in mind, Nereffid

*Other*



> I find these lists fun, informative, and they do absolutely zero harm no matter how much the anti-list brigade may gripe.


I completely agree, and thanks, arcaneholocaust!



> For the purposes of this list let Turnabout Vox set the rules as to what he intends as to be allowable in the list, after all it was his idea and a damn good one.


Thanks, Polyphemus. This I like most of all...so should I be the arbiter of string quartet poll reality? Best to take the Frodo option and (reluctantly) throw the first violin bow of power into the Mount Doom of thread democracy. I'll let myself to be guided by you, and try to make final arbitrations only when they really need to be made.

T-Vox


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

I'd value a list of Top 50 sets (1 or more) of string quartets. Re multiples, I find it difficult and a shame to separate a quartet from its sibling(s). Just sayin'.


----------



## Guest (Oct 15, 2014)

I feel that, if the list is to exceed 50 (which, I think, it should), there are enough great works to warrant the inclusion of string quartets with tape or electronics. For one thing, it's produced a lot of great stuff. For another, many composers clearly feel that the inclusion of electro-acoustic sounds does not nullify the works status as a "string quartet" - see: Gubaidulina "String Quartet No. 4" or Haas "String Quartet No. 4".

I think that voice and string quartet is a bit more of a shaky ground, as we get into works intended more as art song (Dover Beach is for voice and string quartet, right?). However, if you wish to include works like Schoenberg's 2nd quartet and Ginastera's 3rd, a handy distinction exists in that multiple movements of each work contain no voice. While I hesitate to make seemingly arbitrary rules, I think this one might also be worth a bit of case-by-case discretion simply because Schoenberg's 2nd quartet is _kinda_ a big deal.

So I guess for me, we'd have to simply use our heads once more. In fact, I remember someone bringing up Ginastera's 3rd quartet for the art song list, and I pointed out that it didn't even include a human voice until a few movements in. Everything worked out ok.

I think we're settled on a straight-up quartets-only from-scratch list, and I'm quite ok with that. I didn't have the pleasure of watching most of the TC lists form from nothing, and the last two lists created had me listening to new works like crazy 

I assume you're planning to facilitate, TVox?


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

I don't have any particular suggestions for how to go about it, but I wanted to put in my vote for initiating this project. I'm all for it, whether you want to bypass all the warhorses, start from scratch, or start where the previous string ensemble list left off. I think it's a good idea however we go about it! 

The String Quartet is an elevated genre certainly worthy of its own list on TC.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

Just a few comments based on past experience.

Generally a healthy number of people start voting, and as rounds continue, some drop out. The string ensemble list only went to 50 and included about 1/3 works that were not quartets. At the end of that process the number of voters was rather small. The problem is often that people do not know enough works to feel confident in later rounds. Therefore, I would suggest a list of all string quartets independent of era or what has been voted on in past lists. In other words let people vote on warhorses to get things going and include more people. 

Some people are especially knowledgeable and able to create their votes quickly, but others will need time to listen to works in order to properly order them or possibly to listen to new works. So even though it would save time to start with 20 in the first round, I would suggest the standard 10. That gives people more time to listen to works, think about their votes, and settle into the process.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I've never participated in one of these recommended lists projects. I'm keen, but not sure how. I'd rather see a project of all string quartets. There is enough of this string ensemble to have it's own list, it's the most common isn't it? 

Other lists I'd like to see
1) Early music, or maybe prior to Baroque.
2) Guitar concerti or works with ensemble, though they're aren't many.
3) Contemporary music, perhaps post 1980 approx, after most of us were born.
4) Recordings


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

TurnaboutVox said:


> *4) Nomination and voting process*
> Speed up the process - the initial round could involve 20 works rather than the usual 10 - this would take care of the "obvious" ones quickly.
> 
> I hadn't got round to thinking about nomination and voting processes yet, but I'll keep this in mind, Nereffid


Just to clarify: I specifically meant that as a way of dealing with "warhorses".


----------



## MagneticGhost (Apr 7, 2013)

senza sordino said:


> Other lists I'd like to see
> 1) Early music, or maybe prior to Baroque.


Definitely yes. A Medieval and Renaissance project would be great to help me fill the gaps in my early music collection


----------



## Aecio (Jul 27, 2012)

I'm getting late on this thread but yes, I always felt this 50 list was short and incomplete, let's do a 100 only string chamber works list. And it's a good idea to do an early music list !


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

Ladies and Gentlemen, there having been no further comments since Aecio's on October 15th, I therefore propose to open the first nomination round for the TC Top 50+ Recommended String Quartets. I will facilitate the thread, unless someone else who feels better qualified would prefer to do it instead.

I've been persuaded that in order to maximise participation, nominations should be accepted for any string quartet from any era, and I hope that those who felt less inclined to participate in the case of 'open nominations' nevertheless will do, as I think that they will be important contributors.

I will accept nominations of works that are labelled by the composer as string quartets, or 'xxxx for string quartet', or '(work for) string quartet + xxxx'. Contentious works can be discussed between us, I hope, and agreement reached on eligibility.

I will be away from home, music and an internet connection in the Scottish Highlands from 26th October to the 1st of November, so it makes sense for me to open the first nomination round on *Sunday, 2nd November.*

For the Art Song and Chamber Duo projects I found four days between nomination and voting rather short during the working week, but perhaps it will be sufficient as long as the weekend is always available for listening.

Please feel free to return to your audio equipment to listen widely in preparation to nominate in round 1.

T-Vox


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

arcaneholocaust said:


> Tone poems are not symphonies because they differ in form and whatnot. A named work for string quartet is, well, a string quartet.


There may be a logic in there but damned if I can see it. Maybe its the whatnot bit that eludes me but you seem to suggest that all works written for a string quartet ensemble are by that fact alone String Quartets in the accepted sense of the term.

There is no fixed form for a symphony. Most have 4 movements some have 3 others have 6, so by extension of your logic all named works for a symphony orchestra could be called symphonies. Mercifully this is not the case.

However the cases have been made and Turnabout is the arbiter and we should be grateful to him and satisfied with that.
I now look forward to the hopefully many contributions.


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

Once more unto the breech :-
Beethoven No 7 Op59/1
Beethoven No 13/Grosse Fugue
Schubert 13 - 15 
Tchaikovsky 1
Borodin 2
Robert Simpson Probably most accessible in the middle of the 15 so try 7 - 10 (Hyperion)
Debussy
Ravel
Dvorak


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

This is a lot more difficult than I first imagined. I have not begun to scratch the surface yet so it could get tedious for readers. Obviously the greatest hits were first off. I may have to do a rethink and restrict it to a top 20 or 25. The problem is the range is so large and its a long way from Joe Haydn to Penderecki so much thought will be required.


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2014)

Polyphemus said:


> This is a lot more difficult than I first imagined. I have not begun to scratch the surface yet so it could get tedious for readers. Obviously the greatest hits were first off. I may have to do a rethink and restrict it to a top 20 or 25. The problem is the range is so large and its a long way from Joe Haydn to Penderecki so much thought will be required.


You won't have to list more than 1-20 at once, you know.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I, also, have never participated in the making of a list. I enjoy string quartets a lot and have collected quite a number, including many post-1900 ones. I am willing to participate, but I am unsure what meaningful contribution I can make to the making of such a list  What criteria would I use in determining ones to suggest for inclusion: whether I have it in my collection?  whether it is by a composer I like?  whether it happens to be a personal favourite?  I simply do not have the academic knowledge to make a more critical judgement of merit.

While some might feel that the paltry 33 or so in the other list are enough to represent the earlier periods, I think it would be a much more elegant solution to have a definitive and dedicated string quartet list that includes all periods, as has been done (I believe) for other genres. Considering how many string quartets there are, and how interesting the genre has been to composers from the baroque to the present day, a list of even 100 could only barely scratch the tip of the heap of the greatest. Perhaps the best 250 would be more realistic?


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

In the past we started with a number we felt was definitely doable. As we approached that number, we polled voters to see how many would continue. If the number of voters falls too low (that's a judgement call), we generally stop. I would suggest starting with 50 (as TV seems to indicate with the title) and go from there. 

Also people should realize that these lists are not musicological in nature. They are lists created in a process that is fun and educational for the voters, who are generally not experts. When the lists are finished, others of course can use them for reference, and many people have told us that the lists were invaluable to them. That's great. 

The bottom line is that people should not feel that they have to be experts to vote.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2014)

I have so many contemporary string quartets I haven't spent much time with, but I'm not fussed as I'm sure I'll be nominating warhorses for the first couple of rounds anyway (little point casting an obscure vote early on when you could influence the order of the greats). 

I personally treat the Grosse Fugue as a separate work in my mind, btw. I know it was an original finale or whatever, but people typically talk about it separately and I typically listen to it separately. No big deal either way, not like you can do any wrong with Beethoven's late quartets.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

To help participants, particularly those new to compiling a 'TC Top Recommendations' list, here is my modification of the 'Standard Process' which has been used in compiling previous lists, for the present purpose:



> Here is a brief outline of the project:
> 
> - The TalkClassical members with a wide variety of interests and experiences can reach a consensus on the top works from a variety of musical forms.
> - This process should lead to some interesting debate and discussion regarding these various specialized areas of music.
> ...


If anyone would like to see modifications to the process this time round, you have until next Sunday (26th October) to propose this and for those intending to participate to discuss your proposal(s) and come to a decision.

*Round Zero is now open, by the way!* (as can be seen from those posts already made)

T-Vox


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2014)

arcaneholocaust said:


> I am particularly remembering people bashing list threads non-stop before more than 10 items were even solidified...).





arcaneholocaust said:


> I find these lists fun, informative, and they do absolutely zero harm no matter how much the anti-list brigade may gripe.


Just as a side note, there has been absolutely zero contribution from "the anti-list brigade" on this particular thread.

Apparently the anti-'opinions other than mine' brigade has cowed them into submission.


----------



## Polyphemus (Nov 2, 2011)

arcaneholocaust said:


> You won't have to list more than 1-20 at once, you know.


Give it my best shot though. The hard part is what to leave out.


----------



## Guest (Oct 20, 2014)

Edited Because: Superiority complexes are good fun, I suppose.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I have what some might call a stupid question, but I need to ask it. I've haven't participated in a TC recommended list. 

Haydn published six string quartets as part of his Opus 76. Do we count each one as an separate entry or the entire opus 76?

I need to listen to some string quartets over the next few weeks.


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

In general (but not always) in the lists we separate single works from the overall Opus. For example, in the string ensemble list Haydn's OP. 76 No. 2,3,4, and 5 are listed separately. I suspect that we would choose to do that with all the quartets on this list.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

mmsbls said:


> In general (but not always) in the lists we separate single works from the overall Opus. For example, in the string ensemble list Haydn's OP. 76 No. 2,3,4, and 5 are listed separately. I suspect that we would choose to do that with all the quartets on this list.


Yes, I think that is probably the best way to do it, mmsbls and senza


----------

