# Cycle review: Beethoven



## Avey

So, *Beethoven*. Yeah.

Anecdotes, your favorite (ranking maybe? though, this isn't a ranking thread), under-performed and ignored, technical notes, existential revelations -- let us get it all out here.

Pure *L.v.B.* quartet talk.


----------



## Mandryka

One thing I like is the old Calvet Quartet op 131


----------



## Avey

I am a bit surprised of the lack of response here.

Regardless, I originally put this thread up after reviewing all of Beethoven's quartets, and there were a few moments of interest for me.

- Like, I never truly appreciated the _serioso_ quartet, No. 11. I prefer it, to among others, his final quartet, and the first two Rasumovsky quartets.

- Like, still, as I have always been, I appear to be in the minority in my _not_ thinking Op. 131 is Beethoven's greatest, or even one of the best. I hold Op. 130 (including the intended _fugue_ ending) as the pinnacle of Beethoven's creative output, along with the _Missa_, and would venture to place it among the greatest chamber works ever penned, next to Schubert's Quintet, among others.

Op. 131 is certainly a masterpiece -- though, having to clarify this with Beethoven's quartets is like having to justify the immensity and extraordinary nature of any one of the interstellar planets orbiting our Sun -- I just do not hold in such high regard as many (justifiably) do.

- Like, the last Rasumovsky quartet (No. 9) and the _Harp_ No. 10 are frustratingly intense and mesmerizing pieces. There are a number of similarities in the structure of these two works, no doubt, and the more I read about Beethoven's "middle" versus "late" style, the more I question whether these two quartets truly belong in the "middle" period. Post-middle? The late-40s age?

- Like, repeating what I have said in previous posts, No. 12 gets no respect. I have never seen this on a program. I rarely see members post about it. Hell, even its Wiki page is devoid of any interesting anecdotes or analysis of the work.

But maybe it is this repressed reverence that gives the piece such aplomb. This is a fantastically cogent and robust work.

- Like, the _Holy Song of Thanksgiving on a Convalescent to the God-Deity_ is special, FYI.

- Like, Beethoven gets better, even when he was young, because No. 6 > No. 5 > No. 4 > No. 1 or 2 or 3.


----------



## violadude

Avey said:


> - Like, Beethoven gets better, even when he was young, because No. 6 > No. 5 > No. 4 > No. 1 or 2 or 3.


I like your post, but I intensely disagree with this ranking of his early quartets. I think no. 1, 2 and 6 are far and away stronger pieces than 4 and 5, with no. 3 being interesting middle ground between the two.

I think #4 has the weakest finale in all the Beethoven quartets (and I actually find it to be the weakest quartet of all of them). It's not bad, and if someone else wrote it it would be alright, but it's way too trite for the standards that Beethoven had already previously set for himself. The only movement I find really interesting in this piece is the second movement.

#5 has an ok first half, followed by an outstanding second half.

#3 in my mind only has one really weak movement and that's the 3rd. The second doesn't make any huge splashes but is very beautiful and the finale is one of the boldest things Beethoven had written up to that point.

But what I really don't understand is how you can think the 1st and 2nd quartets are among the weakest in the set. The 1st quartet, while the second half may not stand up quite as well as the first half, is bold and steely work throughout, displaying very mature technical prowess and emotional control. And the Haydnesque charm of the 2nd quartet is irresistible to me. It's quite mature piece too, underneath the playfulness. There are lots of fascinating compositional devices in this one.


----------



## Blancrocher

violadude said:


> #5 has an ok first half, followed by an outstanding second half.


That one has the extra-aesthetic interest of being the most Mozartian of Beethoven's quartets--some think for the sake of showing himself that he could compose like Mozart if he tried.

*p.s.* I recently reread Joseph Kerman's book on the string quartets, after having learned of the author's recent decease. It's quirkier than I'd remembered--and all the more recommendable for that.

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Qua...733&sr=1-2&keywords=beethoven+string+quartets


----------



## violadude

Blancrocher said:


> That one has the extra-aesthetic interest of being the most Mozartian of Beethoven's quartets--some think for the sake of showing himself that he could compose like Mozart if he tried.
> 
> *p.s.* I recently reread Joseph Kerman's book on the string quartets, after having learned of the author's recent decease. It's quirkier than I'd remembered--and all the more recommendable for that.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Qua...733&sr=1-2&keywords=beethoven+string+quartets


I love that book. It's a really good read. It always reminds me of just how much thought goes into compositions of the masters.


----------



## Fugue Meister

Wow Avey you were surprised a year ago and still so few posts, I am shocked. Well my favorite is op. 131, but a close second is op. 130 (with the fugue of course). The late quartets are untouchable no human being has ever come close to the realms Beethoven reveals to us here. 

To be honest I adore the whole cycle but if I had to pick 5 they would be:

5- Op. 59 No. 1 in F (The first string quartet I ever fell in love with, the Allegretto vivace e sempre scherzando is out of this world)
4- Op. 127 in Eb (There is some love for no. 12 out there including me)
3- Op. 95 in f (Laying the groundwork for the world he explores in the late quartets)
2- Op. 130 in Bb (What a masterpiece) 
1- Op. 131 in c# (The greatest chamber work of all time)

If picking 5 meant I couldn't listen to the others I could never do it though... I can't live without this cycle, its that important to me.


----------



## KenOC

Fugue Meister said:


> 1- Op. 131 in c# (The greatest chamber work of all time)


Well, we should really stack it up against Schubert's C major quintet. And no, Schubert's opinion doesn't count!


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

I can't believe people don't like the grosse fugue. I find it to be a very grand and powerful piece on it's own.


----------



## Fugue Meister

KenOC said:


> Well, we should really stack it up against Schubert's C major quintet. And no, Schubert's opinion doesn't count!


I don't know I should give it another listen...


----------



## KenOC

Fugue Meister said:


> I don't know I should give it another listen...


Schubert, on having the Op. 131 performed for him just before his death: "After this, what's left for us to write?"


----------



## Fugue Meister

KenOC said:


> Schubert, on having the Op. 131 performed for him just before his death: "After this, what's left for us to write?"


Oh yes, I am very aware that even Schubert tipped his hat to op. 131 and what was it Wagner said about the opening fugue, "the very slow introductory Adagio reveals the most melancholy sentiment ever expressed in music". How true.


----------



## hoodjem

No love for Op. 132?

(IMHO, it is right up there with Op. 131.)


----------



## Eramire156

Tully Potter, a critic whose reviews I have come to value even if I don't always agree with his judgements 100 percent, surveys the Beethoven Quartet landscape in the following article.

https://thebeethovenproject.com/exploring-the-beethoven-quartets-on-disc-many-paths-to-nirvana/


----------



## Kreisler jr

As for op.18 my favorite is #1. Like several others it is trying a bit too hard to be both original Beethoven and keeping up with Mozart and Haydn. The weakest is #4; I only really like the scherzando. #3 is also rather uneven with the finale overpowe ring the rest.
#2 is very good but a bit to obviously a Haydn parody. Similarly #5 as too obvious homage to K 464. #6 maybe the most original with the weight also shifted to the finale but I find it not totally convincing


----------



## Kreisler jr

My overall favorite is op.131. It doesn't have a single greatest mvmt but two great slow movement's and is the most original overall. My 2nd favourite is op.132. Op.130+133 is bolder and I like op.133 but overall as a whole it does not grab me as much as the a minor. Next op.127, maybe an underrated piece. I also dearly love the last quartet. Of the middle quartets I put op.59,1 and 95 almost up with the late ones. I am also quite fond of the E minor. Both the 'harp' and the C major are not favorites. They have great first movements and they are of course still prime Beethoven but the last two movements of the harp don't work so well for me. The presto seems to border on self parody and the finale is too slight and unemotional. Neither do I love the 'russian' andante and the classicist menuet and fugato in the C major very much.


----------



## Merl

I change my mind constantly but op.59.1 is my current fave. By next week it will probably be op.132. Who knows?


----------



## SearsPoncho

Of the post-Op. 18 quartets:

1) Op. 132 - This has always been my favorite string quartet, in fact, it's my second favorite piece of music.
2) Op. 131 - This is nearly tied with Op. 132, so, obviously, I rate it very highly. 
3) Op. 135 - Quirky and, like many late Beethoven works, a bit schizophrenic and unpredictable. That slow movement...yeah, 
that's the stuff.
4) Op. 127 - The most conventional of the late quartets. Again, that slow movement...
5) Op. 59, #1 - It sure says a lot when possibly the most important and revolutionary quartet is #5, but this is Beethoven. 
I have no problem with others ranking it #1. It's that great, and with these quartets, we're picking nits. 
6) Op. 59, #2
7) Op. 59, #3 - Op. 59, nos. 2 and 3 are essentially tied.
8) "Harp" Quartet
9) "Serioso" Quartet
10) Op. 130 - This weird, somewhat enigmatic quartet has never done that much for me. It's still good; I kind of like it, but it just seems like it's almost a "serenade," with many brief, relatively light movements. Even the Cavatina, which made Beethoven cry, is easily the weakest slow movement of the late quartets IMO. It doesn't help that he changed the finale to make it less challenging for audiences of the time.

I never considered a ranking for the Op. 18 quartets, but I'll hopefully get around to that soon. When I listen to early Beethoven chamber music for strings, I usually turn to the string trios.


----------



## Kreisler jr

The string trios are underrated especially the c minor which is clearly superior to the op.18#4, I 'd go so far that it is the most accomplished of the 5 early c minor pieces (op. 1,9,10,13,18) although the least famous...


----------



## Kreisler jr

SearsPoncho said:


> 10) Op. 130 - ...
> but it just seems like it's almost a "serenade," with many brief, relatively light movements. Even the Cavatina, which made Beethoven cry, is easily the weakest slow movement of the late quartets IMO.


I think it''s a feature, not a bug. Despite the weighty first movement and final fugue it is a superserenade in a sense, similar to Mozarts string trio. But the combination of sublime, learned and folksy or trivial is a general feature of late Beethoven, cf. Diabelli and the 9th symphony finale. It's already a feature of Haydn and Mozart with The Magic Flute being the greatest example before Beethoven. One can argue that this has a vaguely pantheistic underpinning... 'All creatures great and small' or worm to cherub in the Schiller ode.


----------



## mparta

interesting that someone revived this yesterday, I have dragged out my Emerson cycle to relisten.

Just making it through Op. 18, and I was horrified by the first 3 at least, the playing seems hyperaggressive. however, made it to 5 today and was really wowed by the virtuosity and elegance, seems different entirely from what the earlier works showed. My guess is that I would revert to my favorite set for these pieces, the Alban Berg, but need to rehear the Takas also. 
The Emerson in #5 is really impressive, though.


----------



## hammeredklavier

Fugue Meister said:


> The late quartets are untouchable no human being has ever come close to the realms Beethoven reveals to us here.


Though I agree they're masterpieces; some of the common hyperboles used to describe late Beethoven seem a bit extreme to me, (like the so-called "divine perfection" of Mozart).
Composers of the 1820s were simply trying to move away from the 18th century ideals of "good taste"; 
I put Berlioz symphonie fantastique, Schubert's G major quartet in this category. Certain moments like the dance movements of Beethoven Op.130 still sound "symmetrical" and "traditional" to my ears.

"The pianist and musical analyst Charles Rosen has written that Berlioz often sets the climax of his melodies in relief with the most emphatic chord a triad in root position, and often a tonic chord where the melody leads the listener to expect a dominant. He gives as an example the second phrase of the main theme - the idée fixe - of the Symphonie fantastique, "famous for its shock to classical sensibilities", in which the melody implies a dominant at its climax resolved by a tonic, but in which Berlioz anticipates the resolution by putting a tonic under the climactic note."


----------

