# Walton - String Quartet 1922 (SQ review)



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Walton's 1922 String Quartet is unusual in that it is rather unlike his later work. Written during his late teens it's a longer and more exploratory work. In fact, when first performed, it didn't go down well at all. Walton quickly withdrew it and made a number of big cuts to the score (it was even longer than its current 35 minute length). When it was revived, after his death, the cuts were retained (thankfully). Walton had remained rather negative about this work commenting that the quartet was ‘full of undigested Bartók and Schoenberg’ and although he was being very hard on his immature work those influences are clearly more evident and he had grounds for some reticence. As I said, whilst unlike the later quartet in many respects (and nowhere near as good, IMO) it still has its good Waltonesque moments. The first movement, Moderato, begins in a slightly agitated manner before settling in to a much more serene, occasionally melancholy and gently probing mid-section with some interesting if inconsistent development. The 2nd movement has a few touches of Walton's later style with moments of solemnity giving way to more animated passages in the Allegro molto vivace e ritmico section. However, for me, this movement is where I feel Walton loses my attention, giving me Bartók without the expertise and rhythmic guile. The final movement is the most interesting for me, especially after the midpoint as Walton plays with the rhythms and textures and introduces some more engaging material. Interestingly I read (via the Doric and Emperor booklets) that there were a large number of errors and revisions between the autographed score and the parts sent by the OUP meaning that there are some more differences between accounts than usual as each ensemble has tried to interpret the score. Its an interesting, historical quartet and I do quite like the Berg-inspired outer movements, but ultimately its not essential listening for me.
Only 3 recordings of it as far as I know so here's what I thought.

The *Doric Quartet *have given us the most recent recording and although the sound is good I find their interpretation of the score rather confusing which it shouldn't be as they use the 'full-length and original version, as edited by Hugh MacDonald in 2008 for Oxford University Press’s William Walton Edition' Yet listening to this recording I find parts of the 2nd and 3rd movements don't seem to mesh anywhere near as well as the other two recordings (maybe Walton wasn't the best person to edit his own work). There's nothing really bad about the recording but it lacks cohesion and I actually found it frustrating to listen to even if the Doric playing is exemplary.
The very first recording of the work, on Chandos, was done by the *Gabrieli* Quartet and is one I find easier to digest than the Doric. They seem to offer a better picture of the structure of this meandering work. However, although they make better sense of the work the recording is unattractive to my ears, with rather hollow, resonant sound.

However, amongst all of the available accounts there is one saviour and that is the *Emperor Quartet* who are easily the most successful in selling me their vision. Where the Doric make increasingly heavy weather of the middle movement the Emperor cut through Walton's mire. Their revisions fit better within the framework of the quartet, they're more concise and the playing and recording is of excellent standard (unlike the bathroom acoustic of the Gabrieli). Their final movement is architecturally the finest here and the ensemble playing and articulation are superb. This was a very easy first choice.


----------

