# Duplication



## Quartetfore

On another "Classical" site, a person in a thread on Dvorak Symphony #9 said he had 28 versions of this work! No reason was give, but I assume that he just likes this music. My question then is do you duplicate a favorite quartet or trio? I for one have complete Beethoven cycle (Quartetto Italian-a gift), an op #18 complete (MIro Quartet) an op #59 (Toyko Quartet), and the Emerson Quartet last quartets set. I do have 3 or 4 other Beethoven quartet recordings, but that is the extent of duplication in collection. Best, Quartefore


----------



## Weston

I have more copies of Beethoven's 8th symphony than anything else - 4 I believe. That is because it is small and fits on a CD with other symphonies. I have three versions of his 9th because I like it and I'm looking for the definitive version. I haven't found it yet. 

I have a couple of versions of miscellaneous other things when they are on CDs that contain something else I want. 

But I would like to have three or more complete sets of the 32 Beethoven piano sonatas and the 2 Well-Tempered Clavier Books. Also you can never have too many versions of The Art of the Fugue. It is so open to interpretation. I just haven't gotten around to purchasing multiple versions of these yet.


----------



## joen_cph

As regards string quartets and piano trios, I have got a very wide range and much of the standard repertoire in 2 recordings, but they aren´t necessarily the most extraordinary ones; compared to orchestral music, concertos and piano music I haven´t studied this refined genre so much in depth as "Head_case" has, for instance. Only own very few quartets in 3 recordings, not to say 4, mostly "by accident". Among favourite ensembles are the _Hagen String Quartet_, always original and worth hearing, I think, whereas I feel that the _Kontra Quartet_, which has been monopolizing so much of the Danish repertoire as regards string quartet CD issues, unfortunately often excels in a slightly unpleasant, sharp sound in their playing.


----------



## Quartetfore

Joen, I like the Hagen Quartet myself. I have their recording of the 3rd, 7th and 8th quartets of Shostakovich, and find it very enjoyable. Best, Quartetfore


----------



## jurianbai

quite similar to this thread.

I try not to get duplication on my collections. but as sometimes there is left space on the cd, the publisher like to put in 'filler' track. (for this instance, Sarasate is my most popular 'filler composer'). I collected mostly violin orientated piece and I found the duplication also serve good. Violin playing is very differ between one player to another player.


----------



## Sid James

I try not to duplicate. I'd rather spend my money on getting pieces I've never heard, rather than just getting another recording of something I already have (I find this pretty unneccessary).

I have three versions of Bartok's_ Concerto for Orchestra_, simply because it seems to be a good "filler" piece with cd's of either his other works, or by other composers from that time.

One time I actively got another version of a piece was when I was not happy with Robert Craft's interpretation of Stravinsky's _Rite of Spring_ on Naxos. The other couplings on the disc were fine, it's just that I felt that Craft's _Rite _lacked bite and was too laid back. So I got another version, which was also a bit incidental - an ABC classics double cd set with the Melbourne Symphony conducted by Hiroyuki Iwaki, with the Stravinsky, Bartok _Concerto for Orchestra _(again) & Messiaen's _Turangalila-symphonie_, which I had never owned. Funnily enough, since then, I have not had a great compulsion to listen to the Stravinsky that much, probably because I've known it for 20 years, and maybe am a bit bored by it.

Another time was when I got another version of Ravel's _Daphnis et chloe_. I previously had an analogue recording, but I wanted to get it in digital. But Rozsdensventsky's account is much better than Rattle's in terms of interpretation, if not sound.

I also like to listen to other interpretations of pieces I have in my collection, either on radio, or from a friend's collection (we get together on a regular basis to listen to eachother's cd's, and he does have other recordings of works that I also have - so that's pretty interesting)...


----------



## Musicdude

Howdy,

longtime pro violinist here. I'd like to share a story about duplication:

Many moons ago, I was dating a rather nutty woman who was very opinionated (often about things she knew nothing about). She came to a concert that I played a concerto on. Afterwards, she somewhat arrogantly said "Well, your version was too slow".

Turns out that she owned one CD of the piece, played by someone with a reputation for playing everything insanely fast! My tempos weren't slow at all, they were the standard tempos that almost everyone uses, except for Joe Play-too fast guy. In this case, duplication would have been a really wise thing for her.

I've always enjoyed getting a "second opinion" of a work. There have been some pieces that I never liked, I'll play it with someone different and suddenly I like it. Youtube is great for this: you can at least hear a piece with a different orchestra/artist. It might not be hi fidelity but it gives one a good idea. Quite often, one gets so used to "Their" recording that they go see a piece in concert and are somewhat disappointed because they played it differently. It's good to check out a few.


----------



## Head_case

quartetfore said:


> On another "Classical" site, a person in a thread on Dvorak Symphony #9 said he had 28 versions of this work! No reason was give, but I assume that he just likes this music. My question then is do you duplicate a favorite quartet or trio? I for one have complete Beethoven cycle (Quartetto Italian-a gift), an op #18 complete (MIro Quartet) an op #59 (Toyko Quartet), and the Emerson Quartet last quartets set. I do have 3 or 4 other Beethoven quartet recordings, but that is the extent of duplication in collection. Best, Quartefore


I'm not sure whether my response to hearing that someone has 28 versions of the same symphony amounts to admiration or ssshock!

For the musicologist or the performing artist, there is a clear need for this kind of specialist endeavour - and we accept in principle that someone who can clearly differentiate between all 28 versions, has a specific appreciation of the composer's music to a rarefied degree.

I prefer chamber music way above orchestrated music and particularly focus on the string quartet medium. That's just because I like string quartet - it exemplifies everything I love about classical music, and is intense in form, yet highly personal. Whereas my OCD is not as bad as the 28 version symphony listener above - I do tend to cultivate a taste for at least two different versions of the same string quartet cycle i.e. -

Shostakovich -

I have owned other versions including the Emersons; Fitzwilliams; Eder; Danel Quatuor - all of which I've dispensed with and homed into the defining versions of Shostakovich's music by the Taneyev Quartet; The Borodin Quartet (versions I/II); St Petersburg Quartet.

As Jonathan Woolf, the superb music critic states - the insights from different versions of the same music (when played as well as the Taneyev; the Borodin and the Beethoven Quartets) - are forward searching, unceasing in their revelations. This intensity of experience, is not possible with a single version, as much as single version listeners might wish to believe - at least for a complete string cycle.

When it comes to individual string quartets - for instance, the sole Debussy string quartet - of the numerous versions I have had (over 10), the only ones which I really would miss, are the Italian Quartet version. The Dante Quartet, or the Ebene Quartet versions are great alternatives, although the gains from switching from the magisterial Italian Quartet, are so limited, that it is almost redundant, owning all three copies.

Like Musicdude states - a 'second opinion' or a second reading, is very crucial for appreciation, particularly for music, which is written essentially for, interpretation by a string quartet or orchestra etc. On the other hand, many of us listen to music, just because we enjoy it and probably are not probing into its texture and substance to the kind of analytical intensity that the 28 version symphony listener might....

As Joen suggests, the kind of quartet which I find I favour, tends to be based on repertoire (usually geographical). I don't know if I have any particular favourites - maybe I just have too many favourites. For instance - the Italian Quartet have rarely been excelled for the Debussy/Ravel/late Schubert readings. The Taneyev Quartet, which has cultivated a hard-edged modern chilliness do greatest justice to Myaskovsky, Shostakovich, Basner, Falik and Taneyev string quartet cycles - most of which, there is no competition at all and they have cleared the field as front runners by miles. Of the Polish quartets, the Silesian Quartet; the Wilanow Quartet and the Varsovia String Quartets are superb, but all fail in the breadth of their repertoire. Likewise, the older and legendary quartets such as the British Aeolian Quartet (Haydn, Elgar, Walton); the Gabrieli Quartet (Janacek, Bridge, Britten, Schubert), or the Czech Vlach Quartet (Dvorak; Janacek; Beethoven) - all occupy the legendary 'must hear' status for me. In this reference group, I have no qualms about duplicating.. Most of the music I listen to, I come to know, through CDs/LPs. That's why recordings are so special to me. I don't go to more than a few concerts a year, whereas I will listen to a CD to death within a year.

I do like the Hagen Quartet, although I'm still incredulous over hearing that they have a Shostakovich Cycle! I have never found theirs - but that's my fault  Their most epic neurotic readings of Janacek's two string quartet cycles are tense, highly agitated and superlative: they offer as much as the Gabrieli Quartet (of the 70's), as well as the Vlach Quartet or the Janacek Quartet of earlier vintages, however it is the Dante Quartet, whose readings achieve a new intimacy for Janacek's quartets. Then there is the Orpheus Quartet (Malipiero); the Gong Quartet (Jongen); the Hellenic Quartet (Skalkottas); the Arditti Quartet (modern American composers); the Debussy Quartet (Bonnal) who have premiered works which otherwise, are untouched by any other other string quartet. Oddly enough, most of the music by these 'premiering' string quartets, is music I would never think of duplicating 

On the other hand, there are the kind of ubiquitous quartets; like the Emerson Quartet; the Chilingirian Quartets who I pass on. They cover just about every populist repertoire, without ever cultivating a distinct 'sound' of their own, playing more like lexicographers to a high proficiency, rather than penetrating into the very spirit of the music.

Yet....no matter how brilliant the Mosaiques Quartet are, I just don't listen or care for most of their repertoire. Those who like their repertoire are blessed by such a talented group. Although I am not a huge Beethoven fan, I hold the Alban Berg cycle; the Vegh Quartet and the Vlach Quartet cycles (earlier mono versions on LPs). I prefer the LP versions over the CD versions by far - the LPs are warmer; richer, and better played with the kind of mid-20th century passion - something which modern interpreters lack, despite their prowess and virtuosity. In this instance, I don't consider owning a LP cycle and a CD cycle as duplication; both exist on different formats, both with their strengths and weaknesses.

As for trios - I have managed (badly) to duplicate the Debussy/Ravel/Faure trios, purely by accident. I don't listen to much trio music though. They sound like need the piano blown up into a million pieces and replaced by a cello and second violin


----------



## Quartetfore

Head Case, A few thoughts on your last post. I don` think that Hagen Quartet did a complete Shostakovich cycle, but the single disk is outstanding. I to like the St. Petersburgs Shostakovich. I agree that the Gong Quartets Jongen is very worthwhile, the second quartet is a favorite of mine. The Bonnal quartets are works of great beauty, onlythe first two are available here in the 'States". I go to hear the Emerson play every year at a University near my home. What they play, they play very well. It would seem to me that American Quartets stick to the standards when it comes to concerts and recordings. I guess that it is up to the taste of those who attend concerts, and the Record Company. Now to the piano trio--a favorite of special interest ( I own 70 recordings, Beethoven through Shostakovich with more to come) Not the equal of the string quartet in depth, and understanding that they were composed to a different end, I find them most rewarding. Best, Quartetfore.


----------



## Head_case

Thanks - yeah. Someone mentioned that there was a Hagen Cycle of the Shostakovich String Quartets some time ago. They aren't a kind of quartet that tends to go for complete exhaustive recording of a string quartet cycle and tend to produce brilliant little single quartetters here and there. 

I'm looking forward to seeing what new stuff the St Petersburg Quartet will bring. They've already released the premiere of some obscure sounding Soviet Padernasvkisvsihisihigksikshiivihi or someone, and their repertoire is extremely lithe, ranging from the early romantic to the late modern era. 

I confess that the Jongen quartets haven't really been that thrilling for me; they do possess a certain slow beauty - romantic beauty? perhaps. Nonetheless, I'm glad they're there, even if I don't listen to them often. (hmm - maybe I need to make a list of my CDs and tick off the ones I listen to, and ones I need to listen to more? )

Bonnal's CDs are hard to find over here too! Whilst exploring a French binge of string quartets, I came across the Bonnal and picked it up and have only got around to listening to it. Is it, that there are only 2 recorded string quartets by the Quatuor Debussy, or that the recordings are extant? 

I hear what you're saying about the American Quartets. I was at a London concert given by the Czech group, the Wihan Quartet recently. One thing which struck me, was the incredibly 'hypersaturated' romanticism of their approach to Martinu; Dvorak and Smetana' quartets. Even their encore, the slow movement from the American Quartet was exceptionally romantic in rendition: their strings all perfectly smooth and tonally sealed. There were only a few minutes where they unleashed the raw nerve edge brooding storm in the Martinu Quartet No. II during the whole set - and this seemed too much for the sedate crowd to handle. I guess they wanted to make sure that they did not scare anyone off 

It would have been a concert to send every romantic music lover into dizzying ecstasy. However a few years ago when I last saw them, they were more expressive; more unbridled and fiery in their play. I guess they have slowed down in their mature years - their 25th anniversary this year. 

Strangely, the Faure' piano trio; the Faure piano quartets and Faure piano quintets are some of the few piano based chamber based music I consider essential to own. There's something special about Faure. Maybe a new thread on 'piano trio recommendations' is in order. I do like listening to Faure's, but haven't quite moved onto others. Shostakovich' piano trio is good too. I duplicated some accidentally, when I bought recordings by 'super artists' like Yoyo Ma, Ax or Thibaudet/Harrell/Perlman collaborations and realised that dedicated trio groups, like the Florestan Trio; or the Beaux Arts Trio or the Solomon Trio, endow a piano trio with a richer Gestalt than 3 super artists jamming together and selling the disc on the strength of their individual loyalty base.


----------



## Quartetfore

Nadarejshvili! is the name of the composer. The quartet shares the recording of the two Prokofiev Quartets. It is an interesting work using Georgian folk themes in a Arvo Part sort of way. I play it once a year. I do like Faure`s piano and strings works very much, but not his quartet. Best, Quartetfore


----------



## Grosse Fugue

I duplicate because each version is different. This is especially true of opera recordings and dvds. It's with them that most of my duplication happens. Still 28 sounds a bit much.


----------



## Head_case

quartetfore said:


> Nadarejshvili! is the name of the composer. The quartet shares the recording of the two Prokofiev Quartets. It is an interesting work using Georgian folk themes in a Arvo Part sort of way. I play it once a year. I do like Faure`s piano and strings works very much, but not his quartet. Best, Quartetfore


Crikes. Only once a year?!

I was reluctant to duplicate the Prokofiev string quartets - in part, I don't find Myaskovsky's younger friend, as interesting as Myaskovsky's lyrical worldview. Prokofiev's sarcasm and wit translates thin in his string quartets and one version by the American String Quartet (whose other works I have never heard) is sufficient. Still, I worry about the St Petersburg String Quartet's way of releasing single quartets from composers as 'fillers' such as the two Prokofiev and one of several quartets from Nadareskhibhsilldhjislivi (sp.!). They did the same with a Glazunov string quartet if I recall correctly.

Arvo Part is one of those composers whose works raise incredulity for me. I've heard a number of versions of 'Fratres' and all have come across as sterile and bland. As much as I like Part and his reverential soundscapes, the experience I derive from them is like coming out after an anaesthetic.

Faure's string quartet is rather strange although ethereally strange. I find it pulsates; contracts and expands to grow in form, seamlessly and fluidly. Before you know it, it is a living organism with four voices, whispering music into life. The original version I had, by the Quatuor Parrenin was never very exciting. The Quatuor Ebene and the Dante Quartet versions are utterly subllime. I prefer the latter actually, although the French guys really resuscitate the Faure string quartet from the kind of blandness that has become too much a part of the fabric of string quartets trying to play the Faure solo quartet.

Are you a Rogister fan too then?


----------



## Quartetfore

Back in the days when the St. Petersburg recorded for Delos that was their practice. Now that that they are at Hyperion and are being much better recorded thay seem to doing to be doing the right way. What is a Roister Fan??


----------



## Quartetfore

I mean a Rogister Fan.


----------



## Head_case

Jean Rogister?

Ohh. I just thought you might like him. Here's some info:












> ROGISTER Jean (Liège, 1879 - Liège, 1964)
> 
> Jean Rogister is one of those extraordinary virtuoso-composers who left a mark on musical life in the first half of the twentieth century. Born in Liège on 25 October 1879, he revealed an undeniable gift for music from an early age. He was hardly enrolled in the Liège Conservatory before he won his diploma with all honours. A pupil of Désiré Heynberg and Oscar Englebert, Jean Rogister was a virtuoso viola player out of the ordinary, and at 21 he was appointed viola teacher at the Liège Conservatory. Jean Rogister considered this appointment not an end but a starting point for a career that was to be as rich as it was diversified. Like his predecessors and contemporaries, this viola virtuoso studied harmony, counterpoint and composition. His teacher had been Jean-Théodore Radoux, an ardent follower of Franck, and Rogister quite naturally fell in behind him. The young composer sought, at first, to reconcile his activity as a viola player, and above all quartet member, with his taste for composition. In 1902 he composed his first string quartet, a genre to which he remained faithful throughout his life. The maturing of this work coincided with his debut in the Charlier Quartet. This double activity, was seen by Jean Rogister as another starting point. For some years Jean Rogister wrote no new works. He quietly studied. On the other hand he developed his activity as a chamber musician and was the driving force behind the "Cercle Ad Artem", of the Chaumont Quartet, and of the group "Piano et Archets", before founding the Liège Quartet in 1925. The year 1925 was important as a point of arrival. Between 1910 and 1925 Jean Rogister had lived through vivid experiences, unique encounters. He returned, first, to composition, taking advice from Vincent d'Indy. As a virtuoso viola player, he left Liège for the USA where, for ten months, he was solo viola for the Philadelphia Symphony Orchestra, then conducted by Leopold Stokowski. He composed not only for the string quartet and the viola, but also for the piano, the orchestra, the violin, the cello and the trombone. Not yet fifty, Jean Rogister was in full possession of a very broad range ofpossibilities. The remaining thirty-five years of his life were devoted to developing and expanding what he had slowly established. First, there was his consecration as a chamber musician with the Liège Quartet (with Henri Koch, Joseph Beck and Lydie Schor), the tours of which triumphed in both Europe and the USA. Then there was his immense output of works. Jean Rogister was indefatigable. He found everything interesting and his compositions reflected this curiosity. Franckian construction continued to fascinate him, but he directed himself more towards developing tone-colour and sonority. Nothing shows this better than his then passion for early music. Between 1933 and 1940, with his "Association for the Study of chamber Music", he set out to discover early music, its interpretative principles and tried to understand its secrets. The war and distressing family matters momentarily put an end to this boundless enthusiasm and intense activity. For three years, the composer was silent. He took up his pen once more in 1943 to produce an astonishing work, a Symphony for solo string quartet and large orchestra, in which he demonstrated not only a remarkable mastery of style, but also a sophisticated assimilation of the different kinds of early music he had avidly practised. This orientation towards the monumental occupied him until his death: the Requiem of 1944 and "Jeux symphoniques" of 1952 are the most striking evidence of this. As for his solo works, they culminated in his wonderful Violin Concerto of 1945. Jean Rogister died on 2 March 1964. Though his long career had been studded with success, his guiding light seems to have been constancy: that, for example, of the viola player who was never too tired to teach, his unceasing self-renewal being a joy for his pupils. As a composer he never sought rupture, preferring to develop an aesthetic plan of which he had very early on sketched out the main lines. His compositions also bear witness to the multiple commitments he took on as a musician, one who was ever seeking perfection and renewal.


PS - I find modern recordings still hit and miss. Some recordings, although much clearer, seem to foreground the violins too strongly and push the cello into the background, or the viola becomes as dark as the cello in the mix. There's something special about recording with a single microphone - like the 1930's classics singers, who used to sing through a microphone and step away for the fade effect and diminuendo in front of the audience. It was a real visual treat to see the synergy and hear the volume drift away like this. I guess the string quartet medium doesn't have that kind of device, unless the cellist manages to get a pair of handy-wheels on his cello to move around the mic


----------



## Earthling

I've got six different recordings of Bach's _Cello Suites_-- probably the only thing I have multiple recordings of-- and possibly some duplicates here and there from overlapping minor pieces on different CDs (I may have two recordings of Copland's _Quiet City_ for example).

There are more recordings of the cello suites I wouldn't mind having as well. The reason why (aside from the fact that it my absolute favourite piece of music) is that the suites have very little by way of interpretive directions, so the suites can vary quite widely from one performer to the next.


----------



## Quartetfore

Thanks for the information about Jean Rogester. Much to my suprise, there is a recording available here in the "States". Our old friend the Gong Quartet playing the 2nd and 6th Quartet---I will give it a go in the Fall, I don`t buy anything during the Summer. I have amend my post about the lack of adventure for American Quartets. I forgot The LaSalle Quartet (1946-87). During the LP era, they recorded works by Berg, Webern, Zemlinsky, Cage, Ligeti, and Nono. I knew their recordings of late Beethoven, and Haydn. Its interesting that while they disbanded over twenty years ago, there influence is still felt. Walter Levin who was the first violinist of the LaSalle Is perhaps the most well know coach/teacher in the quartet world. He has trained among others the Alban Berg Quartet, the Prazak, the Vogler Quartet, the Artemis Quartet, and the Pavel Haas Quartet ( one of the very best of its generation) Best, Quartetfore.


----------



## Head_case

Earthling - I'm amazed at the Bach cello suites just like you - there are a variety of interpretations. Matt Haimovitz is quite enjoyable for me at the moment. I like hearing Bach's suites although I don't own a single copy, I can pick out the distinctiveness in different interpretations. There's much to love about these, compared to say, Britten's solo cello suites which has his typical emotional coldness stamped all over. You're spot on about the interpretation being the core foundation for why any head case might want to 'duplicate' music. 

In the philosophy of hermeneutics, Paul Ricoeur describes the dilemma of multiple interpretation; which version of the music playing do I enjoy most? The version on LP in 1978; the CD version by a modern group in 2009; or the live performance which I was present for, or the memory of the live performance which I hold in mind when the music is not playing? 

One concept of interpretation, points towards the 'plurality of interpretations' as the core of 'meaning'. We make sense of all of these versions of the same music score....and hold the richness in our minds. 

The opposite view of interpretation, more along the Gadamerian lines, suggests that interpretation is not an 'infinite' circle, which can spin off new interpretations. At some horizon in the distance, the version of music I play to myself, reaches 'my' horizon, and I can deign to derive no more from the music, no matter what version I listen to. That is, I am satisfied with having extended myself, beyond my own limits, with the (duplicate) version of the music which I have. 

Some of us follow Ricoeur's philosophy (for example - the 28 version symphonist); others follow the narrower Gadamerian view point, even if they are unaware of what they are doing, and justify it with pragmatic reasons.


----------



## Head_case

quartetfore said:


> Thanks for the information about Jean Rogester. Much to my suprise, there is a recording available here in the "States". Our old friend the Gong Quartet playing the 2nd and 6th Quartet---I will give it a go in the Fall, I don`t buy anything during the Summer. I have amend my post about the lack of adventure for American Quartets. I forgot The LaSalle Quartet (1946-87). During the LP era, they recorded works by Berg, Webern, Zemlinsky, Cage, Ligeti, and Nono. I knew their recordings of late Beethoven, and Haydn. Its interesting that while they disbanded over twenty years ago, there influence is still felt. Walter Levin who was the first violinist of the LaSalle Is perhaps the most well know coach/teacher in the quartet world. He has trained among others the Alban Berg Quartet, the Prazak, the Vogler Quartet, the Artemis Quartet, and the Pavel Haas Quartet ( one of the very best of its generation) Best, Quartetfore.


The Gong Quatuor are quite fabulous aren't they? 

That's very restrained of you not to buy during summer. I think recently I've been splurging on French string quartet music because it's all you guys fault for making such fascinating recommendations.

Perhaps the Gong don't have the utter sensuality of the first violinist from the Dante Quartet or the Zehetmair Quartet - after all, the Gong are chamber musicians who have assembled together and are not used to playing solo, whereas Krysia from the Dante Quartet and Tommy from the Zehetmair Quartet are reknown violin soloists before forming their respective quartets.

Nonetheless, it's hard to imagine the Gong Quatuor being bettered in their premiers of the Joseph Jongen and the Rogister string quartets for the next decade. Similarly - the Debussy Quatuor's opulent and magical textured qualities in the opening of the Bonnal string quartet no. I - less tonally sealed than the Gong Quatuor, however both Bonnal and Jongen didn't write string quartets requiring virtuoso first violin parts which perhaps is why there are so many string quartet ensembles who are neither brilliant nor virtuoso, but perform brilliantly when they select repertoire fitting to their limitations. At times, I can hear faint wisps of Szymanowski (although far less elaborate and more tangible at first listen) in that magically sonorous moonlit first violin part. Like Szymanowski - both composers were eclipsed by the second world war; Bonnal's restitution is late in coming - much later than Szymanowski's.

The LaSalle Quartet don't feature highly in my string quartet collection - more to do with their repertoire than anything else. The Pavel Haas Quartet are very good indeed - although I'm waiting for them to brush up their repertoire and introduce some more original music, like that of Bonnal, to the western world. The Artemis Quartet, I've heard their popular pieces only. The Prazak Quartet have more or less dominated my late Dvorak readings, although only when played on my home hi-fi (superb recordings). The Vogler, I think did the Hartmann & Eisler cd I found lying around in the back of the CD cabinet after knocking it off accidentally by a box set. One of my discontents homes in on brilliant new string quartet ensembles, doing more of the same recorded repertoire that has already been covered. Even the Debussy Quatuor are guilty of this: they have completed the whole Shostakovich String Quartet Cycle, yet the last thing I need (even if I want!) is yet another complete Shostakovich String Quartet Cycle!!


----------



## Quartetfore

Since I live in an area that has 2.5 million lawns, I hear the song of 2.5 million lawn mowers all Summer long from Sunrise to Sunset. When I can steal some time, I listen to favorites. When the birds fly South I take out the checkbook and start buying new recordings.


----------



## Head_case

Wow - I thought you weren't going to get any new music till autumn? 

The Rogister works are delightful eh? 

It's a real joy discovering a quartet like the Gong Quatuor whose discography consistently cover uncharted terrain with glorious recordings. 

One thing I'm finding....I used to think that there was a huge gulf in stylistics between the earlier recordings from say, the 1970's, versus the modern more technical style and favoured the 1950's - 1970's string quartets like the Hungarian; Busch; Beethoven; Taneyev; Gabrieli; Aeolian; LPs over and above, the modern technically precise stuff. I guess once in a while (like a decade), a string quartet like the current Dante Quartet; Ebene Quartet come along with exceptional music that sheds new light and fathoms deeper than ever conceived possible, with the earlier recordings. Other quartets like the Gong Quatuor, simply shed light on new music with such musicality and authority, that questions of technical playing are cast aside. 


Well on the subject of duplication I'm currently listening to the Belcea String Quartet's Bartok Cycle. No matter how much the British music press rave about them, I can't say they are adding any new insights, over and above the Végh Quartet or the Keller Quartet cycles for me. They lack the analytical insights of the more refined recordings from the 90's as well as a lack of that spiritual direction found in the other two epic recordings from the 70's and 1995. 

Has anyone got the Juilliard Quartet versions of the Bartok string quartets (from the 70's?) This is the one I'd love to hear. 

If anything, the trend towards 'CD' from 'LP' in the late 80's/90's, led to a kind of duplication of formats; and an insensible abandonment of the vinyl LP format, except for enthusiasts who realise the sonic qualities of the LP medium as being richer in dynamic/quality than the CD.


----------



## Quartetfore

I just cought up with your post--my fault. I own the 1970`s Juilliard Bartok cycle. The problem I have with it is the sound so dull. Other wise, they do know how the music should go. I have never enjoyed this groups recording, I just don`t like the sound of their recordings. I have heard them live, and they sound much better in person.


----------



## Head_case

Hey - 

thanks for the feedback. I guess I am really happy with the Végh and Keller Quartet cycles, there's no need to push back and discover yet another one, particularly if it is as dull as you've found. 

Are you sure it's not a hi-fi thing? Some recordings which I have are abysmal, depending on which system I play them back on. Generally, I find it easier to listen through decent headphones and a portable amplifier - the quality of the sound is phenomenal for its cost, compared to a fully blown hi-fi kit. Of course, that wouldn't work for carrying LPs 

I'm not a huge fan of the Juilliard school either. I like most string quartets which I've heard live, although it is true that their CDs can be a disappointment.

About 10 years ago, I heard a little known quartet called 'The Eleanora Quartet' play Shostakovich' IV and Debussy. They were utterly sublime. I have no idea what happened to them. Sorry to see they never made it on the international circuit nor release any CDs.


----------



## jurianbai

naah we thanks yahoo for helping us digging sublime and vintage string quartet....









http://www.etcetera-records.com/index.php?401

talking about duplication topic (in chamber sub forum), what's your most referred Dvorak American String quartet ?


----------



## Head_case

Wowsers!

So they did release an album! It's just me spelling their name wrong (as did their parent record label lol).

I was curious and looked on the link, but couldn't find anything about them. I guess they never pulled off completing a cycle, nor any other recordings sadly 

The versions of the Dvorak String Quartet No. XII which I own:

*1. The Vlach Quartet [Josef Vlach] on LP
2. The New Vlach Quartet [Jana Vlachova] on Naxos CD
3. The Prazak Quartet on SACD
4. The Talich Quartet on CD*
5. The Varsovia String Quartet on CD
6. The Carmina Quartet on CD
7. The Amadeus Quartet on LP

I've heard versions by the Prague String Quartet [Box set]; the Hagen Quartet; the Endellion Quartet; the Alban Berg Quartet and of course, the Smetana Quartet.

I really like the versions by no.s 1 - 4. These four ensembles produce really rivetting music. If I had to pick a single one to recommend, it would be the original Vlach Quartet mono version on LP (if you have a vinyl LP player) or the Naxos version if you're on a budget. If you don't have a LP player and you're not on a budget, then it would be the Prazak Quartet version. This is the one ensemble I would absolutely love to have their complete superlative 40 releases on CDs if I could afford £500 on their music 

All the others are fine: technically it is not a demanding quartet and the general level of competence in this string quartet is fantastic across the board - you should be happy with most ensembles. Maybe the age of the recording matters.


----------



## jurianbai

My 'standard' listening to Dvorak is the Prague SQ set. But I also own a weird name quartet 'Turtle Island' SQ, which is a contemporer group doing American, this influence my memory of this popular quartet for so long. I think the Delme SQ also has it take, I remember own the Dvorak's by them.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I hate duplication with a passion and avoid where possible if I'm not specifically collecting different recordings of a particular work. In my case it seems to have happened with Dvorak more than anyone else - especially his Czech and American Suites which tend to crop up as filler when I'm after other works: at least they aren't too long so they are only a minor irritation.


----------



## Head_case

Sorry to hear that. 

I know what you mean ... for decades...Claude Debussy's fabulous string quartet was always paired with a filler by Ravel which meant duplication was inevitable if you wanted just another 3 or 4 readings of Debussy's string quartet


----------



## Air

Head_case said:


> Sorry to hear that.
> 
> I know what you mean ... for decades...Claude Debussy's fabulous string quartet was always paired with a filler by Ravel which meant duplication was inevitable if you wanted just another 3 or 4 readings of Debussy's string quartet


Now that's just an unjust insult to a fine work - finer than the Debussy, some would even say.


----------



## Head_case

It's okay .. you can calm down. It was a facetious comment joking about the art of duplication in case you didn't notice 

As it is, I like Ravel's string quartet a lot (and his piano trio). His piano trio engages me more than Debussy's piano trio. As for string quartets, it's the other way around.


----------

