# Help Karajan #1: How to like String Quartet!



## Guest

Yes, After getting a unanimous message that I should listen more and judge, i ask of TCMs [Talk Classical Members] to help me to get into String Quartets. I have heard SQ No. 14 of Beethoven and i did not enjoy it at all.

I want to start with something light and harmonic. Could TCMs tell me where to SQs and to quote someone "where i went wrong?"


----------



## Guest

Pardon my mistake of putting thread in Orchestral Music


----------



## Marisol

Here is something 'simple' and catchy for starters:


----------



## joen_cph

A couple of immediately attractive ones:

Shostakovich: Quartet 7 




Arriaga: Quartet 1 




Debussy: Quartet, Scherzo 




Mozart: Quartet 17 K458 "The Hunt":


----------



## Ramako

I got into string quartets via Haydn's op. 33. I used to put them as background music because I didn't like string quartets, but wanted to. Op. 33 no. 1 in b minor caught my ear, and when I then listened to it with more concentration I began to understand how good a work it was.

Places to start for the string quartet I would suggest are some of Haydn's (op. 20, 33, 76 and maybe 64 primarily) if you like him. Also Schubert 14 and 15 and Mendelssohn 2 are excellent and quite easy to get into. I must confess I haven't really 'got' Beethoven's quartets yet on the whole, although I do enjoy them.


----------



## Mesa

Thrills, spills and chills abound, my friend. (Not particularly simple or light, but the first movement may grab you by the neck and shake enjoyment out of you.)


----------



## Ravndal




----------



## violadude

Beethoven's 14th definitely requires pretty mature ears. That's not meant as an insult, I didn't like it when I first heard it either. There's nothing immediately exciting about it at all, especially to someone who doesn't listen to many string quartets. You might like Beethoven's f minor sq. It's pretty exciting, but it's not very "smooth" if you are into that.


----------



## quack

Mendelssohn would be my suggestion. Sweet and easy to enjoy, they seem to me to be the part way point between the rather formal, 'clockwork' of the classical era, the melodrama of much of the romantic and the angular spikiness of the 20th century quartets. His string symphonies are early works but are also well worth hearing.


----------



## jurianbai

Not me, in sending you message ... lol.

My first interest in string quartet is Dvorak's American quartet. Listen it all four movements.
And then Schubert's no.13 'Rosamunde' and 14 "Death and the Maiden".











So, what is your prefered styles or era?


----------



## ahammel

Ravel's string quartet takes full advantage of the tone colour possibilities of all four instruments. (Actually, he does this in every genre.)

May I add that this approach is far more likely to be productive than asking "hey, none of you guys like string quartets either, right?", as has been your wont.


----------



## Geo Dude

I'll second the recommendation for Haydn, in particular Op. 20 and 76. Mozart's "Haydn Quartets" may also appeal to you, though his earlier quartets are certainly lighter. Haydn's Op. 9 might appeal to a beginner, too. You might be better off starting with Beethoven's early and middle quartets if you want to try some Beethoven.

EDIT: Dvorak is also a good suggestion, and not just his American Quartet. Many of his works are easily appealing with great use of melodies. Do a search on YouTube for Dvorak String Quartet and see what you can pull up.


----------



## Feathers

Borodin 2 is one of my favourites.


----------



## DavidA

I would recommend the Schubert Rosamunde Quartet.


----------



## Ravndal

Both Rosamund and no 14 is exquisite. And I'm listening to Borodin no 2 (the one Feathers linked) for the first time, and i must say - wow. I recommend that one as well


----------



## Bone

karajan said:


> Yes, After getting a unanimous message that I should listen more and judge, i ask of TCMs [Talk Classical Members] to help me to get into String Quartets. I have heard SQ No. 14 of Beethoven and i did not enjoy it at all.
> 
> I want to start with something light and harmonic. Could TCMs tell me where to SQs and to quote someone "where i went wrong?"


Requesting something light and harmonic indicates a predisposition for Classical quartets. Dive into Haydn and early Mozart to your heart's content. If, however, you want to "like" string quartet (!), then jump into the recommendations of TC members who truly enjoy the music: Schubert might be harmonic, but it ain't light. I still say you can't go wrong with modern composers like Bartok, Shostakovich, and Carter - trust me, if you'll take the time to learn the music by repeated listening and suspend judgement until you are sufficiently saturated with a particular piece, you're bound to gain an appreciation for the genre. Dismissing Beethoven rather quickly doesn't exactly instill me with hope for your success, but I presume that you are at least somewhat sincere about wishing to understand what all the fuss is about from experienced musical listeners who love string quartets.


----------



## peeyaj

Schubert's last four quartets were just amazing..

For an amateur, how about the *Quarttetsatz,*






Then proceed to the lovely *Rosamunde Quartet.*






then to one of the greatest ever written, the *Death and the Maiden*






with the most intense one, the* 15th in G major.*






:cheers:


----------



## Quartetfore

Feathers said:


> Borodin 2 is one of my favourites.


A perfect way to start, and the Tchaikovsky #1. This is the way I started years ago.


----------



## Guest

Bone said:


> Requesting something light and harmonic indicates a predisposition for Classical quartets. Dive into Haydn and early Mozart to your heart's content. If, however, you want to "like" string quartet (!), then jump into the recommendations of TC members who truly enjoy the music: Schubert might be harmonic, but it ain't light. I still say you can't go wrong with modern composers like Bartok, Shostakovich, and Carter - trust me, if you'll take the time to learn the music by repeated listening and suspend judgement until you are sufficiently saturated with a particular piece, you're bound to gain an appreciation for the genre. Dismissing Beethoven rather quickly doesn't exactly instill me with hope for your success, but I presume that you are at least somewhat sincere about wishing to understand what all the fuss is about from experienced musical listeners who love string quartets.


Which "judgement'?


----------



## LiquidCosmic

The Beethoven C-sharp minor is my personal favorite Beethoven, but I really don't think it's the place to start. His middle period quartets tend to be a bit more accessible, and I recommend that you start with Op. 59. I'm not really that familiar with Haydn's quartets, but you sound like you'd really enjoy them.

When in doubt, go with what's popular, since it tends to be popular for a reason. Schubert 13 and 14 are both really nifty, and the Borodin 2 is also performed very frequently and are good places to start.

My own personal favorite string quartets are those of Shostakovich, Bartok, and Schoenberg. Shostakovich 8 was really the piece that got me interested in classical music in the first place, but it is quite dense and very dissonant at times. I'd also highly recommend Bartok 4 and 5.


----------



## Bone

karajan said:


> Which "judgement'?





> I have heard SQ No. 14 of Beethoven and i did not enjoy it at all.


Seems kind of like a judgement to me. My personal experience is that if I'm listening to something I'll likely find something to keep my interest; when I am not actively listening, I would say that I am hearing music. Is that what you mean? I simply have trouble imagining a TC member dismissing Beethoven if one were truly listening. Then again, I tend to do the same with most Schubert...


----------



## KenOC

"I have heard SQ No. 14 of Beethoven and i did not enjoy it at all."

That is not a judgment or a value judgment, it is a fact. The writer did not "dismiss" Beethoven. He described his reaction to it.


----------



## Bone

KenOC said:


> "I have heard SQ No. 14 of Beethoven and i did not enjoy it at all."
> 
> That is not a judgment or a value judgment, it is a fact. The writer did not "dismiss" Beethoven. He described his reaction to it.


An aesthetic response is a judgement based upon one's evaluation of a work of art. This same reaction is noted on many other posts by Karajan. I apologize if I am mistaken, but I get the distinct impression that this particular TC member has a great many judgments based on cursory examination rather than deep reflection. I appreciate opinions, but finding no enjoyment at all in a work that is a cornerstone of all Western Art chamber music makes me question the validity and reliability of the listener.


----------



## KenOC

Bone said:


> An aesthetic response is a judgement based upon one's evaluation of a work of art.


Again, the writer did not "evaluate" the quartet, he merely described his reaction.


----------



## Avey

I want to delve even deeper into examining Karajan's opening remark:

He stated he "did not enjoy it." He did not state the he "does not enjoy it."

Thus, with the past tense form and no indication that he has listened to it [SQ 14] again, we may assume that he listened to the piece one time and one time only, and he has formed his opinion on that single instance alone.

To my point: I would agree with Bone on the insincerity of the listener here.

Call it a "fact" if you wish -- because it is indeed true that he dislikes the piece -- but I don't see an issue with characterizing comments like these as judgments. In this instance, the listener is judging the piece. And "judgment" generally connotes subjective, maybe even unfounded criticism. I do believe Karajan has been quick to form these steadfast opinions on pieces.

Immediate reactions and opinions aren't wrong or inappropriate, but they are absolutely judgments.


----------



## ahammel

Avey said:


> I want to delve even deeper into examining Karajan's opening remark:
> 
> He stated he "did not enjoy it." He did not state the he "does not enjoy it."
> 
> Thus, with the past tense form and no indication that he has listened to it [SQ 14] again, we may assume that he listened to the piece one time and one time only, and he has formed his opinion on that single instance alone.
> 
> To my point: I would agree with Bone on the insincerity of the listener here.
> 
> Call it a "fact" if you wish -- because it is indeed true that he dislikes the piece -- but I don't see an issue with characterizing comments like these as judgments. In this instance, the listener is judging the piece. And "judgment" generally connotes subjective, maybe even unfounded criticism. I do believe Karajan has been quick to form these steadfast opinions on pieces.
> 
> Immediate reactions and opinions aren't wrong or inappropriate, but they are absolutely judgments.


That's awfully harsh. He didn't like the piece so he came here asking for a gentler introduction. What would you prefer he do?


----------



## Bone

ahammel said:


> That's awfully harsh. He didn't like the piece so he came here asking for a gentler introduction. What would you prefer he do?


This particular poster seems to ask for gentle introductions while expressing opinions that are poll-worthy an awful lot. Not sure I would prefer the poster do anything different if sincerity is behind the intent to gain appreciation for art music; take the time to read thru all of Karajan's posts and see what conclusions you reach.


----------



## Guest

Yes, . True, i heard it once and perhaps i shall revisit the SQ No. 14 once again. Also dismissing Beethoven is like dismissing... Well i am an atheist so i got nothing...

But i absolutely love his works, i am not dismissing and neither am i judging his work. As one said i came here for help and not further criticism by hardcore String Quartet lovers who simply cannot imagine a person not being able to appreciate these "fantastic" works.


----------



## KenOC

Hang in there Karajan. Illegitimi non carborundum and all that.


----------



## ahammel

Bone said:


> This particular poster seems to ask for gentle introductions while expressing opinions that are poll-worthy an awful lot. Not sure I would prefer the poster do anything different if sincerity is behind the intent to gain appreciation for art music; take the time to read thru all of Karajan's posts and see what conclusions you reach.


I have read them. I'm interpreting this latest, poll-free approach as evidence that he's reformed.


----------



## Feathers

Hey Karajan, want to update us on how are you doing with the string quartets?


----------



## Guest

Sorry, i haven't got time to reach SQs. I am listening to Piano Concertos and Solo Piano compositions because piano is much _much_ easier to get into than SQs. Also, more the ticks on my like list, the better it is for me. So after getting tired of piano [When i hear it long enough, then i will start SQs...] Also, I am listening to orchestral of Tchaikovsky. Great guy! At the same time, i am also hearing Mozart's symphonies under Hogwood and Mackerass' baton. So a lot of music going on but not started SQ yet. 

BUT, THANKS A LOT for asking! I appreciate it!

P.S. Ravel's Gaspard de la nuit isn't all that bad. XD


----------



## Geo Dude

Well, it's good to know that you're exploring piano music and symphonies right now that you previously thought wouldn't appeal to you.  Let us know how that goes, too!


----------



## Guest

Yes, Mozart a composer which i did not _like_ before is starting to grow on me. I am actually enjoying Mackerass's performance on the first CD. So that's a change!

Anyways I have listened to Violin Concerto of Schoenberg and Sibelius, String Quartet No. 14 of Schubert and String Quartet No. 16 of Beethoven. I found Schoenberg's Violin Concerto _wierd_. Sibelius Concerto, seemingly did not understand. I found Schubert String Quartet pretty ok but not likeable as of yet. And String Quartet No. 16 of Beethoven was a bouncer. Did not enjoy at all.


----------



## Geo Dude

I thought you might find Mackerras (or Hogwood, for example) more to your taste based on the nature of the complaints you made about Mozart's symphonies. Are the Schoenberg and Sibelius by chance the Hahn recording you're listening to? I also find the Schoenberg weird, but you'll come around to the Sibelius in time, I think. Beethoven's late string quartets are difficult, so I second the recommendation others have made to set those aside for now in favor of Beethoven's middle quartets and especially in favor of Haydn's quartets.


----------



## MagneticGhost

Feathers said:


> Borodin 2 is one of my favourites.


This is the correct answer. 

There's some really good suggestions above. But for a newbie to the genre - I think the Borodin is probably the most accessible.


----------



## Guest

karajan said:


> Yes, Mozart a composer which i did not _like_ before is starting to grow on me. I am actually enjoying Mackerass's performance on the first CD. So that's a change!
> 
> Anyways I have listened to Violin Concerto of Schoenberg and Sibelius, String Quartet No. 14 of Schubert and String Quartet No. 16 of Beethoven. I found Schoenberg's Violin Concerto _wierd_. Sibelius Concerto, seemingly did not understand. I found Schubert String Quartet pretty ok but not likeable as of yet. And String Quartet No. 16 of Beethoven was a bouncer. Did not enjoy at all.


Sibelius' violin concerto didn't immediately connect with me. The first time I heard it, it left no lasting impression on me. But then I picked it up again later - the glorious recording by Heifetz (who is my go to guy for violin concertos) - and now it ranks as one of my favorites, if not my absolute favorite.


----------



## Guest

MagneticGhost said:


> This is the correct answer.
> 
> There's some really good suggestions above. But for a newbie to the genre - I think the Borodin is probably the most accessible.


Hmm, I have this one, recorded by the Takacs Quartet on Decca, but it hasn't really done anything for me yet - which is odd, because I love the Takacs Quartet. Maybe I'll have to pull it out and listen to it again.


----------



## Avey

DrMike said:


> Hmm, I have this one, recorded by the Takacs Quartet on Decca, but it hasn't really done anything for me yet - which is odd, because I love the Takacs Quartet. Maybe I'll have to pull it out and listen to it again.


Takacs +1.

Just an aside.


----------

