# Bartok vs. Haydn vs. Schubert String Quartet Cycles



## neoshredder

Basically this is a battle on who has the second best String Quartet (by popular vote) Cycle as Beethoven clearly got the most votes. So pick the one that is your favorite.


----------



## KenOC

Tough one. But I chose the Big H.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Haydn is all-around more fun.


----------



## pendereckiobsessed

Bartók!!!!


----------



## jurianbai

If you mean the quality of the cycle, that's can be Bartok. Because he composed "only" six and all are in serious quality. While Schubert only on his peak after Rosamunde, Death and Maiden, no.15 , Quartettsatz. Haydn, got one third a "student" string quartet.

but of course it is Haydn .....:guitar:... so we can proceed to the third greatest string quartet composer...


----------



## Head_case

? There was a poll on string quartets before? 

I can't even vote. I'm on googlechrome - no options appear on my screen. 

In any case, Bartok's string quartets might be one of the outstanding cycles of the 20th century. Schuberts cycle stands much longer, from the 19th century. Haydn's unfortunately have been standing too long 

I wonder if everyone's choices for a favourite, matches with how much time they spend listening to the quartets?


----------



## Head_case

Schubert!!


----------



## MaestroViolinist

YAY! Schubert is winning!


----------



## elgar's ghost

Bartok for me - Schubert's early quartets are pleasant enough but hardly essential. With Haydn it's difficult - I have his last 15 and like them a lot but something tells me I don't really need to go much further than that.


----------



## KenOC

elgars ghost said:


> With Haydn it's difficult - I have his last 15 and like them a lot but something tells me I don't really need to go much further than that.


That "something" is mistaken.


----------



## elgar's ghost

KenOC said:


> That "something" is mistaken.


I wouldn't be at all surprised, but the prospect of investigating another 50-odd is somewhat daunting, to say the least.


----------



## KenOC

elgars ghost said:


> ...the prospect of investigating another 50-odd is somewhat daunting, to say the least.


Pretty easy for me. I think, "Ah, a Haydn quartet would be good right now." I look at the list and choose one I haven't heard or maybe just don't remember hearing (yes, that happens!) Put it on, and...I've never been disappointed!

Haydn's music, early or late, is always better than you remember or expect.


----------



## Ondine

Hard to choose.

For Haydn the symphonies; for Bartok the string quartets; for Schubert the chamber music and piano sonatas.

Today's mood made me vote for Schubert.


----------



## clavichorder

Amazingly even poll. One or two Bartok's really amaze me. I know what Schubert is capable of, but I don't know his string quartets as well as I could. Haydn is the one who I enjoy the most, that I know of.


----------



## neoshredder

Yeah this has to be one of the hardest polls ever. I picked Schubert though.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Dvorak! ......


----------



## Art Rock

Of the three choices here, Schubert, ahead of Haydn, way ahead of Bartok.


----------



## Head_case

Haha ...

good old Safari browser. 

I've registered my vote for Schubert 

Got to dig out the Prazak Quartet CD recordings to celebrate before some spoiler comes and votes in Haydn


----------



## Ukko

At the time of this post, with 18 votes in, the contest is a close approximation of a three-way tie. Which suggests that there are significant differences in the criteria being used. My own criteria are such that Bartok and Haydn would be tied anyway. Schubert ain't in it.


----------



## Art Rock

neoshredder said:


> So pick the one that is your favorite.


We are picking our favourites - not surprising therefore that there are differences in the votes.


----------



## Ukko

Art Rock said:


> We are picking our favourites - not surprising therefore that there are differences in the votes.


True. I am attempting to legitimize that undignified, plebeian reality with a fabrication of intellectual consideration.

[Ahh. That sentence is satisfyingly multisyllabic.]


----------



## peeyaj

Schubert. All the way


----------



## Trout

I know Schubert's quartets no. 12-15 are normally considered among the best, however his other string quartets seem to be rarely mentioned. Are people voting for Schubert based on those last four quartets alone, or based on the entire cycle? If it is the latter, can you please recommend specifically which of his early string quartets one should look into?


----------



## Quartetfore

Trout, the op#87 is a sunny work and very enjoyable.
Emiellucifuge, there are very fine early quartets composed by Dvorak, I am thinking of say the op#34, 51 and 61. The last three are in my opinion the equal of any composed in the 19th century if we are excluding Beethoven in this poll.
Don`t forget the Shostakovich cycle, I think it is the greatest of our time.


----------



## neoshredder

Beethoven already dominated the poll in the thread KenOC made. This was hopefully a tiebreaker between these 3 that are very close in popularity here. It looks like Schubert has the slight edge for now when it comes to having to pick the favorite of the 3. You can interpret the way you like. I think of it as simple as which Quartet Cycle gave you the most enjoyment. Interpret that question the way you feel best. If you think all the Quartets have to be high quality, than maybe Bartok wins. If you think 4 great Quartets is all you need, than Schubert might be your pick. If you like to have a ton of Quartets, than Haydn might be your choice.


----------



## jurianbai

Schubert string quartet no.8 in Bb D112 is another to pick, sounds just like Haydn's.....


----------



## tdc

Art Rock said:


> Of the three choices here, Schubert, ahead of Haydn, way ahead of Bartok.


I find all three wrote great SQ's but Bartok's seem to be the most enjoyable (to me) with repeated listening - they are masterfully crafted and very dense, there are many intricate layers to be discovered.


----------



## Ukko

tdc said:


> I find all three wrote great SQ's but Bartok's seem to be the most enjoyable (to me) with repeated listening - they are masterfully crafted and very dense, there are many intricate layers to be discovered.


You are clearly a person of sophisticated taste and clear perceptions.


----------



## Head_case

Trout said:


> I know Schubert's quartets no. 12-15 are normally considered among the best, however his other string quartets seem to be rarely mentioned. Are people voting for Schubert based on those last four quartets alone, or based on the entire cycle? If it is the latter, can you please recommend specifically which of his early string quartets one should look into?


They might be rarely mentioned, but that's the nature of popular classical music. One of the most famous quartet ensembles to have traversed his complete cycle was the Busch Quartet: these come into the historical readings and are well worth hearing despite the audio limitations. Playing like this is just out of the world. The Verdi Quartet (who brought us some of the excellent Toch String Quartet Cycle repertoire) completed a cycle of the Schubert string quartets as did the Vienna String Quartet who also had some interesting repertoire.

It is the stature of the latter Schubert string quartets which can hold their own; much like Dvorak's late quartets (X-XIV) although mostly they made their map in the form of recording as the complete cycle by the Prague String Quartet in a box set. Back to the Toch String Quartet Cycle: the first 5 of his 13 string quartets were destroyed so only the rest is known to us.

Back to Schubert: the No. VIII & No. IX are the most strikingly different from the No.s X-XV & Trout Quintet. They are written in the language of Haydn yet with more verve and interest so that the listener isn't as likely to dismiss them as yet another Haydn number 

The recordings which stood out - the Quartetto Italiano recorded the No. VIII & No. IX originally on LP like the late quartets. The late quartets were transferred impeccably onto CD by Phillips. These ones don't seem to have survived beyond LP.

The Taneyev Quartet also coupled the No. VIII & No. IX on LP. Their recordings are typical of their leaner sound. Schubert sounds more acerbic and less Viennese rumpelstilkin fishnet tights and big hair do waltzing frocks. It's a strangely Soviet interpretation which won't appeal to everyone, but it sure appeals to me, because I don't enjoy Haydn's lilting bourgeoise style.


----------



## jurianbai

Unfortunately the set of Schubbie I listen is on budget box set by ensemble called Heutling string quartet. Actually if include the quintet, piano quintet etc. Schubert is likely the champion. 

There is Quatuor Ysaye video of no.8 in youtube, browse it.


----------



## Quartetfore

Add another complete cycle (Schubert) to the list. The Manderling Quartet has recorded both the complete Shostakovich and Schubert. I have their Shostakovich 9th., and as a very well versed friend told me "very different then the old Borodin set he has, but very valid"


----------



## Ramako

neoshredder said:


> Beethoven already dominated the poll in the thread KenOC made. This was hopefully a tiebreaker between these 3 that are very close in popularity here. It looks like Schubert has the slight edge for now when it comes to having to pick the favorite of the 3.


Haydn has the edge on the other one though 

Must say I do like Schubert's quite a lot though.


----------



## neoshredder

Must I say I respect all those who voted in this poll. This is the forum I come to the most when I am looking for the best music.


----------



## MaestroViolinist

neoshredder said:


> Must I say I respect all those who voted in this poll. This is the forum I come to the most when I am looking for the best music.


Wow, someone actually respects my opinion? Amazing.


----------



## realdealblues

I voted Haydn, with Schubert a close 2nd.


----------



## jurianbai

Was Haydn ever win a poll in TC? he must be the greatest underrated composer... Lol.... come on Papa....


----------



## Ramako

jurianbai said:


> Was Haydn ever win a poll in TC? he must be the greatest underrated composer... Lol.... come on Papa....


He's drawn equal now!


----------



## realdealblues

jurianbai said:


> Was Haydn ever win a poll in TC? he must be the greatest underrated composer... Lol.... come on Papa....


Haydn definitely does deserve to win more frequently. The guy wrote not only wrote a "massive" number of works (that dwarfs many other composers) but also wrote exceptionally high quality works as well. I have nothing but love for Haydn.


----------



## Head_case

Gaaggh. I'm outta here. 

The excitement of a drawn poll is too much!


----------



## neoshredder

I thought Schubert had it.


----------



## Arsakes

Master Haydn won by my vote!


----------



## Ramako

Arsakes said:


> Master Haydn won by my vote!


Hurrah!


----------



## neoshredder

Haydn and Schubert still tied. Bump to hopefully get a winner.


----------



## Cnote11

I picked Bartok... perhaps I'll listen to all three tomorrow.... perhaps that would have been the course to take BEFORE voting, eh?


----------



## Ukko

Cnote11 said:


> I picked Bartok... perhaps I'll listen to all three tomorrow.... perhaps that would have been the course to take BEFORE voting, eh?


There are significant differences in how they massage the mind. I'd prefer to have a day between 'listens', to avoid having my mental 'fur' rubbed the wrong way.

[Sorry about getting technical, can't seem to avoid using the industry jargon.]


----------



## neoshredder

3 way tie? Shocking.


----------



## tovaris

That's really tough to decide between Haydn and Bartók. I voted for Bartók. From Schubert I only like the late ones, so as a cycle Bartók for me.


----------



## neoshredder

I found SQ 7 and 8 enjoyable from Schubert as well. Especially 7.


----------



## Head_case

I'm so pleased for you. Now go vote for Schubert if you haven't already done so.

I want Schubert to be my Christmas No.1 chart topper! 

This is my current favourite version of Schubert's late quartet cycle (since the rest of mine are splintered over various recordings):










It's a SACD recording; my goodness...the Prazak Quartet have really outdone themselves on this opulent recording. I'm hesitant in even offering a suggestion that it might have surpassed the Quartetto Italiano's magnificent reading which I've lived off for the past 20 years, since I've only owned this one for a few. But it is a sublime recording. Engineered recordings don't get much better than this. String Quartet craftsmanship doesn't reach this level of artistry, except once in a generation.

They've made me fall in love with Schubert's D887 all over again.


----------



## Novelette

Definitely Haydn for me, too.

There is so much joy in those expressive works.


----------



## KenOC

Schubert is just so much overwrought emotionalism. Bartok is merely banging on trash can lids. Now Haydn...he's _civilized_.

More well-considered opinions coming soon...


----------



## mtmailey

SCHUBERT string quarets are better to me numbers 1-11 are fine but numbers 12,13,14 and 15 are way better.


----------



## Head_case

KenOC said:


> Schubert is just so much overwrought emotionalism. Bartok is merely banging on trash can lids. Now Haydn...he's _civilized_.


Excellent! Remember this one for forthcoming end of the year parties


----------



## PeterF

I admit to not really being a fan of Bartok.
So it comes down to Schubert and Haydn. I very much like Schubert's late string quartets , but. HAYDN is for me, the master of string quartets. Rarely more than 2 or 3 days goes by throughout the year without a Haydn string quartet playing at my home.


----------



## PMarlowe

neoshredder said:


> Basically this is a battle on who has the second best String Quartet (by popular vote) Cycle as Beethoven clearly got the most votes. So pick the one that is your favorite.


ALL of Haydn's quartets or just one of the opuses? 60 to 6 doesn't seem quite fair (to Bartok or Haydn).


----------



## DebussyDoesDallas

I regret to say I've yet to fully explore Bartok's cycle, partially cause I'm so hooked on the quartets of earlier composers. I mean, I've heard them all, but yet to fully _listen._ Regardless, my preference definitely leans towards the classical or romantic chamber sound. As much as I love Schubert's melodic genius, no composer can touch the breadth and depth of Haydn's body of quartets, especially opus 20 onward.


----------



## Morimur

Bartók gets the nod.


----------



## DebussyDoesDallas

elgars ghost said:


> Bartok for me - Schubert's early quartets are pleasant enough but hardly essential. With Haydn it's difficult - I have his last 15 and like them a lot but something tells me I don't really need to go much further than that.


Ah, it pains me to read these sentiments. If course Haydn ain't for every taste, but if you like Opus 76, it's definitely worth giving the others a shot. Why not go back to his first set of masterpieces, Opus 20, and if so inclined go forward from there? I think folks who only know the late period hits should give Opus 20 a listen, as it's noticeably different and great.


----------



## DebussyDoesDallas

elgars ghost said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised, but the prospect of investigating another 50-odd is somewhat daunting, to say the least.


Opus 20 is only 6.


----------



## mtmailey

SCHUBERT later quartets like #9-#15 are his best to me.


----------



## EDaddy

Papa gets my vote. But Schubert comes in a very close second. _Very_ close.


----------



## PMarlowe

Morimur said:


> Bartók gets the nod.


Which one? I have Emerson and Hungarian (and, down the road a bit, Tokyo) coming from the library.


----------

