# Greatest string quartet composers?



## KenOC

A time-honored genre, often with a composer's finest musical efforts. From Haydn to today: Who are the greatest composers of quartets? Vote for two or three!


----------



## science

For me, Haydn and Beethoven had to be chosen, simply for historical reasons never mind my own tastes. But then, that third vote... I went with Bartok over several good candidates there, like Schubert and Mendelssohn and Dvorak, but especially Mozart, whose string quartets (with two exceptions: Dissonant and the Hunt) don't get the glory they deserve. 

Other good options would've been Smetana, Janacek, Kodaly, Schoenberg, Ligeti, Carter. 

Two that don't tempt me are Brahms and Shostakovich. Though to me the latter's 8th is the greatest string quartet since Schubert, if not since Beethoven, there's not a lot to recommend the rest of them.


----------



## Klavierspieler

I was ever so tempted to vote Schumann, but I didn't. Not this time. Beethoven, Shostakovich, and Bartok for me.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Greatest: Beethoven
Favourite: Shostakovich
Underrated or generally under the radar: Hindemith and Zemlinsky


----------



## Ondine

Bartok, Brahms, Dvorak, Mendelssohn, Mozart, Shubert & Shostakovich... the most I like.


----------



## Prodromides

I selected "other" for the string quartets by Giacinto Scelsi.


----------



## KenOC

I seem to have carelessly omitted the Helikopter-Streichquartett, and there *was* room for one more! :cheers:


----------



## neoshredder

Where's Xenakis?


----------



## KenOC

neoshredder said:


> Where's Xenakis?


Smetana, Janacek, Xenakis, Hindemith, Ligeti, Scelsi, Carter, and Zemlinsky have all been mentioned now. Also mentioned should be Holmboe and Simpson (at least these two leap to mind). But there is a limit of 15 entries in a poll...


----------



## MaestroViolinist

Dvorak, Schubert, and Beethoven.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Beethoven, Bartók and other.

Other being *Ligeti,* Carter and Ferneyhough.


----------



## Arsakes

Haydn, Dvorak and Mendelssohn. 
If there was Sibelius option, it would take Mendelssohn's place. Sibelius 'in A minor' and 'in D minor'quartets are very good. Beethoven Quartets haven't influenced me enough yet, like Shostakovitch that only 3 of his quartets I like. Also it seems Brahms' and Schumann's Quartets are underrated and unpopular. 
I haven't heard a complete Quartet from Mozrart and Schubert yet.


----------



## Webernite

Voted Mozart and Beethoven. I listen to Mozart quartets a lot; I found them hard to get into at first (hard to follow what was going on), but now I rate them among the best. 

Brahms and Schumann quartets sound amazing if they're played well, especially the first movement of Brahms 2. But most of the time they're not played well. 

Maybe should have voted Haydn or Bartok as well.


----------



## Art Rock

Schubert, Dvorak and Shostakovich have given me the most consistent listening pleasure in this genre. Haydn and Beethoven would have been choices 4 and 5.

Not mentioned yet, but like them a lot: the SQ's of Max Bruch.


----------



## joen_cph

Should I choose only 3, it would probably be Beethoven, Shostakovich and Janacek. There are other candidates also, including some I need to explore more, though.


----------



## Renaissance

Beethoven, Bartok and Schubert.


----------



## Ramako

Haydn and Beethoven...


----------



## Ukko

"Greatest string quartet composer" can be construed in multiple ways, but it doesn't reach Janacek, who composed two great string quartets, or Benjamin Lees - any of whose quartets are worth immersing oneself in. I selected Haydn, Beethoven and Bartók (listed in order of birth date).

Closely related surveys could be the selection of the one or two string quartets by anyone that effect you most strongly, or raise your gorge to the highest degree of nausea, or produce the severest headache...

Given my strongly expressed attitude toward polls, someone else will have to pick up that gauntlet.


----------



## clavichorder

As usual, Beethoven has a ridiculous amount of votes that are probably given to his later work, which I don't care much for. 

Mozart, Haydn, Bartok, and other were my votes.

Why does nobody ever include Taneyev on these lists?


----------



## neoshredder

Beethoven's later works take many listens to I've heard. Not as accessible as his early works.


----------



## perduto

The ratings in my CD database tell me: Webern, Mozart, Malipiero, so I voted Other, Mozart, Other...


----------



## Arsakes

Honorable mention R.V.Williams's quartets. It seems they're forgotten because they're composed in a wrong time.


----------



## perduto

Arsakes said:


> Honorable mention R.V.Williams's quartets. It seems they're forgotten because they're composed in a wrong time.


The same for Frank Bridge's Third Quartet. Forgotten because it was composed in the wrong country.


----------



## neoshredder

Btw Xenakis was a honorable mention. Not my favorite. I don't have a favorite.  Just not one of my favorite subgenres. I prefer orchestral.


----------



## bigshot

Haydn and Dvorak are my goto guys


----------



## neoshredder

Another honorable mention is Boccherini.


----------



## jurianbai

Haydn, because his output is large. Beethoven for escalating the string quartet to mainstream. Then who else after these two? Schubert is good, but I bet only the latter quartet (no.12,13 and so on) that got attention, same thing with Dvorak. Mendelssohn maybe. How about the Russian friends, Myaskovsky, S.Taneyev, Vissarion Shebalin all produce a nice string quartet cycle.


----------



## Mahlerian

Schoenberg, Bartok, and Beethoven all stand out in this genre, although many of the others listed wrote great works. Their quartets span their whole careers, encapsulating their respective developments.


----------



## KenOC

No love here for Moishe?


----------



## quack

Aye i'd put Weinberg above many of those stringers, although I still haven't heard the full set of them. I am not a particular fan of classical or romantic string quartets so I would probably pick Shostakovitch, Bartok and Mendelssohn in that order. Despite liking a lot of Schnittke his quartets don't grab me. Others thus far unmentioned that I like include: Milhaud, Tischenko, Coates, Reger, Henze, Rihm, Krenek, Malipiero, Gorecki, Crawford Seeger and Davies.


----------



## violadude

I'm really bored and trying to avoid homework. So I'm going to make a really long post here. Most people know about the great string quartet cycles. Just wanna mention some really great string quartet cycles that I know of that don't often get mentioned, some of which have been mentioned already in this thread.

Tanayev: Haven't heard all of them yet (there are 9 I think) but what I've heard is really good. Often referred to as the Russian Brahms, which is pretty much what his string quartets sound like (very German in their sense of form and general "weight" but with some Russian spirit splashed in there). No.1 is especially Russiany, No. 5 is really classically, No. 4 is pretty dissonant. 

Reger: Wrote 5 string quartets (plus an early quartet with a string bass added in the finale). If you are familiar with Reger, you won't be surprised that these string quartets are very contrapuntally dense and VERY German. His style is kind of like Brahms + Bach + Steriods. The first two quartets are especially difficult because they start off with the contrapuntal craziness right away so it's rather hard to tell what exactly the main melody/theme is supposed to be (whereas 3-5 start off with a straight melody untainted by tons of counterpoint). If you listen to any of them I suggest 3. It's very long (about an hour) but it has amazing thematic development and probably, to my ears, the most emotionally involved. Also, don't discount the early quartet either. It's very good despite being a student work not officially part of the cycle. It's probably the most accessible too.

Hindemith: A very sadly overlooked cycle of 7. This cycle is probably not as well known because of Hindemith's stigma for being dry. Like Reger, he has a very German style (obvious for people already familiar with his work). My favorite works in this cycle are 3-5 with 6 being close as well. If you like clever thematic and contrapuntal devices this cycle is full of goodies. For example, the first movement of the 5th starts with a very exciting fugue, then a second more lyrical subject, then the fugue comes back, but the second subject also gets thrown into the fugue as well this time. There are also some very "traditionally" beautiful slow movements that still have a Hindemithian touch to them (No. 6 and 7). No. 2 is okay but too long winded imo (the finale is unorganized and overstays its welcome). Also, No. 1 is a pleasant surprise for those not really into the more modern style, definitely the most accessible Hindemith ever. 

Britten: Britten wrote a string quartet cycle of 3 that is not often talked about, but the consistent quality and variety in these pieces are really great. Since there are only 3 I'll go into a bit of detail. No. 1 (in 4 movements) is very youthful, energetic and vibrant, very springlike. No. 2 (in 3 movements) is the most weighty and is in a notably more mature style than the 1st. The 1st movement is a very developed and involved sonata-allegro with a slow introduction that plays a part in the thematic development of the movement proper, the 2nd movement is a very exciting and menacing scherzo with the strings muted. Then the 3rd movement is an incredible and epic (I don't really like that word, but it's appropriate here) Chaccone movement. This Chaccone is about 14 minutes long and has amazing development and progression, keep listening though cause it starts out kind of slow. String Quartet 3 is written in a suite-like fashion, in 5 movements. Each movement is named after a musical device that gives away the character of the movement. The overall character of this quartet is very dark, sardonic and doom-laden, which is appropriate considering it's the last piece he wrote. The 1st movement is called duets and the majority of it involves only two parts going on at a time (either by having only two instruments playing, or by pairing up the instruments and doubling each part). The 2nd movement is called Ostinato and is almost entirely built upon an obsessive theme made up of 4 straight quarter notes. The 3rd movement is called swan song and the whole thing is a lyrical violin solo with accompaniment from the other instruments. The 4th movement is called Burlesque and it's the craziest and most energetic movement (reminding one of Shostakovich), it includes a very surreal sounding trio that sounds to me like it depicts an hallucination. The last movement is called Passicaglia, and ya...it's a passicaglia, very similar in form to the last movement of the 2nd quartet but a very different character. Much more hopeless sounding. But it's a very appropriate ending.

Saygun: Ahmed Saygun is a Turkish composer that doesn't get too much mention. But he wrote a really cool quartet cycle of 4. Not as familiar with it to give too much detail but I have listened to them each at least a couple times and they are definitely worth listening to if you like early-ish 20th century music. His style is kind of like middle eastern Bartok I guess. There's a lot of really cool harmonies, thematic stuff, and they also just have a really cool "attitude" about them. Like when you listen you're just like woah this is awesome. If you're like me you'll say that at least haha. 

Gubaidulina- Has written a cycle of 4 so far, she's still alive so I don't know whether or not she will be writing more. I have only heard 1-3 and I can say that they are really good if you like Gubaidulina's style. If you don't, then they are really not good. But I really like her style. She uses a lot of symbolic gestures in her music and somehow all these gestures end up culminating to make something quite profound. My favorite at the moment is #2. 

Gorecki- Gorecki wrote a good cycle of 3. Although, just like with his 3rd symphony, they require patience. The 1st one is in one movement (entitled "It is Almost Dusk"). It's in an earlier style so it is more "edgy" than his more consonant "Symphony 3" style. It consists of outer sections that are slow and earthy, kinda spiritual sounding to me, with a really energetic and dissonant middle section, which sounds to me like it is based on folk music. The 2nd quartet (called "Una Quasi Fantasia") is halfway between 1 and 3. In this piece he has definitely started his minimalist style in terms of repetition (each of the 4 movements are built on an ostinato) but he has not lost the dissonance of his early style yet. This quartet might be the least accessible because of the repetition but I still like it. It uses some interesting ways to give the movements some cohesion. For example, in the first movement, the ostinato that the movement is built on is an constant quarter note pulse on E in the cello, very bare sounding. In the 3rd movement, the ostinato is built on the same constatn quarter note pulse, in the same tempo, but this time it's a lush F major chord on the two low strings while the two violins have a duet type role sort of. String quartet 3 is very much like his 3rd symphony, it's the same sort of style. It is almost an hour long so it does require a lot of patience, plus there is only 1 fast movement out of 5 movements total. but like the 3rd symphoy it is very beautiful and worth it when you have the patience for it. It's lyrical and most of the harsh dissonance of the first 2 quartets is gone. The name for this one is called "Songs are sung..." and is based off a poem about death and includes the line "When humans die, they sing songs", hence the title.

Per Norgard- In my estimation, this string quartet cycle should be (or will be) considered one of the greats of the late 20th century. It is made up of 10 quartets so far and they are each unique, full of invention and very high quality (as long as you like late 20th century music). The 1st is a student work and pretty accessible. The 2nd is a lot more mature in style but still quite accessible with thematic transformations that bring to mind Sibelius. Both of these quartets are essentially tonal in nature. 3-5 are the most unique and experimental of the set. #3 is called "Three Miniatures" and is only 4 and a half minutes in total. The bulk of it consists of each instrument having thematic cells that keep repeating, however, the catch is that each cell is a different length, so each part overlaps at different points with each other throughout the piece. #4 is called "Dreamscape" and it is actually for three string quartets, one live and two recorded. Each of the recorded string quartets are recorded in different ways, one with the mic up close and one with it far away to create a really dry and really echoey sound respectively. Along with the live quartet the piece really involved three completely different sound worlds and the result is very beautiful and other-worldly. It has a great climax too. #5 is called "Inscape" and it is a quarter tone piece. The first two movements amazingly stay within the boundaries of a minor third (b-flat and d-flat). This might be boring to some people but it's actually quite incredible the variety of tones he gets working within a minor 3rd. I had to go to my piano and check a few times if it really was contained in this small space. The third movement opens up to include many different tones outside of the minor third but still is micro-tonal. #6 is my least favorite of the set, to me it sounds sort of just like a generic modern piece but maybe I just haven't listened to it enough. #7 is pretty interesting, especially the 2nd movement which is based on a sickly sounding major/minor chord (the third of the triad is a microtone). The 1st movement is waltzy too, in a weird sort of way. #8 is called "Night Descending like Smoke" and it contains some very interesting textures that I haven't heard in any other string quartet, not least of which a random inclusion of voices in the 2nd movement. The 9th I am less familiar with but it sounds like it has some interesting stuff going on, I just have yet to flesh it out. It's called "Into the Source" and finally the 10th goes back to being quite tonal and lyrical and will be one of the most accessible quartets of the cycle for many. It starts out with a very beautiful melody. It's very lyrical but still in a distinctly modern way. This one is called "Harvest Timeless."

Maxwell-Davies- This composer wrote a series of 10 string quartets with unusual conditions. They were actually commissioned by the Naxos record company, so they are appropriately called the "Naxos Quartets." Very weird, it's the only quartet cycle I know of that is named after a record company. It's a very good cycle, with lots and lots of material to explore. It's pretty varied, inspired by a large variety of things such as the Iraq war (#3) childrens games (#4) Lighthouses (#5) Cathedrals (#7) The Queen (#8) and and childhood memories of the world wars in England (#9). The style is a pretty tough one to crack so if you don't like challenging music you won't like this stuff. But if you do like challenging music you will love it. None of them are "experimental" though. They are all structured with themes and melodies and counterpoint and whatnot in the traditional way you would think of them (although the themes and melodies can be quite angular). All in all, these are very "meaty" works.

Rihm- Wolfgang Rihm has written 13 quartets that I know of. I have most of the cycle and have listened to them a bit. They sound good to me, but they are only for a specific taste. For the most part, they are all very crazy, wild, intense and aggressive with extensive use of extended technique (Lot's of really scary tremolos, harsh pizzacatos ect.). A lot of times the instruments sound like they are doing their own thing and even going at different tempos sometimes. It's really noisy kind of music. But hey, I really like them. I'm sure they're to some people's taste on here. 

Also, there are a few quartet cycles that some may like a lot but I don't consider to be among the greats. Most of them I do like to some degree though. These include Prokofiev's cycle of 2 (not his best work by far imo), Bloch's 5 (for some reason, this cycle tends to bore me, I don't know what it is about it though), Villa-Lobos's 17 (Villa-Lobos's cycle sounds like a 20th century latino Haydn, just to give a style reference), and Malipiero's 8 (which are very lyrical, melodious and very enjoyable, but somehow don't scream "great" to me. They are very fantasia-like and I prefer works that are a bit more organized).


----------



## celegorma

If quantity not being an issue, these composers deserves honorable mention
Borodin, Prokofiev, Tchaikovsky, Ravel, Debussy, Sibelius, Grieg


----------



## Arsakes

Why should always Beethoven wins?! WHY??!! 

No actual problem with that though! :lol:


----------



## MaestroViolinist

*Sigh* I realise now that I should also really have voted Mozart.


----------



## peeyaj

Schubert' Death and the maiden Quartet.


----------



## neoshredder

Beethoven should be taken out of all polls as we know he will win it. It's better just asking who is the second greatest string quartet Composer?


----------



## SerbenthumInDerMusik

Villa Lobos deserves a mention. I'd put him instead of either Schumann or Weinberg.

Of available options, I chose LvB, Dmitri and Bartok.


----------



## neoshredder

Btw new thread to determine second place. http://www.talkclassical.com/22646-bartok-vs-haydn-vs.html#post388494 Mine is more of a pick your favorite as I find that easier to choose than which is considered the greatest.


----------



## Machiavel

Such a tragedy that George Onslow is almost forgotten and so rarely talked here or elsewhere. His string quartets are on par with beethoven and the greats in my humble opinion. I could listen to him daily and still find his works fresh to my ears.


----------



## Ramako

neoshredder said:


> Beethoven should be taken out of all polls as we know he will win it. It's better just asking who is the second greatest string quartet Composer?


It's just as well neither Beethoven nor Bach excelled in the same genre, otherwise the wars would never end...


----------



## Head_case

Ugggghh. Shouldn't this be in the chamber music subforum? 

I listen to mostly the string quartet genre to the exclusion of other forms of classical music...yet it's as difficult as being asked if you prefer your left foot over your right foot, or the right hand over the left one..or the right eyeball over the left one. Hmm. No doubt some will protest: "But surely, you can pick your favourite body part?" 

Okay ...here goes....I'm definitely left of the field. Favourites include Szymanowski's two string quartets (well, maybe that doesn't constitute a cycle lol); Myaskovsky's 13 string quartets; Salmanov's 6 string quartets; Bargielski's 6 string quartets; Martinu's 6 string quartets; Shebalin's 9 string quartets; then Shostakovich's 15 string quartets; Ernest Toch's fragmented cycle ...and that's just the ones on CD....


----------



## Llyranor

Whichever one wrote the Grosse Fuge.


----------



## millionrainbows

KenOC said:


> A time-honored genre, often with a composer's finest musical efforts. From Haydn to today: Who are the greatest composers of quartets? Vote for two or three!


Beethoven, Shostakovich, Ives, Babbitt, Wuorinen, Glass, Terry Riley.


----------



## Head_case

listening to James Wiley's string quartets.

He is definitely not a favourite :lol:


----------



## KenOC

Lots of voters! At this point, the top finishers with more than 10 points are, in order:

Beethoven
Haydn
Bartok
Schubert
Shostakovich
Mozart
Dvorak


----------



## Andreas

Anyone mentioned Cherubini yet? Endlessly charming composer. And, from what my ears tell me, on a most solid footing, technically. Not as daring as Beethoven, but who ever was?


----------



## tovaris

Beethoven, Bartók, Shostakovich. Easy one


----------



## Novelette

I'm a little surprised that Bartok is in second place--not that I dislike his string quartets by any means, but I didn't realize that they were so popular.

Good stuff!


----------



## Avey

Mendelssohn did not get enough appreciation. Neither did Beethoven.


----------



## Head_case

Avey said:


> Mendelssohn did not get enough appreciation. Neither did Beethoven.


Mendelssohn I can understand 

Beethoven is plenty popular enough. Like....how can you be any less appreciated than no.1? 

Ezra Laderman; Murray Schafer; Elliott Carter; David Diamond; Vadim Salmanov; Nikolai Myaskovsky; Dmitri Shebalin; Elena Loudova; Jiri Teml; Karel Husa, Filippenko; Dvorak and Kernis are the greats who don't get enough appreciation


----------



## DavidA

Beethoven of course - the Master

Schubert - late quartets are really special


----------



## Conor71

My favourites are Villa-Lobos, Shostakovich and Mendelssohn


----------



## peeyaj

Elliot Carter. We miss you.


----------



## jsparkyp

This is a rather silly exercise and I know this is not ever going to be the be all, end all authority on the subject. That said, the three I leave are Kevin Volans, R. Murray Schaffer and Peter Sculthorpe.


----------



## KenOC

Anybody interested in learning more about string quartets may want to check out the current free Coursera on-line course.

https://www.coursera.org/learn/string-quartet


----------



## MoonlightSonata

I voted for two - Beethoven (because of the Grosse Fuge) and Beethoven (because of the other quartets).
Several others are tied for third.


----------



## hpowders

Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, and Bartók.


----------



## Avey

Can we stop pulling up old threads, so I can stop regretting my decisions?

Thanks.


----------



## Albert7

Elliott Carter and Morton Feldman added now to the list by me.


----------



## Dim7

We all know Beethoven's Disgusting Fugue, but the first movement of Bartok's 4th quartet perhaps even grosser... I don't outright dislike it, but "gross" is very fitting adjective for it.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

I have been immersed in string quartets of late. I got on the kick by listening to a complete Schubert cycle by the Diogenes Quartet, and then characteristically dove in and purchased a bunch of cycles. Currently, I would have to say my favorites are Beethoven, Schubert, Dvorak and Brahms. Mendelssohn is also fantastic. It's a tough call between Schubert and Beethoven for the crown. They both write quartets that are symphonic in scope, but that still highlight the individual instruments. I confess to being a sucker for a deep cello sound, too.

My favorite ensemble is the Emersons. I just do not understand at all the criticism against them (too slick or superficial). I wonder if this is just more success-bashing. The recordings on DG are just sterling. Holographic sound, so rich and beautiful.

Anyway, here's a long dormant thread resurrected! :devil:


----------



## ORigel

Beethoven by far. Followed distantly by Schubert and Bartok.


----------



## SanAntone

I voted for *Bartok*, *Shostakovich* and *Weinberg* - but wish I could have voted as well for *Holmboe*, *Carter,* *Myaskovsky*, *Zemlinsky*, *Ferneyhough*, *Krzysztof Meyer*, *Wellesz*, *Weigl,* and *Schnittke*.

But I am not interested in the "greatest" merely the great.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

ORigel said:


> Beethoven by far. Followed distantly by Schubert and Bartok.


What is it about Beethoven's that leads to this opinion (not that I am disagreeing). And which ones stand out for you? 7 sticks in my head.


----------



## Kreisler jr

Schubert has one or two great (D 887 and 810) and one good (D 804) quartet but as a "cycle" it is not great as the rest are mostly negligeable juvenilia. So he wrote a 2-3 good to great quartets but nothing close to a competitive "cycle"
Beethoven's 5 late ones are above almost everything else, the op.95 and the first two of op.59 are not far behind. Even the best of op.18 are (almost) as good as the best of Haydn and Mozart.

I voted Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, although I'd consider Bartok for Mozart, if pressed. Dvorak is a bit similar to Schubert, although he has more good works, there are several minor ones and at most two great ones (the last two). Mendelssohn, Schumann, Brahms are all good but rarely up with the very best (and 3 works is stretching it for "cycle").
I have not yet got into Schoenberg's except for #2. My favorite 20th century quartets are Berg's Lyric Suite and Bartok's (esp-3,4,5). Going by numbers Shostakovich is impressive, but I am not sure I would put any of his up with those just mentioned. There are lots of interesting and highly commendable somewhat lesser known 20th century pieces, e.g. Zemlinsky.


----------

