# What is it about UK string quartets?



## jurianbai

Ok enough talk about the French and Sovyet String quartets, give some love to UK's now. Other reason I started this is because their works more accessible to me, as you can see the Maggini's done many of this works as published by Naxos.

So what is it about UK string quartets? Here the composers I listen to for starter.

*Elgar's*, only one quartet, not enough to see the consistency (Head_case's string quartet cycle dogma).

*Walton*, string quartet in Am, my favorite maybe from UK. I got the record by the Coull Quartet who also do the Elgar.

*Bax*, in G and in A Major. Maggini Quartet. They said underated and I read less about Bax overhere.

*Frank Bridge*, 4 SQs + Three Idyllis and many more. Maggini.

*Bliss*, no.1 in Bb and in A. Not much notable listening I found. Maggini.

Then there is *Britten's *which completely different and I found harder to understand.

there are many more, also from Maggini like Ireland's, Alwyn, Maxwell Davies but I have no references about them.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

God cursed the Brits when it came to music.


----------



## Earthling

Vaughan Williams' two quartets -- and also his Phantasy Quintet (2 violins, 2 violas & cello) are lovely works.


----------



## starry

ScipioAfricanus said:


> God cursed the Brits when it came to music.


No, there is good music everywhere including Britiain. Some periods more than others perhaps, but that also tends to be the case in different places, things are cyclical. Some periods like the 19th century may have had more of an emphasis on literature but that will have been because that was were the patronage and encouragement was.

Earthlings do have musical talent, and I'm sure our friend Earthling will agree, must be something to do with the large brain.


----------



## Sid James

I've got a few similar to those naxos ones you mention, jurianbai.

I agree that *Bliss'* _String Quartet (No. 2) _doesn't sound very memorable, but his _Clarinet Quintet_ on the same disc is pretty good.

*Walton's *_String Quartet in A minor_, was actually one of the first C20th SQ's that I heard, and I liked it's melancholy darkness and intensity right from that moment on. His earlier_ Piano Quintet _on the same disc is a less "characteristic" work, written when he was just starting out as a composer. I can hear traces of Ravel & Vaughan Williams, and the driving piano part somewhat reminds me of Bartok.

I've also got *Tippett's* _String Quartets Nos. 3 & 5_, also on Naxos played by the appropriately named Tippett Quartet. Some very fine counterpoint there, somewhat reminiscent of Beethoven, but not imitating him. The coda of No. 3 is just amazing, so simple yet intense, and not stereotypical at all. I've ordered the first volume (SQ's 1, 2, 4) but it has been delayed, I've been waiting literally for months for it to come from Europe. Really looking forward to listening to that when it finally does arrive.

I also want to get the Naxos recording of *Elgar's* _SQ & Piano Quintet_. The former I have heard and found very memorable and unique (comparable in feel to the Walton, but from an earlier generation). The latter I have not heard, but am intruigued by (if it's half as good as his SQ, it'll be a worthwhile buy).

I'm not really interested in Vaughan Williams or Bax, not much of their orchestral music has grabbed me (except perhaps _The Lark Ascending_, which I was fortunate enough to see in concert, and the latter's _Tintagel_). But I don't mind RVW's _Partita for Double String Orchestra_, but I can't stand his _5 Variants on Dives & Lazarus _(repetitive and tedious, imo).

As for other guys like *Britten, Rawthsorne* & maybe *L. Berkeley *I wouldn't mind getting some of the Naxos cd's of their SQ's. I've not heard much of their works, apart from some of Britten's more well-known efforts. I'm also interested in contemporary composer *Thomas Ades*, heard his _Piano Quintet _and it sounded very interesting. & haven't heard any of *Maxwell-Davies *works.

That just about wraps it up as far as my interests in this realm are concerned. But as you can see, I've only just about scratched the surface when it comes to SQ/chamber music from the UK. This will change in the next couple of years, I'll put them on the backburner for a while...


----------



## jurianbai

Andre said:


> That just about wraps it up as far as my interests in this realm are concerned. But as you can see, I've only just about scratched the surface when it comes to SQ/chamber music from the UK. This will change in the next couple of years, I'll put them on the backburner for a while...


Same here, my role is just to trigger the talk and then I read from a far.

I found Vaughan William's is quite minimalis, I only listened on Youtube.


----------



## JAKE WYB

I find *Vaughan Williams* quartets to be rather dull and sparse to draw me in genuinely -though the Phantasy Quintet is marvellous -

*Bax* did the most interesting british chamber music and though the quartets arent as stunningly magical as his trios or quintets, his quartets have a beautiful subtle sound that is always reliably rich and moody (in a positive way)


----------



## Argus

ScipioAfricanus said:


> God cursed the Brits when it came to music.


You're right. I'd better inform the surviving members of the Beatles that they're music was rubbish and they'll be joining the other two in eternal damnation.


----------



## Head_case

jurianbai said:


> Ok enough talk about the French and Sovyet String quartets, give some love to UK's now. Other reason I started this is because their works more accessible to me, as you can see the Maggini's done many of this works as published by Naxos.


Although I live here, I have never heard a single English string quartet being performed live! 

What indeed is it about UK string quartets.....which makes them so bland and unmemorable hmmmm? Walker Percy, the American southern writer came across this conundrum when looking at the task of assessing classical English literature (i.e. Jane Austen) versus say, French literature (the philosophical novel) by the likes of Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre. Percy deigned that with Austen, there is no psychological import of existential value. The prettiness of the prose and the language, itself renders page upon page, irrelevant. You could skip chapters of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility and find that the protagonist is still so suffocated in dissimulation and emotionally/psychologically asphyxiated. In contrast, the French existential novel, was compact; concise - not a single note wasted.

Does the same hold for the English string quartet? Foulds, actually wrote well more than 7 string quartets, although most are extant. As a dual national, his insights into the culture of the motherland as a native, and as an onlooker from a colonial position, may have contributed to his keen insights. Thus the 'Quartetto Intimo' with its highly wrought psychological intensity. I don't have any objections to the others - they are all in the 'light music' category, a bit like Doris Day (except that I'd never listen to her). Perhaps, Britten, whose string quartets and solo cello suites are a tedious wading experience is the only one I would steer clear of and his work does not stand out in string quartet literature when I think of the English string quartet. Even Beethoven is more engaging than the psychologically bereft works from the English composers. Their techniques, when not folk-influenced (like Moeran or Ireland), are hardly possessed of the same calibre or ingenuity which we see in Soviet string quartets (the contrapuntal techniques of Taneyev, or the ingenuity of Shostakovich), nor the serialism of the Viennese school, nor the micro-inflections of neo-baroque music like Poland's Szymanski. They are there: the British string quartets are there to wade through. Just like a Jane Austen novel.

When I think of English string quartets, Moeran and Foulds stand out for me. Moeran himself, had regional influences (and a regional flavour) to his music; similarly, Foulds is more colonial English, dare I say, even 'Parisian', in the best of the Parisian traditions. I'd rather have Moeran or Foulds any day, however when blessed with a beautiful recording of Elgar or Williams' string quartet (you know the one) by the Aeolian String Quartet, the beauty of their pastoral work and the shining subtlety really graces the lounge and space where their music come alive for me.



> *Elgar's*, only one quartet, not enough to see the consistency (Head_case's string quartet cycle dogma).


Sometimes I think we're blessed by Elgar not being able to write more than 1 string quartet. His works have a distinctly pompous and grandiose thread which otherwise interferes with what could be beautiful music for the melancholy minded. Instead, he comes across as parochial and someone overfilled like a Mille Feuille with all kinds of dramatic extravaganzas as if it was a Woolworths last day closing sale marketed as a grand opening.

The Maggini Quartet are very competent: what's not to like about them. They look like they are attempting to become the first British Encyclopaedists of the string quartet medium. Still, if you have time and want a richer experience of the same quartets, then the Aeolian String Quartet come to you highly recommended; especially their mono recordings (you heard - MONO! Not dud stereo with misplacement of the cello bones in the mix). The Melos Quartet are also superb at what they do.

On a separate note, the Maggini do a *barely* competent version of Szymanowski's string quartets. I recently had the chance to hear the Royal String Quartet version of the same quartets coupled with the Royczki string quartet. Personally, I found the CD rather dire. They killed the nervous energy of the music and played it at a comatose speed such that I barely recognised the Szymanowski pieces. After hearing it, I was stunned at how review after review seem to appreciate their 'reading' of Szymanowski, however all of these raves, consistently fail to make reference to the finest interpretations available of the Szymanowski quartets: the Carmina Quartet [1990s]; the Varsovia Quartet [1980s]; the Silesian Quartet [1990s] or the Wilanow Quartet [1990s]. We're being impoverished, left with the paucity of the 'modern' readings. On that note - the Aeolian String Quartet coupling of Elgar/Williams on vinyl LP hails from the 1960's. Just absolutely beautiful.


----------



## starry

Head_case said:


> Although I live here, I have never heard a single English string quartet being performed live!
> 
> What indeed is it about UK string quartets.....which makes them so bland and unmemorable hmmmm? Walker Percy, the American southern writer came across this conundrum when looking at the task of assessing classical English literature (i.e. Jane Austen) versus say, French literature (the philosophical novel) by the likes of Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre. Percy deigned that with Austen, there is no psychological import of existential value. The prettiness of the prose and the language, itself renders page upon page, irrelevant. You could skip chapters of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility and find that the protagonist is still so suffocated in dissimulation and emotionally/psychologically asphyxiated. In contrast, the French existential novel, was compact; concise - not a single note wasted.


You're making huge generalisations (something I come to expect in this forum). And the string quartets looked at in this thread are predictably those from around the first quarter of the 20th century in the main. What about other periods? Better to look at the variety of music than to see it as all the same. And as for literature I prefer poetry anyway.


----------



## Head_case

Go on ....enlighten us with some profound English string quartets then 

It's not possible to look at 'the variety of music' when you're considering the string quartet' medium? 

In case you don't know already, my music taste is very narrow (minded). Mostly late 19th century - 20th century and only chamber music. 'Generalisation' isn't the correct term then; the reference point I'm making is too narrow to be considered 'general'. With respect to preferences; the exception is the rule on this forum; therefore it's no surprise that you prefer poetry 

That's all


----------



## starry

Yeh there can be variety in quartets. You can have classical era quartets, then romantic era, then modernist (from impressionist to more atonal). I suppose recordings cater in particular for this early 20th century period but it is a bit limited and gives only a small range of styles relatively. I don't really keep track of what countries all the composers who's work I have are from, but certainly there will be - for example - more modernist quartets among the many composers of the last century (and some from this century) from the UK.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

jurianbai said:


> So what is it about UK string quartets? Here the composers I listen to for starter.


You guys have all missed the point, as far as SQ are concerned in England.

The greatest sets of SQ first performed and first published in England were by Franz Joseph Haydn. Though some may have been composed for continental European commissions, many of Haydn's late SQ were also published in England and performed there; undoubtedly being the earliest virtuosic SQ up to that point in time, in the form that we would normally describe as SQ. Now, dare I speculate that Haydn's works "set the standard", and many English composers would have had a hard task to beat! (Just like Handel set the English standard for oratorios and never since then, with the exception of Haydn's _The Creation_, have there been any more great English oratorios to beat, or indeed English operas for that matter).


----------



## starry

There's no doubt that Haydn did receive plenty of encouragement in Britiain to compose some of his greatest works which were very well received there as well. That would suggest there was appreciation of good music there. There should be more focus on British composers of that period as well to see what they did, ignorance of that doesn't mean all the music was bad. 

Also let's keep quiet about this but I just checked and a composer called Richard Ayres is apparently British (I just checked as I don't bother with these details much) and in the 2000s he did 3 pieces for string quartet that sound nearer Bartok in style being quite jagged and disconnected than the pastoralist school style. But we must keep quiet about this because we can't change preconceived stereotypes of course.


----------



## Head_case

It would be great to think that everyone misses the point, except those who get it, who get Haydn 

Plenty of love for Haydn (not from here though :lol _- just not much for the English  
Most of us who listen to string quartets, don't listen to just anything from the classical; the baroque; the romantic; the neoclassical; the impressionist, or the serialist tendencies. If you spend enough time loving specialist music, you develop a specific preference, rather than thinking it is 'all awesome' or 'all terrible'.

Ayres is the Vermeulen Prize winner. I came to know him through that awful string quartet which completed the George Antheils (The Mondriaan Quartet). Antheils is better known for his reputation than the calibre of his own music sadly. Jurianbai will also know the Mondriaan Quartet by owning the same awful CD which would be no loss, if it was catapulted into outer space rather than spun on a CD player. To my ears, Ayres sounds derivative: he is still young and has not formed a musical language of his own, with his own idioms and distinctiveness, perhaps no doubt, why you have to reference a monolithic Hungarian contributor to the string quartet medium, to describe Ayres' music. His three little ditties for string quartet, don't cut the mustard compared to Pawel Szymanski's 'Three Pieces for string Quartet' or even 'Five Pieces for String Quartet'. Szymanski transforms music with a language of his own, holding a direct lineage to the baroque and fugual tradition. From this generation, work on the string quartet medium by the American composer, Garland, whose string quartet No.1 derives from the oriental poem 'Tao Chien', fused in an American and modern experimental way. 

Whether Ayres attains the proficiency of Garland or Szymanski depends on whether he can muster up his first proper string quartet at all. He's got time and his fledgling efforts are appreciated, particularly since it would be awful if foreigners considered the only interesting musical export from the British Isles hung on four coccinellidae.

Try again


----------



## Sid James

I doubt whether Haydn had any major impact on contemporary or later English composers. Even though he lived there for a while and had many works premiered there, I really can't hear (or haven't read about, anyway) any lasting influence. The English didn't want to sound like the continental Europeans, and if they absorbed any influences, they had to have more universal appeal than Haydn (perhaps like Beethoven, whose quartets have been a benchmark ever since, which had huge impact not only on the continent, but in the UK as well - just listen to any of Tippett's string quartets & you'll understand why). IMO, Haydn's chamber works are undoubtedly well-crafted and have rigorous thematic development (etc), but I think these aspects & the lineage he started - stretching from him to Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann and finally Brahms - is linked more to the Austro-German tradition, not that of the UK. He is less "univeral" than say Beethoven or Brahms, he's more of a mainland European, despite being transplanted for a time in London.


----------



## starry

The classical style was universal at the time. I don't know where you get the idea that people in Britain would have wanted to keep aloof from musical developments elsewhere (even if it's thought there was a slightly longer lingering of the baroque style there). The 1790s might actually suggest this is not the case, and maybe even the 1780s (didn't Thomas Attwood study with Mozart?). Haydn had his own voice within that style, a kind of rustic energy mixed in with some carefully crafted slow movements. Haydn had some influence on others but it was a distinctive voice and it is limiting to view him as anything else imo.


----------



## Sid James

What I should have said (& it's probably safer to say?) that by the time the C20th rolled around, Haydn's impact on the string quartet genre had dimmed (his lineage extinguished with Brahms). In the UK, this was when the string quartet medium was really getting off the ground. I think that Beethoven's more "timeless" appeal was of more relevance, though undoubtedly composers like Walton, Britten & Tippett would have been aware of Haydn's pioneering works in the genre as well. It's more about degrees of influence than it being a totally black & white, all or nothing, situation. Brahms was hugely admired in the UK, so maybe the residue of Haydn's ghost in his music lived on & made an impact. Who knows?


----------



## starry

Of course Haydn's or any other earlier composer's impact would have lessened over time, that's inevitable. You mention Brahms and it wouldn't surprise me if he was more of an impact on the quartet of the early 20th century within Britain rather than Beethoven, simply because he was nearer to their time. But there must have been some earlier string quartets from Britain too though and it would be nice to hear them. Unfortunately classical recordings tend to ignore the classical period maybe more than any other period and the romantic period seems to get most attention.


----------



## Head_case

jurianbai said:


> Ok enough talk about the French and Sovyet String quartets, give some love to UK's now. Other reason I started this is because their works more accessible to me, as you can see the Maggini's done many of this works as published by Naxos.


Perhaps I should've reminded you of this one:



















Krysia Ostocowicistocozickiswosidwicz (or something) is the leader of the *Dante Quartet*. You might have seen her solo works for other chamber music - she is quite the stunning first violinist in her new string quartet now.

*Rubbra* is more compelling in the string quartet format for an Englishman than many of his more famous peers. This recording is really epic and profound, but still not the kind of music I listen to day in and day out. As much as I hate to admit it, it probably is on a par (if not better) than Foulds or Moeran for technical writing. It just takes a long time to wring the nuances of delight out of it.

Btw -if you ever think that Michael Nyman deserved a mention, his 'Traversee de Paris' for string quartet is the biggest load of equine deposit I've ever heard. I stopped bothering investigating British string quartet music after him. That's how severe the trauma was!


----------



## jurianbai

this is the first time I heard the name Rubbra! I'll check.

I have Nyman no.3 since very beginning but rarely listen to it. Nothing wrong with that, only that it's too long for a piece with a flat effect melody. By Del Sol Quartet


----------



## Head_case

Don't forget *Foulds*:










He deserves more exposure than the overrated D Major student quartet stuff by Britten. The Endellion Quartet are one of the formidable. Have you checked them out yet?

http://www.endellionquartet.com/

Their website design is quite amusing 

British string quartet ensembles are also important in the British string quartet writing oeuvre. Besides that, the Endellion are the benchmark for British playing in this generation. Perhaps not as epic as the Aeolian Quartet of the 60's, or the Gabrieli Quartet of the 70's. I'd like to see the Maggini Quartet turn out as fine interpretations as these awesome British ensembles, however I'd hedge my bets on the younger Dante Quartet as the living British legend in string quartet playing over and above the Maggini Quartet.


----------



## Quartetfore

Delius only quartet is quite an enjoyable work, and is well played by the Brodsky Quartet though the sound is a bit dated. I`m not a fan of the Brodsky and their recording of the 2nd and 3rd of Tchaikovsky. The music its self is overheated and the Brodsky turn the heat up even more. I once had the old Taneyev recording, but gave it to a daughter of mine. I wish I had it back! Best, Quartetfore


----------



## Taneyev

For Tchaikovsky's 2 and 3 IMHO no better that the Borodin. For the 3, I once had a LP (lost!) with a
magnificent recording by the old first Vlach.


----------



## Head_case

I see you guys can't stop but drift onto better continental things than staying with the vilified English string quartet 

I'm sure I had the Delius string quartet (oddly coupled with a Sibelius ). 

Quite agree about the Brodsky Quartet's limitations. They regularly do that on other works, such as the Shostakovich Cycle and they sound like an utter mess, with the first violin doing their own thing. The old Taneyev Quartet recording that you had is one that continues to elude me. I've all but given up on Tchaikovsky. The Borodin Cycle was overtly romantic. I have the Vlach Quartet recording although I haven't listened to it in over 10 years! The Carmina Quartet is one of the finer modern interpreters. Still doesn't help with the music hmm.

I wonder if anyone here likes Ian Wilson's work? He's not Russian by the way


----------



## Quartetfore

The Brodsky did do a nice recording of the Respighi quartets. The Taneyev Tchaikovsky was available for a short time here in the "States" on something called "Russian Masters", I think thats what the label was called. Best, Quartetfore.


----------



## Taneyev

I've, and like very much all of Robert Simpson SQ.


----------



## Quartetfore

Head Case, It might be that they were paired because they were composed a few years apart. Have you heard Sibelius quartet op4? It`s a nice work, with touchs of the mature man. What is very interesting is the Sibelius quotes a theme almost note for note from a quartet by Franz Berwald written about 50 years before his own work. Best, Quartetfore.


----------



## Head_case

Sibelius is someone I've struggled to get into - Voces Intimae I have, although the rest I've only heard once and passed by. He engages me more than Jon Leifs, but not as much as Skalkottas or Holmboe, however my geography of that area is a bit scatty, so I'm more likely to compare him to Grieg and Norgard, than say, Delius! Berwald is firmly in the romantic camp. Again, I've only heard his music for a week and was a little disappointed that it wasn't quite as exciting as I had imagined it would be.

Embarrassingly, the first lady of the string quartet - Elizabeth Maconchy - whom I'd always pegged as Irish, turns out to be British! I was looking through the CD booklet for the first time and it dawned on me that her works are better than the minor efforts by the major British composers put together 

This set is emminently recommendable - it is on a bargain price too -










Definitely one to get. She was the daughter of an Irishman, but was born in England, so i guess that makes her English in some ways...?

Like I mentioned earlier; the British string quartets which I've always found the most fascinating, are penned by composers who have one foot in England, and another elsewhere. Thus Moeran; Foulds and Maconchy. Generally however, the British string quartet is as exciting as the British entry in the Eurovision song contest 

Not that any of you cultured people here would watch such a dire and baseless form of entertainment!


----------



## Quartetfore

For some strange reason, when I put on the Moeran quartet (a favorite of mine), I think of the Thomas Hardy novel "The Woodlanders". Who can explain the workings of the human mind. By the way, Moeran did compose a very fine piano trio. I once read some where that its thought to be his best chamber work. Best, Quartefore.


----------



## Vaneyes

Re UK SQs, my faves are Arnold, Walton, Rawsthorne, Britten, RVW, Moeran.


----------



## Head_case

The Aeolian Quartet's version of the Walton string quartet is quite interesting.

The mono quality makes it sound like a happy scene from the Hitchhock film 'Marnie' on a summer day.



> For some strange reason, when I put on the Moeran quartet (a favorite of mine), I think of the Thomas Hardy novel "The Woodlanders". Who can explain the workings of the human mind.


..as in...the unfulfilled love scene when Giles stoically gives up his bed to die of hypothermia outdoors whilst he lets his ex-fiancée sleep indoors? 

I dunno. When I listen to classical music...I tend to blank off words and ideas. Not so much pictures....music evokes images for me ... in that respect, Moeran might bring forth, the beauty of Achill Island, or the pastoral delight of feeling the texture of grass barefooted like a kid. I suppose synaesthesia works differently and independently for us all 

I do like Hitchcock though! Some of the sound tracks selected for his classic films were just sublime. That must be where my love of the edgy harsh jarring string quartet form came in. Lol ~ damaged by television from an early age


----------



## Head_case

> Bliss, no.1 in Bb and in A. Not much notable listening I found. Maggini.


I was listening to Bliss's Bb string quartet today and kind of remembered this thread.

Go back to the "Sostenuto" passage in the third movement and re-listen to it. It takes a listen to pull out the gentle character of Bliss's absolute music. This is probably the best bit of Bliss' music which I like.

I'm on the Delme Quartet version: I have reservations about buying anything with the Maggini Quartet if only because there always seems to be a cheaper vinyl LP version which is better played than anything released on their already cheap Naxos albums.

I'm still wondering if it's because you're listening to MP3 music, the contracted tonal range and the lack of dynamic scale from the compression, just makes the music rather two-dimensional.

Probably not...but there are some very good transfers.

I'd recommend you listen to Bloch's three string quartets by the Griller Quartet. This is the only recording I have of it, but it is a most satisfying recording. He is British. Another quartet recorded the last quartet which the Griller Quartet failed to record before they splintered. If you aren't allergic to 'historic' British music, I'd say is is the kind of British music, recorded by the Aeolian Quartet; the Gabrleli Quartet; the Endellion Quartet which makes me return to the underrated of underrated Brit composers .


----------



## jurianbai

I re listen the Sostenuto in 4am and enjoy it till dawn. A nice British scale (what it is actually? the Celts music?) inserted also. I listen to this one in a same timeframe as I listen to Bax, Walton and Bridge, maybe Blissss didn't give me a quick memorable melody compare to those other. But still a nice pieces to have.

For Bliss and other Maggini's I have the actual CD. that's the best format I have. I still ripped it to MP3 though, just for convenience to play it anywhere.

For *Bloch*, I just want to list it to this thread and thanks for bring this out. I have the 2nd SQ by Pro Arte. You can see in http://proartequartet.org/recordings.html , looks like this group recorded a complete set of Bloch also.

For Bloch, I back to my saying that modern composer like to go 'different' in string quartet. I listen to other Bloch's music , his Violin Concerto, which is sound tonal and romantic, but in this 2nd SQ, more sounds atonal but I guess he is by nature a tonal guy (?)

I know he is Brit, but he is also associated with American composer, not sure how this is connected to his music.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Hi all. I agree that British string quartet writing has not been universally loved as a lot of the core repertoire is seen to be lacking in individuality what it may have in being well-constructed. Overall we aren't too jingoistic about the merits of our quartets in the UK but I would say that a lot of our composers who wrote them in the first half of the 20th century may have been intimidated by the great ones of the past and so tried to write them in a more understated manner (with possibly a token 'British' bucolic feel) rather than try and outdo the grand romantic and early modern masterpieces. Having said that, maybe it was a minor miracle that any were written at all, seeing that there was no outstanding British composer at all during the evolution of the string quartet throughout the 18th and 19th centuries - in other words there was no British precedent in the genre so the likes of Elgar could probably only compose them within established classical/romantic perameters. In more modern times Robert Simpson's cycle has been internationally praised, not least by US critics/musicologists. They are certainly written on a grander and more personal level than most that went before and as a body of work they certainly compliment his symphonies. I think Rawsthorne's three are worth looking into as well.


----------



## Head_case

> I re listen the Sostenuto in 4am and enjoy it till dawn. A nice British scale (what it is actually? the Celts music?) inserted also. I listen to this one in a same timeframe as I listen to Bax, Walton and Bridge, maybe Blissss didn't give me a quick memorable melody compare to those other. But still a nice pieces to have.


I really don't know - sorry.

Bliss's pre-war string quartet isn't easy to make sense of, in terms of his psychological experiences between the war and his separation from his family. It's like ... .he wrote it, void of the unpleasant human misery ... and wrote blissful music as a response.

The quieter nature of the English string quartet writers (excluding Maconchy, whose modern techniques are very intensely expressive) is something I like, but I guess ... I find it better done by the Russians...the Soviets ... the Poles .. the Hungarians etc. Personal taste 



> For Bliss and other Maggini's I have the actual CD. that's the best format I have. I still ripped it to MP3 though, just for convenience to play it anywhere.


I think it's the Maggini's playing! They're good, but at times, I imagine that there could be more arcing or bowing; more attention to phrasing; more fervour in the music.

The Pro Arte Quartet (from the 1940s') premiered Bliss's first string quartet in the USA ... and then the Griller Quartet in the UK followed suite. The Pro Arte Quartet which you've linked, isn't the same group as these legendary ones.

I remember the first time I heard the Busch Quartet play Schubert's String Quartet No. XV - I'd been so used to the Quartetto Italiano version and was so offended by the historical recording, I took it back to HMV and got a refund after one listen. About 6 months later, I came across a better amplifier and realised that my CD player is too 'transparent'. It plays all of the artifacts from the digital transfers from analogue. It had a lot to do with me not liking historical recordings of great playing. So I bought the CD again. They played Schubert like no one else before or after them. Some recordings do that - and with string quartets - hearing the tonal differentiation is so soooooo important for me 

Yeah - Bloch is on the threshold of that 'modern language' of the string quartet which I really like. It's that 'era', where the tonal basis of music was being questioned and transformed which is so exciting.


----------



## Head_case

elgar's ghost said:


> Hi all. I agree that British string quartet writing has not been universally loved as a lot of the core repertoire is seen to be lacking in individuality what it may have in being well-constructed. Overall we aren't too jingoistic about the merits of our quartets in the UK but I would say that a lot of our composers who wrote them in the first half of the 20th century may have been intimidated by the great ones of the past and so tried to write them in a more understated manner (with possibly a token 'British' bucolic feel) rather than try and outdo the grand romantic and early modern masterpieces. Having said that, maybe it was a minor miracle that any were written at all, seeing that there was no outstanding British composer at all during the evolution of the string quartet throughout the 18th and 19th centuries - in other words there was no British precedent in the genre so the likes of Elgar could probably only compose them within established classical/romantic perameters. In more modern times Robert Simpson's cycle has been internationally praised, not least by US critics/musicologists. They are certainly written on a grander and more personal level than most that went before and as a body of work they certainly compliment his symphonies. I think Rawsthorne's three are worth looking into as well.


That kind of sums it up. Although the Teutonic-Germanic-Viennese school founded the string quartet form, other traditions sprang up over the centuries. Maybe something with do with us being an island, less permeable to European influences? Who knows.

Which recording of the Simpson do you have? I only have a Delme Quartet LP. He, by all accounts, having written as many string quartets as Shostakovich, is on a par with Elizabeth Maconchy in finding the string quartet as a personal vehicle for his musical language.

His clarinet quintets - these are beautiful, particularly in their epic recordings by the Aeolian String Quartet (British). I liked what I have heard by Simpson, but I am nowhere close to even listening to all of his works. The legendary recordings by the Aeolian String Quartet command a premium (LPs), and not only did they fail to record a complete cycle: no one after them (except the Delme) have come close to completing it. It is an extremely frustrating (and expensive) task, trying to discover more of this interesting British composer. Those of you who have his recordings - count yourself lucky 

PS - Alan Rawsthorne is fine for me, although I wouldn't classify him as anything like a favourite.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Hi H_C. Currently I have only two of Simpson's quartet discs (Delme Quartet on Hyperion). As I consider parsimony to be a noble art I'm picking and choosing when to buy more as the price of Hyperion discs tend to stay at the upper limit. I was hoping they would have been released in a box set like his symphonies but it hasn't happened. The discs I have are Quartets 1 & 4 and Quartet 12 with String Quintet 1. I wonder how neglected he'd have stayed had Hyperion not instigated a series of releases dedicated to his output? They really are to be congratulated for carrying the torch virtually single-handed.

In case you haven't heard them I'd just like to mention that Quartet no. 4 by Frank Bridge was very advanced by British standards (it was written in 1937) and the preceding no. 3 also pointed the way forward.

I've yet to hear the Maconchy quartets although I heard glowing reports about them. The box set seems out of print now but the individual Unicorn-Kancha releases are still available on the market place in some shape or form (yet another cycle to be put on my wish-list!).


----------



## Head_case

I don't have those ones 

You're absolutely right about the parsimony, although having said that, I tend to really hold onto my Hyperion releases, even 15 years after they've been in my CD player. 

I get the impression Simpson was probably more famous during the height of his BBC controversies even if I wasn't around then. I wasn't sure if the Delme were planning on a complete cycle on Hyperion: it feels rather late in the decade for that, and if anything, the more modern Vanbrugh seems to be edging in to the Simpson repertoire. A Hyperion box set would be cool! Does anyone in Hyperion love Simpson enough to make it work? 

It seems he gets a lot of flack for being too systematic and clinical. I've never heard the whole string cycle, so I can only go on the fragments I've heard. 

Maybe Brits as a whole, don't appreciate the string quartet genre as much as Yuro-peens? Americans? 

The Maconchy Quartet Cycle is a HUGE bargain. For the price of less than 1 CD, you get the whole CD kit. It's overcharged on the auction site, but if you look around, you should be able to get it for less than £10 for the whole cycle new. 

Actually - the Maconchy String Quartet Cycle and the Rubbra String Quartet Cycles are probably the two easiest recommendations for Brit string quartet cycles: they both cost less than a single CD and are of a consistent and high quality. 

If you like Brit string quartets that is


----------



## Quartetfore

A work that I like is the 3rd quartet of Arnold Bax. I have to admit, that it took several hearings to "get it". I think that the last movement is not as strong as the first three, but as a whole its a fine work. By the way, has any one heard a Tippet quartet and if so what is your opinion. Quartetfore.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Tippett's quartets 1-3 were written between 1935 & 1946 and although accessable they are not a hangover of the late romantic style to which some of the early UK practitioners turned. I'd say these are more along the lines of Hindemith.

Tippett didn't write his other two until 1978 & 1991 respectively and are more singular and idiosyncratic but not by any means what I would call 'difficult'.

Naxos have all 5 available on two inexpensive discs. The ones I have are by The Lindsays (who were under the composer's aegis while recording the first three and for whom 4 & 5 were specifically written) on ASV.

Hope this helps a little.


----------



## Head_case

I can't say I'm a fan of Tippett - the version I had was by the Britten Quartet (or was it 'The Tippett Quartet'?)

There's been a large number of more recent re-recordings by the Belcea Quartet, Elias Quartet, Coull Quartet (older maybe), the Maggini Quartet (who are trying to hit the jackpot by surveying every single British string quartet ever written, judging by their overabundant releases). 

I share E.Ghosty's view that Tippett had "moved on" from the Walton/Bridge/Moeran camp, but perhaps fails to make a distinction like Bliss or Hindemith in his music, and certainly not as notable as Britten's string quartet efforts. 

Whatever its merits, some people out there do 'get it' with Tippett. 

I just don't


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Did anyone mention the Dante SQ's fab disc of Franck and Fauré?
http://www.amazon.com/Faure-Franck-...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1281485500&sr=1-1

How 'bout the Lindsays?
http://www.amazon.com/Borodin-String-Quartets-Sextet-minor/dp/B0000BX5LE/ref=cm_cr-mr-title


----------



## Head_case

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Did anyone mention the Dante SQ's fab disc of Franck and Fauré?
> http://www.amazon.com/Faure-Franck-S...1485500&sr=1-1


Yeah probably me and someone else who have the Dante Quartet's releases for Edmund Rubbra as well as Janacek, Debussy, Faure. This Faure/Franck disc by the Dante - it's a superb disc. It was also the BBC recommendation for chamber music for the year it was released.

The Dante Quartet's lead Krysia Ostosocowsoewixztoxcodisdocwicz (whatever) is very famous here in these isles for her solo violin works before she formed the Dante Quartet. They brought us some of the best British interpretations of Janaceks' String Quartets No. I & No. II since the British Gabrieli Quartet of the 1970's vintage; as well as some of the best DDD recordings of Debussy & Ravel's string quartets.

However - as you've pointed out - this album is in a league of its own. Their recording of the Faure Quartet is one I prefer way over the Quatuor Ebene's recording [coupling Faure with Debussy and Ravel] - that in itself is no mean task, as the Quatuor Ebene's recording is possibly the most exciting recording to ever play and couple all three.

The Franck Quartet is one I'm still trying to get into. It's cyclical principle has always left me lost in the woods so I'm trying again with this one. My first pwned recording of it on CD.

I'm not a Lindsays fan. They're a bit like the Emersons, or the Fitzwilliams to me.


----------



## hocket

Well, first off, it's no secret that England (or perhaps Britain) was 'the land without music' for most of the 18th and 19th centuries and as far as home grown talent goes that's not entirely without justification. As for string quartets after that, I'm not anything like knowledgeable enough to judge. However, England did excel spectacularly in string ensembles during the 16th and 17th centuries with the viol consort:






It might be worth taking that into account before sinking to predictable cliches.

As for the 'literary analysis', I'm not sure I could imagine anything more ill conceived. Comparing Austen to Camus is like comparing Dumas's 'The Three Musketeers' to Joyce's 'Ulysses' (or to 'Decline and Fall' or 'A Dance to the Music of Time' etc etc). Incidentally, Austen was a moralist not a phosopher so if you're looking for philosophy it's not all that surprising that you find parts of her books expendable. Mind you, as a general rule of thumb, if you are looking for philosophy you're probably better off actually reading philosophical works rather than novels.

*Head Case wrote:*



> there is no psychological import of existential value.


So what you're saying is that there is existentialism in the novels of the existentialists (Camus, Sartre) but not in Austen. Well, that certainly is inspiringly perceptive.


----------



## Quartetfore

A bit of Brahms here and Dvorak there, but Stanford did write a number of enjoyable quartets.


----------



## Head_case

> As for string quartets after that, I'm not anything like knowledgeable enough to judge. However, England did excel spectacularly in string ensembles during the 16th and 17th centuries with the viol consort:


Yes...it figures 

...


> As for the 'literary analysis', I'm not sure I could imagine anything more ill conceived.


It makes sense that you cannot consider anything as ill-conceived, particularly if as you say, string quartets after the 16th/17th century are not your area of interest. Most of this thread pertains to what comes after ... particularly the late 19th early 20th century. Feel free to keep on imagining 



> Comparing Austen to Camus is like comparing Dumas's 'The Three Musketeers' to Joyce's 'Ulysses' (or to 'Decline and Fall' or 'A Dance to the Music of Time' etc etc). Incidentally, Austen was a moralist not a phosopher so if you're looking for philosophy it's not all that surprising that you find parts of her books expendable. Mind you, as a general rule of thumb, if you are looking for philosophy you're probably better off actually reading philosophical works rather than novels.


By your own admission, you've demonstrated clearly that you really do not grasp the concept of the 'philosophical novel' at all. This is not a form of writing which Austen's mammoth writings can be subsumed into: it was never invented by the British, anymore than the string quartet form was. Neither can you cram Austen into the succinctness and sparse form of the philosophical novel, anymore than you can cram a symphonic work into an intimate string quartet form.

The philosophical novel is precisely that. Philosophy itself operates on a different plane; as does a novel. The same parallel applies here for the string quartet form, which we've seen, has plenty of English stabs at making it succeed.

Besides: what higher philosophy is there, than the morality of one's own existence? Moralising about the social code and societal fixtures itself does not constitute that very existential import which opens up the tangibility of the existential novel. Here is where the parallel with the string quartet form lies. Not that parallels, or analogies should be taken quite so literally as you have tried here by referencing literature.



> So what you're saying is that there is existentialism in the novels of the existentialists (Camus, Sartre) but not in Austen. Well, that certainly is inspiringly perceptive.


That's correct. Existentialism, was not brought to us by Jane Austen. Neither a philosopher, nor aware of the existential currents, we do not recall Jane Austen as an existentialist. We recall her as a novelist ... or as you say, a 'moralist'.

Perhaps you do not understand, the meaning of the term 'existential'? We cannot pretend that her works exemplify existentialism. Let Austen inspire you in the ways she intended, rather than trying to read something into her work which her world view had little grasp of.


----------



## Head_case

quartetfore said:


> A bit of Brahms here and Dvorak there, but Stanford did write a number of enjoyable quartets.


The Stanford Quartet have a superb disc of a Milhaud, Bridge string quartet and the Faure quartet!


----------



## Quartetfore

I will pass on Bridge--not my cup of Earl Gray. Milhaud is an interesting composer. I have a recording of his first and second quartets, and they are enjoyable. Speaking of Frenchmen, have you heard any of Charles Koechlin quartets? The first is a beautiful work, the second I think is a bit to long I have not heard the third.


----------



## jurianbai

I have the almost complete set of Milhaud by Quatuor Parisii, the issue with Milhaud is, he seem like to composed short duration piece (maximum only around 5-6 minutes) but put a lot complexity on it.

Btw, we have a dedicated thread for >>>>> FRENCH <<<<<

For another UK composer that haven't talked are, William Alwyn and the Naxos Peter Maxwell Davies quartets. I don't owned these by the way. Also John McCabe bizzare quartet, I owned the Vanbrugh version. The CD broken into many track according to movement's variation, which is not convenience to rip!


----------



## Head_case

> I will pass on Bridge--not my cup of Earl Gray. Milhaud is an interesting composer. I have a recording of his first and second quartets, and they are enjoyable. Speaking of Frenchmen, have you heard any of Charles Koechlin quartets? The first is a beautiful work, the second I think is a bit to long I have not heard the third.


Lol. I like the Aeolian String Quartet rendition of Bridge: they make boring music sound exciting 

Interesting you bring up Koechlin. In the thread Jurianbai has linked, I was exploring French quartets and came across the Ardeo Quartet's recordings of his first two string quartets.

I didn't get it - the players look kind of spooky on the album cover!










This isn't a string quartet I know anything about, so I tend to be very conservative and reluctant to buy unknown music unless I've heard the string quartet play before.

Is his works anything like Magnard/Gou'e/Cras or the later Koerig/Dusapin?


----------



## hocket

*Head Case wrote:*



> It makes sense that you cannot consider anything as ill-conceived, particularly if as you say, string quartets after the 16th/17th century are not your area of interest.


This is a profoundly stupid remark. Firstly, what I said was that I wasn't knowledgeble enough to judge English string quartets after the 19th C, not after the 17th (do try and keep up). Secondly, the 'ill conceived' remark was quite clearly about your absurd literary comparison so your attempt to muddy waters by bringing my musical tastes into it is naked sophistry.



> By your own admission, you've demonstrated clearly that you really do not grasp the concept of the 'philosophical novel' at all.


Really. How so?



> Austen's mammoth writings


Huh? We are talking about the same Jane Austen here? Whilst not as short as most existentialist novels she is generally known for writing fairly short and succinct books. We're not exactly talking about Bleak House or War and Peace here (let alone 'Clarissa'). I don't think anyone could seriously describe her books as 'mammoth' unless they suffered from ADD.



> Not that parallels, or analogies should be taken quite so literally as you have tried here by referencing literature.


The analogy was yours, and I dealt with the matter separately and from a purely literary perspective.



> Besides: what higher philosophy is there, than the morality of one's own existence? Moralising about the social code and societal fixtures itself does not constitute that very existential import which opens up the tangibility of the existential novel.


Well, leaving aside the obviously blinkered view of Austen this is a futile debate. The 'philosophy of the morality of one's own existence' might well be regarded as self-indulgent navel gazing. I wouldn't be so hasty to dismiss it as such myself but perhaps you might broaden your horizons a bit -perhaps something a little less sixth form.



> That's correct. Existentialism, was not brought to us by Jane Austen. Neither a philosopher, nor aware of the existential currents, we do not recall Jane Austen as an existentialist. We recall her as a novelist ... or as you say, a 'moralist'.
> 
> Perhaps you do not understand, the meaning of the term 'existential'? We cannot pretend that her works exemplify existentialism. Let Austen inspire you in the ways she intended, rather than trying to read something into her work which her world view had little grasp of.


Well, it's awfully decent of you to paraphrase everything I've already said in a more long winded fashion, as you've done here, but are you really sure that you want to expose the fallacious nature of your initial remarks in this way? BTW, when am I supposed to have suggested that Austen was in any way 'existentialist'? I could've sworn that the whole point of what I said was that she wasn't.

Comparing Austen to Sartre or Camus is patently absurd, as would the comparison between any early to mid-ninteenth century French novelist with them on those terms. To use that approach as some kind of a 'measure' of a culture over a broad timescale as you have done is sheer lunacy, not to mention clearly offensive, and is suggestive of someone with a bit of an axe to grind.


----------



## Quartetfore

I don`t know enough of Magnards music to compare. There was an interesting review of the Ardeo Quartets recording of the Koechlin quartets on the German site Klassic.com. Without getting into the entire review, they made the point that the Ardeo was not the Emerson "but would the Emerson ever play these works let alone record them".


----------



## Head_case

hocket said:


> *Head Case wrote:*
> 
> This is a profoundly stupid remark. Firstly, what I said was that I wasn't knowledgeble enough to judge English string quartets after the 19th C, not after the 17th (do try and keep up). Secondly, the 'ill conceived' remark was quite clearly about your absurd literary comparison so your attempt to muddy waters by bringing my musical tastes into it is naked sophistry.


Yes ... we're up to the 21st century now. We're keeping up with you lol.

Not sure why you're getting so worked up? Maybe someone on the forum is wrong and you need to show them just how wrong they are! 

Your 'moral judgements' about what constitutes an 'ill-conceived remark', when you neither grasp the concept of the literary form - that is - the 'philosophical novel' versus the novel style conveyed by Jane Austen, is a parallel or a metaphor: i.e. the string quartet is not a symphonic form.

Really. How so?



> Huh? We are talking about the same Jane Austen here? Whilst not as short as most existentialist novels she is generally known for writing fairly short and succinct books. We're not exactly talking about Bleak House or War and Peace here (let alone 'Clarissa'). I don't think anyone could seriously describe her books as 'mammoth' unless they suffered from ADD.


String quartet = 4 instruments.
Symphony = mammoth plenty of instruments.

Get it?

Now now! Ad hominem attacks on a forum? You simply do not understand what the philosophical novel is. Try Google your friend:

http://science.jrank.org/pages/22613/novel-philosophical.html

This is a short version in case, so that even discrimination against those who suffer from medical problems like ADD are not excluded 



> The analogy was yours, and I dealt with the matter separately and from a purely literary perspective.


By being 'literal' or 'concrete', you've completely missed the point. The string quartet, is not a symphony: it has a different form; it has a clarity from four tonal instruments, and it engages in a form of music, called 'chamber music', which leads its form to be used in more intimate compositions, than larger scale forms. The same analogy is applied to the philosophical novel.

If you don't get the analogy from neither understanding the philosophical novel, why labour the point? 



> Well, leaving aside the obviously blinkered view of Austen this is a futile debate. The 'philosophy of the morality of one's own existence' might well be regarded as self-indulgent navel gazing. I wouldn't be so hasty to dismiss it as such myself but perhaps you might broaden your horizons a bit -perhaps something a little less sixth form.


Sixth formers have the advantage of being open to discovery: as the Socratic maxim goes: "Know yourself". You see navel gazing; others see those who fail to reflect on their existence as living in a dark Platonic cave.

Of course, you are not in this cave, however the contempt in your statement blinds your perspective.



> Comparing Austen to Sartre or Camus is patently absurd


Both are forms of literature. Get it?

The string quartet, and the symphony, are forms of music. Get it?

Is it really that difficult? 



> ...as would the comparison between any early to mid-ninteenth century French novelist with them on those terms. To use that approach as some kind of a 'measure' of a culture over a broad timescale as you have done is sheer lunacy, not to mention clearly offensive, and is suggestive of someone with a bit of an axe to grind.


lol. No idea what you're on about or what you're on.

Have a nice day!


----------



## jurianbai

Head_case said:


> This isn't a string quartet I know anything about, so I tend to be very conservative and reluctant to buy unknown music unless I've heard the string quartet play before.


Just get this Koechlin along with Gounoud, and both are very interesting quartet. Btw, both are French's composer.


----------



## robert

Head_case said:


> Lol. I like the Aeolian String Quartet rendition of Bridge: they make boring music sound exciting
> 
> Interesting you bring up Koechlin. In the thread Jurianbai has linked, I was exploring French quartets and came across the Ardeo Quartet's recordings of his first two string quartets.
> 
> I didn't get it - the players look kind of spooky on the album cover!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't a string quartet I know anything about, so I tend to be very conservative and reluctant to buy unknown music unless I've heard the string quartet play before.
> 
> Is his works anything like Magnard/Gou'e/Cras or the later Koerig/Dusapin?


Wow!, Where did this come from? I have never seen it.....Do you own it? If so, what can you tell me about this group and the music... thanks...


----------



## jurianbai

Been listening to Maggini's quartet of other UK composers, eg Alwyn, Ronald Corp, Malcolm Arnold and Lennox Berkeley. These composers style is just too close each other to me,and they are not really my prefered style.

I am now hoping to get some different UK composers with these set.... maybe something more romantic standard and this what I am hoping for it: John McEwen complete string quartets, anyone familiar with this?


----------



## haydnfan

Walton is my favorite, and was an accidental discovery because it was coupled with the Elgar Q, what I bought the cd for.


----------



## Taneyev

Which Walton? There are 2 SQ.


----------



## Head_case

> This isn't a string quartet I know anything about, so I tend to be very conservative and reluctant to buy unknown music unless I've heard the string quartet play before.





> Is his works anything like Magnard/Gou'e/Cras or the later Koerig/Dusapin?


Hi there,

You can hear a very short sample of it here:

http://www.allmusic.com/album/koechlin-string-quartets-nos-1-2-w161791

For me, it seems closer to the Magnard, Gou'e, Cras axis, than the Dusapin/Dutilleux/Koerig line - chronologically and stylistically.

The Ardeo quartet's championing of this neglected French composer (like Ropartz; Bonnal +/- Jongen) is reviewed in some of our lesser UK papers:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2007/nov/23/classicalmusicandopera.shopping6

I came across it when I got the (dreadfully) horrible Renoir Quartet's version of Myaskovsky's string quartets No. I & XIII - they share the same gallic record label, 'Ar-Re-Se' which in English, is pronounced without the embellishment of the middle 'Re':

http://www.arre-se.com/arr-koechlin_en1.html

Be cool to hear more about the McEwen quartets. I find British string quartets less astonishing compared to the wartime Soviet string quartets.

Recently I discovered John McCabe's string quartets (Vanbrugh) which are very satisfying. As far as Arnold goes ... his flute works are quite nice, but I can skip his string quartet efforts happily.


----------



## jurianbai

bumping this.

Rutland Boughton, as usually I like the exploration unto folky tune.


----------



## Head_case

Listening to Richard Arnell's sunnyside up string quartets. Think I posted this before.

Then again, I've listened to it before too so here goes again


----------



## jurianbai

These are lecture and performing video for Benjamin Britten's quartets. If you like to get some idea on what Britten doing in the first two quartets, here it is:

Britten String Quartet No.1 in Dm





No.2 in C - Professor Roger Parker and Badke QUartet


----------



## PetrB

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> You guys have all missed the point, as far as SQ are concerned in England.
> 
> The greatest sets of SQ first performed and first published in England were by Franz Joseph Haydn. Though some may have been composed for continental European commissions, many of Haydn's late SQ were also published in England and performed there; undoubtedly being the earliest virtuosic SQ up to that point in time, in the form that we would normally describe as SQ. Now, dare I speculate that Haydn's works "set the standard", and many English composers would have had a hard task to beat! (Just like Handel set the English standard for oratorios and never since then, with the exception of Haydn's _The Creation_, have there been any more great English oratorios to beat, or indeed English operas for that matter).


Not that you said either Haydn or Handel were British composers, but since I've seen it 'claimed' ...

A passport, and the fact something was written while the composer was on British soil doth not a British composer make: Haydn, Handel, are no more British Composers than Stravinsky and Schoenberg are American composers. All arriving in the new place with all training done, taken outside the country, and their powers developed, craft and tools honed, elsewhere.


----------



## PetrB

To me, I hear a near constant and predominant inherent quality to the majority of English music I call 'literary bound,' i.e. it is never far from wanting directly to be a narrative, or convey some literal or pictorial scene.

Too, other than the few modernist bad boys, then and now (Britten, Ferheyhough, name the bad boy of your choice) there is also an inherently polite conservatism which makes me think of music made while being careful to not épater la bourgeoisie, or it is quite the opposite, going out of its way to épater la bourgeoisie.

Hardly any of it, past a bit of Purcell or the earlier composers, through later periods, has ever made a lasting impression on me, enough to want to hear it again. There is perhaps a coziness, reflecting the British ethos of love of the land and the older social rural community, trying to be evoked, over and over, whether I am imagining that or 'the general sound evokes it', which does not tug at me, but cloys.

Britain is a nation of undeniably enormous verbal and literary strengths, and I think that sense permeates its visual art as well as its music, most often to the detriment of those arts.


----------



## Vaneyes

"Hardly any of it, past a bit of Purcell or the earlier composers, through later periods, has ever made a lasting impression on me, enough to want to hear it again."

Keep at it, PetrB. Epiphany shall arrive. Though, like the progression of this thread, it may take some time.

And Rawsthorne needs more love from Head_Case (posts seem few lately ).


----------



## PetrB

Vaneyes said:


> "Hardly any of it, past a bit of Purcell or the earlier composers, through later periods, has ever made a lasting impression on me, enough to want to hear it again."
> 
> Keep at it, PetrB. Epiphany shall arrive. Though, like the progression of this thread, it may take some time.
> 
> And Rawsthorne needs more love from Head_Case (posts seem few lately ).


Fortunately, from all of music in the Western art tradition, and some from outside of it, there is an ocean of it left for me to love and enjoy.

From that ocean of music I love, enjoy and admire, there are only a few tiny dots of music from British composers. I wish I could better articulate why that is, but can not.

But hey, nobody 'gets' everything.


----------



## Ingélou

@PetrB, I do see the 'cosiness' bit, re British music. Un mot juste.  Still, as you say, we all major in something.


----------



## PetrB

Ingenue said:


> @PetrB, I do see the 'cosiness' bit, re British music. Un mot juste.  Still, as you say, we all major in something.


Sure, it was more by way of an explanation of why I don't care for it -- note, not one criticism about its being necessarily 'bad writing' or such -- more than anything else.


----------



## Yardrax

Hey I live on this godforsaken Island and even I can't figure out what it is about classical music from 'round these parts. Don't feel bad


----------



## bejart

This just to prove that the Brits did compose string quartets during the late 18th century. Unfortunately, it's out of print and second hand copies are apparently difficult to obtain ---

View attachment 20566


----------



## KenOC

Simpson! [to make it long enough...] Simpson!


----------



## MagneticGhost

ScipioAfricanus said:


> God cursed the Brits when it came to music.


Really - If only I'd known. I've wasted 20 years of my life really enjoying the music of my countryland.
I must give up on it and go and listen to some God inspired music from Germany or from wherever. 
Thank the stars that God has chosen someone of impeccable taste such as yourself to tell us what we shouldn't be enjoying.


----------



## MagneticGhost

OK - brushing off my annoyance and offering something constructive.

Rubbra has written some exceedingly fine string quartets.


----------



## elgar's ghost

MagneticGhost said:


> Really - If only I'd known. I've wasted 20 years of my life really enjoying the music of my countryland.
> I must give up on it and go and listen to some God inspired music from Germany or from wherever.
> Thank the stars that God has chosen someone of impeccable taste such as yourself to tell us what we shouldn't be enjoying.


I'll give Scipio the benefit of the doubt and assume he means that rather fallow period post-Purcell and pre-Elgar/Delius/VW etc. (apologies to Sullivan fans).


----------



## MagneticGhost

elgars ghost said:


> I'll give Scipio the benefit of the doubt and assume he means that rather fallow period post-Purcell and pre-Elgar/Delius/VW etc. (apologies to Sullivan fans).


hmm Maybe you're right. I just read it as a rude, complete dismissal of all of the music from my country.


----------



## Selby

I'll admit that I don't rank Irish/British string quartets as highly as I would the French, but I continue to find pleasure in McEwen, Bax, and RVW. RVW's Phantasy Quintet - although obviously not a quartet - for me ranks amongst the most captivating of the genre. 

I read somewhere that Charles Villiers Stanford wrote something like 22 string quartets. Can anyone verify this? I have only been able to see numbers 1 & 2 for sale. Has anyone heard these?


----------



## Garlic

I saw the Maxwell Davies quartets mentioned earlier in the thread, and just ordered the whole set because they're so cheap.
Anyone familiar with these works?


----------



## Quartetfore

Mitchell said:


> I'll admit that I don't rank Irish/British string quartets as highly as I would the French, but I continue to find pleasure in McEwen, Bax, and RVW. RVW's Phantasy Quintet - although obviously not a quartet - for me ranks amongst the most captivating of the genre.
> 
> I read somewhere that Charles Villiers Stanford wrote something like 22 string quartets. Can anyone verify this? I have only been able to see numbers 1 & 2 for sale. Has anyone heard these?


I have a recording of the 2nd quartet, not a "great" work but nice to hear once or twice a year.


----------



## Quartetfore

Mitchell said:


> I'll admit that I don't rank Irish/British string quartets as highly as I would the French, but I continue to find pleasure in McEwen, Bax, and RVW. RVW's Phantasy Quintet - although obviously not a quartet - for me ranks amongst the most captivating of the genre.
> 
> I read somewhere that Charles Villiers Stanford wrote something like 22 string quartets. Can anyone verify this? I have only been able to see numbers 1 & 2 for sale. Has anyone heard these?


He composed 4 published and 1 unpublished quartets


----------



## Selby

I'm so confused! The very irritable often irritating music critic David Wright wrote that Stanford wrote "8 very fine string quartets" in his article about RVW.

http://www.wrightmusic.net/pdfs/ralph-vaughan-williams.pdf

Page 2, third paragraph


----------



## Quartetfore

Mitchel, according to earsense.org four quartets published, and four unpublished. Earsence is a very good site for dates. It could be that the unpublished work went to the printer after this list was made, but I doubt it.
QF.


----------



## Mal

Head_case said:


> What indeed is it about UK string quartets.....which makes them so bland and unmemorable hmmmm? Walker Percy, the American southern writer came across this conundrum when looking at the task of assessing classical English literature (i.e. Jane Austen) versus say, French literature (the philosophical novel) by the likes of Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre. Percy deigned that with Austen, there is no psychological import of existential value. The prettiness of the prose and the language, itself renders page upon page, irrelevant. You could skip chapters of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility and find that the protagonist is still so suffocated in dissimulation and emotionally/psychologically asphyxiated. In contrast, the French existential novel, was compact; concise - not a single note wasted.


I just listened to Walton's String Quartet, played by the Maggini Quartet on Naxos, and found it far from bland - exciting outer movements, beautiful largo. I think Walker Percy, whoever he is, is far from the critical consensus on Jane Austen. Harold Bloom, in "The Western canon" calls Persuasion a "perfect novel" with " canonical persuasiveness" and "extrordinary aesthetic distinction". This was also my experience. (Bloom doesn't mention Camus or Sartre... and although I quite admired Nausea and the Plague, for me Austen provides a far superior aesthetic experience - I might compare Austen to Haydn in his greatest String Quartets and Sartre/Camus to Walton - the "moderns" are good, interestingly edgy & complex, but there's no doubt who provides the greater aesthetic experience.)


----------



## Roger Knox

Argus said:


> You're right. I'd better inform the surviving members of the Beatles that they're music was rubbish and they'll be joining the other two in eternal damnation.


How so confident in your prognostication . . . ?


----------



## Omicron9

Garlic said:


> I saw the Maxwell Davies quartets mentioned earlier in the thread, and just ordered the whole set because they're so cheap.
> Anyone familiar with these works?


I have the full set of PM-D Naxos string quartets. I like them. Modern. If you like the Walton quartets, you'll likely enjoy these as well. Recommended.

Regards,
-09


----------



## TurnaboutVox

An interesting if occasionally dyspeptic thread!

I guess I spend as much time with British string quartets as most people. I certainly think that British composers have produced many good string quartets in the 20th century. Perhaps the jury's still out, and will be for many years, on 21st century works, but there are a few I like very much.

My favourites are undoubtedly Frank Bridge's second and fourth quartets (respectively impressionist and strikingly modernist), both of Walton's - he grossly under-rated his own early serialist quartet, in my view, but I regard the second as a masterpiece; the three numbered quartets of Britten and those of Harrison Birtwhistle ('The Tree of Strings', and '9 Movements for String Quartet'. 

More recently I've obtained recordings of Ferneyhough's, Maconchy's and Tippet's string quartets which I am still assimilating, but all three are very interesting.


The complete list of my present collection (should anyone be interested) includes:

Elgar (Chilingirian, Maggini & Goldner quartets)
Delius (Fitzwilliam Quartet - a rather nice and very 'Delian' work.)
Bridge (Maggini - includes an early unnumbered quartet and numerous clever and rather delightful shorter pieces)
Bax (Maggini quartet)
Vaughan Williams (Maggini quartet, with RVW's string quintet which is a much more striking work)
Elizabeth Maconchy (Hanson, Bingham, Mistry quartets)
Walton (Maggini & Doric quartets - the latter particularly recommended)
Britten (Britten & Maggini quartets - the Maggini are very good indeed here)
Lennox Berkeley (Maggini quartet)
Malcolm Arnold (Maggini Quartet)
Alan Rawsthorne (Maggini Quartet)
Tippett (Heath Quartet)
Maxwell Davies #Naxos 1-8 (Maggini Quartet)
Robert Simpson #14 & 15 (Vanbrugh quartet)
Birtwhistle (Arditti Quartet)
Ferneyhough (Arditti Quartet)
Benedict Mason #1 
Rebecca Saunders 'Fletch' 
Luke Bedford 'Wonderful Four-headed Nightingale' (all Arditti quartet)
James Dillon #5 (Arditti) and #6 (JACK quartet) 

I have also listened to string quartets by Hubert Parry and Charles Villiers Stanford on Spotify - both composers works would seem to justify further exploration, though the late romantic isn't necessarily a period whose music I seek out often.


----------



## Quartetfore

TurnaboutVox said:


> An interesting if occasionally dyspeptic thread!
> 
> I guess I spend as much time with British string quartets as most people. I certainly think that British composers have produced many good string quartets in the 20th century. Perhaps the jury's still out, and will be for many years, on 21st century works, but there are a few I like very much.
> 
> My favourites are undoubtedly Frank Bridge's second and fourth quartets (respectively impressionist and strikingly modernist), both of Walton's - he grossly under-rated his own early serialist quartet, in my view, but I regard the second as a masterpiece; the three numbered quartets of Britten and those of Harrison Birtwhistle ('The Tree of Strings', and '9 Movements for String Quartet'.
> 
> More recently I've obtained recordings of Ferneyhough's, Maconchy's and Tippet's string quartets which I am still assimilating, but all three are very interesting.
> 
> The complete list of my present collection (should anyone be interested) includes:
> 
> Elgar (Chilingirian, Maggini & Goldner quartets)
> Delius (Fitzwilliam Quartet - a rather nice and very 'Delian' work.)
> Bridge (Maggini - includes an early unnumbered quartet and numerous clever and rather delightful shorter pieces)
> Bax (Maggini quartet)
> Vaughan Williams (Maggini quartet, with RVW's string quintet which is a much more striking work)
> Elizabeth Maconchy (Hanson, Bingham, Mistry quartets)
> Walton (Maggini & Doric quartets - the latter particularly recommended)
> Britten (Britten & Maggini quartets - the Maggini are very good indeed here)
> Lennox Berkeley (Maggini quartet)
> Malcolm Arnold (Maggini Quartet)
> Alan Rawsthorne (Maggini Quartet)
> Tippett (Heath Quartet)
> Maxwell Davies #Naxos 1-8 (Maggini Quartet)
> Robert Simpson #14 & 15 (Vanbrugh quartet)
> Birtwhistle (Arditti Quartet)
> Ferneyhough (Arditti Quartet)
> Benedict Mason #1
> Rebecca Saunders 'Fletch'
> Luke Bedford 'Wonderful Four-headed Nightingale' (all Arditti quartet)
> James Dillon #5 (Arditti) and #6 (JACK quartet)
> 
> I have also listened to string quartets by Hubert Parry and Charles Villiers Stanford on Spotify - both composers works would seem to justify further exploration, though the late romantic isn't necessarily a period whose music I seek out often.


If you have a chance, try to hear the Takacs Quartet recording of the Britten quartets. It is outstanding.


----------



## malc

Argus got there first , but forgot the Troggs.


----------



## HenryPenfold

I adore the rich and varied UK string quartet genre. Too many to mention all my favourites, so I'll name my current (it changes often!) top three:

1) William Mathias, String Quartets 1-3 - Medea Quartet 
2) Peter Maxwell Davies, String Quartets 1-10 - Maggini Quartet
3) Michael Tippett - String Quartets 1-5 - The Tippetti Quartet (but the Heath Quartet is on my wish-list)

And may I give a huge shout-out for the Maggini Quartet for their sterling service to UK string quartets and UK string quartet fans!!!


----------

