# Schönberg's String Quartets--(and other Fin de Siècle Modernisic stuff)...



## Sebastien Melmoth

Just listening to the *Aron Quartet*'s reading of *Schönberg's Third Quartet*.
The Aron is the ensemble in residence at the Schönberg Institute in Vienna, and they do a fine job with his quartets; however, in this instance with the *Third* I really don't think anyone will ever out-Herod the* LaSalle*'s classic reading. (Am awaiting, however, Naxos' new release of the *Fred Sherry Quartet*'s realizations of *Quartets Nos. 3 & 4*.)

Schönberg's Third and Fourth Quartets are entirely 12-tone fantastic works of art unrivalled.

(Heard *Hindemith's first two String Quartets* the other day--my how he did ape *Schönberg's First*! While *Zemlinsky's Second Quartet* sounds like a merger between *Schönberg's Second* quartet and *Mahler's Fourth Symphony*!)

Will anyone speak of the quartets (and other chamber music) of *Schönberg*, *Berg*, *Webern*, *Hindemith*, *Zemlinsky*, *Reger*, *Pfitzner*, et alii?


----------



## jurianbai

I am the least knowledge listener here and really don't care (or too blur) about what is 12 tone technique or atonality. When it come to Schoenberg, I just heard it's a 'normal' music playing. From many 20th century string quartet I listened, I notice a specific favorite phrase or 'lick' using chromaticism used by many composers (if I notice again will try to write down it). This phrase will create effect like in horror movie or just simply said like, 'this is not a tonal music'. In Schoenberg's I did not found it. and I also find Schoenberg use his technique to create a 'polite' song, not an extreme random notes hit around. All of his string quartets movement really begin with something that hummable.

there is only one problem with Schoenberg, that is I get bored quickly over the 'improvisation'. the music heard only one-dimentional, with first violin playing around and the rest of band staying background, most of time.

and I am yet to listen the rest of mentioned composers above.


----------



## World Violist

I put Webern and others unmentioned, the latter mostly as a general thing. I like Berg, but I feel that there's something uneven in his music that disturbs me. Webern, I think, is one of the most fascinating of the three big 2nd Viennese school composers. The Bach analogies/comparisons I think are quite apt for Webern. And despite his being the one of the three with the smallest audience, I think his influence over the next generation is much more vast than either of the others.


----------



## Sid James

Of the composers around 1900, the one that fascinates me most (at the moment) is Charles *Ives*. Haven't heard his string quartets yet, but I plan to get them soon. I don't think that he needs an introduction here & most people will know the fact that he foretold so many of the trends that would occur in C20th music. Yes, his music does have a certain rough-hewn quality to it, but (some) people should get a bit beyond that.

Another one not on the list that I also like is *Janacek* who was middle aged around 1900, most of his most significant works composed after that date. His string quartets, written in the 1920's, can be easily counted as among the best of the century. What he had in common with Ives is that he was a maverick, he didn't care about what people thought, he just got his hands dirty and did what he wanted to do.

& another one not on the list is *Busoni*. I haven't heard that much of his music, but his _Berceuse Elegiaque _(dedicated to his student Varese) is one of the most amazing pieces that I have heard from that era. Apparently, Mahler was to conduct it's premiere, but he died. I like the sense of the melody just floating freely in this work, at times there is a rocking and calming effect, at others it sounds spooky and (almost) horrifying. It's not really a chamber music piece, but I thought I'd post it here, as I don't think it's as well known as it should be...


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

For somewhat more 'relaxed' and 'easier' listening, I can recommend *Reger* who sounds like an extended *Brahms*.

Both wrote much fine chamber music; Reger's orchestral works however are execrably orchestrated.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

two "cousins": Schreker and Wellesz...why you didn't mention them?

Martin...a bit sad...


----------



## Edward Elgar

Webern is doing well. He fascinates me to. His work is very fun to analyse and one could easily analyse his entire output in a lifetime. My tutor described him as the "bad boy" of modernism which I think is completely justified. Schoenberg and Berg are too romantic, whereas Webern is pure intellect. There is no room for emotion, but there is a force in his music which words cannot express. The closest words I can summon are decay, disease, ancient mutterings, voices on the wind.


----------



## Edward Elgar

Sebastien Melmoth said:


> For somewhat more 'relaxed' and 'easier' listening, I can recommend *Reger* who sounds like an extended *Brahms*.
> 
> Both wrote much fine chamber music; Reger's orchestral works however are execrably orchestrated.


Reger is the poor man's Brahms. His music sounds the same backwards as it does forwards. Like his name. :devil:


----------



## myaskovsky2002

Webern was killed by accident.

Martin


----------



## Edward Elgar

myaskovsky2002 said:


> Webern was killed by accident.


And the moral of the story... Don't shoot anyone!


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Hindemith is cool! He wasn't a dodecophonist, he was original. I played a flute sonata by him, and doing an orchestral excerpt from Symphonic Metamorphosis for college auditions. I also like the ending to his 2nd string quartet.


----------



## Aramis

If the question would be which of those composers you count among your favourites my answer would be "none". But being fascinated, well, that's another story. It has to be Schönberg, Berg, Webern trio. To understand their music is my ambition - not to force myself to enjoy it, but understand it. It's quite difficult I guess, considering that not many people understand them and those who claim to do so also say that that's because they spent YEARS trying to dig it. Now, that's fascinating thing about them.


----------



## starthrower

I'm just getting into some of Hindemith's chamber music. I really dig it. Love the Kammermusik with Claudio Abbado. 

The first disc of Boulez's Complete Webern on DG is beautiful to my ears.

My only ambition concerning music is to expose myself to everything. If I enjoy it, fine.
I don't need to understand it. Music is for listening, not analysis.


----------



## Edward Elgar

starthrower said:


> The first disc of Boulez's Complete Webern on DG is beautiful to my ears.


Do you have the box set? Is it complete Webern or just the orchestral works? If it's his complete output, who plays the chamber music? I'm thinking of getting it. How would you rate it? Thanks.


----------



## Aramis

> Is it complete Webern or just the orchestral works? If it's his complete output, who plays the chamber music?


Not sure how about chamber ensambles but Krystian Zimerman plays the piano on this box.


----------



## starthrower

I got the Webern box from the library. I didn't have time to absorb the whole thing. Disc one features orchestral works, so I focused on that. I'll have to check it out again for further listening. The Emerson Quartet is featured on some of the chamber works. Check out the Amazon page.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

I have two Webern Boxes. The 3 CDs box and the 6 CDs boxes, both by Pierre Boulez. In the first he was younger, in the second older....but always arrogant!

Martin Pitchon


----------



## jurianbai

now that I have added Zemlinsky set of quartet of above composers. I like the Zemlinsky's piece, very different to Schoenberg. The Zemlinsky's cycle as I remember has thematic melody repeated in his four string quartets. I enjoy that Zemlinsky's.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I like all of the above apart from Pfitzner who I haven't heard and Reger who I sometimes find too 'safe'/stolid/dull. Hindemith is the one that interests me most as he never got the kind of plaudits that guys like Stravinsky did. As much as I like Stravinsky I fail to see why Hindemith is so undervalued in comparison. He wrote a vast amount of music for all kinds of forces and genres and is always worth listening to. His cycle of 7 string quartets seems to be especially under-rated, I think. Also, his numerous wind sonatas are an absolute delight.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Reger's String Quartets are absolutely underrated:
http://www.amazon.com/Reger-String-...tet/dp/B0009HL7K6/ref=cm_lm_byauthor_prod_9_0

Brilliant has a new reissue of the LaSalle's Zemlinsky SQs:
http://www.amazon.com/Zemlinsky-Str...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1292259583&sr=1-1

The original DG issue included the Apostel SQ; can't tell with Brilliant's...


----------



## Head_case

Hindemith is the only composer out of the bunch whom I enjoy listening to regularly. The others all have their merits of course

The Zehetmair recording of the Hindemith string quartet (no. IV) is sublime. Otherwise, I guess it makes sense to go for a whole cycle. The Pacifica Quartet do a great reading of the Hindemith number too.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

The marvellous Prazák Quartet of Prague has finally completed it's *Schönberg* cycle with its terrific issue of the *Third Quartet* plus Webern's Piano Quintet version of the First Chamber Symphony and the two Quartettsätzen.

http://www.amazon.com/Schonberg-String-Quartet-No-3-Prazak/dp/B0046IGO7U/ref=cm_cr-mr-img

============================

A version of *Reger*'s great *f-minor Piano Concerto* is due for release next month.
http://www.amazon.com/Romantic-Conc...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1300112987&sr=1-2

The old release with Serkin is OOP.
http://www.amazon.com/Reger-Variati...r_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1300113098&sr=1-12


----------

