# Digesting string quartets from a large amount from a given composer



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Using Haydn as an example since he wrote 68 quartets. Im interested in how many of the 68 can you actually "remember" ie a few themes or even a general feel just by thinking about them? Question is really a general question but I think Haydn is a good example. If you have only listened to a handful this question is not applicable to you. If you want to comment on other composers its ok as long as they have a large amount maybe at least 20? Mostly interested in String Quartets. At least for me other genres are easier to "digest"


----------



## Bruce (Jan 2, 2013)

I've listened to most of Haydn's quartets, but not often enough to recognize any of the themes. I can recall the beginning of Mozart's 23rd string quartet, and part of the first movement of his 14th. There are segments of several of Beethoven's quartets I can recognize, but of the composers who wrote quite a few works in this genre, that's about it.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I don't think one needs to know a large body of works "by heart". Not everyone has a superior musical memory.
Of Beethoven piano sonatas and quartets I have a mental picture of all of them and can hum at least a few themes. Same for Mozart's piano concertos from K 271 on. I think I'd recognize almost all of these pieces soon if someone played an excerpt (containing some meaningful themes or passages).
As for Haydn's quartets I have at least a vague mental picture for most from op.20 onwards (and a few earlier ones) and can hum some themes. I'd guess that I know around 30 so well that I'd recognize at least the beginnings of the first and the slow movements very quickly (I wouldn't bet on menuets), or at least put them in the correct opus. But I have been listening to them for about 20 years, longer for some.
Going through them in my head, I'd say I remember quite well:
all of op.76, 77, 64, 54, 20; 74/3; 55/2; 50/1,4,5,6; 42; 33/1,3,5,6; 9/4; 1/3. That's 36. I have some memories and would certainly recognize some more of op.9 and 17 when they were played to me but to invoke the mental image gets only very blurry results. What's really embarrassing is that I listened to op.71 a week or two ago and have only a very vague memory, for some reason I only remember the "rider" from op.71+74.


----------



## Forbes (Apr 18, 2020)

I have the complete Beethoven, Mozart, Schubert, Bartok and Janacek quartets and some Haydn on CD which I have listened to several times following the score. I "remember" most of them when I listen to them, by which I mean I usually know what is coming next. However, apart from Op. 18 No, 1, if you played an Op. 18 quartet I would not be able to tell you which one it was.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

My problem is not with remembering some of the melodies, etc, but with remembering which opus number they are (old age). I had similar problems to you, Kreisler, the other week with the op.55s. I'd tagged them, the op. 74 and the op.50 sets all wrong (no opus numbers) when I burned them to the car USB and it did my head in trying to remember which was which. I'm usually great at remembering numbers, in daily life, but I'm notoriously shocking at matching melodies and opus numbers for Haydn. I don't know why. Mind you, I'm getting as bad with rock songs and album titles these days.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

The way the material of the slow movement of Op.50 No.4 is similar in feel to that of the 104th symphony, -helps me remember its feel.

"In the first place, on account of nearly one hundred years of unrivaled attention, Haydn's quartets are so deeply rooted in our blood . . . that we feel . . . that we are encountering an old friend. Furthermore, it was part of the historical character of the Haydn era that his quartets represented much more the common elements of a genre than a differentiated sharply defined individuality. It is revealing that one always refers to 'a Haydn quartet' whereas one is precise with regard to the specific work one is talking about in the case of Beethoven. . . . The reasons do not lie exclusively with the fundamentally different personalities of the two masters. The manner of composition was entirely different in their respective times. Anyone who wrote more than one hundred symphonies and came close that that in terms of quartets could not possibly invest in each of these works a distinct richness of individuality." -Eduard Hanslick

I mean Haydn is good, but in my subjective view, rather than obsessing over every single thing he wrote, it's a bit better to also give some attention to guys like Franz Ignaz von Beecke (1733~1803):




string quartet in C (cir. 1780)







Kreisler jr said:


> I don't think one needs to know a large body of works "by heart". Not everyone has a superior musical memory.


Sure, but it's possible if you're passionate enough about them. The member AbsolutelyBaching (who left TC long ago) got 46 of these correct:


----------



## Great Uncle Frederick (Mar 17, 2021)

golfer72 said:


> Using Haydn as an example since he wrote 68 quartets. Im interested in how many of the 68 can you actually "remember" ie a few themes or even a general feel just by thinking about them? Question is really a general question but I think Haydn is a good example. If you have only listened to a handful this question is not applicable to you. If you want to comment on other composers its ok as long as they have a large amount maybe at least 20? Mostly interested in String Quartets. At least for me other genres are easier to "digest"


How many composers wrote 20 or more string quartets?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Recognising the music (knowing where it is going to go next etc) is one thing. I have heard all Haydn's quartets and would recognise any part of about half of them. I could also recognise all Beethoven's and Mozart's quartets. But being able to say exactly what work any of these is I would find much more challenging. I could certainly assign any Beethoven quartet to the early, middle or late of his periods and there are a few I could probably name. There may also be one or two of Mozart's that I could name and I might be able to name the set from which some Haydn quartets come. 

I think my ability to name pieces of music on hearing changed around the age of 40 - works I loved before then I can definitely name but not so much with works I came to love after that age. I often recognise (and "know") such music and can certainly say who composed it and perhaps when they composed it but naming the actual piece ... not if it's a number or a name attached to a piece in a career of pieces in that genre.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Great Uncle Frederick said:


> How many composers wrote 20 or more string quartets?


Ha ha not too many. Mozart had like 26 but cant think of anyone else off the top of my head. The 20 was just a number i threw out. I chose the string quartet genre because in general for all composers for me they are harder to remember one from the other. This question also applies to other genres.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> I don't think one needs to know a large body of works "by heart". Not everyone has a superior musical memory.
> Of Beethoven piano sonatas and quartets I have a mental picture of all of them and can hum at least a few themes. Same for Mozart's piano concertos from K 271 on. I think I'd recognize almost all of these pieces soon if someone played an excerpt (containing some meaningful themes or passages).
> As for Haydn's quartets I have at least a vague mental picture for most from op.20 onwards (and a few earlier ones) and can hum some themes. I'd guess that I know around 30 so well that I'd recognize at least the beginnings of the first and the slow movements very quickly (I wouldn't bet on menuets), or at least put them in the correct opus. But I have been listening to them for about 20 years, longer for some.
> Going through them in my head, I'd say I remember quite well:
> all of op.76, 77, 64, 54, 20; 74/3; 55/2; 50/1,4,5,6; 42; 33/1,3,5,6; 9/4; 1/3. That's 36. I have some memories and would certainly recognize some more of op.9 and 17 when they were played to me but to invoke the mental image gets only very blurry results. What's really embarrassing is that I listened to op.71 a week or two ago and have only a very vague memory, for some reason I only remember the "rider" from op.71+74.


"I don't think one needs to know a large body of works "by heart". Not everyone has a superior musical memory." I didnt mean by heart i meant maybe a theme or two or general feeling as I stated in my question.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> I don't think one needs to know a large body of works "by heart". Not everyone has a superior musical memory.
> Of Beethoven piano sonatas and quartets I have a mental picture of all of them and can hum at least a few themes. Same for Mozart's piano concertos from K 271 on. I think I'd recognize almost all of these pieces soon if someone played an excerpt (containing some meaningful themes or passages).
> As for Haydn's quartets I have at least a vague mental picture for most from op.20 onwards (and a few earlier ones) and can hum some themes. I'd guess that I know around 30 so well that I'd recognize at least the beginnings of the first and the slow movements very quickly (I wouldn't bet on menuets), or at least put them in the correct opus. But I have been listening to them for about 20 years, longer for some.
> Going through them in my head, I'd say I remember quite well:
> all of op.76, 77, 64, 54, 20; 74/3; 55/2; 50/1,4,5,6; 42; 33/1,3,5,6; 9/4; 1/3. That's 36. I have some memories and would certainly recognize some more of op.9 and 17 when they were played to me but to invoke the mental image gets only very blurry results. What's really embarrassing is that I listened to op.71 a week or two ago and have only a very vague memory, for some reason I only remember the "rider" from op.71+74.


Thanks for detailed answer.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Great Uncle Frederick said:


> How many composers wrote 20 or more string quartets?


There's Spohr (36, listened to all of them the past few months).


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> There's Spohr (36, listened to all of them the past few months).


Any input related to my original question?


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Nope. I take them one CD at a time, and with these large bodies of works I really can't distinguish them.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Boccherini, Haydn, Mozart, Onslow wrote > 20, Villa Lobos 17, Simpson 15.



golfer72 said:


> "I don't think one needs to know a large body of works "by heart". Not everyone has a superior musical memory." I didnt mean by heart i meant maybe a theme or two or general feeling as I stated in my question.


Yes, I understood this. I lumped in my other response basically together recalling themes and having a vague notion that I think would be enough to recognize the piece (or at least main parts, probably not the menuet).
As a comparison, I don't have such vague impressions of any of the early 11 Mozart quartets and only for one (E flat D 87) of the early Schubert quartets (although I might identify some as early Mozart/Schubert if they were played to me).


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

I have a similar problem with Shostakovich's quartets, and he only wrote 15 (there were plans for 24, one for each major and minor key, but he didn't live long enough to complete the project). I've heard all of them multiple times and I enjoy hearing them all, but, with the exception of the 8th and 15th, the thematic material doesn't really "stick" for me even after multiple listens.
I have no problem identifying and remembering thematic material from all 15 of the his symphonies. I'm not sure why it is more difficult with the quartets.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Yeah for some reason like i said i have more trouble with String Quartets than say Piano sonatas. Piano sonatas are my favorite "format" so maybe that has something to do with it? Thats why I was interested in others opinions on this. Its been interesting hearing others takes. Seems kind of similar to my experience


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> Nope. I take them one CD at a time, and with these large bodies of works I really can't distinguish them.


That sounds like input to me  Thanks!


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

golfer72 said:


> Yeah for some reason like i said i have more trouble with String Quartets than say Piano sonatas. Piano sonatas are my favorite "format" so maybe that has something to do with it?


It was certainly worse for me with piano music in earlier times and maybe still is. (I certainly have worse grasp on even the better known half of Haydn's piano sonatas than on his string quartets, and I don't know how often I would have to listen through the 50 Chopin mazurkas to the number of a majority) I think it's partly how many works there are, partly how well one knows the music, partly how much there is wrt contrasts. Pieces from the baroque and classical (before latest Haydn and Mozart and Beethoven) often have less obvious contrasts and draw from a limited pool of forms, melodic and harmonic patterns. And obviously there aren't as many sound contrasts in most string quartet or piano music.
So I'd guess that you are overall more familiar with the piano pieces therefore you can remember and identify them better.


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

Great Uncle Frederick said:


> How many composers wrote 20 or more string quartets?


Everyone's favorite American composer Fidelis Zitterbart Jr. (1845-1915) wrote 125 string quartets, plus 100 more that he threw away.
At least according to Wikipedia. The highest number one finds at IMSLP.org is 88, and that's a work completed shortly before he died, so I don't know...


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> Pieces from the baroque and classical before latest Haydn and Mozart often have less obvious contrasts and draw from a limited pool of forms, melodic and harmonic patterns.


Sorry, but in terms of harshness of vertical harmony Haydn is one of the "mildest" among his peers (not a bad thing objectively).


hammeredklavier said:


> "Alceste is an opera in German in five acts by Anton Schweitzer (1735–1787) with a libretto by Christoph Martin Wieland. It was commissioned by Abel Seyler for the Seylersche Schauspiel-Gesellschaft, and premiered on 28 May 1773 at the Hoftheater Weimar. Considered a milestone of German opera, it was revived in Weimar and recorded in 1999."
> 
> 
> 
> ...





hammeredklavier said:


> Aumann's music was a large part of the repertoire at St. Florian in the 19th century, and Anton Bruckner availed himself of this resource for his studies of counterpoint. Bruckner focused a lot of his attention on Aumann's Christmas responsories and an Ave Maria in D major. Bruckner, who liked Aumann's coloured harmony, added in 1879 an accompaniment by three trombones to his settings of Ecce quomodo moritur justus and Tenebrae factae sunt.
> Aumann's oeuvre also includes instrumental music, such as some of the earliest string quintets.


Btw, I was intrigued when you talked like Haydn expresses "pain" in the harmony of his late works such as Op.76 No.5. Another time I was was when you said "the passion recitatives of Handel's Messiah are daring examples of chromaticism rivaling Bach's in terms of effective contrasts" (or something to the effect), which made me wonder if you're really hearing harmony the way other people do. (But I didn't condemn your "unpopular opinions" by saying things like "everyone except you thinks X is always just happy or funny".)



Kreisler jr said:


> And obviously there aren't as many sound contrasts


Sorry, but everytime you start a sentence with "obviously", I know in advance you're expressing a subjective opinion. (And some things are not subjective; such as the fact that a major triad is less dissonant than a diminished 7th chord, and that milk is less spicier than chilly pepper.) No offense, btw, I'm just pointing out there are plenty of other elements outside of melody, harmony, form, which you can point to and praise a composer about - (eg. "rhythmic ingenuity in Haydn symphonies"):








3 Hilarious Examples of Rhythmic Ingenuity in Lesser-known Haydn Symphonies


Please support this channel on Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/RichardAtkinsonRichard Atkinson analyzes three hilarious examples of rhythmic ingenuity from H...




www.youtube.com


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> It was certainly worse for me with piano music in earlier times and maybe still is. (I certainly have worse grasp on even the better known half of Haydn's piano sonatas than on his string quartets, and I don't know how often I would have to listen through the 50 Chopin mazurkas to the number of a majority) I think it's partly how many works there are, partly how well one knows the music, partly how much there is wrt contrasts. Pieces from the baroque and classical (before latest Haydn and Mozart and Beethoven) often have less obvious contrasts and draw from a limited pool of forms, melodic and harmonic patterns. And obviously there aren't as many sound contrasts in most string quartet or piano music.
> So I'd guess that you are overall more familiar with the piano pieces therefore you can remember and identify them better.


Yeah like i said i listen to solo piano the most so that plays into it as well. You mentioned Mazurkas but those are short pieces where i doubt anyone except a pianist would remember all. I have a pretty good memory or at least impression of most of Beethovens 32 piano sonatas and Im "working" on Schuberts 20 or so. Discussion has been interesting.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> The member AbsolutelyBaching (who left TC long ago) got 46 of these correct:


Btw, we could certainly make one for Haydn quartets or other things if anyone wants to take the challenge


hammeredklavier said:


> Aren't you curious, how many of these Rosen could identify? (at the time he was writing The Classical Style)





hammeredklavier said:


> 50 randomly-selected, unidentified 20-second excerpts from 50 different C.P.E. Bach keyboard sonatas (each excerpt extracted from a different work). How many can you identify?





hammeredklavier said:


> O RLY? Then let's see how many you can identify :


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

hammeredklavier said:


> Sorry, but in terms of harshness of vertical harmony Haydn is one of the "mildest" among his peers (not a bad thing objectively).


Must your really highjack EVERYTHING with your silly pet peeves! This is insufferable. Until now nobody in this thread made any claims about "vertical harmony" which is your obsession. So there is nothing here for you to disagree with but you should in fact be sorry about always bringing up your silly pet peeves regardless of what was talked about before. Can't you keep this elsewhere?



> Sorry, but everytime you start a sentence with "obviously", I know in advance you're expressing a subjective opinion.


Says the guy who think silly youtube links prove "obvious" points. If you're trying to belittle me, say that I am harping some received wisdom (which is usually reasonable, because I don't think a random smartass on the internet knows better than 200 years of experts and musicians).
I really should not respond anymore to your highjacking everything.

Do you disagree that it's easier for most listeners to keep 32 Beethoven sonatas in one's mind apart compared to 50 Haydn sonatas (and respectively with Mozart symphonies or Boccherini quartets and whatnot)? If so, how would you explain the OP's problem? If you agree that this is a frequent experience, why is it easier with Beethoven than with most 18th century music?
Maybe because Beethoven's are more "individual" as "characters" whereas many differences in Haydn are more subtle? It's a tired cliché but also apparent to most listeners that baroque and classical music relies on formulas, tags, standard patterns to very large degree. So does 19th century music but for most listener not to such an extent.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> Until now nobody in this thread made any claims about "vertical harmony" which is your obsession. So there is nothing here for you to disagree with but you should in fact be sorry about always bringing up your silly pet peeves regardless of what was talked about before. Can't you keep this elsewhere?


I don't get the point of this at all. I wasn't the one who started talking about "harmony" or "harmonic contrasts" in this thread. If a member makes claims that I perceive as wrong and I state the reasons why I disagree, it's not like I'm committing a crime by doing it.



Kreisler jr said:


> Says the guy who think silly youtube links prove "obvious" points.


At least I try to get us come to an agreement about certain things with proper examples (but the tone deaf will never see the point). I just would want the term "harmonic contrasts" (or what is meant by it) be explained with specific examples similarly, before any more strange, vague, unsubstantiated claims are made with it.



Kreisler jr said:


> If you're trying to belittle me, say that I am harping some received wisdom (which is usually reasonable, because I don't think a random smartass on the internet knows better than 200 years of experts and musicians).


Actually, the quotes by Berlioz, the Schumanns, Hanslick, Tchaikovsky, Wagner, etc, I sometimes cite are all from scholarly sources. I'm not trying to belittle anyone. "Some received wisdom"? What is the "received wisdom" regarding the specific things you talked about in this thread; ie. "harmonic contrasts"?
And of course, when certain someone criticizes Bach, he's not just being a "smartass".



Kreisler jr said:


> Must your really highjack EVERYTHING with your silly pet peeves! This is insufferable. I really should not respond anymore to your highjacking everything.


Ok. But it's not hijacking. It's just an objection to another member's comment.



Kreisler jr said:


> Maybe because Beethoven's are more "individual" as "characters" whereas many differences in Haydn are more subtle?


One can't use any fancy terms any way he likes just cause he thinks they sound cool and still expect to be accepted as "having a valid subjective opinion". In this thread, certain fancy lofty terms have been used to describe certain works and their traits in ways they don't quite deserve and it's doubtful to me the speaker even really knows what he's talking about, considering the past experiences. There are plenty of other ways to discuss "subtlety" with some sense of objectivity, but maybe he doesn't find them as glorifying.
"Bariolage, and the Frog Quartet" www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xhXCRVIbGY



Kreisler jr said:


> Do you disagree that it's easier for most listeners to keep 32 Beethoven sonatas in one's mind apart compared to 50 Haydn sonatas (and respectively with Mozart symphonies or Boccherini quartets and whatnot)? If so, how would you explain the OP's problem? If you agree that this is a frequent experience, why is it easier with Beethoven than with most 18th century music?


Which part of my comments are you addressing? I haven't said _"I think all Haydn quartets sound the same"_ or anything of the sort in this thread. It's just that the OP uncannily reminded me of a similar comment by Hanslick. Please don't be paranoid to misinterpret anything I've said, or set up a strawman. I haven't praised Mozart symphonies over Haydn quartets in terms of individuality in this thread. What other listeners find easy to remember is irrelevant; we all have different experiences, amounts of listening time with composers and their works, and senses of perception of what is "memorable" in them. If you find Beethoven WoOs, Hesses, and lesser-known Ops "memorable" for whatever reason, then good for you.
_"If you're passionate about Haydn quartets like how AbsolutelyBaching was about Bach cantatas, it's possible you could memorize all of them."_ <- If one finds this so offensive, he should ask himself if he's paranoid.


----------



## golfer72 (Jan 27, 2018)

I never wanted this to devolve into an argument or anything confrontational. I was just interested in others thoughts. Thanks everyone for their input.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

golfer72 said:


> I never wanted this to devolve into an argument or anything confrontational.


Sorry about that.



Kreisler jr said:


> Pieces from the baroque and classical (before latest Haydn and Mozart and Beethoven) often have less obvious contrasts and draw from a limited pool of forms, melodic and harmonic patterns.





Kreisler jr said:


> Says the guy who think silly youtube links prove "obvious" points. Can't you keep this elsewhere?


Feel free to join me in the discussion in the other thread, if you would like to argue your points further:


hammeredklavier said:


> The former style (1) consists of simple suspensions. eg. The "Bb" in the "V7 - I" in the section in F.
> The latter style (2) consists of colorful "chords" arising from non-chord tones (marked in red) and "inner lines" contributing to their occurrence. ([see example 2] the harmony in the strong beat (bar 258) is spelled "D, F, Ab, C", like a "half-diminished 7th chord", which resolves to the dominant 6/5 in Eb, in the next beat. And due to the movement of the alto voice line, the next beat contains the non-chord tone, 'Eb', which clashes against the dominant 6/5 in Eb, resulting in a momentary sonority, "D, Eb, F, Ab, Bb", and so on...)
> Ex 1.
> 
> ...


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Returning to Haydn my respect for his string quartets grows every day. In my early days of listening to them I used to think (naively) that many of them "sounded a bit samey" but over the years I've fostered a growing respect for his work and, these days, I love many of his quartets.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> The way the material of the slow movement of Op.50 No.4 is similar in feel to that of the 104th symphony, -helps me remember its feel.





hammeredklavier said:


> Haydn Op.50 No.1/ii (watch?v=7osJCddGJSc&t=12m42s) uncannily reminds me of Mozart K.219/iii (watch?v=4mNJ43S1RIQ&t=20m15s) and Haydn Op.50 No.4/i (watch?v=7ZRunrrfje0&t=5m27s) reminds me of Mozart K.379/i (watch?v=YbHuK9Hjh_g&t=9m37s) in parts, although I'm inclined to think the similarities (of thematic material) are merely coincidental.


Likewise, I try to remember (or have a mental image) by "melodic fragments" in this way, by relating the things to Haydn's own other works or his contemporaries' (But on the broader scale of things, these composers are different and distinct from each other in how they go about doing things). For instance, I find that,





Op.42/i




Hob.XVIII:11/i
the former starts off a bit like a "minor key version" of the latter.

Likewise, the minuet of Op.50 No.3 youtube.com/watch?v=-VEmoqqUFn0
reminds me of his brother's "Wer kann als ein Wildbretschutz lustiger sein" (Die Hochzeit auf der Alm) youtube.com/watch?v=CGX4E5zbFo0 in melodic fragments.
(which is, btw, interesting cause Haydn's own "Wie wallet mein Herze" (Die Feuersbrunst) youtube.com/watch?v=-1jr4x3IV_k reminds me of the minuet of his brother's MH189 youtube.com/watch?v=S9YdRLZF2PE)





Op.50 No.6/i




MH411/i
(which is interesting cause, these are almost contemporaneous, the latter predates the former by an year.)


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Whether or not I can identify or distinguish works from a large number of others by the same composer depends on how long I have known them and, in particular, how old I was when I first heard them. When a composer has written many works of a given genre I can often sing along without being able to actually name the pieces. When I was younger my memory may have worked better but I also knew far few works (so that those I listened to stood out more) and I probably needed to listen more times to a work to get it really talking to me. Works I first encountered back then tend to be works I can name. These days with composers I am familiar with I can listen once or twice and enjoy and it may be months before I listen to it again. I can get to "know" the music but often without being able to name it.


----------

