# Favorite String Quartet



## Violinista

I want to know who your favorite current string quartet is! I don't mean repertoire...I mean actual string quartet!

My favorit is the Magellan String Quartet. 
First Violin: Ryan Kho
Second Violin: Jonathan Aceto
Viola: Carl Purdy
Cello: Ruth Berry
They are great


----------



## Daniel

Hello Violinista and welcome to the forums! 

Depends as usual on the work.

But for me such a great string quartet: The Borodin Quartet.

Currently members:
1st violin: Ruben Aharonian
2nd violin: Andrei Abramenkov
viola: Igor Naidin
cello: Valentin Berlinsky

Greetings,
Daniel


----------



## Wisdumb

The Kronos Quartet: Hank Dutt, Joan Jeanrenaud, David Harrington, John Sherba
They can play absolutely anything, and their focus is on new music.


----------



## Wisdumb

The Kronos Quartet:
Hank Dutt, Joan Jeanrenaud, David Harrington, John Sherba
They can play anything, but their focus is on new music.


----------



## linz

For contemporary works: Alban Berg String Quartet
For most other music: Emerson String Quartet (UNFORTUNATELY THEIR RECORDING ARE VERY PRICEY $$$!)

Kronos String Quartet's recording of Schnittke's 3rd quartet is impeccable!


----------



## Celloman

The Emerson String Quartet
The Borodin String Quartet

Two excellent quartets that have not yet been mentioned! 

P.S. Never mind, the Emerson was mentioned by linz. Oops. But they deserve to be mentioned twice!


----------



## Topaz

Quartetto Italiano.

One of the best SQ's ever. Packed up now. Excellent Beethoven SQ set. One of my best.



Topaz


----------



## oisfetz

My favorites:
Borodin
Taneyev
Shostakovich
Melos (in the 70s.)
Tokyo (the first)
Prague
Budapest (in the 40s)
Koeckert
Primrose (on the very few recordings they made)
Vlach
Smetana
Janaceck
Krasni
Kreisler (on Kreisler's, the only one they made)
Paganini
Schneider (on complete Haydn)
Fine Arts.
Yale (on Beethoven)


----------



## Guest

Again this depends on repertoire, for me at least.
My Beethoven Qts are a collection of various Qts, with many repeats, Lindsay, Emerson, Tokyo, Melos, and a lone Op 135 from the Juiliard which I picked up for about NZ$5 and is superb and the best 135 that I have.
Brahms New Budapest 
Mozart Chilingirian
Haydn for me just has to be Quatuor Mosaiques.
And of course our own NZ St Qt with a Beethoven cycle.


----------



## robert newman

Quartetto Italiano and also the Alban Berg quartets.


----------



## ChamberNut

Quartetto Italiano. I have the complete Beethoven SQ's by them and it is the music I listen to the most often.


----------



## robert

oisfetz said:


> My favorites:
> Borodin
> Taneyev
> Shostakovich
> Melos (in the 70s.)
> Tokyo (the first)
> Prague
> Budapest (in the 40s)
> Koeckert
> Primrose (on the very few recordings they made)
> Vlach
> Smetana
> Janaceck
> Krasni
> Kreisler (on Kreisler's, the only one they made)
> Paganini
> Schneider (on complete Haydn)
> Fine Arts.
> Yale (on Beethoven)


What no Mosaiques or Talich???


----------



## gottachatter

Violinista said:


> I want to know who your favorite current string quartet is! I don't mean repertoire...I mean actual string quartet!
> 
> My favorit is the Magellan String Quartet.
> First Violin: Ryan Kho
> Second Violin: Jonathan Aceto
> Viola: Carl Purdy
> Cello: Ruth Berry
> They are great


Hey I took a violin lesson from Ryan Kho and my teacher is a student of Ryan Kho. He coached a string quartet I was in too. Amazing person.

I personally like the Emerson String Quartet


----------



## Zarzowski

Ševčík-Lhatsky Quartet

1st violin: Bohuslav Lhatsky
2nd violin: Karel Procházka
viola: Karel Moravec
violoncello: Bohuslav Váska (until 1911), succeeded by Ladislav Zelenka (until 1914), and by Antonio Fingerland.


----------



## Ephemerid

What little I've heard of the *Hagen Quartett *I quite like (Debussy, Ravel, Beethoven, Shostakovich). I actually prefer their recordings over what the *Emerson Quartet *has done (especially Shostakovich's 8th 4tet). What I can't get by the Hagen, I tend to go with the Emerson-- I always keep an eye out for them.

And I like the *Kronos Quartet *as well, though sometimes I feel like some albums of theirs can be a bit hit-and-miss IMO.

~josh


----------



## World Violist

Am I the first one to say "Guarneri" on this board? They've just been around so long and their interpretations are just excellent. That's in my opinion, anyways. Budapest Quartet was the best quartet, no doubts, but they're all dead and the recordings are old, so if one can't go beyond the surface noise... but I can, so I like them a lot too.


----------



## rich23434565

As others have said, it depends on the repertoire!

For Beethoven I prefer the Alban Berg's recent live recordings that were issued on EMI. Their performance of Op. 131 in C# minor is awesome. Same goes for the great A minor quartet too. I prefer them overall to the Takacs. For Mozart's 'Prussian' quartets I love the Alban Berg's late 1970s recordings on Teldec and for the 'Haydn' quartets it's got to be between the Chilingirians and the Mosaiques on period instruments. With Schubert it has to be the Lindsays (although I prefer the Amadeus Quartet for the great string quintet in C).


----------



## BuddhaBandit

Now I'm aware that the Emerson Quartet has been mentioned... but I want to put in another vote for them, especially for their work on Bach's The Art of Fugue. Rich, I like the Alban Berg, too, especially their recording of the Debussy and Ravel quartets.


----------



## Ludovyk

Nowadays, my choice is the Alban Berg, for any repertoire: the Viennese classics as well as the XXth century classics. I have had the opportunity to attend their concerts many times: and their live sound is powerful... I still recall an interpretation of the Lutoslawski quartet, it sounded like a symphony orchestra! The cello, Valentin Erben, may be in my opinion the best cello player I've ever heard to... Unfortunately some years ago, their former viola, Thomas Kakushka, died, and a young Isabel Charisius replaced for him: although she was Kakushka's disciple and plays Kakushka's own viola... well, it's not the same thing!

I also like the Takács a lot. They are splendid, their virtuosity has always left me out of breath... And the Borodin: their Shostakovich is always quite an experience, and their historic cellist, Valentin Berlinski, with his still magnificent sound, at 80 years...

The Tokyo have decayed a lot in the last years, they don't have anything to do with the splendid quartet they were once.

As for historic quartets, my favourites are the Amadeus and the Budapest.


----------



## confuoco

*Alban Berg Quartet*


----------



## Ludovyk

confuoco said:


> *Alban Berg Quartet*


Can the Janacek's quartets be played more beautifully??


----------



## confuoco

Ludovyk said:


> Can the Janacek's quartets be played more beautifully??


Or Smetana and Debussy?


----------



## shsherm

I attended a performance uf the Berlin Philharmonic String Quartet last fall and they were ther most humorless Teutonic stern-faced group I have ever seen. The contempt for the audience was quite evident and this was a performance at The California Institute of Technology which is one of the two most esteemed technical schools in the US. They are my least favorite string quartet. I know this is the opposite of the intention of this thread but I wanted to give my opinion of this group.


----------



## altiste

*Quatuor Diotima*

I go and listen to the Diotima String Quartet whenever I can. Their most recent concert that I heard was at Opéra Bastille where they played Beethoven's Op.132 and Nono's _Fragmente-Stille, an Diotima_. The quartet performs a lot contemporary music.

The violist of the quartet, Franck Chevalier, performed my Viola Concerto in 2001 with the Chamber Orchestra of the NZSO, and in 2002 the quartet participated in a recording (for Radio France) of my Tango Suite for contralto, string quartet & double bass. This was with Eiichi Chijiiwa and Nicolas Miribel as violinists.

The current members of the group are Naaman Sluchin & Yu-Peng Zhao (violins) Franck Chevalier (viola), & Pierre Morlet (cello).


----------



## Scelsi

Arditti Quartet, ABQ and Hagen (and Quartetto Italiano for old times' sake)


----------



## Efraim

(My answer went to another page, so I copy it here.)

Favourite String Quartets 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, I have several favourite SQs, mostly depending on the work. For Beethoven the best for me is the Smetana Quartet (Supraphon LP-s)(except for their F Major Op. 59 which is pale). They have not a very brilliant sonority, compared to some other famous quartets, but this is the last thing that bothers me about the works I like with them. Their interpretations of Beethoven is the most intelligent, revealing a profound understanding of these works. On the contrary, their playing of Haydn's The Bird and The Lark is uninteresting, Brahms' Clarinet Quintet utterly colourless and bad. - 
For Haydn: D Minor Op. 9, D Op. 17, B Minor Op. 33, all of Op. 50: Festetics Quartet. - Op. 76 & 77: Mosaiques. Op. 20: various quartets, I have a hard time to decide which one is the best for this or that work, Buchberger, Mosaiques, Ulbrich (old Eterna LPs), or Pellegrini; for C Major : perhaps Dekany Quartet (old VOX LP), the most tragic and the most moving reading of this work, in spite of or independently from an ugly sound; Salomon Quartet (mainly for A Major). The Buchberger Quartet is always excellent. Each of these teams has a different style and all are convincing. There are now scores of fantastic quartets on an astonishingly high level, both technically and from the point of view of the originality, that the old famous quartets didn't reach by far, especially for Haydn, who is being "re-invented" in our days. (Elysee Quartet, Eben Q., Jerusalem Q. ...)
I have only one record of the Panocha Quartet (Haydn's Op. 33 Nos 4-6). Simply perfect!
I have an incredibly rich interpretation of Brahms' two quartets Op. 51 by the Bartok Quartet, on an old Hungarian LP, from about 1968. All the other interpretations I have became poor, little interesting after it: Budapest, Italian, Cleveland... Beethoven's Op. 59 quartets are also the greatest with them, but not so his last quartets.
Beethoven Op. 18 No 6: the Janacek Quartet (on Supraphon). They make of this work, the traditional nickname of which is "The melancholy", the most humorous work I ever heard, and they are right against the tradition. As for their other interpretations, I don't like them. They have a very original but heavy and somewhat clumsy manner of playing.
I have an excellent A Minor of Beethoven with an Artis Quartet, Vienna. (Sony)
Schubert's G major: the Novak Quartet. By far the most dramatic, the most expressive. Also good with Alban Berg Quartet, unbearable with the Juilliads.
Ravel: the Parrenin Quartet.
Bartok: Juilliard and Hungarian quartets.


----------



## starry

Wow, nobody's mentioned the Busch Quartet? Not that I have a single favourite group anyway....


----------



## Efraim

I sometimes had the opportunity to buy some LPs with the Busch quartet for cheap but I didn't: after all you always can spend your money for other things and space is not unlimited on your shelves either. We certainly must respect the famous old musicians but their manner of playing has been out of date for long. As early as some 50 or 60 years ago violin teachers used to put on the turntable old records to show the pupils the way they were not allowed to play: exaggerated and unceasing tremolos, portamentos and other easy-going technical possibilities, which make a mawkish effect and occult the richness of the work instead of unveiling it. Maybe the Busch quartet was not so or not too much; after all the Budapest Quartet, which started at the end of the 20s, already dropped this kind of mannerism. I just bought through the internet a few quartets of Haydn with the Pro Arte Quartet, thinking it was a new group; it turned out that it was a famous old one, founded in 1912. The whole business is just good to ornate your collection but not to listen to it. The playing of the Smetana Quartet for example, which I mentioned in my previous reply, is diametrically opposed to these old manners: a breathtakingly elaborated common-playing, an equally breathtakingly exact intonation (without the slightest gliding between the different notes); as for the tremolo, you can surely not play without it because the sound would be really dead, but you shouldn’t hear it. Maybe some find this style too cold, too sober, too “objective”, but generally speaking, the whole performing art moved foreword after the war in this direction.
To make things worse, old recordings are so poor und ugly that after you got accustomed to the fantastic modern recordings you can not really enjoy them, even not, s


----------



## starry

Efraim said:


> We certainly must respect the famous old musicians but their manner of playing has been out of date for long.
> 
> generally speaking, the whole performing art moved foreword after the war in this direction.
> To make things worse, old recordings are so poor und ugly that after you got accustomed to the fantastic modern recordings you can not really enjoy them, even not, s


I have heard the Pro Arte Quartet in Haydn in the past too, and liked that.

I don't really accept this evolutionary approach to performance history though. It's as bad as someone looking at music in an evolutionary way. Music changes and develops, but that doesn't mean it gets better it just changes. Just look at period instrument performances...they are trying to recreate an older performance style. As long as the performance serves the music that's all that matters, there can be different ways of performing a work.

As for the recording sound quality I believe if the performance is good enough it can shine through in many instances, it just needs the listener to adjust to the sound.


----------



## Efraim

Hello Starry, you are right in not accepting musical historicism, theoretically I don't accept it either. But I think gradual dropping of mannerisms and wanton claptrap virtuosity in musical performances was accidentally a good thing. Modern ensembles are not better just because they are more evolved that the old ones but they are simply better, or at least I like them a lot more, out of comparison. As to technical abilities, it seems to me that we really can speak of evolution, ie of _improvement_ in intonation, sound quality, overcoming technical difficulties. Since I am no specialist but simply a maniacal music listener, we should ask some professional whether I am right or not.

You certainly hold that mere technical perfection is not enough. I agree with you; this mewing Pro Arte Quartet is still more interesting even for me than, for example, the modern Kodaly Quartet, technically probably beyond reproach, which has sound quality and rhythmical precision but nothing more. (I have their Op. 20 of Haydn.)

The vogue of period instruments is no argument against "evolution" or rather improvement. Old interpretations were often arbitrary, making of everything romantic stereotypes; authenticity is a relatively new requirement. By the way I don't understand what is new about playing string quartets on period instruments; violinists always played on Stradivariuses, Amatis etc. if they could afford. As to fortepiano, I don't like it at all. This was simply an imperfect instrument as everyone felt it: it was gradually developed into modern piano for this very reason. I am sure Haydn or Beethoven would have been happy to play on a modern piano.

Don't think that I am a hi-fi crank. The quality of the interpretation is the first thing for me. For example I have up to 30 recordings of Brahms' Trio in B, most of them very good, but I listen almost exclusively to the oldest one, probably from the 50s, even though it sounds lamentably. But the playing is celestial… (by the Prague trio of old: Frantisek Rauch (a pianist otherwise little interesting), Bruno Belcik and Frantisek Smetana. But recordings from before WWII are already too poor: I can not enjoy them.


----------



## starry

But wouldn't you say there can be more than one way of playing or interpreting a piece as well? It would be pretty boring if most musicians just sounded the same. That's why it's refreshing to hear a different way of approaching a piece which has the character of another style of performance. What could be merely a mannerism in some cases might be a more characterful and personal way of approaching the music in another. And really can we know exactly how - for example - Beethoven wanted some of his pieces to exactly sound anyway? And even if we did would that preclude other styles of performance?

I can't say I'm too worried about pre-WWII recordings. The big change really happened with the switch from acoustic to electrical recording. I can understand how some might struggle with acoustic recording but the electrical process really did bring about a huge improvement.


----------



## Efraim

My dear Starry, did I tell something different? Didn't I write: "_I have a hard time to decide which one is the best for this or that work ... Each of these teams has a different style and all are convincing_" ? Sure there is more than one way of interpreting a piece, especially a piece of Haydn. But it doesn't mean that every performance is good. Many of them are bad. Moreover, some of them are blameless but uninteresting, eg Tatrai Quartet's of Haydn. (I first had Haydn's Op. 50 only with Tatrai and saw in these works little more than very intelligent lukewarm background-music, except for the slow movement of D Major, which can probably not be spoiled. Later on, Festetics Quartet revealed to me that they are among the most exciting summits of music.)

Paradoxically, I don't like at all Bartok's Sonata for two pianos and percussion in Bartok's own interpretation with his wife, even though logically it must be the truest reading of this work. They play it as some meditative, introvert piece; for me, as well as for performing musicians - Ashkenazy-Frager, Ranki-Kocsis, Argerich-Bishop… - this is violent, combatif music. By the same token, Stravinsky's Oedipus is far more expressive, spirited, colourful, characteristic with Ancerl than with Stravinsky himself conducting, Schonberg's Pierrot Lunaire with Andras Mihaly-Erika Sziklay than with Schonberg-Pilarczyk...

You write: "_What could be merely a mannerism in some cases might be a more characterful and personal way of approaching the music in another_." I just got a recording from 1955 (the pressing is more recent, seemingly from the 70s) - the sound is O.K. -, of Lili Krauss playing three sonatas of Haydn. It fully vindicates your contention! She abundantly uses the pedal, which probably no one does anymore with Haydn, she plays the 2nd movement of the A flat sonata Hob. 46 much like a piece of Debussy - well, she makes a wholly new work out of this sonata, a second work of genius, and completely different from all the nine other interpretations I have, most of which are also very good, but far less subjective and overbearing. I never liked this kind of overly subjectivist approach - this woman simply overwhelms me... I wouldn't like to be her husband. (Nevertheless I wonder if something like that - I mean overwhelming me with an even less subjectivist playing - could be possible by Beethoven, Schubert or Brahms...)

I don't agree with your last paragraph. I would say that the fundamental leap foreword has been made in the early 60s, whereas between acoustic and digital recordings, or more exactly between LPs and CDs, I can hear hardly any difference, and if I can, it is in favour of the LPs (of the good ones only, of course: Philips, Decca, EMI etc.). Toward the end, good LPs stopped even being noisy. On CDs you have a stronger low register. The sound is purer, but not necessarily more beautiful.


----------



## Efraim

starry said:


> Wow, nobody's mentioned the Busch Quartet? ....


Why, there are many quite famous quartets that nobody mentioned, eg Roth, Capet, Hollywood, Flonzaley, Loewenguth, Schneider, Smetana, Vienna Konzerthaus, Vegh, Hungarian, Weller, Barchet, Barilly, Paganini, Juilliard, Yale, La Salle; more recently Panocha, Lindsay, Salomon, Buchberger...


----------



## Guest

Efraim said:


> Why, there are many quite famous quartets that nobody mentioned, eg Roth, Capet, Hollywood, Flonzaley, Loewenguth, Schneider, Smetana, Vienna Konzerthaus, Vegh, Hungarian, Weller, Barchet, Barilly, Paganini, Juilliard, Yale, La Salle; more recently Panocha, Lindsay, Salomon, Buchberger...


Are the Lindsay's still going? I thought they had disbanded.


----------



## Efraim

Dear everyone, 

did you know that Donizetti who, as we know, is famous as a composer of operas, wrote more (18) string quartets than Beethoven? Or more than Schumann, Brahms and Dvořák together? 

(In some sense this is not entirely true. Actually Brahms wrote a lot of quartets but destroyed twenty or so of them because he didn’t like them.)

Other opera composers wrote string quartets as well, eg Gounod, Verdi, Puccini, Borodin, Humperdinck…

Paganini was not an author of operas – as far as I know – nevertheless some of you might be surprised to learn that he also wrote 3 string quartets (I have them on LP). By the way, the Budapest Quartet used to play in the Library of Congress of Washington on a set of instruments that once belonged to Paganini.


----------



## Taneyev

Yes, I've Paganini's SQ on CD. And some with quitar. The once famous Paganini SQ (Heryk Temianka first violin) was so named because all 4 players used instruments that had belong to Nicoló.


----------



## Efraim

Taneyev said:


> The once famous Paganini SQ (Heryk Temianka first violin) was so named because all 4 players used instruments that had belong to Nicoló.


Thanks, I didn't know that. I have one of their records but this interesting information is not written on the sleeve.

The Talich Quartet is not called so after one of its members whose name is Talich but after his father who had nothing to do with string quartets, having been a conductor. The Novák Quartet was not called so after one of its member called Novák but after the composer Vítězslav Novák. Same thing for the Suk Trio. Does somebody know of similar cases?

The Budapest Quartet was really founded in Budapest by three Hungarians and one Dutchman but it left Budapest almost immediately and very quickly all its "founding fathers" dropped off one by one. All of the four famous musicians who played together for decades came from Russia and they never played in Budapest. (During the war they considered changing the name of the ensemble, but for a different reason: because of Hungary being an ally of Hitler.)


----------



## Taneyev

A rarity I've. NOVELLO LEGEND CD: Schubert 14+Dvorak American+fragments by the Budapest, recorded 1926/28. Not the first, but still mostly hungarians at the time. Russian Joseph Roisman appear,but the rest
were hungarians..


----------



## livemylife

Jean Sibelius Quartet.


----------



## Efraim

Dear Addicts to music, that's a pity that the string quartet, perhaps the noblest of all musical genres, is somewhat neglected here. *Is somebody interested in a talk about comparing different interpretations of famous string quartets? *

I know there are difficulties, for some of us mention ensembles which are unheard of for others, eg Diotima, Magellan, Sibelius and more for me, or not unheard of but "unheard", never heard playing, like Emerson, Kronos and others. Nevertheless the numerous new releases of Haydn's quartets are right now, in this Haydn-year, fairly within everyone's reach: I guess you can listen to them in shops without buying them. So discussing them shouldn't be overly hindered by practical difficulties.

I have all or some of his quartets performed by the following teams: Buchberger, Festetics (all), Salomon, Mosaïques (all they have recorded so far), Auryn, Pellegrini, Ébène, Quatuor Élysée, Panocha, Jerusalem, London Haydn Quartet, Alban Berg, Tokyo, Takács, Lindsay, Pro Arte, Kodály, as well as by some older quartets (on LPs): Budapest, Schneider, Wiener Konzerthaus, Tátrai, Prague, Janáček, Smetana, Juilliard, Allegri, Slovak, Italian, Hungarian.

I think some of the most famous recordings of Beethoven's works (by Budapest, Juilliard, Hungarian, Smetana, Alban Berg, Italian, Amadeus, Beethoven...) could be discussed too, as well as a few others often performed quartets of Schubert, Brahms, Ravel...


----------



## altiste

The first group you mentioned, Diotima, I heard in a concert last year playing Beethoven's op.132. It was a very pure interpretation, that is to say, straight Beethoven, much like a version I have on CD by the Fitzwilliam Quartet.


----------



## Efraim

altiste said:


> The first group you mentioned, Diotima, I heard in a concert last year...


Is it a French group? 
Since you live in Paris, you surely heard on concert the Quatuors Ébène and Élysée. Of both I have Haydn, the first playing B Minor Op. 33, "The Lark" and G Major Op. 76, the second the whole of 76 together with Webern's Six Bagatelles. Both are excellent, dynamic, expressive. According to the inlets both quartets are mainly interested in modern music. What did you hear from them on concert?


----------



## Guest

Efraim said:


> Dear Addicts to music, that's a pity that the string quartet, perhaps the noblest of all musical genres, is somewhat neglected here. *Is somebody interested in a talk about comparing different interpretations of famous string quartets? *
> 
> ...


I agree 100% with your remarks, the StQt is the epitome of chamber music although I only get to about 5-6 concerts a year I look forward to the discussion, why don't you start a new thread and keep it just for that purpose, any way I am with you.


----------



## altiste

*Diotima*



Efraim said:


> Is it a French group?


Yes, Diotima is Paris-based, although most of the concerts they play are outside of France. Actually, I have a personal connection with this group so have seen them in concert quite a few times since the beginning of 2000. The violist, Franck Chevalier, was soloist in a performance of my Viola Concerto in 2001. The violist and cellist are original members of Diotima, but the violinists have changed since - there's been 5 different violinists since they started out. Diotima, in its earlier formation in 2002, participated in a recording (for Radio France) of my work Tango Suite for contralto, string quartet and bass.


----------



## Efraim

Andante said:


> I agree 100% with your remarks, the StQt is the epitome of chamber music although I only get to about 5-6 concerts a year I look forward to the discussion, why don't you start a new thread and keep it just for that purpose, any way I am with you.


I think in this thread we have a better chance of being joined in our discussion by other quartet fanatics. - Do you know any of the interpretations I mentioned in my post of August 21st? If you do, you can tell straight what you think of them. If not, please tell us what interpretations you have, compare them etc. Or if you want we could begin by discussing the interpretations of the quartet(s) of one specific composer. (Which one - I mean whose quartets are your favourites? I guess Beethoven's, but it is by no means granted.)


----------



## Efraim

altiste said:


> ... in a performance of my Viola Concerto in 2001 ... Diotima ... participated in a recording (for Radio France) of my work Tango Suite for contralto, string quartet and bass.


What a pity that we can not hear your works! - What else did you write? I assume your Tango Suite is not an atonal work.


----------



## altiste

Efraim said:


> What a pity that we can not hear your works! - What else did you write? I assume your Tango Suite is not an atonal work.


It's possible to hear a lot of my music on my website. If you click on my username "altiste" there's a drop-down menu; the third item down "Visit Altiste's Homepage!" is a link directly to my homepage.

No, Tango Suite is not an atonal work. I created an instrumental version recently for string quartet. I'm not really keen these days in describing things in terms of atonal versus tonal even if I liked to think my music of 1985 was "atonal". Definitely there's been a progression to incorporate tonal elements, perhaps it's "tonality in disguise". I had one work described as "tortured tonality"! I could argue that i was torturing atonality by throwing in the tonal elements!!

In terms of concert-going I'm really more interested in recent repertoire for string quartet though not necessarily in a modernist aesthetics that is heard a lot in Paris. I'm always on the lookout for quartet works that will sit well programmed with my own music. I've heard some good quartet playing at Radio France concerts; Fine Arts quartet, Silesian Quartet as well as quartets formed from the ranks of the Orchestre National de France and the Radio Philharmonic.


----------



## Guest

Efraim said:


> I think in this thread we have a better chance of being joined in our discussion by other quartet fanatics. - Do you know any of the interpretations I mentioned in my post of August 21st? If you do, you can tell straight what you think of them. If not, please tell us what interpretations you have, compare them etc. Or if you want we could begin by discussing the interpretations of the quartet(s) of one specific composer. (Which one - I mean whose quartets are your favourites? I guess Beethoven's, but it is by no means granted.)


The original purpose of this thread was [I want to know who your favorite current string quartet is! I don't mean repertoire...I mean actual string quartet! ] why go off topic?? I was always an admirer of the Lindsay's even with the asthmatic breathing of Mr Cropper


----------



## altiste

*Mr Cropper*

Andante, sorry to go off topic here, but did you know that Mr Cropper's brother lives in NZ? (or at least he did several year's ago) I know this because I had a quartet in Auckland called the "Blue String Quartet". We did a concert in Devonport one time and Mr C. came and introduced himself as an avid quartet fan with a brother that played in a quartet. Anyway, just a little detail that I thought of when you mentioned the name.


----------



## Guest

Thanks altiste I did not know that, when were you in NZ? and do you know any of the NZSQ?


----------



## altiste

*Nz*

Lived there from 1955-1997! And trips back since then, on one trip back in 2001 when in Wellington, Rolf Gjelsten, cellist of the NZSQ, told me that he had coached the Nevine String Quartet on my String Quartet No.2. Nevine were a Wellington group, all permanent members of the NZSO. A recording of my SQ2 taken from a concert they did was broadcast on Concert FM, so perhaps you've even heard them and my work already.

The "Blue String Quartet", that I mentioned before, had a recording of "Three Transcriptions" (a work also in the NZSQ repertoire) broadcast on NZ's Concert FM. The first violinist and cellist of BSQ now play in an Auckland quartet, the Jade String Quartet, not to be confused with a Singaporean group of the same name. I heard the JSQ on a visit back about five year's ago, so look forward to catching up with them again on a future visit.

The last time I heard the NZSQ in a concert was probably their all-Bartok concerts, the six quartets over two evenings I think it was. On their last European tour France wasn't included, so I hope they'll play in Paris on a future trip.


----------



## Efraim

Andante said:


> The original purpose of this thread was [I want to know who your favorite current string quartet is! I don't mean repertoire...I mean actual string quartet! ] why go off topic?? I was always an admirer of the Lindsay's even with the asthmatic breathing of Mr Cropper


Our purpose is not overly remote from the original purpose of this thread, but if you want, open a new thread, I don't know how to do it. How will I be avare of it?


----------



## Taneyev

Mine are:
Beethoven - Taneyev-Leningrad - Borodin - Fine Arts - Shostakovich - Old Tokyo - Old Budapest - Melos - 
Koeckert - old Vlach - Pro-arte - old Hungarian - Smetana - Janacek - Primrose - Raphael - Glazunov - 
Schneider - Schneiderhann - Oistrakh - Paganini - Yale - Kreisler unique recording - Pasquier - Loewenguth - 
Krasni.


----------



## Guest

Efraim said:


> Our purpose is not overly remote from the original purpose of this thread, but if you want, open a new thread, I don't know how to do it. How will I be avare of it?


I am sending you a PM


----------



## Guest

altiste said:


> Lived there from 1955-1997! And trips back since then, on one trip back in 2001 when in Wellington, Rolf Gjelsten, cellist of the NZSQ, told me that he had coached the Nevine String Quartet on my String Quartet No.2. Nevine were a Wellington group, all permanent members of the NZSO. A recording of my SQ2 taken from a concert they did was broadcast on Concert FM, so perhaps you've even heard them and my work already.
> 
> The "Blue String Quartet", that I mentioned before, had a recording of "Three Transcriptions" (a work also in the NZSQ repertoire) broadcast on NZ's Concert FM. The first violinist and cellist of BSQ now play in an Auckland quartet, the Jade String Quartet, not to be confused with a Singaporean group of the same name. I heard the JSQ on a visit back about five year's ago, so look forward to catching up with them again on a future visit.
> 
> The last time I heard the NZSQ in a concert was probably their all-Bartok concerts, the six quartets over two evenings I think it was. On their last European tour France wasn't included, so I hope they'll play in Paris on a future trip.


Thanks for all the information altiste, I have visited [very briefly] the web sites you provided links for I will devour them in detail over the next few days, it would be a couple of years since I have heard the NZSQ in concert, our nearest venue is 'Academy of Performing Arts, University of Waikato, Hamilton' it has fantastic acoustics! Do you know it? I don't know how the NZSQ rate internationally but I think they are fantastic compared to some that I have heard live. Have they ever performed sitting down??? I hope to listen to both of your Qts this week end can they be downloaded? Unfortunately our Hamilton venue which was run by the Hamilton Chamber Music Soc found it was just too hard to get known names to perform so handed over control to Akd, much too far for me as I live 2hr south of Hamilton.
Regards Andante

Just checked out a few of your compositions I love your Serenade for strings, your on site music will keep me busy for weeks, we are lucky to have such a distinguished musician on the forum.


----------



## altiste

Thanks very much Andante, I feel honoured to be referred to as such. Yes, I do know the Academy of Performing Arts in Hamilton, I've been to just one concert there given by the Opus Chamber Orchestra. 

As for the NZSQ, I recently saw a British violinist on another forum talk glowingly about them, or a recording he had just heard, certainly another little indication of them being serious contenders in the international arena.


----------



## Efraim

altiste said:


> ... a performance of my Viola Concerto in 2001 (...) Diotima ... participated in a recording (for Radio France) of my work Tango Suite for contralto, string quartet and bass...





altiste said:


> ... he had coached the Nevine String Quartet on my String Quartet No.2...


We are sometimes told that the string quartet sprang up from a casual situation: two violinists, a violist and a 'cellist happened to be together, therefore Haydn hastily wrote a divertimento, so the whole company could be kept busy. Fine, but that doesn't explain why he fell in love with this scoring so much that he wrote for it almost 60 of his most ambitious and the most carefully elaborated masterworks, and why this genre was to achieve such a glorious career up until your own quartets and further.

Haydn was once asked why he had never written string quintets. He replied: "I was never commissioned to." This was but a frivolous quibble since he apparently wrote his first 18 true quartets (Opp. 9, 17 and 20) without any request, as well as many of his best piano sonatas which he didn't even publish for more than twenty years, and he did so in the middle of his musical slavery (conducting concerts or operas every morning, afternoon and evening, supervising the instruments and the musicians, teaching the singers, writing countless symphonies, operas, baryton trios, incidental music…)

*Question number one: *

Why four instruments yes, five or three not? 

(Actually Haydn did write string trios, but they are almost never played, and only a handful of them were written ever since.)

*Question number two:*

The violin and the 'cello are among the instruments of the most beautiful sonority; uniting them was obviously a brilliant idea, whether Haydn's or others'. Filling the gap between their respective registers seems also "natural". But why did Haydn and all the other composers after him adhere to the viola, which sounds somewhat neutral, having neither the suave brightness of the violin nor the warmth and the "seriousness" of the 'cello? (which is certainly the reason why it is not a solo instrument, in spite of a small number of viola concertos and sonatas and Berlioz' Harold in Italy). Would the clarinet or the oboe not have been more appropriate for this task? Or, if for some reason they wanted only strings, why do you think they didn't pick up the viola da gamba instead, which has a more colourful, agreeably nasal twang and which was largely used during Haydn's whole lifetime? 

I hope our friend Altiste will contribute to this topic as he is a composer - author of string quartets -, a performing artist and viola specialist.


----------



## altiste

In response to question 2, certainly the viola evolved late as a solo instrument, and not many concerti existed before the 20th Century, but I estimate there's now a repertoire of about a hundred, even if only a handful are widely played. I also once read that the output of the viola is 7db less than the violin or cello, so in practical terms it doesn't have the same cutting power when used as a solo instrument, although that aspect is perhaps dependent on register. It's mostly the C string on the viola where the body of the instrument is considered a bit small for the actual pitch. 

Actually, makers and players are still really searching for the ultimate solution; a viola design inspired by the viole with indented bouts has become fashionable recently, before that larger violas were a definite trade-off with player comfort. Seems to me that there are almost two categories of viola sound today; the "soprano"-style sound typical of an Amati brothers model (41.5cm body) or the larger-bodied design sound. There's an argument that these new designs unbalance the quartet overall, and make the violins seem pallid by comparison, as the repertoire was conceived for the traditional Amati styled instrument.


----------



## Efraim

Thanks for your answer. - It would be certainly far-fetched to say that something is "wrong" with the viola; but since, as you say,



altiste said:


> makers and players are still really searching for the ultimate _*solution*_; a viola design inspired by the viole with indented bouts has become fashionable recently


there really must be some problem to be solved, and people really draw inspiration from the viole (viola da gamba) in order to solve it. By the way, as far as I know, the viola, unlike the violin, has no definite size and shape. - In addition, if



altiste said:


> these new designs unbalance the quartet overall, and make the violins seem pallid by comparison, *as the repertoire was conceived for the traditional *Amati styled *instrument*


then the viola must really have joined the string quartet somehow casually, in spite of its disadvantages, and be to-day irreplaceable only because composers, while writing their, now famous, string quartets, took it into account as it was. Do you think it is really so?

The beginning of your reply "in response to question 2" suggests that you intend to answer question 1 as well. Let me anticipate your answer and ask you more directly, perhaps more indiscreetly:

1 - Do you write string quartets - and not, say, string trios or string quintets - simply because experienced professional quartet ensembles are available? Or because you feel that four voices are an ideal frame for shaping musical ideas?

2 - Do you feel, while composing string quartets - and while playing them, if you do - some limitation of your instrument, the viola?


----------



## altiste

*the viola in the string quartet*



Efraim said:


> It would be certainly far-fetched to say that something is "wrong" with the viola


Agreed. Nevertheless, viola players are aware that they have to constantly maximize their sound output to a greater degree than violinists or cellists. Some examples of this are a) on choosing an instrument, I've often seen it stated that "power" is the single most desirable feature, listed often above beauty of sound. It's rare to hear of violins or cellos talked about in the same way. And b) concerning playing technique, quartet players will state that they favour lower positions for the left hand to maximize string length thus giving greater resonance.

As you know it's a feature of violin and viola that they are played close to the head, so we never hear ourselves from an audience position, but I'd say that, to answer your question directly, that no, I don't feel a limitation of the viola in a quartet context; even if being aware that the lowest C, if this equivalent pitch is played on the cello, is going to be hugely more resonant when played on the cello. While it's fascinating to contemplate this large difference in resonance between viola and cello concerning those lower register viola notes, it's usually on listening back to recordings that it all seems to work.

In terms of writing for string quartet, after I wrote my second quartet in 1995, I became more orientated towards orchestral music with the Philharmonia residency in Auckland, and this triggered a love affair with very low-register instruments to the point that string quartet seemed limiting because the cello didn't descend far enough in pitch! When I next had a work for/with string quartet I felt it had to have double bass there (Tango Suite for Contralto & String Quintet) that is, in a sense, my 3rd string quartet. I've just recently finished a duo for violin & viola, so I think that marks the end of the compulsion to have very low register possibilities in the instrumentation.

As for why 3, 4 or 5 instruments, well, 4 seems a really convenient number. Four instruments gives much more possibility to toss around motives whereas 3 strings is a much leaner ensemble. My friend Jeffrey Harrington wrote a series of string trios thinking that there was probably more need for trios which might lead to more performances as the quartet repertoire is already vast as you know. I asked him to create a quartet version of one of these trios; it's been easier to both programme and play as a quartet. My own writing is often based around 5 or 6 different strands but this can easily be work into a quartet context with the double stopping capabilities of the quartet.


----------



## Efraim

*The viola in the string quartet*

Thank you very much for your answer. These are extremely interesting problems and a layman like me, while listening to quartet music, has no inkling of them!

Please explain us what the expression "*the double stopping capabilities of the quartet*" means.


----------



## altiste

I should have said the double stopping capabilities of each instrument of the quartet ie. using double stopping and careful writing it's possible for a single string instrument to play two melodies simultaneously on two adjacent strings.


----------



## Classical Review

There are three groups I'd pay good money to hear perform live (and have done in the case of the first):

- Belcea Quartet

- Maggini Quartet

- Jerusalem Quartet

Outstanding, all three. Hear them if and when you can.

FK


----------



## symphonicrevolution

Emerson String Quartet (especially their Borodin quartet no 2 recording) and Quartetto Italiano


----------



## Guest

Efraim said:


> Please explain us what the expression "*the double stopping capabilities of the quartet*" means.


Just to expand on the post by *altiste*
To stop a string means to press down the string to the finger board, to double stop means to press 2 strings down, treble stopping means 3 strings are pressed down, a new Bow was developed a while ago that allowed Quadruple stopping but I don't know if it caught on


----------



## World Violist

symphonicrevolution said:


> Emerson String Quartet (especially their Borodin quartet no 2 recording)


Personally I prefer the St. Petersberg Conservatory Quartet in Borodin 2. Just my preference.

I haven't heard many quartets that I would think of as "favorites" overall but the Borodin Quartet seems really amazing so far as what I've heard from them.


----------



## Taneyev

I've 3 versions of Borodin 2: Borodin, Galimir and Hollywood. All great.


----------



## Head_case

Hmmm...tricky question. It's hard not to love more than one, especially when they bring so many rich insights into our experience of music. 

I love the Taneyev Quartet most; probably because they cover my favourite string quartet cycles - Myaskovsky and Shostakovich. No one else does 

Also love the Varsovia String Quartet: they have a small but impeccable output, covering Szymanowski, Brudowicz and Bacewicz. 

Also love the Silesian String Quartet - they cover Alexander Tansman's neoclassical string quartet cycle. Nothing else like it. Apart from Boulanger and Bacewicz lol. 

The Végh Quartet are up there for me too. I'm not so thrilled by the Busch. I must be tone deaf when it comes to listening to those squeaky mono badly remastered CDs.

Of the modern groups, I love the St Petersburg Quartet; the Ebene quartet and the Arditti Quartet. 

Of the fusion cross-overs, the Section String Quartet are great fun, as can be the Kronos and the Balanescu Quartet. The Brodsky Quartet aren't so great in substance but are great with Elvis Costello.


----------



## hankz

"Death and the Maiden" quartet by Schubert.


----------



## Alexandre F

I think everyone will to like the string quartetos of Villa Lobos. My favourite is no.5.

Also should be known the second quartet of Edward Rubbra, an English composer.


----------



## Head_case

Alexander,

are you seriously blessed with such a cool surname? 

I like Heitor Villa-Lobos a lot. Which string quartet are you recommending? I only have the Danubius Quartet .... sometimes I think they're stopping me from progressing with Heitor's work...


----------



## Alexandre F

I recommend specially quartet 5 of 1931. My recording is from Quarteto Bessler-Reis (of Brasil).

My surname is very common in south of Brasil and also in Germany,


----------



## Head_case

That's a sublime string quartet! I was waiting for this version:










But being a big music spender, I thought I'd try the Naxos' Danubius Quartet. I only own one string cycle on Naxos (the Vlach Prague Quartet doing the Dvorak stuff) and thought I'd give them a try.

Righto. I'll call you Alexandre otherwise when I look at your surname, I start to think things I shouldn't


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

I myself estimate the top five most `popular' string quartets to be: 

1) Haydn `Emperor' Quartet (C-major) Op. 76 No. 3 
2) Beethoven `Resolution' Quartet (F-major) Op. 135 
3) Tchaikovsky `Cantabile' Quartet (D-major) Op. 11 
4) Borodin `Notturno' Quartet (D-major) No. 2 
5) Dvorák `American' Quartet (F-major) B. 179.

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

My own personal top five favourite string quartets: 

1) Schönberg No. 3 (without key signature) Op. 30
2) Schubert No. 15 (G-major) D. 887
3) Borodin No. 2 (D-major)
4) Franck (D-major)
5) Ravel (F-major)

Yours?


----------



## Lemminkainen

I am quite fond these days of Smetana's No. 1.

Janacek's "Intimate Letters" is a worthwhile, if challenging, listen.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

As for quartet ensembles, very partial to Czechs:
Prague,
Panocha,
Stamitz,
Prazák.

Viennese:
Amadeus,
Artis,
Aron,
sorry but not so much the Alban Berg.

American:
LaSalle,
in the 'just too perfect' category the Emerson.

German:
Leipziger of course,
Ayrun.


----------



## Head_case

Lemminkainen said:


> I am quite fond these days of Smetana's No. 1.
> 
> Janacek's "Intimate Letters" is a worthwhile, if challenging, listen.


Hmmm. Love both Janacek and Smetana's two quartets too. Of the two, Janacek is more distinctive ~ Smetana is almost too Germanic.

Not to forget Fiser, Bodorova and Fernstrom from the Czech country.


----------



## jurianbai

actually which String quartet (group) we can called the Menuhin of violin?


----------



## Head_case

I think each generation has their own ... most come about by winning the International Evian String Quartet prize, or other international prizes in open competition.

The field of string quartet music is so rich, that I'm not sure it would ever do any justice: the problem which any string quartet has ... is that they just cannot cover the string quartet repertoire sufficiently. No single string quartet ensemble had the kind of domination across the field, like in the violin repertoire, where doing a Sibelius and Beethoven violin concerto for a first disc, followed up by either a Prokofiev/Shostakovich second disc, more or less qualified you for international recognition. String quartet ensembles are less like that, and the string quartet listeners are not a fickle group 

In this respect, the string quartet medium does not welcome people easily: most average bods probably get to know the 'string quartet medium' because they watched Norman Bates in the shower scene of the Psycho films, or Alfred Hitchcock's black and white films, or similar goth films like Dracula. At best, they get to know sweet romantic easy going stuff like Borodin's strinq quartet no.2 as well as a few Mozart ditties which are all very easy for shop keepers to play on classical Radio in the hairdressers.

A first class string quartet, like say, the *Silesian String Quartet*, may cover 200 pieces of string quartet literature, yet only have about 15 discs on release. By far, the majority of string quartet listeners buy more music, rather than attend concerts: that way, we only get to experience a sample of what a string quartet has on offer.

Generationally - the *Italian Quartet [Quartetto Italiano] *have outlasted any of their contemporaries: in terms of covering popular repertoire, the *LaSalle Quartet*,* Amadeus Quartet*, the* Juilliard *have kind of fossilized into institutions, where other string quartets go to them for expert classes, so they have that kind of geographically following in the west. In the Soviet countries, the same is true for the *Borodin Quartet* and the *Taneyev Quartet *(Moscow/Leningrad Conservatoires etc). I'm sure this is probably the case elsewhere. Like in the Czech Republic, where the Vlach Quartet of the last century, recorded some of the most legendary renditions of Debussy/Ravel/Beethoven/Janacek/Dvorak quartets, but were always let down by their rather narrowly conceived record company (Supraphon) and barely marketed outside of Europe, thus reducing concert performances etc abroad.

When it comes to 'the Menuhin of violin' as a parallel .... hmmm - I guess this would refer to a degree of virtuosity in string quartet playing, as well as breadth of repertoire, and cross-collaboration across geography. Maybe there is no precise parallel in the string quartet form, however any of the above names would probably fit.

The younger generations of string quartet players, or the more recently formed ones (i.e. within the last decade), haven't cultivated that kind of reputation sufficiently. Thus, the *Ebene Quartet *from France, the *Dante Quartet *from England; the *Pacifica Quartet *from the States, the *Zemlinsky Quartet *from the Czech Republic, the *Danel Quatuor *from France, or the *St Petersburg Quartet *from the Soviet - none stand out head and shoulders like Menuhin.

On the other hand, there are specialists of modern repertoire - like the *Arditti Quartet*, who only ever seem to play 'difficult' music - difficult to listen (i.e. amelodic) and difficult to play technically) e.g. Xenakis, Ligeti, Elliot-Carter, Dusapin. Can you imagine how hard it is for a string instrument player to synchronise four parts for a piece of music 2 hours long, like Feldman, which has no melody?  Then there are geographical specialists like the fabulous *Prazak Quartet *- every single disc I've ever heard of theirs or read in review has never scored less than 10/10 for technical and artistic performance.

Maybe it was just a marketing trick from Menuhin's record label, which recognised his definite talent, and promoted it to this level? 

Anyway, I would like you to start referring to '*Taneyev Quartet'* as the Menuhin of violin


----------



## jurianbai

thanks for that piece of writing.

I agree the SQ form has too wide repertoire. For example, only few quartets done ALL Haydn's works (Kodaly, angeles, tatrai etc.) in recording, and that's just a starting point.

for all mentioned above, I may name *Alban Berg Quartet*, that seem specialized in big names (Beethoven, mozart, schubert). then there is group like *Kronos* that mostly do original/premiere recording.

but honestly I know less about string quartet groups. I mentioned that I only pay attention about who perform who in classical music lately.


----------



## Head_case

Haydn's works have been covered by the *Mosaiques Quatuor* and a number of eminent contemporary quartets. Back in the halycon days of British chamber music, the *Aeolian String Quartet* undertook his cycle too. This remains a legendary set worth getting if you have a LP player.

I often find it too frustrating when a brilliant quartet only touches on one or two quartets by an exemplary composer. For instance - the *Carmina Quartet *(Switzerland), who graced us with one of the most perfect transmissions of Szymanowski's string quartets (the other was the *Varsovia String Quartet* who have a similar limitation), only covered one Dvorak string quartet (yep! you guessed it...the 'American') and one Haydn quartet. I can see the advantage from a clueless buyer's point of view - the buyer can then get to taste different snippets of music, rather than plumbing it in depth. I guess there are cost/recording constraints to going into the studio and producing complete string cycles though.

The *Alban Berg Quartet *aren't my favs at all. They have a distinct 2nd Wiener Schnitzel school approach to their music. I have their Beethoven string cycle, and find that, although their perfect and clinical recordings are ideal for analytical detail, tend not to have the richer and broader soundscapes of earlier string quartet techniques (like the *Vegh*, or the *Vlach*), which are worlds apart.

The *Kronos Quartet* are hit and miss for me. I have about 8 of their albums, however only like about 4 of them. Their 'Early Music' album of polyphony transcribed for string quartet and the Latin-American albums are my favourites. 'Howl' is interesting, although can lose me in between. "Black Angels" was a disaster as far as I can hear, and the third Gorecki string quartet was premiered by them, so there was no competition until the *Silesian String Quartet *'complete' CD set of Gorecki's 3 string quartets came out (I already have the other 2 by Gorecki, so it doesn't make economical sense to get the 2CD set  ). Other 'cross-over' string quartets in the same genre as the Kronos Quartet, include the *Brodsky Quartet *(they collaborate with Elvis Costello in "The Juliet Letters" which is a masterpiece, even if you don't like Elvis Costello - I don't - but I love this album), the *Section Quartet* (more of a modern-pop string quartet though) as well as The Balanescu Quartet (less famous eh). The Brodsky also have an excellent recording of Brahms string quartets, but a disastrous recording of the Shostakovich cycle which is to be avoided at all costs. Far from being hopeless, they are in fact very good when they get into their repertoire. The eminent contemporary Polish composer, Pawel Szymanski, actually commissioned his 'Five Pieces" for string quartet for the Brodsky back in the early 90's when I snagged the CD the first week it came out onto the shelves of HMV. If I was Simon from the *Silesian String Quartet *(Poland), I would've been gutted, but I guess that was to do with the pecuniary aspects which comes with commissioning for the BBC etc. Incidentally, the Silesian String Quartet have released Szymanski's complete string quartet works on CD, but it is only really available in Yurop at a premium.

Likewise, the *Balanescu String Quartet*, the *Section String Quartet*, the *Vitamin Quartet* and other modern fusion quartets are all out there, but the Brodsky and Kronos adhere more firmly to their classical genre and roots, so yeah I guess you're spot on, flagging up the *Kronos Quartet*. They really are marketed heavily by Nonesuch - such a good record label. They aren't so much the 'Menuhin' of the string quartet world though.

More like the 'Bjork' of the string quartet world lol


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Head_case said:


> _The *Alban Berg Quartet *aren't my favs at all. They have a distinct 2nd Wiener Schnitzel school approach to their music. I have their Beethoven string cycle, and find that, although their perfect and clinical recordings are ideal for analytical detail, tend not to have the richer and broader soundscapes of [other] string quartets which are worlds apart. _


Totally agree: they are technically accurate, but at the same time strident, slashing, and shrill: they have little sympathy with the composer's emotional soundscape.


----------



## Quartetfore

While we lack a Budapest, Quartetto Italiano or a Vegh quartet on todays scene, I think that we are living in at least a " Silver Age when it comes to the art of the String Quartet. Witness all the groups that have been mentioned in this thread. I`ll add a few more to the list. The Belcea, Miro, Artemis, Brentano, and the Pavel Haas String Quartets are all outstanding young groups. Just a word about the Emerson. There are those here in the States who think that they are a "Golden Age" Quartet. I`m not sure of that, but it comes down to a matter of taste. Best, Quartetfore.


----------



## Head_case

Sebastien - which French string quartets are prominent on the French scene these days? 

I like the Danel Quatuor, particularly their obscure works, not so much their standard repertoire (Shostakovich). The Renoir Quatuor aren't quite in their league yet, but they make up for it by having a go at the Myaskovsky Quartet No.I - a first for a French quartet. Apart from that, Ebene Quatuor seem to me to be a one hit wonder. They've started on their Bartok cycle, but I haven't heard it yet and they are alienating me by going down the Brahms route. 

Quartetfore - totally agree with those groups. The Emerson, like the Fitzwilliam in the States, never really took off over here. I think there is something about the geography and the 'artist in residence' mentality which determines popularity in some quarters, as well as which repertoire they play. 

One thing about the Pavel Haas Quartet: their sublime releases are completely flawed by their parent record label marketing. I'd rather have a complete cycle of Pavel Haas' string quartets on a box set; the two Janacek string quartets on one disc; the two Smetana quartets on a separate disc, rather than mixing and matching one quartet from each composer, mating it with another composer. Maybe when they release a mid-price re-issue, then they will collect string quartets more appropriately on disc?


----------



## Quartetfore

It is sort of strange how the Pavel Haas records are released. Emerson Quartet is just about perfect when it comes to the technical aspects of performance, and I think that that is the trend today. To my ears so many young groups are note perfect, I wonder how a Vegh Quartet or a Budapest Quartet would fare today? Not well I think. Quartetfore.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Head_case said:


> _Which French string quartets are prominent on the scene these days?_


The Ysaÿe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ysaÿe_Quartet_(1984)

The Ysaÿe records on Aeon label:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias=popular&field-keywords=ysaye+aeon&x=0&y=0

-----------------------------

Quator Terpsycordes on Ricercar:

http://www.amazon.com/Franz-Schuber...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1281485206&sr=1-1


----------



## Head_case

> It is sort of strange how the Pavel Haas records are released. Emerson Quartet is just about perfect when it comes to the technical aspects of performance, and I think that that is the trend today. To my ears so many young groups are note perfect, I wonder how a Vegh Quartet or a Budapest Quartet would fare today? Not well I think. Quartetfore.


I kind of find the same parallel which you've described in the field of photography. These days, digital photographers possess a clarity ... a clinical clarity and anaesthetised perfection, void of the visceral quality which the older masters of the photographic emulsion medium possessed. No - not possessed: conveyed and expressed.

I guess we call that progress.

The Vegh Quartet still have its fans thankfully. I'm one! But we're in small numbers 

But what about the Loewenguth Quartet? Or the Calvet Quartet? These seminal Quartets are almost extant from the recorded music repertoire, although the former has made a recent comeback with two recordings.

I find the technical perfection of modern ensembles quite tiresome: the attention and detail to phrasing, seems overly analytical to the point of losing the bigger picture. Case in point - here is my latest CD:










It is technically well played, and the score markings seem to be followed faithfully.

Yet it is the most utterly sterile and infuriating recording of Myaskovsky's string quartet no. XIII I've ever heard.

What a marvellous waste of money. The Bolshoi Theatre Quartet, or the Borodin, or the Kopelman and of course, the Taneyev Quartet, all play with that larger picture and direction in mind. This new French quartet are utterly clueless when it comes to Myaskovsky.

I'm so cross. Having waited 15 years for another string quartet to re-interpret the Myaskovsky No. I, this is the biggest disappointment of the year.


----------



## Quartetfore

In pre-historic times I did own a recording by the Loewenguth Quartet, but for the life of me I can`t recall what it was. As for the Calvet I know the name, but have not heard them. I do know that some of their recordings are available in remastered sound. If and when time travel is invented, I plan to back and hear the Joachim Quartet! Best, Quartetfore.


----------



## Head_case

Wowsers. 

You were around when the Joachim Quartet were playing?! 

I'm really bad at math ... but does that dates you back to around 1907?!


----------



## Quartetfore

No I was not around in 1907!! Thank G-d. I think that they would sound a lot different than what we hear today.


----------



## Enjoying Life

I agree with oisfetz with the Yale Quartet and Beethoven late quartets.

They are sharp and yet still communicate emotion and depth.


----------



## jurianbai

Efraim said:


> Dear everyone,
> 
> did you know that Donizetti who, as we know, is famous as a composer of operas, wrote more (18) string quartets than Beethoven? Or more than Schumann, Brahms and Dvořák together?
> 
> (In some sense this is not entirely true. Actually Brahms wrote a lot of quartets but destroyed twenty or so of them because he didn't like them.)
> 
> Other opera composers wrote string quartets as well, eg Gounod, Verdi, Puccini, Borodin, Humperdinck…
> 
> Paganini was not an author of operas - as far as I know - nevertheless some of you might be surprised to learn that he also wrote 3 string quartets (I have them on LP). By the way, the Budapest Quartet used to play in the Library of Congress of Washington on a set of instruments that once belonged to Paganini.


LOL,,, indeed there is lot of fun in this thread. Yes , lets move back a bit in early classical romantic SQ repertoire. I always like to collect pieces from this era. Is there recording of Donizetti's SQ?



Efraim said:


> I think in this thread we have a better chance of being joined in our discussion by other quartet fanatics. - Do you know any of the interpretations I mentioned in my post of August 21st? If you do, you can tell straight what you think of them. If not, please tell us what interpretations you have, compare them etc. Or if you want we could begin by discussing the interpretations of the quartet(s) of one specific composer. (Which one - I mean whose quartets are your favourites? I guess Beethoven's, but it is by no means granted.)


If u have time and patience, over the months, there;s already several members 'specializing' in String quartet repertoire.. and bit fanatic indeed 

just browse any thread with 'String quartet' in the title in this sub forum. We will keep talking about this until the Solo and Chamber Music can hit the Opera sub forum in post count... still lack of 500 post the last time I check 

The OP is a bout favorite String quartet GROUP... Maybe I will list my favorite on quantity of work I have by single quartet. Like the* Maggini *who favour poor collector like me with their UK quartet release on Naxos and *Kodaly* for complete Haydn. Then the elite should be like the *Emerson, Julliard, Vermeer and Prager *(who doing complete Dvorak). Then the quartet that do rare things like the* New Budapest *doing complete Spohr's sq, the *Taneyev (Leningrad Taneyev)* doing Myaskovsky's (member Head_case will share more love story on this..)

Random name I like should be the *Tempera* SQ doing SIbelius, also the Hagen for Mozart. Then the rest is many many strange and unknown quartet, as I never really pay detail on CD performer, I see who is the composer mostly....


----------



## Quartetfore

There is a complete recording of all the Donizetti Quartets on the CPO label. I own the recording of the Tempera Quartet preforming the Sibelius op 4 quartet--very enjoyable.


----------



## Head_case

I haven't heard the Donezetti quartets yet. Boccherini - yes. 

I'm afraid I don't do so well with earlier classical music. It sounds a bit like country or folk music to me - I'm happy to have it on in the background and listen to it loads wherever I go.


----------



## Quartetfore

I think that Donizetti used the Haydn Quartets as his model, there are I think 17 of them. Sorry to say, I find Boccherini a bore, the music never seems to go any place.


----------



## TSHare

Enjoying Life said:


> I agree with oisfetz with the Yale Quartet and Beethoven late quartets.
> 
> They are sharp and yet still communicate emotion and depth.


Thanks for the tip. I am surprised how cheap this set is. No excuse not to pick it up immediately!


----------



## jurianbai

quartetfore, here youtube video about Donizetti:





I like the Boccherini's. From all his SQ I have, the music heard (Op. 8, 24, 32,39, 44 'La tiranna') are rich and some include Spanish elements. Maybe a selected opus from his many many SQs. If only there is a quartet record all his quartets.........

oh, and I like the late classical era, the age where composers compete in music solely by using harmoni and melody.... something 'utterly civilised'...


----------

