Quartet Recordings/Upcoming Concerts

[NickB]

I've been collecting the Cleveland Quartet's recordings of
the string quartets (starting with the late, and now
including Razumovsky 2 & 3). These are my first recordings
of the quartets, and I think I like them a great deal.
Previously, I had focused on B's works for piano and orchestra.

I've read that the extensive use of vibrato in playing the
quartets is more modern interpretation, that quartets in B's
time would've been more restrained in its use. I now perceive
that the Cleveland recordings are well-stocked with vibrato
use.

What I like about the Cleveland recordings is the excellence
of the sound and what I think is a fairly emotional (to my
un-trained ears) performance. I'm still trying to work my
little brain around the Grosse Fugue...

Can anyone recommend another recording of Op. 130 & 133 for
me to try to compare & contrast my Cleveland?

There will be a chamber concert of Schubert, Mozart, and B at
a local pub Wednesday night, performed by a violinist,
violist, cellist, and oboist from the local symphony. I plan
to attend, since I like the approach of "Chamber music in the
context of pizza, beer and non-linear seating"
(http://www.orsymphony.org/joinus/CMOTinfo.html), but I have
no idea WHAT exact works will be on the program.

Any guesses? A string quartet arranged for oboe?

Saturday I'll be up close for a concert of the Violin C'to
with Joshua Bell (http://orsymphony.org/s_applause/bell.html).
Anyone have experiences with Bell's Beethoven? Things to look
for in his interpretation?

[Rod]

Originally posted by NickB:

I've read that the extensive use of vibrato in playing the
quartets is more modern interpretation, that quartets in B's
time would've been more restrained in its use. I now perceive
that the Cleveland recordings are well-stocked with vibrato
use.

I'm glad you mentioned the use of vibrato today, for I believe this obsessive use of it is the curse of all classical music!! I hate it! And it's uncouth effect is further exagerated on modern stringing. I can tell you that in B's time it was used far less. I have read a letter by a famous cellist contemporary with Beethoven (can't remember his name at this moment) discussing the use of vibrato. Firstly I can tell you the term 'vibrato' was unknown to this man, which must say something in itself - he describes the practise in more long-winded terms - but he says that if it must be used at all (he wasn't keen it), it must be restricted to no more than one third the length of a note, lest the note lose its effect.

Of course the curse is not restricted to strings, but equally with winds and, probably worst of all, vocals.

Originally posted by NickB:

Can anyone recommend another recording of Op. 130 & 133 for
me to try to compare & contrast my Cleveland?

If you read elsewhere in this forum we have discussed other alternatives. If you like authentic instrument versions like me, you have little or nothing to choose from!

Originally posted by NickB:

There will be a chamber concert of Schubert, Mozart, and B at
a local pub Wednesday night, performed by a violinist,
violist, cellist, and oboist from the local symphony. I plan
to attend, since I like the approach of "Chamber music in the
context of pizza, beer and non-linear seating"
(http://www.orsymphony.org/joinus/CMOTinfo.html), but I have
no idea WHAT exact works will be on the program.

Any guesses? A string quartet arranged for oboe?

Saturday I'll be up close for a concert of the Violin C'to
with Joshua Bell (http://orsymphony.org/s_applause/bell.html).
Anyone have experiences with Bell's Beethoven? Things to look
for in his interpretation?

That must be a unique pub, playing S, M and B!!!!! Whatever B work they will perform, it will definitely be an arrangement considering the line-up of instruments you mention. Never heard of Mr Bell.


------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 05-15-2001).]

[PDG]

Opus 130, with the Grosse Fuge placed before the Rondo, is very agreeably played by the Medici Quartet, on Nimbus. Currently, for around £16(!), the entire quartets, plus the underrated Quintet, op.29, are also available on Nimbus - NI 1785 - & a better bargain it is hard to imagine.

There is no Schubert Oboe Quartet, either, but Mozart wrote one - K.370. Please come back to us & let us know which works you hear that night.

------------------
PDG (Peter)

[NickB]

Originally posted by Rod:
That must be a unique pub, playing S, M and B!!!!! Whatever B work they will perform, it will definitely be an arrangement considering the line-up of instruments you mention. Never heard of Mr Bell.

It is a great pub, a brewpub actually. Come to think of it, I can fit an England reference in: They won an award at an English beer competition a year or so back. http://www.firkin.com.

The players are not associated with the pub; the pub puts on a monthly "Chamber Music on
Tap" performance. The players in this group are all from the Oregon Symphony. I'm off to see it in less than an hour from now.

[NickB]

Originally posted by PDG:
Opus 130, with the Grosse Fuge placed before the Rondo, is very agreeably played by the Medici Quartet, on Nimbus. Currently, for around £16(!), the entire quartets, plus the underrated Quintet, op.29, are also available on Nimbus - NI 1785 - & a better bargain it is hard to imagine.

Yes, that looks like a very, very good deal!

There is no Schubert Oboe Quartet, either, but Mozart wrote one - K.370. Please come back to us & let us know which works you hear that night.

In the end, it was a string trio performance with a guest oboe.

The program:

Schubert trio (#1?), single movement
LVB Op. 3, String Trio 1
{pizza & beer break}
Mozart Quartet (#?) arr for oboe
Dohnányi Serenade for String Trio

As always, nothing should properly follow a B work; it was nearly insulting to have the trifle of the M do so. But all was well-played, except for a few squeaks from the violin.

I'll have to look into the B trio's, as I have no recordings of them now. Even such an early work as Op. 3 demonstrates his genius in capturing emotion in music.

The Dohnányi impressed the most, besides the B. Interesting piece, that one. Might have to explore him a bit.

[Michael]

Originally posted by NickB:

As always, nothing should properly follow a B work; it was nearly insulting to have the trifle of the M do so. But all was well-played, except for a few squeaks from the violin.

I'll have to look into the B trio's, as I have no recordings of them now. Even such an early work as Op. 3 demonstrates his genius in capturing emotion in music.

.[/B]

The String Trio, Opus 3, a very attractive piece in six movements, was the first work of Beethoven's to find its way to England. I consider the five string trios (including the Serenade) the most attractive of B's early work but they are never given the same attention as the quartets. I think the string trio is perceived as a sub-standard string quartet - rather like a three-wheeled car - but from what I have read about the subject, a string trio is actually more difficult to write than a quartet. And it was Beethoven's early practice in this medium that gave him such mastery when he came to compose the Opus 18 set.
Incidentally, if the Mozart work was the Oboe Quartet, K370, I wouldn't describe it as a "trifle" although it may sound rather light after the Beethoven.

Michael

[Rod]

Originally posted by Michael:
The String Trio, Opus 3, a very attractive piece in six movements, was the first work of Beethoven's to find its way to England. I consider the five string trios (including the Serenade) the most attractive of B's early work but they are never given the same attention as the quartets. I think the string trio is perceived as a sub-standard string quartet - rather like a three-wheeled car - but from what I have read about the subject, a string trio is actually more difficult to write than a quartet. And it was Beethoven's early practice in this medium that gave him such mastery when he came to compose the Opus 18 set.
Incidentally, if the Mozart work was the Oboe Quartet, K370, I wouldn't describe it as a "trifle" although it may sound rather light after the Beethoven.

Michael

I would say op3 is a masterpiece! I agree absolutely that the trio is probably a more difficult medium than the quartet - at least if you intend to write music of the first order. On CD I can recommend two disks on the Sony label by 'L'Archibudelli' that cover op3/8 and op9 respectively.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[PDG]

Originally posted by Rod:
I would say op3 is a masterpiece! I agree absolutely that the trio is probably a more difficult medium than the quartet - at least if you intend to write music of the first order. On CD I can recommend two disks on the Sony label by 'L'Archibudelli' that cover op3/8 and op9 respectively.

I agree with the sentiments about op.3 (missing from the compositions list on this site, along with others I've pointed out), but can't understand your & Michael's thinking that a trio is more difficult to write than a quartet. Quartets are notoriously difficult to compose, & in any event, surely Beethoven used the medium of the trio to pave the way for his quartet writing - not the other way around. When he offered the quartet, op.18/1 to Carl Amenda, he wrote: "Please let no one see your quartet; I have only just learned how to write them properly."
------------------
PDG (Peter)

[This message has been edited by PDG (edited 05-18-2001).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by PDG:
I agree with the sentiments about op.3 (missing from the compositions list on this site, along with others I've pointed out)

I appreciate any errors being pointed out, but the Op.3 Eb String trio is listed in the 1792-4 section, along with the arrangement of it Op.64 . The only ommision is the Opus number!

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Rod]

Originally posted by PDG:

I agree with the sentiments about op.3 (missing from the compositions list on this site, along with others I've pointed out), but can't understand your & Michael's thinking that a trio is more difficult to write than a quartet.

I suggest the tring trio is a sparcer combination sonically and musically relative to the quartet. My qualification 'at least if you intend to write music of the first order' is an important one in this context. One could say there are greater restrictions to invention with the trio. A piano trio is not quite the same - by it's very nature the piano can be used for more than one voice. A string duo presents a harder task still, if one wishes to produce a work comparable with quartets and piano trios - as B's own standards would have led him to do with his string trios. I also suspect the fact that B had less competition from the big two in the genre of the string trio that this gave him a greater sence of inventive freedom - many a comentator has suggested that op9 are better works than op18. Would you agree?

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 05-18-2001).]

[PDG]

Originally posted by Rod:
I suggest the tring trio is a sparcer combination sonically and musically relative to the quartet. My qualification 'at least if you intend to write music of the first order' is an important one in this context. One could say there are greater restrictions to invention with the trio. A piano trio is not quite the same - by it's very nature the piano can be used for more than one voice. A string duo presents a harder task still, if one wishes to produce a work comparable with quartets and piano trios - as B's own standards would have led him to do with his string trios. I also suspect the fact that B had less competition from the big two in the genre of the string trio that this gave him a greater sence of inventive freedom - many a comentator has suggested that op9 are better works than op18. Would you agree?

No, although I'd say that any of opus 9 is still greater even than Mozart's trio, K.563. The number of instruments used is primarily based on the harmonic possibilities of the material deployed. Bach's Cello Suites for solo Cello are considered masterpieces, yet would sound weak if their music were shared between two cellos. This is always a judgement call by the composer. A string quartet MUST be more difficult to compose than a string trio because the necessary interplay among the instruments is more complex with four strings, not to mention the fine balancing act required between the two violins. Even a quintet is not considered so tough an assignment because two cellos or two violas are easier to balance with two violins. Brahms was never satisfied with his quartets, and even Mozart could not compose them fluently - his manuscripts are full of crossings-out & mistakes!

When all is said & done, it is a fact that Beethoven very quickly abandoned composing string trios in preference of the greater challenges presented by quartets.

------------------
PDG (Peter)

[Michael]

Originally posted by PDG:
[B[/b]

I agree with the sentiments about op.3 but can't understand your & Michael's thinking that a trio is more difficult to write than a quartet. Quartets are notoriously difficult to compose, & in any event, surely Beethoven used the medium of the trio to pave the way for his quartet writing - not the other way around. [/B][/QUOTE]

Peter, I honestly don't know myself which is the harder to write as I can compose neither. I just mentioned that I had read about it somewhere and the "somewhere" turns out to be the Beethoven Companion where Robert Simpson writes:
"It is perhaps not surprising that Beethoven, before embarking on ..the quartets... should tackle the more rigorous medium of the string trio - more rigorous, that is to say, in the sense that it is more difficult to create a sonority productive of momentum with three than with four parts....The real difficulty .. is not to find the means of producing a full texture .. but to make the movement of the parts themselves develop an organic energy without attenuating themselves. It is surprising how often the second violin in a quartet will be found to save the situation; the string trio must learn to live without it".
Nobody is suggesting that the trios are superior to the quartets (I can't think of ANYTHING superior to the quartets!) but on a purely technical level they may present more of a challenge to the composer - at least until he wrote the Rasumovskies where all bets are off.
Incidentally, did I not say that the trios paved the way for Opus 18?

Michael

[NickB]

Originally posted by Michael:
Incidentally, if the Mozart work was the Oboe Quartet, K370, I wouldn't describe it as a "trifle" although it may sound rather light after the Beethoven.

Michael

I'm 99.99% certain it was not the K370; the oboist introduced the work as a "string quartet composed at the time of [x] opera" and arranged for oboe as first violin. Very quick, light, fluffy, and nice. I failed to take along a pen, and there WAS beer there, which impeded my remembering exactly which opera, and I don't think she stated a K#...

Of course, I was being facetious about it being a 'trifle', but it WOULD have been proper to place the B trio last in the program. (Partly facetious, anyway.)


[This message has been edited by NickB (edited 05-19-2001).]

[NickB]

Originally posted by Rod:
On CD I can recommend two disks on the Sony label by 'L'Archibudelli' that cover op3/8 and op9 respectively.

Thanks for the recommendation. In browsing the web a bit, I see that a couple other recordings might have potential. Anyone have opinions to offer on:

Perlman/Zukerman/Harell (EMI) (~$30)
Mutter/Giuranna/Rostropovich (DG) (~$20)
vs. L'Archibudelli (~$25)

[Michael]

The only recordings I have are the DG ones with Mutter, Rostropovich etc. I think they are great but they have had mixed reviews. The set Rod recommends is generally considered to be excellent though I haven't heard it myself.
Whatever set you go for, Nick, you are in for a treat!

Michael