Originally posted by Frankli:
Yes they do the same with Haydn and Mozart. But they articulate extremely well, while most quartets rush through the notes. The classical string quartet was strongly associated with conversation, and that's why I don't mind if the tempi are a bit slow. I even wonder if these aren't exactly the right tempi.
In their op. 132 (live recording from the radio), which is not as slow as Fitzwilliam, the timbre of the instruments works very well with the magical slow movement, where Beethoven explores pure sound.
Yes they do the same with Haydn and Mozart. But they articulate extremely well, while most quartets rush through the notes. The classical string quartet was strongly associated with conversation, and that's why I don't mind if the tempi are a bit slow. I even wonder if these aren't exactly the right tempi.
In their op. 132 (live recording from the radio), which is not as slow as Fitzwilliam, the timbre of the instruments works very well with the magical slow movement, where Beethoven explores pure sound.
I can suffer only a certain amount of moderation of tempo with Beethoven. After a certain point the performance becomes a disaster very easily. I did not know the Quator Mosaiques had concerned themselves with the late quartets, I hope if they do a recording they do a better job than they did with the 2 op18 cds. I'm sorry but I took one of them back to the shop I was so appauled by the tempi. I assessed the track timings and they looked slow but I still bought it so it was my own fault. The Turner Quartet I play now for Op18, very far from perfect, but adequate. I think op18 in some respects represent more of an interpretational challenge than the later pieces.
Concerning the Eroica Quartet of course I have the op74 and 95, they are on the same disk! Neither performances to be greatly recommended, only good in places.
------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin
[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 09-26-2006).]
Comment