BaL 15.04.23 - Janácek: String Quartet No 1, “Kreutzer Sonata”

[Mal]

Having listened to the Prazaks in full I certainly think it "challenges" the "integrated classical-romantic" approach, definitely taking a "fragmented, expressionistic" line. In fact it's extreme in several dimensions - very intense, very bright... for me it *is* too far off the scale, too dissonant. It's the kind of performance that initially put me off collecting this string quartet, which was only alleviated after hearing the Pavel Haas performance - which maintains enough intensity & passion but actually sounds beautiful. I can see why a very experienced, very interested collector like LeMartinPecheur, or the BAL reviewer, might choose the Prazaks - it's something different, something extreme, perhaps something more idiomatic. But is it really a good BAL choice? BAL is, surely, aimed at the average listener, not Janacek experts, and therefore perhaps a more moderate, more obviously beautiful recording shoud have been chosen.

Also, the Prazaks have not impressed other professional critics, only one of my six CD guides mentions them - Third Ear - and it mentions them to dismiss them, awarding "diamonds" to 9 other performances but not to them, saying, "overpowering if not in the mood".

I wasn't in the mood.

One then has to ask why the BAL reviewer was "in the mood"? Maybe listening to 100 performances back to back, and studying Janacek for a lifetime, puts you in the mood for something "different", something that wakes you up?

This has me questiong who the BAL reviewer should be. I suggest a panel of reviewers making the choice - the expert reviewer, Andrew, and A.N.Other non-Janacek all-round expert (who knows his Tolstoy and Beethoven...)

[Master Jacques]

I suggest a panel of reviewers making the choice - the expert reviewer, Andrew, and A.N.Other non-Janacek all-round expert (who knows his Tolstoy and Beethoven...)

A suggestion which gives me, for one, the horrors. You make an arguable point, in suggesting that a library choice should not be at an extreme, but some sort of central benchmark version. I agree with that, to a large extent. But it's for the reviewer to decide. Levi's survey was a model broadcast, illuminating and clear - whether or not we agreed with his choice - and a committee job could only make the slot even blander, and more middle-of-the-road than its 'twofers' already are.

We should beware of paying too much attention to critical guides. The Prazaks are not such a high-profile quartet, internationally (despite their fabulous cv) and the Praga label for which they record is not widely distributed here. Most critics would ignore their issues, or assume they weren't top notch because their label was small.

[vinteuil]

.

But it's for the reviewer to decide. Levi's survey was a model broadcast, illuminating and clear - whether or not we agreed with his choice...

.
... yes : and it is the illumination and the examples that are key. Often the recording that 'speaks' to me is not necessarily the one finally selected - but I will have had a chance to understand what the reviewer is looking for, and a good range of samples to choose from. I found this BaL exemplary.

.

.

[soileduk]

That's the recording I "imported" from QOBUZ in 96/24 2-channel stereo. It was also issued in SACD format with the addition of a surround sound layer. That is the option I linked to and which is very difficult to source.

The SACD is a re-visit to these quartets recorded in 2013. Pavel Hula replaced Vàclav Remeš on 1st violin for these recordings.

[mikealdren]

A suggestion which gives me, for one, the horrors. You make an arguable point, in suggesting that a library choice should not be at an extreme, but some sort of central benchmark version. I agree with that, to a large extent. But it's for the reviewer to decide. Levi's survey was a model broadcast, illuminating and clear - whether or not we agreed with his choice - and a committee job could only make the slot even blander, and more middle-of-the-road than its 'twofers' already are.

We should beware of paying too much attention to critical guides. The Prazaks are not such a high-profile quartet, internationally (despite their fabulous cv) and the Praga label for which they record is not widely distributed here. Most critics would ignore their issues, or assume they weren't top notch because their label was small.

Very interesting points, to some extent I think it probably depends on the music, this quartet sounded very tame in some of recordings and I think it needs a great deal of passion and commitment that the Czech quartets tend to have in spades.

[pastoralguy]

the conductor bloke who’d been given the big Haitink box started by saying: “My first reaction was… Wow”. Well, thanks for that … (I reached for the fast-forward button).

My Haitink set arrived this afternoon and ‘WOW!’ was exactly my reaction!!

[RichardB]

I listened to the Prazak Quartet recording yesterday, and it isn't going to supplant the Janáčeks and Hagens for me, although I was very taken with the Violin Sonata which I don't remember hearing before, but it does complement them nicely. So that's three recordings I can alternate between now. Speaking of the "composer's wishes", to open that can of worms once again, I really don't think that they would have included "I only want my music to be played by my compatriots". So the existence of a Czech (or should it be more localised to Moravia?) tradition of Janáček performance is interesting and meaningful, but it's not the only way to play and hear this music, surely.

[Mal]

A suggestion which gives me, for one, the horrors. You make an arguable point, in suggesting that a library choice should not be at an extreme, but some sort of central benchmark version. I agree with that, to a large extent. But it's for the reviewer to decide. Levi's survey was a model broadcast, illuminating and clear - whether or not we agreed with his choice - and a committee job could only make the slot even blander, and more middle-of-the-road than its 'twofers' already are.

We should beware of paying too much attention to critical guides. The Prazaks are not such a high-profile quartet, internationally (despite their fabulous cv) and the Praga label for which they record is not widely distributed here. Most critics would ignore their issues, or assume they weren't top notch because their label was small.

Surely expert reviewers will, I hope, listen to everything and, surely, be beyond being star struck. Surely we can avoid "most critics"? Levi probably fits the "expert" bill, but so (probably...) does Roger Hecht, the Third Ear reviewer. It's interesting that experts can differ so much - for Levi the Prazak's are top choice, for Hecht they don't make his top ten.

Sorry to give you the horrors :) I also don't like two-fers much, I'd much rather have one expert give it to us straight. Maybe a BAL "second look" would be an interesting additional programme, where you would have an expert with a very different opinion arguing with Levi's choice (Hecht vs. Levi I'd like to hear!) Andrew could act as chairman, with minimal intervention...

[underthecountertenor]

Yes far too much of that… Last weekend - OT I suppose, as it wasn’t BaL but the ‘new release’ segment - the conductor bloke who’d been given the big Haitink box started by saying: “My first reaction was… Wow”. Well, thanks for that … (I reached for the fast-forward button).

The same conductor bloke who gave us a 'singularly unenlightening' (to quote you, and I agree) BAL on Prokofiev VC2 not so long ago.

[Nick Armstrong]

The same conductor bloke who gave us a 'singularly unenlightening' (to quote you, and I agree) BAL on Prokofiev VC2 not so long ago.

Quite

[Master Jacques]

Surely expert reviewers will, I hope, listen to everything and, surely, be beyond being star struck. Surely we can avoid "most critics"? Levi probably fits the "expert" bill, but so (probably...) does Roger Hecht, the Third Ear reviewer. It's interesting that experts can differ so much - for Levi the Prazak's are top choice, for Hecht they don't make his top ten.

Sorry to give you the horrors :) I also don't like two-fers much, I'd much rather have one expert give it to us straight. Maybe a BAL "second look" would be an interesting additional programme, where you would have an expert with a very different opinion arguing with Levi's choice (Hecht vs. Levi I'd like to hear!) Andrew could act as chairman, with minimal intervention...

You raise many interesting questions about the nature of reviewing. It's a rare reviewer who can achieve the level of genuine criticism, represented by Erik Levi. He's in the happy position of not having to listen to too much, day in, day out, which is what burns out most full-time reviewers (those few who still exist) after a few years. My feeling is, that they ought to be sent out to work in the fields for a month or two, regularly, to re-establish their relationship to reality!

"Expert opinions" often differ. You only get to establish yourself as a person of consequence, by going out on a limb and disagreeing with "mainstream" opinion at a given time, and doing it convincingly. "Chiming in" only takes the hacks so far, as in all artistic fields.

Having the horrors occasionally is salutary, so no apologies are needed! I like your idea of a "round table" debate on recent recordings, in the good old Gramophone style. Whatever happened to that forum? Nowadays, they have a chummy monthly feature where a couple of regulars chew over somebody else's antique review, suitably trimmed for modern tastes. This is rather like vultures pecking at a corpse.

[ardcarp]

My feeling is, that they ought to be sent out to work in the fields for a month or two,

I beg your parsnips? Which reminds me....John Field was a question on University Challenge this week as 'the inventor of the Nocturne'. Nobody got it on TV, but no doubt there was much back-slapping chez forumistas. Osbert Parsley next up?

[Mal]

... I like your idea of a "round table" debate...

As many BAL choices are repeated, maybe they can dust off the previous reviewer for a head-to-head with the current reviewer.

[Master Jacques]

As many BAL choices are repeated, maybe they can dust off the previous reviewer for a head-to-head with the current reviewer.

Rather like the old Brain of Brains contest on Radio 4, between the three previous winners of Brain of Britain? Fortunately in the case of Janacek's Quartets, we'd have Erik Levi against Ivan Hewitt, which would be a civilised contest without need for a referee!

[underthecountertenor]

I beg your parsnips? Which reminds me....John Field was a question on University Challenge this week as 'the inventor of the Nocturne'. Nobody got it on TV, but no doubt there was much back-slapping chez forumistas. Osbert Parsley next up?

Actually as I recall John Field was (part of) the question and Nocturne was the answer, which the captain of Jesus Cambridge got (after Chopin had also been mentioned in the question).