Talking about string quartets

[Richard Barrett]

Yes yes yes OK, I believe you, I'm just a bit behind with James's work obviously.

Lachenmann's third string quartet Grido hasn't been mentioned yet. I'm not really a Lachenmann fan and I don't like its two predecessors, but when I first heard this one I remember being somewhat bowled over by it despite myself, and subsequent listenings have confirmed my first impressions.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Lachenmann's third string quartet Grido hasn't been mentioned yet. I'm not really a Lachenmann fan and I don't like its two predecessors, but when I first heard this one I remember being somewhat bowled over by it despite myself, and subsequent listenings have confirmed my first impressions.

I'm more of a Gran Torso man, messeln (those tiny, beautiful sounds carying right to the back of the cheap seats of St Paul's Hall - a real changing moment in my attitude to Music) But I love GRIDO, too (even when played by ALIRA, APFPR or JACK).

[Richard Barrett]

Hmmm... for me Gran Torso finds Lachenmann at his most sternly didactic.

Anyway there was another thing I thought might be worth discussing in EdgeleyRob's original post: the bit about the string quartet being the "perfect musical combination". Is there such a thing? The fact that many of my favourite pieces are string quartets doesn't necessarily mean that this combination of instruments is in and of itself preferable to others, does it? Of course the existence of the whole tradition we've been talking about means that the members of string quartets regularly and frequently play serious and often structurally/expressively complex music together, which encourages the development of skills that aren't likely to be specifically required of, say, a saxophone quartet. And this is clearly an important factor for both composers and listeners. But IMO there isn't an instrumental combination as such which could be described as more or less perfect than any other, surely. (It's kind of an article of faith for me that there is something interesting to be done with any conceivable combination of instruments, which would then hopefully be "perfect" for that particular work.)

[EdgeleyRob]

The string quartets of Beethoven contain some of his most intimate,personal and profound statements.
I don't think this applies to any other of his works,not even the symphonies (maybe the Missa Solemnis and the late piano sonatas are exceptions).
Shostakovich also seemed increasingly drawn towards SQs,and they too contain some of his most poignant music.
It seems to me that they (and Weinberg,Bartok,Myaskovsky and some others) found the SQ to be the perfect combination or medium for expressing their deepest thoughts.

[Richard Barrett]

It seems to me that they (...) found the SQ to be the perfect combination or medium for expressing their deepest thoughts.

Which is exactly what I was saying. But of course that doesn't go for all composers, which is why I thought your idea of "perfection" might be looked at a bit more closely. Or, to put it another way, what is it about the musical personalities of Beethoven, Bartók and the others which made the string quartet the medium for "expressing their deepest thoughts"? - given that for Brahms, Wagner, Bruckner, Mahler, Debussy, Stravinsky, Varèse, Stockhausen, Boulez, Berio, Messiaen (all composers with profound things to express, if that phrase means anything) and many others this wouldn't be the case.

[Nick Armstrong]

"Well done, Wilson; I wondered who'd be the first to spot that."

.... Don't panic, Mr Mainwaring!

I'm in a strange and perverse position, Sir.

I don't often - or at all - sit at home and listen to string quartets. But to sit in the front few rows of e.g. the Wigmore Hall, with a string quartet going full tilt a few feet away, is one of the musical experiences I love most. To me it seems contradictory - I'd have thought string quartets were ideally suited to the scale and absorption of home listening.

Ho hum.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

ho hum indeed ... just does not work for me through the hifi, but live i can listen with joy [even to Britten shhhh]

[Nick Armstrong]

ho hum indeed ... just does not work for me through the hifi, but live i can listen with joy [even to Britten shhhh]

I am not alone!

[Ian]

I think the string quartet can offer some practical advantages in that I think there is a bigger difference between a trio and a quartet and than a quintet and a quartet - in other words I think there is an element of diminishing returns. Perhaps also the combination of 2 violins matched with one of each of the other instruments reflected the availability and popularity of the instruments. Mind you, at a concert a couple of months ago I heard a marvelous quartet by Arensky for violin, viola and 2 cellos!

No doubt the rise of the string quartet during the 18c lay in a combination of the wide popularity and availability of string instruments, the emergence of a market of ‘middle class’ amateur music makers, and their exploitation by music publishers who, at that time, were falling over themselves to publish quartets, songs, and other forms of chamber music.

Whereas the typical classical symphony was engineered to entertain the crowd with big and bold gestures, chamber music including the quartet (which usefully related more closely to the symphony) was composed essential for domestic consumption. More conversational, it didn’t have to be so immediate, and therefore well suited for further, more personal exploration. The quartet did seem to take a bit of a hit in terms of numbers written in the 19 c - perhaps because the piano had taken over as the domestic entertainment centre of choice so there simply wasn’t the demand for them. (It’s easy to forget that music was once much more something people did rather than consumed)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

The string quartets of Beethoven contain some of his most intimate,personal and profound statements.
I don't think this applies to any other of his works,not even the symphonies (maybe the Missa Solemnis and the late piano sonatas are exceptions).

Sort-of, yes - but I don't think that Ludder's Op 18 quartets are as intimate, personal and profound as the slow movement of the Ninth Symphony (nor, for that matter, the Slow Movement of the Fourth Symphony). Nor do I think that the last movement of the last Piano Sonata is "beaten" for intimacy or profundity by anything in the Quartets. It might just be that, increasingly isolated socially by the deterioration in his hearing (and fewer performances of his works in the last couple of years of his life) he wrote the most "inner" works for the ensemble that was most willing to perform them? The intensity of the Music in these late Quartets (and again, I'll emphasize the playfulness of much of the Music in these works) might be what composers responded to from the mid-19th Century on - and they associated this new "language" with the medium for which it was written and felt challenged to match this in their own works for that medium?


Nah - this is Lobbocks: I can't imagine that, if Beethoven had been commissioned to write Wind Quintets in the last years of his life (for an ensemble as dedicated as Schuppanzig's Quartet), the resulting Music would carry comparible innig: there has to be something in the alchemy between what went on in the composer's imagination and the medium for which he imagined it.


Like Bach's solo works for Violin and those for 'cello - different in "weight" from most of his other instrumental work? (Or is that a result of performing traditions and reputation?)

[ahinton]

Hmmm... for me Gran Torso finds Lachenmann at his most sternly didactic.

Anyway there was another thing I thought might be worth discussing in EdgeleyRob's original post: the bit about the string quartet being the "perfect musical combination". Is there such a thing? The fact that many of my favourite pieces are string quartets doesn't necessarily mean that this combination of instruments is in and of itself preferable to others, does it? Of course the existence of the whole tradition we've been talking about means that the members of string quartets regularly and frequently play serious and often structurally/expressively complex music together, which encourages the development of skills that aren't likely to be specifically required of, say, a saxophone quartet. And this is clearly an important factor for both composers and listeners. But IMO there isn't an instrumental combination as such which could be described as more or less perfect than any other, surely. (It's kind of an article of faith for me that there is something interesting to be done with any conceivable combination of instruments, which would then hopefully be "perfect" for that particular work.)

Bang on! That, I think, provides the answer to the OP and effectively brings the thread to a close.

[Nick Armstrong]

That, I think, effectively brings the thread to a close.

I di'n hear no fat lady !!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I di'n hear no fat lady !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FxvnhPvJgI

[ahinton]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FxvnhPvJgI

Pipped me at the post, you did, damn you!

Anyway, of course not all sopranos are as girthful as Cali's reference to that old chestnut might be thought to imply - especially those who sing with small string chamber groups (as of course I know well!)...

[Richard Barrett]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FxvnhPvJgI

On the subject of string quartets with voice, I wonder how many here are familiar with Othmar Schoeck's rather beautiful Notturno op.47 for baritone and string quartet, composed in 1933.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeV3uxsa23A