Beethoven's String Quartets
 

https://www.thegreatcourses.com/medi...1559137023.jpg

Ludwig van Beethoven took the string quartet, initially codified by Joseph Haydn, to another level with his distinctive approach to the form. The four voices (2 violins, 1 viola, 1 cello) of the traditional four movement work became far more subjective or individual and the form itself extended into 5 and 6 movements. The 16 quartets written by Beethoven can be divided into four periods as follows:

Opus 18: No. 1 in F major No. 2 in G major No. 3 in D major No. 4 in C mino No. 5 in A major No. 6 in B♭ major

Opus 59 (Rasumovsky): No. 7 in F major No. 8 in E minor No. 9 in C major

Other middle period quartets: No. 10 in E♭ major, Op. 74 (Harp) No. 11 in F minor, Op. 95 (Serioso)

Late quartets: No. 12 in E♭ major, Op. 127 No. 13 in B♭ major, Op. 130 No. 14 in C♯ minor, Op. 131 No. 15 in A minor, Op. 132Große Fuge, Op. 133 No. 16 in F major, Op. 135

The No. sequence doesn't necessarily correspond with the date of composition. They're more of a categorical convenience.

For example, No. 14 was the last in a trio of quartets written in the order, Op. 132 (No. 15), Op. 130 (No. 13) and Op. 131 (No. 14).

Op. 131 was apparently Beethoven's favorite so why not start there? Actually, it was unintentional as the live version by the Danish String Quartet on YT caught my attention first. Let's listen to their take and then the Alban Berg and Juilliard Quartets, two well regarded interpretations currently streaming on Spotify (and/or most music streaming platforms), and then, perhaps, a trashed version of No. 14 just to get a well rounded idea of what can, cannot or should not be done with one of Beethoven's best loved pieces. If anyone has any other ensemble suggestions/recommendations please contribute!

The Danish Quartet, for a contemporary ensemble, gives an admirable performance of which I can find zero fault - but then I haven't listened to the Berg or Juilliard versions of this one in a while. But without more ado, Opus 131:

Right away let me say that there are a couple versions of the Complete String Quartets by the Alban Berg String Quartett, one of which (apparently the better) is no longer being produced:

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....3L._SX450_.jpg

The Complete String Quartets (1999, EMI Classics)

These late '70s/early 80s recorded versions are the ones to get and/or listen to where available. Spotify edition

According to Jed Distler on classictoday.com this version lacks the "occasional finicky phrasal adjustment or looser-limbed ambiance marking the ensemble’s live 1989 remake". Indeed, the playing is tighter, more focused and even a bit brighter than their later versions. And the 7 disc box sets, few of which are left, are dirt cheap compared to some of the other prestigious complete sets out there.

Compared to the Danish Quartet's recording above the Berg Quartett's version has far more verve and less heaviness. Closer, as I recall, to what Juillard (in their early formation) was doing with Op. 131. I like the Berg.

My immediate impression favors the Berg but that’s the one I’m already familiar with so there might be an unfair bias.

Had to do a double take when I saw the Leonard Bernstein YT snapshot but apparently he conducted an orchestral arrangement of Op. 131 with the Vienna Philharmonic strings in 1979:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/83/03...92fead80c3.jpg

Not sure how I feel about it. Need another listen or two. :)

How common is it for a SQ to have a conductor?

:D It isn't. Bernstein conducted an expanded string ensemble (just the string section of the Vienna Philharmonic) for his version of No. 14. The novelty of it intrigued me. The opening adagio works beautifully. Haven't listened to the successive (more up-tempo) movements yet, which really are the test of such an arrangement. Looking forward to it.

So it’s looks like the Bernstein take will end up being the dud of the Opus 131 picks, at least in my opinion. The problem with turning chamber pieces (the string quartet) into orchestral works is that you change the nature of the composition: chamber pieces are essentially private or personal in nature while orchestral works are far more public or universal (communal, if you will). While I love the lushness of Bernstein’s first movement arrangement the expansion in the successive movements lose the character of the original four voice arrangement. It’s no longer poignant contemplation, it’s a kind of sorrowful landscape - a pastiche, not a prayer. Although Beethoven was not overtly religious Opus 131 certainly has strong elements of supplication - even reverence. All of that is diluted on the Bernstein version, imo. It’s lush and evocative, even plaintive, but without the depth of emotion, reverence or intensity of the original four voice arrangement.

And with all due respect to the late Lenny Bernstein, I'm not listening to Beethoven to fall asleep. His appeal is in the drama of the human experience, collective and personal, not soundscapes for meditation. Beethoven Light is somehow not right. Think Ludwig would have hated it. :)

The Juilliard String Quartet Beethoven String Quartet No. 14 in C-Sharp Minor, Op. 131 (1962, RCA Victor Red Seal)

https://img.discogs.com/Y8MqcXBUJn4S...-7939.jpeg.jpg https://img.discogs.com/5o49aCOkaPcv...-6202.jpeg.jpg


Spotify Edition

This is a super neat idea Ando! I'm just now listening to the Danish Quartet version, and it's really beautiful. I can't compare or judge yet, especially since I hadn't heard this piece before, but I'll get to the other versions at some point too.

It was Hawk's idea to do the quartets - and boy, Op. 131 has been a challenge.

https://movie-fanatic-res.cloudinary...r-walken-i.jpg
As a sidebar Yaron Zilberman directed a 2012 film titled A Late Quartet which features 131 and a nice ensemble of actors mimicking The Bretano Quartet's performance of the piece. The piece isn't played in its entirety, of course, but the soundtrack contains the full performance:



The sound is much warmer than the Juilliard and the Berg quartets but I don't know which I prefer yet. First, I need to fully understand how and where certain themes are repeated and their relationship to the whole - the structure of this highly unusual seven movement piece then I can cut that part of my brain off and enjoy. Though I suppose the point is that understanding and pleasure occur simultaneously. And, obviously, after many listens. :)

It really is. Adding the Bernstein was a good call. Gives us something to talk about. Imma get to it. I’m a good soldier that way.

Op. 132 in A Minor
 

Moving on to No. 15, Op. 132 in A Minor. The Talich Quartet recordings are regarded as among the best. The founder, Jan Talich, passed earlier this year (his nephew, Jan Jr., currently occupies his seat).




I think No. 15 is much more approachable in terms of immediate appreciation and the Talich is a fine recording. Here's a Spotify playlist which includes Talich versions of the late quartets and The Great or Grossee Fuge.

Ok, Wonhee Bae, Yuna Ha, Yeeun Heo, Kim Ji-won, collectively known as the Esmé Quartet bring No. 15 TO LIFE. Although the group was formally started in Cologne, Germany these four Korean women were apparently childhood friends. Their synchronicity is apparent in any event. I’m afraid they make the previous Talich Quartet version seem rather staid by comparison. It’s a first rate rendition (IMO) performed and taped earlier this year -

I’m going to fall way behind. I’m sorry.

What? Pick it up where U can. So many good versions of the quartets. I'm just noting the ones that strike me as exceptional right off the bat and giving them a few listens. Can't listen to em all! :)

Backtracking a bit to Op. 131 (the quartet that began the thread) I found this discussion and breakdown of the piece by Bruce Adolphe which is an experience in itself. It does throw light on the quartet’s construction and subsequent influence so if, like me, you’re especially taken with 131 it will intrigue.

At least you're sort of keeping up. I wanted to, but got stuck way earlier. I WILL pick it up again

Thanks for posting the videos, none of the Spotify links work for me in Malaysia, apparently the third world doesn't deserve culture! >: (

I'm not into classical music apart from the occasional piece and therefore have no idea how I would even begin to compare two performance of the same piece since they always seem to be so perfect (I always assume all of these musicians have started rigorous training since kindergarten and there is NO room for error or improv of any kind!).

But thanks for your thoughts and effort, it helps to bring this elusive topic to laymen such as myself. I will be following occasionally. :)

Edit: Actually I found a few Juliard quartets so I'll give them a go since you say they're among the best! :D

Of course there is generally no error or improv, but these pieces of music are written down on paper, and even though they have instructions there is a lot of subtle room to decide how to play it so the musicians give their own interpretation. Like the same spoken language sounds a bit different depending on who says it because of the exact delivery

That makes sense. But I wonder, is there a lot of room for interpretation? Can these pieces vary wildly (unless someone decided to do something experimental with them)?

I guess I should compare the various interpretations and see...:)

Define a lot. Some musicians have a more experimental (or rather, interpretative) approach than others for sure, but I'd say conventionally the differences aren't great. I don't know enough about classical music to give a very detailed answer though

Also actually, I think the analogy with spoken language applies here too: I think the differences between classical music performances are comparable to different actors playing the same role in a play, although plays leave a bit more room for variation maybe

It’s an apt analogy imo

A play might even leave less room for interpretation depending on factors like the personality of the theatre director and how much instruction the composer included with their scores and so on.

Plus, that ability to find that really perfect tone which is universally crucial throughout all genres of music from garage rock guitar hooks to free jazz saxophone to classical even to computer generated drone ... it’s completely make or break and there’s no faking it.

All of that is spot on. To me it's all about the group's sound. Of course, they need to be good musicians in their own right but a group of talented people don't always add up to a crack ensemble. That magic is rare. And it doesn't always communicate despite what the players may be feeling (as anyone who's ever played in a band could tell you!).

I like the early Juilliard Quartet's version because they were in a period where Happy Birthday would have sounded fabulous. They just had that indefinable fire and cohesion missing from most versions of the quartets that I've heard. I'm listening again to the Danish Quartet's version of Op. 131 (in the first post) and, for me, while there are moments of brilliance (particularly in the up-tempo movements; the scherzo, in particular) they lack the power of the unity of voices in the Juilliard version. They play beautifully but, to me, the Juilliard group were on another level. But, as they say, to each his own.

I think part of that is being such a good musician that you can not only play your part but you can simultaneously play in your head the other parts and as a result they know exactly where to show deference make a little space or even attack harder to harmonize and there’s even little cues in the playing that communicate pick it up here or sweep in like this or here we go to climax or interlude.

And you know they practice together all the time and know how to communicate verbally. But I don’t think it’s just that. Like I’m saying above there’s something borderline telepathic about it.

Much much easier for me to spot in jazz though.

Thought I’d move to a more bite-sized quartet and picked No 11 Opus 95 in F Minor, “serioso”. Man, do I pick em. Opus 95 backstory.

And, well yeah, the Alban Berg Quartet again. :D

:) Dave Hurwitz calls The Alban Berg the Viennese clone of the Juilliard Quartet. His videos are fun to watch (if you’re really interested in classical works). Here’s a run-down of his favorite Beethoven String Quartet cycles on CD:

Good, full-bodied, spirited version of the "serioso" quartet.

This is a good "interpretation" of the Serioso, particularly of the 1st movement and Beethoven's approach to music, in general:

Beethoven's Concerto Grosso is my favorite work from him, his 15th and 16th Quartets are also him in his prime, truly innovative stuff as well

Better than 14? :)

Hey all the late quartets are amazing either way, but 15 and 16 get me.

Someone just (recently, anyway) put up a live version of The Juilliard String Quartet performing Op. 131 LIVE (the 1974 group). Well, I had to stop everything to listen.

no. 13 Op 130 in b flat major alban berg quartet

Commenters go on about how good the Catavina (fifth movement 23:30 ) is. We'll see. :)

I assume it's been mentioned, but the Emerson String Quartet recordings are really something. Very well recorded too

Yes and yes! ;)

https://i.discogs.com/tcV7qvTyOz54Dx...OC5q/cGVn.jpeg

String Quartet In B Flat, Op. 18, No. 6 (1977, CBC)
The Orford String Quartet
Terence Helmer viola
Andrew Dawes violin
Kenneth Perkins violin
Marcel St-Cyr cello

One of the "lighter" quartets in the series and handled so by Orford.

Music and notes, notes and music.