Mozart's "Haydn" Quartets
td
quartets on Hungaroton from 1989-90. The original ensemble, of course,
not the ensemble as it is now constituted.
I was raised on the Juilliard, Italian, Talich and others.
What do our quartet mavens think of these Takacs versions?
TD
herman
> Finally managed to get a copy of the Takacs Quartet version of these
> quartets on Hungaroton from 1989-90. The original ensemble, of course,
> not the ensemble as it is now constituted.
Haven't those been been issued under the Decca / London label, too?
td
It would surprise me greatly.
Why would Hungaroton license recordings to Decca?
Do you have a link to this effect?
Or are you thinking rather of their recent Beethoven recordings? Those
are all with the new leader.
TD
Bob Harper
>>
>>> Finally managed to get a copy of the Takacs Quartet version of these
>>> quartets on Hungaroton from 1989-90. The original ensemble, of course,
>>> not the ensemble as it is now constituted.
>> Haven't those been been issued under the Decca / London label, too?
>
> It would surprise me greatly.
>
> Why would Hungaroton license recordings to Decca?
>
> Do you have a link to this effect?
>
> Or are you thinking rather of their recent Beethoven recordings? Those
> are all with the new leader.
>
> TD
question, I think the '60s Juilliard recordings are stupendous. As well,
I like the Petersens, and hope the Prazak will complete their set (the
issued disc contains K.421, 458, and 465). Add the Alban Berg (Teldec),
Smetana, Hagen, and Carmina (again, only one disc so far, slightly HIP
but beautifully played). These works are inexhaustible.
I heard the Takacs play K.421 live in Boulder a couple of years ago. It
was the first work on the program, and frankly it didn't go too well,
seeming rather tentative. The rest of the program (Bartok 6 and Brahms
51/2) was much better, especially the Brahms.
BTW, how are the original Takacs?
Bob Harper
Kevin N
Is the '60s Juilliard available anyplace on CD? I had the '70s
recording, but found it so unbelievably dull, I ditched it the next
day.
Bob Harper
(snip)
> Is the '60s Juilliard available anyplace on CD? I had the '70s
> recording, but found it so unbelievably dull, I ditched it the next
> day.
Try
http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=SICC-825
or
http://www.hmv.co.jp/en/product/detail/1367684
The shipping won't be cheap, but the set is worth every penny.
Bob Harper
Bob Harper
Oops. The HMV listing above is the '70s set. The '60s set is here:
http://www.hmv.co.jp/en/product/detail/2616394
Sorry for the error.
Bob Harper
herman
My bad, indeed. I was thinking of the Haydn op 76, which must have
been one of their first Decca takes.
Alan Cooper
news:BLPWm.158889$Td3...@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com:
If you order the Juilliard set from cdjapan (and you should, imo), when you check
out, try coupon code xmas2009 (500 yen off if it works). Note also that the
Smetana Quartet's superlative first stereo recordings of four of the "Haydn"
quartets (previously issued on Testament) were reissued in Japan a few months ago:
TOCE-14270 and TOCE-14282. I'd be curious to know how the Japansese transfers
compare with Testament's. A later Smetana SQ digital set of all six is available
on Denon as well, but I would not prefer that to the Juilliard set or the earlier
Smetanas. One o' these days the Musikverein's Decca set will be reissued. (It
was available in Japan for a while, but I only managed to acquire two of the
quartets.) It's a stunner. I also may be the only one here who thinks highly of
the Melos Quartet set on DG. Lovely performances, imo. Currently op, I think,
but often available used for a reasonable price.
AC
graham
"td" <tomde...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:0dacbc12-3b38-4ebd...@s19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
(along with the Italians inter alia).
Graham
mandryka
which is just amazing. If that 1962 set is anything like that then it
is well worth the shipping costs.
Are any more of the 1957 Juilliard Mozart/haydns available anywhere?
Hopefuly someone somewhere sometime has transfered them! I have all
their Testament CDs -- Beethoven, Debussy et al. -- and I can't
recommend them more enthusiastically.
RE Mozart/Haydns, I just compared Leipzig and Petersen in the
variations movement of K464. Much prefer Leipzig, who seemed more
alive and energetic.
I also have fond memories of ABQ's Teldec recording in this movement
-- will check later.
herman
Overall I tend to like the Petersen better than the Leipzig. The
latter adopted some HIP affectations for their Mozart which become
boring soon.
In the seventies, as I was getting the hang of this music I used to
regard the sixties Juilliards as my reference set. I hadn't heard them
for twenty years when the Japanese cds came out, and I was at first
taken aback by some mannerisms, such as the constant use of slowing
down & diminuendo at the end of a phrase.
david...@aol.com
the wonderful 1972 recording with the Hungarian Quartet that was
released as a Vox Box and later reissued on CD. The set has its
problems: Zoltan Szekely was no longer a young man when the set was
recorded, and there’s some evidence of diminished digits, to borrow a
little phrase from Ulysses, but the playing couldn’t be more
sensitive. I truly love that set. Makes me want to bring back the
Austro-Hungarian empire.
Love the earlier Juilliard set, too, although, like Steve Emerson, I’m
never quite convinced that Mozart is the best composer for them,
whereas I find their Beethoven, Berg—that sensational 1959 RCA Lyric
Suite—Bartók, and Carter unassailable, not to mention their wonderful
recordings of Schubert’s fiercely “modernist” G major quartet. Mozart
seems less like a natural fit for them.
Then again I love their 1974 recording of the last four Mozart
quartets, which was the last recording they made before the departure
of Claus Adam, I think. (It’s never been reissued on CD.) Sadly, for
me, the quartet takes a nosedive thereafter: the blandly disappointing
second recording of the Mozart “Haydn” quartets was made in 1977 after
Adam was gone.
-david gable
Ward Hardman
Any thoughts on the Suske's set on Berlin Classics (the last 10 great
quartets, including the 6 "Haydns," on 4 CDs)?
Does the Klenke Quartet on Profil have anything to offer beyond their
attractive appearances?
--Ward Hardman
"The older I get, the more I admire and crave competence,
just simple competence, in any field from adultery to zoology."
- H.L. Mencken
herman
Excellent workmanship, but not stratospherically beautiful.
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:078853d3-f2b5-4b5c-a812-
731026...@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> When it comes to Mozart�s �Haydn� quartets, my dark horse candidate is the
> wonderful 1972 recording with the Hungarian Quartet that was released as a
> Vox Box and later reissued on CD. The set has its problems: Zoltan
> Szekely was no longer a young man when the set was recorded, and there�s
> some evidence of diminished digits, to borrow a little phrase from Ulysses,
> but the playing couldn�t be more sensitive. I truly love that set. Makes
> me want to bring back the Austro-Hungarian empire.
Szekely was still playing his Bartok concerto authoritatively a few years
later.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
mandryka
> On 19 déc, 09:28, mandryka <howie.st...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Overall I tend to like the Petersen better than the Leipzig. The
> latter adopted some HIP affectations for their Mozart which become
> boring soon.
Do you want more vibrato?
Any fans of the Hagen's Mozart around?
Bob Lombard
>> Overall I tend to like the Petersen better than the Leipzig. The
>> latter adopted some HIP affectations for their Mozart which become
>> boring soon.
>
> Do you want more vibrato?
>
> Any fans of the Hagen's Mozart around?
I find it interesting that the Bart�k SQ recordings of these quartets
haven't been mentioned. Not heard? Not liked?
bl
Johannes Roehl
>> Overall I tend to like the Petersen better than the Leipzig. The
>> latter adopted some HIP affectations for their Mozart which become
>> boring soon.
>
> Do you want more vibrato?
>
> Any fans of the Hagen's Mozart around?
Yes. I think they are exceptionally good, very expresssive. But they may
strike some listeners as "overdone" oder mannered, I find them quite
fascinating.
Actually for the last 1,5 years I have listened to so much Haydn that I
am somewhat of of tune with Mozart right now, so I it's been a while I
did some serious listening to these quartets. While I am generally a
great fan of the Petersens, I found the sound on their Mozart somewhat
unpleasant.
Johannes
Alan Cooper
news:f2e7e32a-08b4-461f...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.
com:
> On 19 d�c, 13:49, Ward Hardman <ward.hard...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Any thoughts on the Suske's set on Berlin Classics (the last 10
>> great quartets, including the 6 "Haydns," on 4 CDs)?
>
> Excellent workmanship, but not stratospherically beautiful.
Exactly so, and well worth acquiring if the price is right. (I paid very little for
it.) You might prefer the comparable Alban Berg Quartet set on Teldec, however.
AC
Steve Emerson
<6a72ec32-1ec2-42ea...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
Ward Hardman <ward.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any thoughts on the Suske's set on Berlin Classics (the last 10 great
> quartets, including the 6 "Haydns," on 4 CDs)?
Yes, I think it's terrific. Virtuosic, beautiful tone and exact
intonation from all the instruments and well balanced among them. The
quartet is perfectly suited to this music (some of their Beethoven cycle
lacks oomph, moodiness, and other intangibles).
A final piece of my rave -- the sound is terrific; reference-quality.
Placement of the four voices across and into the sound-stage, second to
none.
SE.
Steve Emerson
Bob Lombard <thorste...@vermontel.net> wrote:
I don't think the CD versions ever saw much distribution. Besides that,
you and Rich Sauer and I seem to be the only real partisans of the BQ
that loiter here. And Rich, besides abandoning his e-mail address,
doesn't post enough.
o� sont les neiges...
SE.
Bob Lombard
This is annoying, because the only Mozart string quartets that I enjoy
much are the 'Haydn' bunch. Now, if the others in the sets were the
quintets....
bl
Johannes Roehl
What don't you like about the later 4 quartets?
Johannes
(asking as someone who for now (mostly) prefers Haydn's quartets to
Mozart's "Haydn" quartets ;) but I still like them and I love KV 499)
herman
> In article
> <6a72ec32-1ec2-42ea-95b2-dba5c04f1...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
> Ward Hardman <ward.hard...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Any thoughts on the Suske's set on Berlin Classics (the last 10 great
> > quartets, including the 6 "Haydns," on 4 CDs)?
>
> Yes, I think it's terrific. Virtuosic, beautiful tone and exact
> intonation from all the instruments and well balanced among them. The
> quartet is perfectly suited to this music (some of their Beethoven cycle
> lacks oomph, moodiness, and other intangibles).
>
> A final piece of my rave -- the sound is terrific; reference-quality.
> Placement of the four voices across and into the sound-stage, second to
> none.
>
> SE.
I think that's way overblown. A very long way.
Perhaps I got the Suske's after one of those rapturous posts here, one
or two years back. They never made much of an impression on me. Good
workmanship. If I heard this kind of playing in recital I would be
very happy. But not on the home stero. In that case some more magc,
and drama is needed IMO.
Oh, but the Mozart is not the Suske's best, someone on GMG quoth.
Beethoven used to be the Suske Q's speciality.
So I get the late LvB quartets, and again I am distinctly unimpressed.
The only thing I can come up with is that the Suske is not an
internationally well know quartet, and hence it would count as inside
dope to talk about them as if they were one of the best quartets ever
(which they are really not in a long shot).
Never mind. Enjoy those Suske Quartett recordings, please.
herman
> On 19 déc, 22:36, Steve Emerson <eme...@n-n-nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <6a72ec32-1ec2-42ea-95b2-dba5c04f1...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
> > Ward Hardman <ward.hard...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Any thoughts on the Suske's set on Berlin Classics (the last 10 great
> > > quartets, including the 6 "Haydns," on 4 CDs)?
>
> > Yes, I think it's terrific. Virtuosic, beautiful tone and exact
> > intonation from all the instruments and well balanced among them. The
> > quartet is perfectly suited to this music (some of their Beethoven cycle
> > lacks oomph, moodiness, and other intangibles).
>
> > A final piece of my rave -- the sound is terrific; reference-quality.
> > Placement of the four voices across and into the sound-stage, second to
> > none.
>
> > SE.
>
never use pitch as an expressive device, which is one reason why I
find them rather middle of the road. And technically the ensemble is
not quite 100% virtuosic. In the LvB there are moments when they are
not quite rhythmically secure.
Johannes Roehl
> On 19 d�c, 23:35, herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I haven't heard their Mozart, but I got rid of Beethoven's op.59 + 74,
because, while mking lovely sounds, their playing was seriously lacking
in drama (and often too slow as well, yes). Their cirtues do probably
suit Mozart's music better.
Johannes
Bob Lombard
'conversation' rings false.
bl
Bob Lombard
Um, yeah sure.... Do you know that Rich is still residing in this
plane of existence? When a person hasn't impinged on my awareness for
awhile, I begin to wonder if he/she has moved on. One of the things
about surviving to dotage is that so many friends don't.
bl
bl
Bob Harper
Mozart "Last 10", and my reaction is similar. Good, but no cigar. I've
not heard their Beethoven. What I *have* begun to hear recently is
Beethoven from another German Quartet, the Leipzig, and I have to say
that I'm impressed almost in spite of myself. Tempos are faster than I
would ordinarily like, but what precision--and what wonderful choices of
exacly when to modify the tempo for expressive purpose (at least that's
what I'm hearing so far). Comments?
Bob Harper
Steve Emerson
<ccaa991a-d265-4f08...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 19 d�c, 22:36, Steve Emerson <eme...@n-n-nospamsonic.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <6a72ec32-1ec2-42ea-95b2-dba5c04f1...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
> > �Ward Hardman <ward.hard...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Any thoughts on the Suske's set on Berlin Classics (the last 10 great
> > > quartets, including the 6 "Haydns," on 4 CDs)?
> >
> > Yes, I think it's terrific. Virtuosic, beautiful tone and exact
> > intonation from all the instruments and well balanced among them. The
> > quartet is perfectly suited to this music (some of their Beethoven cycle
> > lacks oomph, moodiness, and other intangibles).
> >
> > A final piece of my rave -- the sound is terrific; reference-quality.
> > Placement of the four voices across and into the sound-stage, second to
> > none.
> >
> > SE.
>
> I think that's way overblown. A very long way.
What part is way overblown, "a very long way"? You don't think the
sound-staging in these recordings is superlative? You don't think the
recordings qua recordings are reference quality?
Everybody who's ever heard them on my system thought so. And the editors
of Stereophile magazine were enthusiastic enough about the sound to put
these on one year's "Records to Die For" list.
You don't think the Suske Quartett is virtuosic? You don't think the
voices are well balanced? If so, your definition of these terms must be
very different from any definition I've encountered.
> Perhaps I got the Suske's after one of those rapturous posts here, one
> or two years back. They never made much of an impression on me. Good
> workmanship. If I heard this kind of playing in recital I would be
> very happy. But not on the home stero. In that case some more magc,
> and drama is needed IMO.
>
> Oh, but the Mozart is not the Suske's best, someone on GMG quoth.
> Beethoven used to be the Suske Q's speciality.
>
> So I get the late LvB quartets, and again I am distinctly unimpressed.
You know, I only wrote seven lines. Do I have to point out that two of
those lines were addressed to my reservations about their Beethoven?
> The only thing I can come up with is that the Suske is not an
> internationally well know quartet, and hence it would count as inside
> dope to talk about them as if they were one of the best quartets ever
> (which they are really not in a long shot).
Did somebody say that they were? I don't think so; I think this is a
straw man.
Still, the precision and accuracy of the Suske's playing are manifestly
remarkable. That ain't everything, but it is certainly something. (And
the more noteworthy in that they weren't even a full-time quartet....)
SE.
Steve Emerson
Bob Harper <bob.h...@comcast.net> wrote:
> What I *have* begun to hear recently is
> Beethoven from another German Quartet, the Leipzig, and I have to say
> that I'm impressed almost in spite of myself. Tempos are faster than I
> would ordinarily like, but what precision--and what wonderful choices of
> exacly when to modify the tempo for expressive purpose (at least that's
> what I'm hearing so far). Comments?
Which discs have you heard? I have most or all of their late Beethoven.
As well-played as it is, the only work that I'm finally very much
convinced by is their Op 130, which is wearing pretty well here. I'm not
sure even that is on the level of their Schubert D.887 and D.956, or
their Mendelssohn and Alban Berg. (Which is a very high level.)
BTW, I noticed recently that they've begun to record Haydn, obviously
with their new first violinist. Just one disc, with Op 77, so far. I
wonder what this will be like.
SE.
mandryka
> In article <PbhXm.412864$Jp1.96...@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com>,
It's the Leipzigs' Opus 18s which I enjoy the most.
herman
>
>
>
> herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Oh, I see. Perhaps it would be a good idea to recommend such a
recording in future by saying Stereophile likes it too. That's
sufficient.
And, no, the Suske is not a virtuoso quartet. Virtuoso is a relative
term, obviously. But compared to more illustrious contemporaries, such
as the Italiano, the Amadeus or the Juilliards, they experience
problems in some of the more rhythmically complex passages,
occasionally. That in itself is not a big deal for me. It is more that
their music making is not on the highest level in terms of
imagination. That is the dealbreaker. And whether the instruments are
perfectly placed on the sound stage, well, that's for air conductors.
td
One should always be suspicious of recommendations by "audiophiles"
who are swayed by non-musical criteria such as "placement of
instruments on the soundstage" rather than purely musical
considerations.
TD
Bob Lombard
I have reservations about this focus on 'precision'. I've been
listening to the Vermeer Op. 18s lately; precision is not their forte,
variety and depth of expression is. If I have to choose, it's an easy
choice.
bl
Bob Lombard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article
>>> <ccaa991a-d265-4f08-a020-e49de524c...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
LOL. All things considered, this sub-thread is a fine example of what
I call Selective Absorption With Added Inference.
Are you ready, Gerard? That is SAWAI.
bl
herman
>
> One should always be suspicious of recommendations by "audiophiles"
> who are swayed by non-musical criteria such as "placement of
> instruments on the soundstage" rather than purely musical
> considerations.
>
> TD
Oh, that goes without saying, Tom, the audiophile bit was just Steve's
last line of defense (unless there's another one yet, for instance,
the Suske's impressive 70s sideburns).
However basically I'm always suspicious of people who make outright
recommendations; I already was years ago, which is why I don't have a
single Joyce Hatto cd. Teehee!
More seriously. I have never understood why people would want to make
recommendations. I like what I like, and trying to make other people
buy the same product doesn't make it any better for me.
Steve Emerson
<75ed5041-b632-470f...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oh, that goes without saying, Tom, the audiophile bit was just Steve's
> last line of defense
How can it be my "last line of defense" when it was a large part of what
I said in the first place?
BTW, you think the *Amadeus* Quartet is a virtuoso outfit and the Suskes
aren't? Case closed.
SE.
graham
"Steve Emerson" <eme...@n-n-nospamsonic.net> wrote in message
news:emersn-FD3541....@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
Graham
Gerard
In a closed case, I suppose.
td
It is simply good to state what one likes, yes, including those Hatto
CDs which were not her but some other worthy musician tricked out to
be her. Frank Rich's oped piece today is all about fakery, from Enron
and WMDs, to Barry Bonds and Tiger Woods. and Joyce fucking Hatto! We
all seem to be prepared to be taken in by appearances this past
decade. Or we are simply more trusting, not to say credulous. The
question is whether hardened cynicism is a better posture in the face
of life's experiences. Not sure about that one.
TD
herman
Oh dear, do we want to open that can o' worms one more time? I think
there was some kind of neediness in some of the Hattoists. That's
different from just being trusting, though it's not a black or white
case. They needed to have this revelation of a unheard-of talented
pianist. If I don't have this need, that doesn't mean I'm a 'hardened
cynic'.
wagnerfan
"herman" <her...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:21244ea3-02ad-4340...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
On 20 d�c, 23:03, td <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
> On Dec 20, 11:58 am, herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>n
Well there's no problem with being "needy" but there is a problem when one
hears a performance whether by Hatto or Donald Duck and gives it the exact
opposite review of the same performance under the real name - that not the
fault of Hatto - thats the fault of the reviewer, isn't it????? Wagner fan
Steve Emerson
<5c9e6fc4-273b-48fc...@s19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
td <tomde...@mac.com> wrote:
> One should always be suspicious of recommendations by "audiophiles"
> who are swayed by non-musical criteria such as "placement of
> instruments on the soundstage" rather than purely musical
> considerations.
Since some of that language is quoted from me, I guess it's supposed to
comment on my views.
You don't have any idea what swayed me or didn't sway me, TD.
For the rest, I don't know why -- in a group addressed to "recordings"
-- anybody would be troubled by a remark as to what's good about the way
something was recorded.
Pretty weird coming from a guy who comments on recorded sound (that
non-musical consideration) at least as often as anybody else.
SE.
wagnerfan
He's also the same guy who says that quality of sound doen't matter much
since "the artistry will always shine through" or some such nonsense.
Wagner fan
td
>
> td <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
> > One should always be suspicious of recommendations by "audiophiles"
> > who are swayed by non-musical criteria such as "placement of
> > instruments on the soundstage" rather than purely musical
> > considerations.
>
> Since some of that language is quoted from me, I guess it's supposed to
> comment on my views.
>
> You don't have any idea what swayed me or didn't sway me, TD.
Never said I did. Are you an "audiophile"?
>
> For the rest, I don't know why -- in a group addressed to "recordings"
> -- anybody would be troubled by a remark as to what's good about the way
> something was recorded.
>
> Pretty weird coming from a guy who comments on recorded sound (that
> non-musical consideration) at least as often as anybody else.
I do believe that it is the "imaging" comment and the ability to place
all four instruments in the "soundstage", which screamed "AUDIOPHILE
AT WORK".
Generalized comments about sound quality are not in that league, I
think.
TD
TD
td
> "Steve Emerson" <eme...@n-n-nospamsonic.net> wrote in message
>
> news:emersn-5B9C5D....@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
>
>
>
> > In article
> > td <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >> One should always be suspicious of recommendations by "audiophiles"
> >> who are swayed by non-musical criteria such as "placement of
> >> instruments on the soundstage" rather than purely musical
> >> considerations.
>
> > Since some of that language is quoted from me, I guess it's supposed to
> > comment on my views.
>
> > You don't have any idea what swayed me or didn't sway me, TD.
>
> > For the rest, I don't know why -- in a group addressed to "recordings"
> > -- anybody would be troubled by a remark as to what's good about the way
> > something was recorded.
>
> > Pretty weird coming from a guy who comments on recorded sound (that
> > non-musical consideration) at least as often as anybody else.
>
> > SE.
>
> He's also the same guy who says that quality of sound doen't matter much
> since "the artistry will always shine through" or some such nonsense.
The only nonsense is that coming from our mongrel fascist fan.
You realize - of course you do, but choose to ignore it - that my
comments refer only to 78 RPM transfers.
But hey, babble on, cretin.
TD
Bob Lombard
Hmm. Could it be that you don't understand the language, Tom? I admit
that I don't have a good grip on 'imaging'. 'Soundstage', I'm fairly
sure, refers to the _perceived_ location of the instruments in
relation to the listener. The word doesn't scream AUDIOPHILE, or even
good recorded sound, by itself. Have you not heard recordings of
string quartets that seem to place you close to or even among the players?
I'd say that Steve displayed reasonable restraint in his description,
especially considering that he _is_ an audiophile.
bl
td
"Imaging" is simply one of those words in frequent use by HP and his
followers. I read them, Bob, so I am not inventing this in any way.
> I'd say that Steve displayed reasonable restraint in his description,
Me too. But those words are red flags to the anti-audiophiles. Like
green felt pens. Remember them?
TD
wkasimer
> One should always be suspicious of recommendations by "audiophiles"
> who are swayed by non-musical criteria such as "placement of
> instruments on the soundstage" rather than purely musical
> considerations.
One should be equally suspicious of recommendations by people who
completely ignore sonic considerations.
Bill
td
I agree. The operative word being "completely".
That said, the statement might lead one to ignore completely ALL
recordings made before, say, 1950, as they are invariably distorted
representations of the reality that took place in the studio. But this
would be a grave mistake, I think.
Presuming that the music survives intact in pitch and dynamic
variation, I find that recordings from all periods can convey the
message intended by both the composer and the musician(s). Some more
accurately than others, of course, with MDG representing musicians
extremely well and acoustic 78s much less well. The Leipzig String
Quartet is extremely well represented on their recordings for MDG but
so is Benno Moiseiwitsch, to pick just one musician whose acoustics I
am reasonably familiar with. Moiseiwitsch's tone quality is
immediately apparent right from the start regardless of the
limitations of the recorded sound.
I must say, however, that I find it fairly taxing to declare that mad
Hungarian pianist a "genius" on the strength of a cassette recording
made in some San Francisco bar by a rank amateur. Indeed, I refuse to
go along with his acolytes on that score, and that regardless of Kevin
Bazzana's fine work of biography.
TD
Steve Emerson
<8802b9b0-da73-4def...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
td <tomde...@mac.com> wrote:
> Never said I did. Are you an "audiophile"?
Well, yes and no. I've done a pretty good job avoiding "upgraditis" in
recent years, not to mention audio dealers.
It seems I'm capable of being satisfied when it comes to gear.
SE.
td
>
> td <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote:
> > Never said I did. Are you an "audiophile"?
>
> Well, yes and no. I've done a pretty good job avoiding "upgraditis" in
> recent years, not to mention audio dealers.
>
> It seems I'm capable of being satisfied when it comes to gear.
The ear makes adjustments, I have found, for the weaknesses in some
systems, allowing you to hear the music that is being made despite the
system you are listening to it on.
Ii haven't altered my equipment (C22, MC275, Clearaudio Champion
table, Musical Fidelity NuVistor CD player, Coincident Audio
Technology "Victory" speakers) since the early part of this decade.
Don't see any reason why I should. Perhaps the "Total Victory" would
go deeper into the bass, but I don't listen to much romantic organ
music anyway.
Thing is, I can also hear how wonderful Rachmaninoff was on an iPod.
TD
Norman Schwartz
"td" <tomde...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:ce615c5c-c31a-4a32...@x18g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
After reaching a certain age (which I've attained long ago) no one can claim
to be a true 'audiophile'. :-(
td
> "td" <tomdedea...@mac.com> wrote in message
Strange, however.
Wilma Cozart Fine retained her legendary hearing abilities well into
her 70s.
TD
number_six
>
> - Show quoted text -
She may have won the genetic lottery, and also, realizing what she
had, took care to protect it by avoiding the moshpit in her younger
days.
Bob Harper
(snip)
>
> Wilma Cozart Fine retained her legendary hearing abilities well into
> her 70s.
>
> TD
>
too many years around paper machines without really good hearing
protection :(
The ear is not a muscle.
Bob Harper
Lena
> On 20 déc, 09:27, Steve Emerson <eme...@n-n-nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>
[I'm cutting this, see thread]
> > Still, the precision and accuracy of the Suske's playing are manifestly
> > remarkable. That ain't everything, but it is certainly something. (And
> > the more noteworthy in that they weren't even a full-time quartet....)
>
> > SE.
>
> Oh, I see. [....bla... ]
It's not great that you bought a recording you hated, but you're not
two, and you don't have to do what someone here tells you to do.
I think it's basically good that people are positive-enthusiastic
about something. To avoid disappointments, you have to figure out the
essentials about the other person's tastes, and then do some
calibrations. (And it might be good to discount initial ravings a
little -- the evaluations tend to get more moderate later.)
> no, the Suske is not a virtuoso quartet.
I'm not that happy with the virtuoso concept, but why don't we talk
about your virtuosity criteria (after Christmas)? Something seems a
little off with those, considering the quartets whose names you offer
in support of that statement. If I may put my opinion nearly as
bluntly as you put yours.
(It's very easy to find quartets - hyped up to nauseating heights,
some probably justly :) - who'd be far better examples of virtuosity
than the Amadeus, the Juilliard of the 70s and 80s, and the Italiano.)
> Virtuoso is a relative term, obviously. But compared to more
> illustrious contemporaries, such as the Italiano, the Amadeus or the
> Juilliards, they experience problems in some of the more
> rhythmically complex passages, occasionally.
What moments are rhythmically "insecure" and in what way? How
prevalent are the moments, according to you? (Leaving the Grosse Fuge
out of this for now, please.)
Your "occasionally" notwithstanding, I thought I'd spot-test-drive
your statement. I took two normal rhythmically complex Beethoven
passages. The Suske was quite good, though a bit slow. The Amadeus
actually less good. So more detail from you is required for me to
even understand what you're trying to say.
> That in itself is not a big deal for me. It is more that their
> music making is not on the highest level in terms of
> imagination. That is the dealbreaker.
"Highest level of imagination" -- uh.
Actually, considering your descriptions of the quartet, and that you
don't acknowledge Steve's mention of the Suske's excellent balance --
I think you're not listening that carefully to everything about
these. (Or, for some reason, the amount of detail present, about
which the Suske is not at all middle-of-the-road, isn't of any
interest to you?)
There are some controversial things about the Suske's style; I've
thought that style works well for some pieces but not well for some
others. In any case, the Suske's "good" traits, the potentially "bad"
traits (and the kind of an effects those traits might have on
different types of movements), all that has been talked about before.
So you can't say there were no half-warnings (in the archives), along
with whatever ravings.)
> And whether the instruments are perfectly placed on the
> sound stage, well, that's for air conductors.
(Well, I don't think it necessarily is; soundstage is probably not
*that* important to anybody in this conversation, but a good one is
still a nice thing to hear... (Though I'm quite happy if the
instruments are just broadly approximately placed. :) ))
> The only thing I can come up with is that the Suske is not an
> internationally well know quartet, and hence it would count as
> inside dope to talk about them as if they were one of the best
> quartets ever (which they are really not in a long shot).
Such things don't apply in this instance, with the person you're
answering. To say that to anyone without a reason is also quite
insulting. (Which is why I'm answering this post.) Otherwise,
Merry Christmas, Herman.
Lena
Kip Williams
> td wrote:
> (snip)
>>
>> Wilma Cozart Fine retained her legendary hearing abilities well into
>> her 70s.
>>
> too many years around paper machines without really good hearing
> protection :(
Sympathy to that.
I'm glad that loud concerts were never much to my taste, and that I
sometimes remember to keep ear protection where I can find it. My in-ear
phones fill the auditory canal nicely, and I have been known to put them
in without hooking them up to my iPod just to take the pain out of movie
theater sound.
Kip W
Norman Schwartz
"Kip Williams" <k...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:KFpYm.14101$eH1....@newsfe16.iad...
One's hearing begins to age (as does everything else) upon emerging from the
birth canal. No amount of hearing protection will save it from
'self-destruction'.
>
> Kip W
Matthew�B.�Tepper
following letters to be typed in news:4b323e84$0$4978$607e...@cv.net:
> One's hearing begins to age (as does everything else) upon emerging from
> the birth canal. No amount of hearing protection will save it from
> 'self-destruction'.
But one can speed the deterioration by hanging around ordinance, rock bands,
and other weapons of hearing destruction.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers
Bob Harper
> "Norman Schwartz" <nm...@optonline.net> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in news:4b323e84$0$4978$607e...@cv.net:
>
>> One's hearing begins to age (as does everything else) upon emerging from
>> the birth canal. No amount of hearing protection will save it from
>> 'self-destruction'.
>
> But one can speed the deterioration by hanging around ordinance, rock bands,
> and other weapons of hearing destruction.
>
of his time on the Serengeti) is as good or better at 60 than that of
the average American teenager at 16. I am prepared to believe it.
Bob Harper
Bob Lombard
The Masai are not shepherds. Cowherds rather. Yeah I know, picky-picky.
bl
--
Music, a few books, a few movies
LombardMusic
http://www.amazon.com/shops/A3NRY9P3TNNXNA
Bob Harper
> Bob Harper wrote:
>> Matthew B. Tepper wrote:
>>> "Norman Schwartz" <nm...@optonline.net> appears to have caused the
>>> following letters to be typed in news:4b323e84$0$4978$607e...@cv.net:
>>>> One's hearing begins to age (as does everything else) upon emerging
>>>> from
>>>> the birth canal. No amount of hearing protection will save it from
>>>> 'self-destruction'.
>>>
>>> But one can speed the deterioration by hanging around ordinance, rock
>>> bands, and other weapons of hearing destruction.
>>>
>> True. I have read that the hearing of a Masai shepherd (who spends
>> most of his time on the Serengeti) is as good or better at 60 than
>> that of the average American teenager at 16. I am prepared to believe it.
>>
>> Bob Harper
>
> The Masai are not shepherds. Cowherds rather. Yeah I know, picky-picky.
>
> bl
>
>
rate, I wish I could hear as well as they apparently do.
Bob Harper
Doug McDonald
>
>>
>> The Masai are not shepherds. Cowherds rather. Yeah I know, picky-picky.
>>
>> bl
>>
>>
> Correction accepted. I should have remembered that, but spaced. At any
> rate, I wish I could hear as well as they apparently do.
>
And they drink the blood of their cows too.
I saw them do it ... and some of my travel companions did that too.
Not me. I'll eat fried grasshoppers ... not drink raw cow blood
in trypanosome country.
Doug McDonald
Norman Schwartz
"Matthew B. Tepper" <oy�@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9CEA58D5CF5...@216.168.3.30...
> "Norman Schwartz" <nm...@optonline.net> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in news:4b323e84$0$4978$607e...@cv.net:
>
>> One's hearing begins to age (as does everything else) upon emerging from
>> the birth canal. No amount of hearing protection will save it from
>> 'self-destruction'.
>
> But one can speed the deterioration by hanging around ordinance, rock
> bands,
> and other weapons of hearing destruction.
>
subways at about the age of nine. I would have been better off by wasting it
on nearly anything else.
gggg gggg
> Finally managed to get a copy of the Takacs Quartet version of these
> quartets on Hungaroton from 1989-90. The original ensemble, of course,
> not the ensemble as it is now constituted.
> I was raised on the Juilliard, Italian, Talich and others.
> What do our quartet mavens think of these Takacs versions?
> TD
(Recent Y. upload):
Dave's Faves No. 147 (Mozart)