String Quartets #2,3 [Import]

It is interesing to contrast this recording of Carter's Second and Third quartets with that of the Juilliard--both are excellent and worth owning, but this one underscores the stylistic continuity of the two pieces in rather a startling fashion. Where Mann and company offer a warm, almost Mozartean rendering of the Second and dig into the Third as hard as they can, Arditti and friends give a comparatively robust reading of the Second and a smoother reading of the Third. I daresay the latter is almost mellifluous, especially in the scorrevole passages. One can see how one quartet sprang from the other. They sound like the offspring of a single mind, rather than contrasting evolutions from different planets.

The Elegy is a bonus and a treat-- a pretty piece from Carter's neoclassical period, much in the mood of Barber's Adagio, but with more muscle and greater contrast in tempos and textures.

All in all, a worthy addition to the Carter discography.

Elliott Carter's string quartets have come at key moments of his career and often have heralded some important stylistic evolution. That's why the recordings where the Arditti Quartet performs are so important for fans of the composer. The lineup of the Ardittis here are Irvine Arditti and David Alberman on violins, Levine Andrade on viola, and Rohan de Saram on cello. Note that Etcetera has now put out a two-disc set, so I'd suggest getting the recordings that way for economy instead of buying the original two volumes separately.

The String Quartet No. 1 (1951) marked the beginning of Carter's mature career as a brazen modernist. Cast in three movements, this is music constantly on slippery metrical slopes with astringent harmonies. But what sounds so wild and out there at the beginning of hearing this collection sounds remarkably tame and traditional if you go back to it after hearing the later string quartets, especially the last movement "Variations" which approaches the "kinder, gentler modernists" who arose in the '70s and '80s.

It's with the String Quartet No. 2 (1959) that we find Carter's mature style, where instrumental lines are maximally separated in order to create the atmosphere of a dialogue. This is often called Carter's masterpiece, and it won a load of prizes, but I just don't enjoy it much at all. It just meanders. However, the String Quartet No. 3 (1971) is very impressive. It has the ensemble seated apart, split into two duos (violin and viola, violin and cello) which stay entirely in their own metrical and harmonic universes. It is a piece of constant action, sure to entertain if you are a fan of Carter's other busy pieces like the Piano Concerto. The String Quartet No. 4 (1986) has often been called the most enigmatic of all Carter's quartets, but I like it a lot. Though cast in a single movement, it consists of many varied sections, and abounds in references to the classical tradition. This work of Carter's late period also has much clearer textures, but with the same sense of rhythmic zest.

Elliott Carter's string quartets are often touted as the quartets to beat all others in the latter half of the 20th century, but I warn you that not all will find these the cat's meow, even if you enjoy a steady diet of modernism. Personally, I get more from Per Norgard's Fifth, Gubaidulina's Second, or Rihm's Third than any of the Carter quartets. And in fact, I find Carter's most entertaining string quartet to be the Fifth, which appeared a few years after this recording (the Ardittis perform it on a Naive/Montaigne disc). That's why I give the collection four starts instead of five, to offer this critical perspective.

Carter's Second Quartet inhabits the shadow of the groundbreaking First Quartet, where a virtual rethinking of the genre occurred, Carter while in the quietude of the Western Plains, the airidness of Arizona,the heat is what nourished this departure,almost like Descartes stay inside a stove. The Second is much shorter,looking backwards almost,contracted with a modest agenda than the First Quartet,yet retains a self-contained statement, a lyrical one, perhaps even in gesture,mood,ambience,and concept predating the First.

We then warp-speed to 1971 for the monolith(by comparison) Third Quartet. Here we have a grandiose,overbearing creative agenda an extension of Carter's newly found language of utilization of various self-contained characters here accreted now toward shaped Duets which loudly proclaimed themselves pitting their originality against each other, the dual forces of First Violin and Viola, against Second Violin and Cello. Carter was fond of continous opaqueness of rhythmic design,well it is the gradation,of onward pushing music in regular pulses against ferocious syncopations something Brahms(if he were alive) might find within the depths of utter madness. The second opening extended pizzicati section functions very much like a development section of a fragment searching for a place,a safe place to resolve.Obviously within this context in never does.

Arditti recorded this CD with Carter during their very first American Tour,1988,when they still had some interpretive distance to trek in affirming their penchant for the constitution of themselves as four independently minded soloists rather than a Quartet. They play now with more guts and conviction than back then,even their Ferneyhough Third Quartet from 1988 I found(in a live Chicago performance) rather labored and timid. Here as well in the Carter Third.,there is not the penchant for violence,for pure virtuosity unafraid of the reality as they currently play. But I leave this comparison to your own judgements.

The Elegy by comparison and its inclusion here is a point of welcome repose, a piece from the Forties,exhibiting the roundedness the nostalgic kind of shaped lyricism that was a frequent visitor to American music composers,primarily East Coast Harvard,Princeton,Juillard boys.Like the private quietude of the Hopper "early morning" red (visage) brick painting. Arditti sometimes don't know what to do with music with this vapid melancolic content. It seemed a bit passive in an inferior way.