Shostakovich String Quartets

[Todd]

 

Since I first picked up the Danel's first DSCH cycle, it has been my reference set.  When I learned they recorded a second take, it was just a matter of time before I got my grubby paws on it.  Now the inevitable comparison must be made.

#1.  Similar in approach, the newer recording sounds slightly more refined and warmer in places, almost approaching Rubio Quartet quality in some passages.  There's a greater interpretative elasticity, with more tension, more refinement, more lightness, more edge, etc, when and where needed.  Danel II takes it.

[Mandryka]

 

Since I first picked up the Danel's first DSCH cycle, it has been my reference set.  When I learned they recorded a second take, it was just a matter of time before I got my grubby paws on it.  Now the inevitable comparison must be made.

#1.  Similar in approach, the newer recording sounds slightly more refined and warmer in places, almost approaching Rubio Quartet quality in some passages.  There's a greater interpretative elasticity, with more tension, more refinement, more lightness, more edge, etc, when and where needed.  Danel II takes it.

Now go straight to 15 please.

[Todd]

#2.  Danel I is sleek, lean, edgy but refined.  The waltz is dark and elegantly savage.  The theme and variations closer has enough bite and energy to satisfy.  Nice.  Danel II sounds fuller and more intense overall, though the waltz sounds more austere, desolate.  Also, it sounds like the first violinist's nose had its own microphone.  Danel II by a smidge.

[Todd]

#3.  Danel I  starts light and breezy, but before the first movement ends the tension starts building.  The second movement ratchets tension up without getting heavy, and the third movement is all tension.  The sorrowful Adagio then segues to an almost searing, at least at times, final movement that trails off into the ether.  Nice.  Danel II sounds richer and displays greater variety of tempi and dynamics, but it lacks the cohesiveness of the earlier recording.  Danel I takes it handily.  Since this is one of my favorite DSCH quartets, that's extra notable.

[Todd]

#4. Danel I sounds restrained and melancholy in the opening movement, and almost depressive in the Andantino, though the players bring the tonal beauty.  The second Allegretto has some dour boogie to it, and the final Allegretto incorporates the dance element nicely, with a perfect blend of rusticity and refinement and bitterness.  Intense where needed, intensely inward where needed, with piercing upper register playing from the first violin, it works quite well.  Danel II sounds fuller, bigger, and more intense and less restrained in the open.  The Andantino sounds more lovely but less depressive.  Heck, it barely sounds melancholy.  The second Allegro sounds quicker, more vibrant, more rockin', and the final Allegretto has more appealing rhythmic snap, quantitatively more searing upper register playing, though it's not quite as intense.  Hmmm.  A tie. 

[Todd]

#5.  Danel I starts off with a refined yet searing first movement, with the violins delivering ear-piercing musical pile drivers.  The second movement, so slow, with such fine intonation, haunts the listener, while the final movement relives the heaviness with some nifty dancy rhythms to start in the Moderato, but refined intensity returns in the Allegretto.  The concluding Andante section maintains hushed tension, with superb sustained notes by the violins.  Danel sounds fuller, and a little clearer, with both violin parts more distinct.  The intense playing is intense, but it's a weightier, almost rougher – in the context of refined chamber music – sound and feel.  Gotta say, the thinner, wirier sound of Danel I is more to my liking in the most intense playing.  Danel I.

[Todd]

#6.  Danel I starts off light and fun, in DSCH terms, and ratchets up tension, but not too much, in the first movement.  The fairly light second movement segues to a slow, hypnotic, and often just downright lovely Lento.  The final movement mixes what can best be described as laid-back slow playing and tense-adjacent fast playing.  It is, in DSCH terms, a light work.  Danel II sounds pretty much the same, just warmer and fuller, and so gets the nod.

[Todd]

#7.  Light and quick, slow and somber, quick and biting and nearly ferocious and somber by movement, Danel I hits the spot.  Danel II again sounds fuller, and quite similar, but the thing that stands out in comparison is the viola playing.  The greater tonal variation and richness gives Danel II the slight edge.  (The extra close microphones also allows the listener to hear the physical exertion, in grunt form, in the final movement.)

[Todd]

#8.  Somber, quiet, brooding, dark, songful, Danel I starts off with a nifty Largo.  Things intensify considerably in the Allegro molto, though perhaps things are just a smidge too sleek.  Perhaps.  The second Largo could probably use more ferocious slashing, but it's still quite good.  Danel II sounds darker throughout, with the Allegro molto gruffer sounding, to boot.  The two closing Largos are somber and sorrowful in satisfying amounts.  Danel II takes it.

[Todd]

#9. Danel I starts off with a very contained, very moderate Moderato Con Moto, with playful but  not entirely light-hearted pizzicato, and slightly mysterious tremolos.  The second movement is like a mournful hymn.  The third has wiry violins and a biting gallop, while the Adagio has both sorrow and intensity, while the final movement sounds something like a dance of death, with that tune that shows up later in the 14th Symphony.  The ensemble keeps it tight and somewhat light given the music.  Nice.  Danel II again sounds fuller, and all the ingredients are there, with a very similar overall approach.  But it lacks the edginess and at times musically sneering feel of the earlier version.  Danel I takes it in one of my very favorite DSCH quartets.

[Todd]

#10.  Danel I manages to sound light on its feet in the opening, dark Andante, even with the cello dominating in passages.  The Allegretto slashes and cuts, sears, and invites impolite volume to maximize impact.  The somber Adagio gives way to the more boisterous, bouncy, and bitter Allegretto opening of the final movement, with all the themes coming into focus, and playing remains held back, coiled, then it ramps right back up to ear assaulting intensity before trailing off nicely.  Danel II sounds richer, but too relaxed in the opening movement, and the cello lacks the same punch.  The slashing second movement has ample punch, but less edge than the earlier recording.  The comparative lack of edge pervades what is otherwise a superb performance.  Danel I takes it. 

[Todd]

#11.  Danel I opens dark and brooding, moves to tense with some sharp ascending violin glissandi stinging the ear, and then blasts music at the listener in the Adagio and the next two movements, with brief internal respites.  The Elegy sears and moans, and the final movement slow burns right to the end.  Danel II sounds fuller, again, but lacks the nail biting tension, and somewhat against expectation, the dynamic outbursts sound less compelling, less hard hitting.  Danel I takes it.

[Todd]

#12.  Danel I sounds slow and dense and dark and detached in the first movement, and then switches to edgy, but fuller playing than some other edgy quartets received.  There's a detached, almost formal air to the playing most of the time.  It's not emotionally engaging, but more of an intellectual exercise.  Danel II sounds richer and more emotionally engaged from the opening bar.  It has more energy and oomph.  While the austerity and coldness of the first recording has ample merit, the second works better overall.  Much better.  Indeed, it's one of the best and maybe the best version I've heard.

[Todd]

#13.  Danel I sounds dark, nearly depressive in the opening section, with extended slow passages of exposed solo instruments, with the viola getting lots of love, of course.  The second section amps things up, with plenty of higher register sting, but it never goes fast and retains a slow burn feel.  The second slow section is more depressive, more desolate than the first.  The recorded sound Danel II, richer and fuller, makes the piece sound heavier, in a good way, and it displays some other minor touches.  Qualitatively, it's a tie. 

[Todd]

#14.  Danel I starts off playing the first movement in a style that evokes whimsical dread, never becoming heavy, often sounding light – but something just ain't right.  Things fluctuate between sorrow and anguish in the Adagio, and the final movement mixes all the forms of darkness that came before with some biting intensity in some passages.  Danel II sounds less tightly wound, tonally more beautiful, and therefore ought to be less satisfactory.  But the little details that pop out and emphases make it satisfactory.  Danel II by a slim margin.

[Todd]

#15.  Danel I makes Glum and Glummer sound mostly sorrowful.  The opening Elegy is exactly that, and exceptionally beautiful if glum, with perfectly judged vibrato – not too much, but not none, either.  Whether slashing or playing lyrically or with deep sorrow, there's a dark through line that the ensemble deliver on.  Danel II sounds more mournful, more beautiful in the slowest music, and the opening bars have an almost medieval or Renaissance Requiem vibe going on. 

Overall, the new Danel set wins on points, but that masks something.  First, Danel I is better in 3, 9, and 11, which happen to be three of my favorite quartets.  Second, the leaner, edgier sound offers that little something different.  Obviously, as per usual, the only reasonable approach is to own and cherish both cycles.  Either way, the Danel remain my reference.