Epilogue - Miro Quartet; Schubert: Quintet D956/Mendelssohn: Quartet, op. 80

Miro Quartet (Artist), Felix Mendelssohn (Composer), Franz Schubert (Composer), Matt Haimovitz (Performer) | Format: Audio CD

Product Details

• Performer: Matt Haimovitz
• Composer: Felix Mendelssohn, Franz Schubert
• Audio CD (April 6, 2004)
• Number of Discs: 1
• Label: Artemis Classics/Oxingale Records
• ASIN: B0001C9YPY
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #602,164 in Music (See Top 100 in Music)

Track Listings

1. I. Allegro Vivace Assai - Presto

2. II. Allegro Assai

3. III. Adagio

4. IV. Finale: Allegro Molto

5. I. Allegro Ma Non Troppo

6. II. Adagio

7. III. Scherzo: Presto - Trio: Andante Sostenuto

8. IV. Allegretto

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars I love this album!, April 6, 2004

By 

"johnnyharang" (Denver, CO USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Epilogue - Miro Quartet; Schubert: Quintet D956/Mendelssohn: Quartet, op. 80 (Audio CD)

I love this album! I am such a big Miro Quartet fan now. I think this is by far the finest recording I know of the Mendelssohn and the Schubert just blows me away. The Miro and Matt are so committed and emotional. I love this album! I want more from the Miro!

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A remarkable schubert, April 13, 2004

By 

roberto gutierrez (Binghamton New York) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Epilogue - Miro Quartet; Schubert: Quintet D956/Mendelssohn: Quartet, op. 80 (Audio CD)

The Miro is one of the finest young quartets around. So when this record came out I rushed to buy it. I have heard them live recently and was well aware of their musical commitment, their intelligence and honesty, combined with extraordinary technical polish, etc. So, when I heard the Mendelssohn, which opens the CD I was a bit surprised that the playing, while excellent, did not have the burnished sheen and complete interpretative insight I have heard from them in the past year. Mendelssohn switches the main theme rather suddenly from instrument to instrument, and in their youthful ardor,the Miro in the Mendelssohn, did not allow the main theme to be consistently clearly delineated. There was simply too much sound, with lesser harmonies overwhelming the hauptstimme (main theme.) It was all two-dimmensional for me. The octave sections, of which there were many, were not quite perfect, with not everyone agreeing as to what constitued a half step (tempered or not tempered, that is the question?) Nor did the slow movement have a clearly defined overall conception. The color pallette was also a bit too limited.

The Schubert, on the other hand was magical. Intonation was extraordinary, with the two celli creating a drone like excitement that spoke of the impending death Schubert must have felt. The pizzicati were amazing, the pacing mature, etc. etc.
(I could have had the musicians "cry" more, but this is quibbling.)
This led me to look at the recording dates of the two works. This is where I discovered that the Mendelssohn was a more youthful effort, dating back to 2001. Then all became clear. The coupling was of the current mature Miro with a work-in-progress Miro -- the effort of an up and coming quartet.

In retrospect, the Miro may have done better to record a second work reresenting their current level of playing, not where they were in 2001. One more comment: The engineering in both works favored the lower strings slightly with the first violinist getting a more diffused sound than the celli. With such a superb first fiddler like Ching, this was an unnecessary if slight detriment.

Haimovitz playing, with it's emphasis on power is very reminiscent of Lynne Harrel's: burnished, unsentimental, and strong. but he could vary his sound more.

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A remarkable schubert, April 13, 2004

By A Customer

This review is from: Epilogue - Miro Quartet; Schubert: Quintet D956/Mendelssohn: Quartet, op. 80 (Audio CD)

The Miro is one of the finest young quartets around. So when this record came out I rushed to buy it. I have heard them live recently and was well aware of their musical commitment, their intelligence and honesty, combined with extraordinary technical polish, etc. So, when I heard the Mendelssohn, which opens the CD I was a bit surprised that the playing, while excellent, does not have the burnished sheen and complete interpretative insight I have heard from them in the past year. Mendelssohn switches the main theme rather suddenly from instrument to instrument, and in their youthful ardor,the Miro in the Mendelssohn, does not allow the main theme to be consistently and clearly delineated. There is simply too much sound, with lesser musical lines overwhelming the Hauptstimme (main theme.) It is all a bit two-dimmensional. The octave sections, of which there are many, are not quite perfect, with not everyone agreeing as to what constitued a half step (Tempered intonation or not tempered? That is the question.) Nor does the slow movement have a clearly defined overall conception. The color pallette is also a bit too restricted.

The Schubert, on the other hand is magical. Intonation is extraordinary, with the two celli creating a drone like insistence that speaks of the impending and inescapable death Schubert must have been facing. The pizzicati are amazing, the pacing mature, etc. etc.
(I could have had the musicians "cry" more, but this is quibbling.)
This led me to look at the recording dates of the two works. This is where I discovered that the Mendelssohn was a more youthful effort, a recording session dating back to 2001. Then all became clear: the coupling was of the current mature Miro with a work-in-progress Miro -- the effort of an up and coming quartet.

In retrospect, the Miro might have done better to record a second work reresenting their current level of playing, not where they were in 2001. One more comment: The engineering in both works favors the lower strings slightly with the first violinist getting a more diffused sound than the celli. With such a superb first fiddler as Daniel Ching, this is an unnecessary if slight detriment.

Haimovitz playing, with it's emphasis on power is very reminiscent of Lynne Harrel's: burnished, unsentimental, and strong. but he could vary his sound more.