Piano Quintet must hear

[Kriton]

I'll stand up for the Bacewicz - the first is sort of Bartok-ish (...)

It is indeed Bartók-ish - just not like his piano quintet 

[Glazier]

Ther seem to be at least four categories here:

1 Great works by the great composers

2 Unsung works by great composers

3 Unsung works by unsung composers

4 Unsung works of no value


Exactly how a work gets from one category to the other is not clear. Does recording count as progress from category 4 to 3?
Is it possible to be relegated?

[eschiss1]

I've only heard Weinberg's early piano quintet a few times (a couple of times in the commercial recording with a Borodin Quartet and Weinberg at the piano, and once too in a more recent performance from a chamber music festival in Ireland broadcast over BBC Radio 3 a few years back. His style in general is often described as close to Shostakovich (his friend) (a description of his style I find to be superficial anyway ) - I don't recall if that was so true of the quintet (which he did write after meeting Shostakovich, I believe, but only soon after?...).  Seem to recall the piece itself being mostly on the quiet side except maybe for its scherzo; in F minor; lyrical; and rating a recommendation.
(You might like Weinberg's cello&piano sonatas possibly- haven't heard the performances on several recently released CDs, the recording I have is on Russian Disc, but the first sonata is also early- op.21 as against the quintet's op18 - while the 2nd sonata is from later in his career. Also good works imhonesto. To my mind his style does have something of Prokofiev _and_ Shostakovich in it, here and there, as well as others...)
Eric

[TerraEpon]

So how are we defining 'Piano Quartet'? If it means "piano + string quartet" then Schubert doesn't even count since he uses a double bass instead of a second violin.

If it's "piano + four instruments" that opens another can of worms beyond just the Trout, including the piano and wind quintets of Mozart, Beethoven, and (my fav) Rimsky-Korsakov. (Actually, I don't like the other two much, for some reason, no matter what others think...).

Also, just for clarity's sake, isn't the Korngold for left-handed piano?

[eschiss1]

So how are we defining 'Piano Quartet'? If it means "piano + string quartet" then Schubert doesn't even count since he uses a double bass instead of a second violin.

If it's "piano + four instruments" that opens another can of worms beyond just the Trout, including the piano and wind quintets of Mozart, Beethoven, and (my fav) Rimsky-Korsakov. (Actually, I don't like the other two much, for some reason, no matter what others think...).

Also, just for clarity's sake, isn't the Korngold for left-handed piano?

Korngold's suite op. 23 is for left-hand piano and trio- but that's a quartet, I think we're talking about quintets here (like Korngold's quintet op. 15, which I believe is not for left-hand piano.)
Franz Schmidt's piano quintet in G _is_ for left-hand piano, though only one or two recordings use that original version (most use Wuhrer's arrangements for both hands, likewise I believe recordings of his two quintets for piano, clarinet and string trio. There are a few of all three works though maybe less than 10 of each )
Eric

[Glazier]

Hey, do you want me to take my cricket/baseball bat home?

This thread is strictly  p with v v va vc.

All Trout quintet combo people, please go and start your own thread!

[FBerwald]

After Brahms and Dvorak .......... (for me) the Reynaldo Hahn Piano Quintet!!!

[black]

And I am rather fond of Henry Hadley's Quintet op 50.

[Peter1953]

I make a strong case for Rubinstein's Quintet for piano and wind instruments in F, op. 55.
Oops... sorry, Glazier.

[eschiss1]

I make a strong case for Rubinstein's Quintet for piano and wind instruments in F, op. 55.
Oops... sorry, Glazier.

How about his piano quintet in G minor op. 99, though?

[eschiss1]

Hey, do you want me to take my cricket/baseball bat home?

This thread is strictly  p with v v va vc.

All Trout quintet combo people, please go and start your own thread!

Indeed, I think there already is a thread for the quintets by (among others) Schubert, Goetz, Hummel, Onslow (I think), Farrenc...

[Kriton]

Ther seem to be at least four categories here:

1 Great works by the great composers
2 Unsung works by great composers
3 Unsung works by unsung composers
4 Unsung works of no value

Exactly how a work gets from one category to the other is not clear. Does recording count as progress from category 4 to 3?
Is it possible to be relegated?

A very interesting question. A very philosophical one, as well. Is a work of art only a work of art, if there are people around to appreciate it? Or, in this case, if it is 'around' people? And then we didn't even start defining a work of art...

A recording (or a free score from the Petrucci music library, for that matter) may make people finally evaluate some otherwise completely unknown music. If the piece is held in high esteem after that, and manages to stay that way for a long time, is another matter entirely. Of course, a lot of beautiful works are being dug out of the treasure trove of music history, nowadays, but not all of them will be remembered in a decade or 2, or perhaps not even in a few years. I reckon I own plenty of works on CD that won't have a long live beyond their only recordings.

Relegation is, of course, possible. A case in point are Schubert's piano trio's: until the 20th century, it was the 1st that was played and enjoyed over the 2nd. This has changed over the last decades, with his 2nd trio being recognised as the masterpiece.

BUT, since classical music assumed a totally different role in our society since the advent of popular music, it is very hard to imagine the 'canon' will change. For that, we may need another cultural (or even technological?) revolution.

Raff, for instance, has finally been recognised as one of the masters of the 19th century. Still, most people I know who regularly listen to and enjoy classical music haven't heard of him yet. It might say something about my acquaintances, but it really is hard for a composer, dead or otherwise, to enter the canon, nowadays. In this respect, I'm regularly asking myself how many people will be listening to Glass or Pärt, in a few decades. The Raff piano quintet, to stay on the subject, for instance, has been recorded. I've never encountered it in a chamber concert programme. A beautiful work it may very well be, but does this one (or are there 2?) recording elevate the work to your 1st category? That remains to be seen...

I digressed hugely, apologies.

[chill319]

Great topic, great responses. I was going to third the Berger quintet but see that Alan has already done so,  most eloquently. I'll fourth it.

On a slightly less exalted but still elevated plane, I would nominate Foote's opus 38 (1897). Sound samples here:
http://www.amazon.com/Arthur-Foote-Chamber-Music-Vol/dp/B00000DHTD/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1276117357&sr=1-1   [Apologies to edurban, whose earlier mention of this work I missed.]

[ahinton]

This thread is strictly  p with v v va vc.

Ah, well - that seems to let me in, sort of, then - although the river Monnow not far from my present temporary abode is as famous for its trout as the nearby Wye is for its salmon...

[John Hudock]

The Badings, Leighton, Perosi, Turina, and Vainberg quintets I don't know yet - can you tell me anything recommendable about them? I have yet to start liking their music, but perhaps their piano quintets are a good place to start?

The Turina is quite lovely, full of romantic charm. I am very fond of all of Perosi's chamber music, although there is mixed opinion of it (and all of Perosi's music) by other members. I think the Leighton is quite good and undeservedly unknown. It reminds me of Shostakovich, with very angular piano and string writing. The Vainberg is also reminiscent of Shostakovich.

I haven't listened to the Badings quintet yet, but it did win him an award. Badings music is frequently dark toned and at times quite experimental, so it is not everyone's cup of tea.