Reinecke Complete String Quartets

[Alan Howe]

I've always had a soft spot for Reinecke, I admit. Probably something to do with him having been dismissed virtually everywhere in the literature as the dry-as-dust teacher under whom countless later composers studied in Leipzig. But I've never found him dry at all and have found him a faithful companion when wanting to listen to well-constructed, beautifully crafted and melodically grateful music.

When the things of this world are so rootless and ugly, it is a relief to find such solidity and beauty in his music.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

I decided to spend some more time with the Reinecke quartets and I wish to amend some of my earlier comments.

I have started with Quartet No.3. Upon rehearing, I found the first movement rather appealing. The main reason I think I felt the material was too thin has to do with the fact that every repeat was taken. Maybe back in the day when everything moved a lot slower and players and audiences had thicker sitzfleisch than we do today, it did not make much difference. Perhaps one or two repeats in this movement could be justified, but not all. As for the second movement, I recant, it is not something junior would play in grandma's parlor. It is a good, but not a great movement. It is well done and worth hearing. The third movement was made worse by the repeats all of which were taken and have a deadening effect almost making the material sound trite. Without the repeats, it is okay but I could not call it good. As for the last movement, it is better than I remembered, workmanlike. A lot of fast passage work which is not bad to listen to but not really memorable and the ending is a bit weak. To sum up, the first movement stands out from the others. Overall, this quartet reminds me of so many others I have played and forgotten. Decent works, not to be despised by any means, but not with any real melodic material which sticks with one afterwards, with the exceptin of movement 1. It might be worth hearing in concert since it is by Reinecke, but given the fact that so few quartets by unsungs get a chance at resuscitation, I would plump for No.5 well before I ever sponsored No.3.

A word about the recording. As I said earlier, the Mannheim play the music beautifully. But I do think that quartets which are bring back these works need to rethink whether they should take all of the repeats. I understand the rationale for doing so. There are two I can think of, the first being that they want to be true to the composer's intentions. Personally, I think this is weaker of the two rationales. Composers routinely bunged in repeats perhaps without even thinking of the effect and who knows whether or not they were taken in concert. The second rationale can be summarized as, we will not pass this way again any time soon. In other words, this may be the only recording that will ever be made of the work and therefore it should present the music as written. Nonetheless, I am not convinced by this one either.

I have played in quartet concerts for many years, have gone to them for years, and I can assure you that no one is taking all of the repeats in Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Mendelssohn etc. No one could sit through, much less want to listen to concerts of such length. Well, enough said...

I plan to spend some more time on Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and will report back if there is interest. Five is a good work and does need any further revision by me. I am spending th time because I think Reinecke has been unfairly shunted to the side. Fame is fickle and Box Office rules the concert programmer's world.

[eschiss1]

This is true- they even skip repeats in Schubert and Brahms they _must_ take. Boo.
Still, unless Reinecke was, like Schubert and Brahms (_especially!!_ Brahms), in the habit of introducing important new melodic material (that will be heard again...) in the first ending block (see eg Brahms Op.111 quintet first movement - also maybe? Schubert piano sonata D960 first movement, quartet in G major, some other works)... there's less reason. Though not no reason: repeats can be important for temporal balance (Beethoven sym. 3 first movement eg), too, and at least certain composers' wishes should be strongly thought about before jettisoning them, I think...

[Santo Neuenwelt]

On to String Quartet No.1 I pretty much stand by my evaluation of the first movement. The main theme is quite attractive and memorable. Subsequent development is not great, but again the taking of all repeats does not help the music. The second movement is truly outstanding. The theme is first rate and the variations are good, although at one point, he briefly quotes the violin recitativ in Mendelssohn's Op.13. But here, I will use the Brahmsian defense. I forget which piece it was,  but when confronted by concertgoers who accused him of plagerism, taking a theme from another composer, Brahms replied, Yes, but look what I have done with it. The third movement, again, much better than I remembered it. It is exciting and full of foreward motion. So what if it is hard to pull off. Here, the repeats do not hurt the overall effect. To his credit, Reinecke does not take Mendelssohn and his scherzos as his own model. Scherzos make their mark by the effect they create and not so much by their melodies. This is a pretty good one. The opening theme to the finale sounds very vaguely like Old McDonald Had a Farm, if not, in any event it does have a folksy barnyard quality to it. The development is decent as is the movement. Some Mendelssohn does creep in here and there, but not at all bad. So I upgrade my overall impression pf the quartet to good but not great. Keep in mind Reinecke was only 22 when he wrote this. I would get my quarteters to play this one with me again from time to time.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

String Quartet No.2. As to the first movement, if anything, I was too kind in my initial assessment. Except for a few brief moments, a whisp of an attractive second theme, the movement is entirely forgetable, a bunch of scale passages and wandering about to no purpose. Poor. I wrote that the second movement was the strongest, I am not sure about this. It is better than the first and third movements. Workmanlike but nothing special here. The third movement, ugh, all smiles and empty refrains of have a nice day. However, the finale is better than I wrote. Schmannesque, well yes, you cannot escape this fact. However, it is fairly well done, exciting. It does hold your attention. But by itself, it is certainly not strong enough to rescue this otherwise very mediocre quartet.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

String Quartet No.4. I stand by what I wrote about the first two movements. Neither is compelling. They start off a little promising but they do not fulfill any promise. The development in each case ruins them. The third movement is better than I initially wrote. It is not a great movement. The pizzicato in the main section is original and memorable, but a little too cutesy for my taste, although that may be personal. The trio section contrasts nicely but is too short. As to the finale, I take back what I said about the main theme being trite. It is not great, but it is decent as is the rest of the movement. But decent is the best I can say about it. All in all, there is little to recommend this work for concert or home. Just not worth the time.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

Okay, I know, I wrote a lot but surely a composer of Reinecke's stature, a composer who did write many first rate works deserves a second look.

Final thoughts. Quartet No.1, a youthful work to be sure, good though not great, is worth your time. If it had been written by a Sung such as Mendelssohn or Schumann, it would have made it into the repertoire. Just maybe the same might be said of No.3. But this could not be said of Nos. 2 and 4. By any standard, they must be judged as very weak efforts.

I think we are all agreed that No.5 outshines the rest by far. It deserves concert performance and will be on the music stands in my music room in the not too distant future.

[Alan Howe]

I still disagree about No.4, but there we are...

Thanks so much for spending all this time analysing them for us.

[Tapiola]

Lately I've been exploring these quartets. At first I was very enthusiastic, but my excitement vanished too soon. Incredibly, the 1st SQ was the most interesting of the bunch for me. The others seemed too common, with no many arresting ideas. Whilst pleasant listens, this set is not essential by any means.