******
- Verified Buyer
No. 1 & 5: Fresk QuartetNo. 2 & 6 Kopenhagen QuartetNo. 3 & 4: Gotland QuartetThis review covers the three separately available discs which encompass this oeuvre.I am not aware if they've been published in a box, but they should have been. As you can see from the above list, the quartets were recorded in pairs, but the pairing offered on each disc splits up the performers, which seems a bit silly to me (the aural ambience is different in each recording).Stenhammar enjoyed a lifelong friendship with the members of the Aulin Quartet, of which the fruits were six string quartets.Considering the era in which they were written, they are very traditional in their structure, melodic material and harmonic textures. None of them is remotely comparable to Sibelius' String Quartet, which sounds quite "advanced" in direct comparison. However, set beside Grieg, they are of considerably higher quality, which is a sad observation to make in view of the relative popularity of Grieg in this genre, which he certainly doesn't deserve.Stenhammar made use of traditional folk tunes throughout, but to a stranger to this milieu they are unrecognisable - completely absorbed, unlike for example the Irish tunes in Moeran's works.The works encompass a significant portion of the composer's life and exhibit a growing mastery of the genre - helped, no doubt, by the fact that he had a natural talent for counterpoint and introduces important fugal, canonic and variation forms in three of the quartets to quite dramatic (rather than academic) effect. Being paired as here makes biographical sense, but obscures somewhat the relevant grouping, which would see Nos. 3-5 as representing the works in which his creativity peaked. No. 6 stands apart for biographical reason, as in the similar case of Mendelssohn's F minor Quartet.If you think of the quartet literature as a long line of works of a specific genre, in which for about 150 years composers cultivated their most demanding musical expression, then you have a context for these compositions. For Stenhammar, Beethoven was still a model to follow in the first two works; later his harmonic diction approached more closely to the moderns of his day, but he never dissolved the stringent framework that was still binding on Dvorak, Fauré et al.No. 1 in C major op. 2 is on the whole a happy, jovial affair, rustic in its general feeling and with bold rhythmic textures. Beethoven peeks into the Mesto, whose tones of lament reveal a very personal grief, but not so effusive as to break the classical mould. After a playful Scherzo, a very Brahmsian finale closes the work, with rather abrupt outbursts of passion and much double stopping on all four instruments. The composer was plainly searching for his own voice here. Still, it is well finished and a pleasure to listen to.No. 2 in C minor op. 14 offers a significant contrast. Here Stenhammar lean very heavily on the Beethoven of the Razumovsky Quartets. The first movement with its descending C minor scale sets a sombre tone and features a stomping ostinato that alternates with long melodic curves, impressing as an unsettled and almost wild ride on an unruly stallion. The second movement is the most remarkable of all six, an hymnic chant in which the debt to Beethoven is recognisable at first hearing. Yet the wonderful melody which figures as its main theme is beautifully carved and richly scored, ample compensation for the quasi-plagiarism. This quality is not maintained, however the ensuing movements. The ostinato returns in the end, suggesting tragedy; but the development is awkward and not finally convincing, despite the great skill invested in it. The comparison with Beethoven reveals the distance of mastery to which Stenhammar still had to aspire. (It might be noted in passing that Stenhammar composed several more than his six published opera; but was very self-critical and withdrew that did not meet his own standards after performance).Although No. 3 in F minor op. 18 is only four opus numbers further up (mainly because of a large Wagnerian opera that occupied him in the years before 1900), the change in maturity is remarkable. Here is a fully grown quartet composer, in charge of his means of expression and technique. The sequence is remarkably "adventurous" here - from an idyllic, melodious and transparently scored opening movement to a turbulent, almost frighteningly brusque Scherzo with lots of tremolo figures; then a long Lento in variation form which strongly reminds one of the spooky medieval stories of lonely figures coping with socerers, witches, devils and saintly maidens. The quartet ends with a Fantasy and Fugue that picks up the agitation of the Scherzo and develops it in a long series of transformations. All told, a masterful work, deserving of much greater notice than some quartets that are better known to music lovers.No. 4 in A minor op. 25 and No. 5 in C major op. 29 maintain this level of mastery. The first is balladesque in a very imaginative manner, almost like a tone poem, full of arabesques and arpeggios which contrast starkly to a sad folksong motif and make for an iridescent pallette of melodic patterns. The ensuing Nocturne ("appassionato") brings more folk material into it, but is worked through in an allusive and extremely eloquent manner which it takes repeated listening to make it cohere in the listener's mind. A brief scherzo leads over to an Aria with 10 variations. Being once again based in a folksong, the emotional impression here differs very much from the preceding quartet. In form a Siciliano, it soon acquires a strong rhythmic profile and ends on the same arabesques that began the work.No. 5, subtitled "Serenade" is a joyful, exuberant work, and I wonder if this overt expressiveness does not convey a hint of (premonitional) hysteria? It's all diatonic, major mode, "a declaration of love to classical Viennese chamber music" in the sleeve note writer's words. I would qualify this, since it seems to me that after his first two Beethovenian quartets, Stenhammar seems to have leaned much more heavily on Haydn, who was an experimenter par excellence and varied the forms of his quartets over a long life with all conceivable kinds of "tinkering", including all the strict counterpoint forms, folk songs, operatic arias etc., while (unlike Beethoven) always remaining within the 4-movement mould. The propinquity of Stenhammar to this manner seems obvious on closer acquaintance (although naturally in late romantic harmonic diction). While the technocal mastery of No. 5 is beyond question, you may still end up feeling that its exaltation is a bit over the top. Occasional, barely discernible drops of bitter acid warn you of what is to come.No. 6 is set off by being a tragedy, a deeply personal memorial to his dear friend Tor Aulin, the leader of the quartet, who died in 1916. The is characterised by unredeemed gloom from beginning to end, expressed in various modes of despair, lament, protest, revolt, resignation. The first movements is marked "rubato", as if to say, play this from the heart, not according to the staves. The forms are loosened to give room to this freedom and the movement ends with a combination of rigid polyphony and a dissonance (most unusual for Stenhammar). The Intermezzo, grim and Beethovenish again (op. 135); the Adagio with its modernistic allusions as a means of liberating more emotional juice; and the Finale with its desperate hammering out of a kid of "fate" motif, is almost demonic in its turbulent pace and rushes into a final unisono on all strings that sound anything but final - as if the heart stopped, without finishing its sentence.As a set of quartets, these are - I venture to say - rewarding to repeated listening. They are quality work and sadly neglected for no good reason at all. Much of Stenhammar's work in other genres, while pleasing, gives evidence of being written by a minor composer. If someone played these quartets to you blindfold (e.g. as "new discoveries" from a known composer's oeuvre), you might guess very much higher than "Stenhammar"! I have lived with them for over 20 years, and audition them at least once a year. There is in truth not a great deal of good quartet writing to set beside it in the same era. Consider Glasunov, Sibelius, Busoni, Zemlinsky, Sinding, Reger, Ravel, Dohnanyi . . . how many of these quartets aspire to fully representational merit? I would say: one each from Sibelius and Ravel. So here is a clear cut argument for, and recommendation of, Stenhammar's oeuvre.The recordings, three different groups each playing two quartets, are commendable, though with evident reservations. They were issued initially by the Caprice label in 1983. The performances are good and satisfactory. I got used to them, although I can easily imagine better ones. The same applies to the recorded sound, which is variable from one to the other, but overall a little on the hard side and not overly transparent. Nevertheless, I think you will not regret the investment.Postscript: I note that Amazon offer an edition by the Oslo Quartet, which is not a complete set. I have sampled them: The sound is much superior, but from 30 second segments it is hardly possible to get a real impression of the performances.
