It must be roughly a decade ago that I heard the Miró Quartet play in Calgary. At the time they were not far distant in time from their impressive win of the top prize as the Banff International String Quartet Competition, and they showed the qualities that often mark quartets on the way up: solid technical execution, enthusiasm, and something often called “promise”-a word that suggests further accomplishments and refinement to come.

To judge from what was heard at their concert in the distinguished Wyatt Artist in Residence Series, the Miró Quartet has lived up to the promise of their previous Calgary appearance. In a program devoted to three monuments of the string quartet literature by Beethoven and Schubert, the quartet delved deep into the beauty and mystery of this great music, showing not only technical refinement in execution but a maturity of interpretation born of serious purpose and striking imagination.

While all the works were excellently performed, perhaps pride of place on this occasion could be given to the Schubert Death and the Maiden Quartet that occupied the second half of the program. This is a dark, even sombre work in its emotional character, the happier moments containing more the sound of smiling through one’s tears than of simple happiness.

It was this integration of the total emotional tenor of the work that most convinced in this fine performance.

The program also opened with Schubert, the one-movement work called Quartettsatz, which in many ways foreshadows the emotional world of the later quartet.

The third of Beethoven’s Razumovsky String Quartets is the most popular of the group, perhaps because of its emotionally deep slow movements, one of Beethoven’s best, and the unique finale. Played well, no quartet loses with this piece, and the Miró Quartet can certainly play well.
The Quartet has a new second violin now, who hails from these parts, and indeed was a member of Mount Royal’s training program. His name is William Fedkenheuer, and together will being a fine violinist, he is something of a natural ham, a point event by his remarks during the concert. Comfortable as performer or emcee, Fedkenheuer brought to the concert not only local colour but a measure of humour and personality that will certainly bring individuality to the group as a whole. With playing of this calibre, one can only wish the Quartet continued success in their career.

To read this review in its entirety, please click here.

“I think we saved the best ’til last,” said Flagler Museum Director John Blades, at intermission of the Miró String Quartet’s concert Tuesday night, the final one of the season in the Flagler’s music series.

They had just played Franz Schubert’s Quartettsatz and the third Rasumovsky Quartet of Beethoven (Op. 59, No. 3, in C) and were impressive. Sentiment ran high at the end of the concert, too: “Can’t we have more?” said one elegant Palm Beacher. “The season will seem empty without them,” meaning the 14 years of well-established concerts at the Flagler.

Indeed, the Miró were the best American group I’ve heard there. They had energy to burn and played as if nothing else mattered but the music.

The Schubert Quartettsatz, one movement long, was written in 1820 and never finished. First performed in 1867, 40 years after his death, it has a stormy opening crescendo anchored by the seductive cello. Each instrument plays without pause or relief and with an intensity that takes listeners by surprise. It is so different from the Schubert of the lieder.

Shifting from major to minor and back again to major, it has a staggeringly difficult part for the first violin, which the Miró’s Daniel Ching shook off with the brilliance of a Menhuin. The excellence of the other three soloists was demonstrated, too, in this lively warm-up piece.

Introducing the Beethoven quartet, violist John Largess spoke clearly and distinctly of the composer’s established international reputation when he wrote it at the behest of Count Andrei Razumovsky, the Russian ambassador to Vienna in 1806. Again the lead violin, Ching, was heaven-sent, his bowing technique reminding one of a golfer at the first tee. His massive sweeps of the arm made the music sound terrific, played in the highest register of the violin.

The second movement opens with plucked cello strings, vibrantly played by the gifted Joshua Gindele. Ghostly sounds arise like themes for a haunted house, artistically tackled by these four superb players. Solos follow on the violin and then the cello in a languorous mood. Gloomy, sentinel-like statements seem to promise doom as the ending settles on A major.

The Minuet, third movement, has rhythmic tricks and though stately, at times, suggests a couple of cheeky peasants have interrupted the minuet to do a polka. Lastly, the Allegro molto, showed off the high energy of this foursome as they wrestled with a fugal sonata form. The opening attack was so fast it sounded like the wind swooshing through high slung electricity wires.

Schubert’s Death and the Maiden Quartet (No. 14 in D minor, D. 810) followed intermission. Written in 1826, two years before his all-too-early death at the age of only 31, Schubert reached back for this quartet to a lieder of the same name and used its theme. In the song, Death demands prenuptial rights, but the maiden begs to be left alone. At Schubert’s burial a small wind band played these variations.

The Allegro opens quietly and reverentially, as the lieder song dominates. The pianissimo section had beauty and warmth. And a nice balance was achieved as the Maiden escaped to a gallop, announced dramatically by all four players.

The second movement, Andante con moto, opens with a very familiar statement, but I felt it wasn’t too clearly delineated, getting lost in the brilliance of the quartet’s interpretation. The third, Scherzo, borrows from a Schubert German Dance (D. 790) and is fast and energetic with fine syncopated themes. The Presto has characteristics of the tarantella, with a lovely solo from second violinist William Fedkenheuer.

The Romantic mood of this movement is ever-present in one form or another as Schubert works tune after tune into the ground with repeat after repeat, and the odd sudden interjection. Big dynamic changes take over with long pauses as Schubert tries to find an ending by returning to the key of D minor and an unmistakable final chord.

The 100-plus attendees gave the Miró, who will record this work in April, a standing ovation. Surely they’ll replace the Tokyo String Quartet, who are retiring, as the best of the best in the eyes and ears of today’s concertgoers. They’re poised for the top spot.

Special to the Daily News

In the past decade or so, the Flagler Museum’s Music Series has established itself as a cultural treasure — we can only wish it would present more than its current lineup of five concerts. This year, the museum closed its 14th Music Series on Tuesday.

In its latest installment, it featured the celebrated Miró Quartet, an American string quartet with a bold, forceful approach to chamber music.

Bold, indeed, was their performance of the opening number, the Quartettsatz, D. 703 by Franz Schubert. Intended as the first movement of a four-movement work, it is another intriguing mystery in Schubert’s output: The other three were never finished and this movement (the English translation of “Satz”) stands alone as a dramatic piece, full of that edginess so favored by early romantics.

Violinists Daniel Ching and William Fedkenheuer, violist John Largess and cellist Joshua Gindele gave the work a thrilling reading. Here is an ensemble of four accomplished virtuosi, who share a common aesthetic vision.

Their unity of purpose was apparent in the next work, Ludwig van Beethoven’s Quartet in C Major, Op. 59 no. 3. The third of his “Razumovsky” quartets, it is also the most daring and strange. That is especially true in the second movement, an exotic number, even considering Beethoven’s later output.

Miró Quartet’s penchant for boldness accentuated the strangeness of the work. Cellist Gindele’s pizzicati in the second movement were not your typical accompaniment and they almost distracted from the “classical” overall sound of the piece.

The same can be said about the third movement, a menuetto that looks back to Haydn and Mozart. The Miró’s muscular approach missed some of the elegance associated with the old-fashioned courtly dance. But that was of little consequence as they gave an electrifying reading of the final movement, a fugue that is one of the crowning achievements of Beethoven’s chamber music.

The second part consisted of a single work, the masterfully tormented Quartet in D minor, D. 810by Schubert. Nicknamed “Death and the Maiden” it is, arguably, the greatest quartet written in the long period between Beethoven and Debussy.

Once again, the Miró Quartet’s forceful approach worked well, especially in the outer movements. The work’s second movement would have benefited from more “breathing” — a slightly slower tempo would have allowed the first violin to finish his phrases more elegantly.

Additionally, the prominence of the cello over the ensemble (a first in a medium that is usually dominated by the first violin) was distracting at times. But, again, this was due to a conscious aesthetic choice on the part of the Miró Quartet.

And that is precisely one of the beauties of the Flagler Museum Music Series: By presenting outstanding chamber groups playing more or less from the same body of works (18th and 19th century central European repertoire) it allows us to enjoy different approaches, thus expanding our understanding of the musical canon. The result is illuminating.

 A magnificent performance by the Miro Quartet opened the season for the Chamber Music Society of Fort Worth on Saturday afternoon. If the rest of the schedule holds up to this standard, it’s going to be a season to remember.

The Miro is the quartet-in-residence at the Butler School of Music at the University of Texas at Austin. Lucky school — the four showed great precision in pitch and ensemble, enviable technique and a way of giving vivid life to the music they played.

The members are violinists Daniel Ching and William Fedkenheuer, violist John Largesse and cellist Joshua Gindele. They came in on short notice to substitute for the originally scheduled Amernet String Quartet. But it was obvious from the way they played that they’ve had plenty of experience together and with the music they played.

Their program included two of the great masterpieces of string-quartet literature separated by a modern work: Mozart’s Quartet No. 16, K. 428, Schubert’s Death and the Maiden quartet, and the French composer Henri Dutilleux’s Ainsi la nuit quartet, which dates from the 1970s.

The Mozart and Schubert quartets were given superb performances that demonstrated the skill and teamwork of all four musicians. In early string quartets the first violinist dominates, with the second violinist, violist and cellist taking secondary roles. Mozart made a conscious effort to give interesting and significant material to all four musicians, and so did Schubert. This gave Saturday’s audience an opportunity to savor masterful technical skill while absorbing music of the highest quality.

The Dutilleux was also impressively played, though not as easy to absorb on a first hearing. Violist Largesse gave introductory explanations, which were supplemented by Laurie Shulman’s program notes.

Dutilleux, who at 96 joins 103-year-old Elliott Carter among the most senior composers alive, uses Bartokian techniques and Proustian obsession with time to create a dissonant though tonal work that jars and at times caresses the ears of the listener. The Bartokian techniques are obvious, but it’s not easy to find the connection of Proust to the musical sounds. It would take a few hearings to get a better grasp of the work.

The program, like all Chamber Music Society concerts, took place in the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth.

There are many tales in music history of composers frantically trying to finish a commissioned work and completing it just in time. Or sometimes not. So it was at the Santa Fe Chamber Music Festival.

The summer is in full swing and after a thrilling show with the New York Philharmonic and Yo-Yo Ma in June (at Avery Fisher Hall), we spent 5 days with our friends and colleagues at the Hotchkiss school and a week in Santa Barbara for our debut at Music Academy of the West!

While we have been a bit delinquent in updating this section of our website, we promise to do better! This will be the hub for photos, videos, and unusual blog posts from the various members of the group (and if you know any of the guys, it could prove to be interesting!).
So check back often and see “What’s up”.

On to Santa Fe!

The New York Philharmonic devotes relatively little of its stage time to contemporary works, but things may be looking up. Last year the orchestra established the Marie-Josée Kravis Prize for New Music, a $200,000 award for a composer selected every two years by a committee of musicians. And if you award a prize, you might as well perform the recipient’s work.

To read the review in its entirety, please click here.

When it comes to classical music, the difference between what’s new and what’s “new to you” can leave an otherwise well-rounded person feeling culturally clueless while sipping bubbly at highbrow pool parties. The good news is, there’s a shortcut through the information pipeline: awards.

Awards are often derided in the “popular arts”—most rock stars would rather fall off the stage than win a Grammy—but in classical music, many awards boost the visibility of artists who deserve wider recognition among fans of the form. Honors in the field can develop an audience and, to some degree, the presenting institutions as well.

On Tuesday, the New York Philharmonic will give a special concert, featuring the ubiquitous Yo-Yo Ma, to celebrate the inaugural Marie-Josée Kravis Prize for New Music, a biennial honor recognizing “extraordinary artistic endeavor in the field of new music.” Mr. Ma is not the recipient—I was just shamelessly name dropping there. The Kravis prize, which was announced in December, is going to the nonagenarian French composer Henri Dutilleux for his contributions to the modern repertoire.

Not familiar with Monsieur Dutilleux? Don’t go hide in the cabana. Though widely admired among musicians, “to the general public, he is not as well known,” said pianist and selection-committee member Emanuel Ax (who, if you’re title-dropping, is also the orchestra’s artist-in-residence). “This is a wonderful chance to have his music played.”

Said cellist Joshua Gindele of the Miró Quartet, which will perform at Tuesday’s concert, “He stands to be remembered as one of the great French composers in Western classical music. Dutilleux is in the line of Debussy and Ravel.”

The Miró Quartet, based in Austin, Texas, will perform Mr. Dutilleux’s string quartet, which is part of the group’s standard repertory. “There were a handful of pieces that the Quartet felt were important in the last 40 years, and we set out to understand and learn them,” Mr. Gindele said. “We felt they were going to be around for a long time.”

Mr. Dutilleux, who was born in the small Western city of Angers in 1916, will be represented by two additional works: “Metaboles,” for orchestra, and the cello concerto “Tout un monde lointain (A Whole Distant World).” Of the latter, Mr. Ax said: “Every cellist I know plays that piece. It has really taken hold in terms of repertoire.”

Mr. Dutilleux has won numerous awards in Europe, but this honor aims to raise his profile in America. And, by asking that the $200,000 prize be shared with three other composers, each of whom will compose a new work for the Philharmonic, he’ll be sharing the award in a way that extends its significance to the next generation of composers. One of the three, the Hungarian Peter Eötvös, has already been announced; on Tuesday, the Philharmonic’s music director, Alan Gilbert, will announce the others.

To read the complete article, please click here.