![aria maestosa retard aria maestosa retard](https://windows-cdn.softpedia.com/screenshots/aria-maestosa_1.png)
I can't imagine trimming too much fat off of these performances! Razor sharp, yet very friendly.Īnother perusal of timings yielded the quickest Op.64 yet (as opposed to the Lindsays with the longest) but, no matter.īut I must say, these SQs (1-3) are the least memorable Haydn SQs so far, to my ears (along w/ Op.71). No, I don't have a compare, and it's been ages since I heard these SQs (if I ever bothered in the first place), but the anonymous quartet rocks these SQs! They are extremely tight and perky.
![aria maestosa retard aria maestosa retard](https://www.waimg.com/495/aria-maestosa-3-3.jpg)
so, according to the "you get what you pay for" folks, I should be crying, but, I'm not ( 4-6, at $0.79, should arrive tomorrow). I also got the "Caspar da Salo" Quartett on PILZ/Vienna Masters playing Op.64 1-3. Next I'd like to try QM, QF, Archi-b, Edding, Kujiken, or Smithson (sorry, Que, my computy just won't play stuff (or I'm dense, which could be)), and one other modern. I mean, it "sounds" just fine, but I can tell, for me, my journey with Op.77 has just begun, oy vey! So, the Kodaly wasn't as "opulent" as I'd hoped (I thought the Unitarian Church was more reverberant), nor as "gutsy" (more homogenous than I'd hoped, which, of course, is not neccesarily a bad thing), but I don't think you can levy the usual "Kodaly criticisms" against Op.77. Neither was perfect in tempos: technically, they could always be faster. The Kodaly were more delicate than I'd hoped, but the contrast compared to the Amadeus was invaluable.
![aria maestosa retard aria maestosa retard](https://windows-cdn.softpedia.com/screenshots/aria-maestosa_2.png)
Ultimately, the Amadeus had great ensemble, sound, and generally just could've used a little tempo alteration (up or down). The Kodaly here aren't as fast as I would prefer (maybe no one is), but overall the Kodaly manage the Prestos just fine. Only 2/4 had any severe discrepencies (4:27 vs 6:09), but once again, it must be a repeat deletion. The Kodaly seem to correct whatever problem I had with the Amadeus here (Goldilocks syndrome), though, perhaps, there could be a little. longer than the Amadeus in 2/1, this must be due to a repeat. For 77/1, the Amadeus had the absolute shortest times of the 10 comparisons. Must be a repeat, though I can't tell where it begins. The funny little upward scale is taken just about right in the Kodaly whereas the Amadeus do not retard in the slightest.ġ/4 seems similar, though the Kodaly are 1:20 longer. Though timings are relatively close (30secs.) the Kodaly seem to be just that amount slower that makes the whole thing work.
![aria maestosa retard aria maestosa retard](https://images.sftcdn.net/images/t_app-cover-m,f_auto/p/fa0726b8-a4d3-11e6-9525-00163ed833e7/742097869/aria-maestosa-screenshot.png)
Those chirping high notes have a charm I don't recall from the Amadeus. Again, I kind of miss the Amadeus "sound" (whether the playing or recording, I don't know).ġ/3 really shines with the Kodaly. I don't know if they play it too slow, but they manage to keep it up nonetheless. I thought the Amadeus could have played it slower, and the Kodaly certainly make up for it. I can't tell, but is there some "smudging" in the Kodaly sound?ġ/2 is taken muuuch slower by the Kodaly (6:02 vs 7:40) even though there appears to be a repeat addition by the Kodaly (just 20secs. The Kodaly aren't as "gutsy" as the Amadeus, though, having a much "smoother" ensemble sound (I did miss the Amadeus "sound"). Except for disliking the very first chord, I thought the Kodaly corrected what I might have thought was missing from the Amadeus. longer than the Amadeus, but the general tempo isn't that much slower, so it has to be a repeat (though I'm having trouble figuring out where it begins). (I think.I had to return the Amadeus set, but listening now to the Kodaly I can remember some of the diffs and similarities.Īs I said before, the Kodaly seemed to have the longest timings out there, and finally I get my answer.
#Aria maestosa retard software#
So in this case, we are using a brief combination of words and commercial DAWs cannot make claims of exclusivity because it is a common phrase and existed long before the commercial software was invented. When a recipe or formula is accompanied by an explanation or directions, the text directions may be copyrightable, but the recipe or formula itself remains uncopyrightable.