Mozart's genius is best defined by his....?

[ChamberNut]

Ahhh, Mozart! 

[MN Dave]

Ahhh, Mozart! 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH, Mozart!!! 

[Florestan]

Operas, Piano Concertos, Simfonia Concertante for Violin, Viola and Orchestra, Piano Sonatas, Clarinet Concerto, String Quintets, String Quartets, Piano Sonatas, Violin and Piano Sonatas, Gran Partita, Posthorn-Serenade... 

[Harry]

Symphonies and SQ.

[karlhenning]

Define genius?

[ChamberNut]

Define genius?

As it pertains to Mozart's creativity, orginality.

[(poco) Sforzando]

If only two categories allowed, the operas and the piano concerti.

[71 dB]

Piano Concertos made me understand Mozart's greatness.

Define genius?

Elgar 

[ChamberNut]

If only two categories allowed, the operas and the piano concerti.

That was my vote also.

[lukeottevanger]

Ditto

[PerfectWagnerite]

If only one example I go with the C-minor Fantasy, K475, which would be what? Others?

[lukeottevanger]

Really? You want one example? Then I go for the Sinfonia Concertante - it contains almost everything which makes Mozart great.

[ChamberNut]

If only one example I go with the C-minor Fantasy, K475, which would be what? Others?

I added an "Other" category. 

[Don]

If only two categories allowed, the operas and the piano concerti.

Same here.  They are the two categories where I feel Mozart surpasses all others.

[Mozart]

If only two categories allowed, the operas and the piano concerti.

Of course! It's what I picked, and everyone else also.

[karlhenning]

As it pertains to Mozart's creativity, orginality.

I question the enterprise (defining genius).

Carry on . . . .

[c#minor]

i choose not to vote. Too little votes, too many categories.

[ChamberNut]

I question the enterprise (defining genius).

Carry on . . . .

So........which ones did you vote for? 

[Morigan]

I chose "Symphonies" solely for the fugal ending of the 41st Symphony. If that isn't genius...

My other answer is Opera.

[lukeottevanger]

I prefer Bach's keyboard concertos to Mozart's varied, rather light, non-intrusive and less interesting/meaty batch, and there are several piano concertos after Wolfie that are much greater and more interesting IMO.

I think critical opinion goes against this. Not enough to time to go into it, but Mozart's piano concerti (much more than his other concerti) are formal marvels which entirely, repeatedly and ever-differently, overcome the problems inherent in the form and are practically unique in doing so.

With Mozart, both his good and bad pieces (and inbetween) are both lucid and elegant, i.e. the perfection of style is always there, but not always the substance. (this is perhaps why he is susceptible to being treated as musak in adverts!)

And that's not true of Bach? I mean the use in adverts, not the lack of substance, but you can't make the argument for one without implying it for the other...

(As a Brit, I can't see this logo



without the strains of Wachet Auf running through my mind....!)