GMG Classical Music Forum

The Music Room => Composer Discussion => Topic started by: facehugger on April 06, 2007, 01:37:52 PM

Title: Mozart
Post by: facehugger on April 06, 2007, 01:37:52 PM
i called it. this thread is mine. mine, i tell you!

anyway, mozart is awesome, no?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on April 07, 2007, 02:02:48 PM
Dude you forgot the clever name after Mozart like Haydn's Harem or Beethoven's Brothel.


Mozart is great.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on April 07, 2007, 11:29:13 PM
i called it. this thread is mine. mine, i tell you!

anyway, mozart is awesome, no?

Yes, Mozart is awesome... 8)

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 08, 2007, 04:50:24 AM
Yes, Mozart is awesome... 8)

Q


I don't know, "awesome" is a mighty powerful word.  He's OK though... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: George on April 08, 2007, 05:04:33 AM
Yes, Mozart is awesome... 8)

Q


We would have made excellent Mozart groupies.  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on April 08, 2007, 05:59:08 PM
In terms of counterpoint how does Mozart's requiem match up against earlier composers?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on April 09, 2007, 08:44:40 PM
The 3rd mov of pc 24 k 491 is so catchy!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: scottscheule on April 19, 2007, 03:20:17 PM
I've been listening to the wind concerti in the Philips collection.  The clarinet concerto is the strongest composition--though at the same time it's more reflective, cooler than the others.  I love the rondos on the horn concertos, especially the second.  And the third movement from the oboe (and flute no.2, perforce) is delightful.

I started listening to them because a friend of mine performed the bassoon concerto a few weeks ago.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: hornteacher on April 19, 2007, 04:50:11 PM
The clarinet concerto is the strongest composition--though at the same time it's more reflective, cooler than the others.
Very true.  This is due to the fact it was one of Mozart's final compositions, completed just months before his death.  Martin Frost has an outstandingly good recording of this work on CD.


I love the rondos on the horn concertos, especially the second.
Also agree.  I played the entire 2nd concerto on my University Recital about what seems like a million years ago.  However, if you would rather hear it performed WELL, I suggest Barry Tuckwell's CD on EMI.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: springrite on April 19, 2007, 04:54:07 PM
For a couple of years now I only listen to Mozart's lesser known or lesser played compositions, such as the early (or otherwise lesser known) operas. I am a bit tired of the familair or catchy ones, the only exception being my favorite Mozart non-operatic composition -- the Clarinet Quintet.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Daverz on April 19, 2007, 05:14:04 PM
Listening to the "Szell Conducts and Plays Mozart" set.  This is some good shit.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: George on April 19, 2007, 05:17:07 PM
Listening to the "Szell Conducts and Plays Mozart" set.  This is some good shit.

Well put.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: 71 dB on June 25, 2007, 02:15:05 AM
For a couple of years now I only listen to Mozart's lesser known or lesser played compositions, such as the early (or otherwise lesser known) operas. I am a bit tired of the familair or catchy ones, the only exception being my favorite Mozart non-operatic composition -- the Clarinet Quintet.

Yeah, Mozart's lesser known works should not be ignored. For example, I found Litaniae K. 109, 125, 195 and 243 very interesting works when I listened them last years (Brilliant Classics Mozart Box). I like many of Mozart's early operas, the ones with baroque feel.

The most famous works have a tendency for catchiness (reason for the fame) that can be tiresome as you said.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Haffner on June 25, 2007, 03:10:31 AM
In terms of counterpoint how does Mozart's requiem match up against earlier composers?




There are people whom will dislike me for this: I find Mozart's use of imitation (as Jochanan pointed put, it's hard to call them "fugues" for the most part) far more interesting and natural than alot of J.S. Bach. This is coming from a man for whom the Brandenburg Concertos were often his whole life in the '80's. Once I "discovered" Haydn, Beethoven, Mahler and Mozart's imaginative, blood-infused use of counterpoint (Haydn examples abound in opps. 20-77), some of Bach's WTC fugues sounded kind of mathematical and lifeless...learned, as many (besides Haydn and Mozart) would have stated in the mid to late 18th century.

I am certainly aware of the enormity of J.S. Bach's achievements (been listening to him for well over 25 years, Haydn and Mozart only 1 and a half). And my appreciation for the abovementioned B. Concertos, the Violin Concerto in D minor, and the Tocattas, etc. is truly heartfelt, profound. But I guess I've never been much of a fan of too much "mathematics" in music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Tancata on June 25, 2007, 04:29:03 AM



There are people whom will dislike me for this: I find Mozart's use of imitation (as Jochanan pointed put, it's hard to call them "fugues" for the most part) far more interesting and natural than alot of J.S. Bach.

I am certainly aware of the enormity of J.S. Bach's achievements (been listening to him for well over 25 years, Haydn and Mozart only 1 and a half). And my appreciation for the abovementioned B. Concertos, the Violin Concerto in D minor, and the Tocattas, etc. is truly heartfelt, profound. But I guess I've never been much of a fan of too much "mathematics" in music.

What about Bach's vocal music? IMO, the rigour only adds to the music there...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Haffner on June 25, 2007, 04:32:52 AM
What about Bach's vocal music? IMO, the rigour only adds to the music there...



You found me out! I realize how many fantastic Bach works I left out; trust me, Johann Sebastian is very highly regarded by me. I'm overall quite a "fan" of his work. It's just that the other composers mentioned above (especially Mozart) just tend to seem less mathematical on the average (hey! A bit incongruous, that sentence, "mathematical, average").

Okay,I 'm very strange...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: 71 dB on June 25, 2007, 05:47:23 AM
I find the music of Bach musically exact rather than mathematical.

Mathematical music would sound like polyphonic morse code...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on June 25, 2007, 08:34:10 AM
You found me out! I realize how many fantastic Bach works I left out; trust me, Johann Sebastian is very highly regarded by me. I'm overall quite a "fan" of his work. It's just that the other composers mentioned above (especially Mozart) just tend to seem less mathematical on the average (hey! A bit incongruous, that sentence, "mathematical, average").


Allow me to pick up on this, being a discussion board and all... :)

As far as the 'mathematical' thing, I can see where it's easy to think this. Bach is, after all, a master of proportion.

But to me getting under the skin of the music, so to speak, is where I find the greatest musical rewards. The felicities deeply buried under all that surface structure (mathematics) is where the gold lies in Bach.

And the imagination on display underneath the mathematical template to me couldn't be more pliable. Not to mention colorful. IOW, it'll put the boogie-woogie in your step! Contradictory this may sound but that's the nature of a genius. 

And yes, I'd agree it's the vocal music (cantatas, Passions, etc...) where this is most in evidence (and his greatest music).

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Tancata on June 25, 2007, 10:42:18 AM
Great post, donwyn!

But as to the question that launched this little digression: I would say that Mozart could write pretty much as well as anyone in the old strict styles...well, except for one...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bonehelm on June 25, 2007, 10:53:29 AM
Great post, donwyn!

But as to the question that launched this little digression: I would say that Mozart could write pretty much as well as anyone in the old strict styles...well, except for one...

I knew it. LvB.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Catison on September 12, 2007, 07:02:11 AM
Most of you know my opinion of Mozart (i.e., a mostly shallow, easy to understand composer whose music is very boring).  Well, my friends, all has changed.  I just bought this:

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/81/28/057e228348a04c78c4552110.L.jpg)
 (http://www.amazon.com/Wolfgang-Amadeus-Mozart-Complete-Works/dp/B000BLI3K2/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-3185607-7313713?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1189612552&sr=1-1)
its the complete Mozart.  Everything.  And now that I have some real context for his music, it all seems to make sense.  All those stupid little melodies seem joyous.  I am going to have a magnificent time getting to know his music!

What is a good "unknown" work to hear?

PS - I also got the Bach complete edition as well, but that's another thread.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on September 12, 2007, 07:18:16 AM
What is a good "unknown" work to hear?

I vote for the Adagio & Rondo for glass harmonica, flute, oboe, viola and cello, K. 617
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Larry Rinkel on September 12, 2007, 07:49:15 AM
I always get a kick out of these large boxes. :)

I like the colors. It looks like a gay pride banner.

"What is a good 'unknown' work to hear?" asks Brett.

The problem is, of course, that if I know the work, it's not unknown, and I have no idea who else knows it. So I don't know what works Brett does not know. But if the issue is, what Mozart works are worthwhile ways to upend the cliché that he writes shallow, boring music, I could offer:

- Quartet in D minor, k. 421
- Quintet in G minor, k. 516
- Mass in C minor, k. 427
- Piano Quartet in G minor, k. 478
- Rondo in A minor, k. 511
- Prague Symphony in D (#38)
- Symphony #39, E flat, k. 543
- Piano Concerto in G, #17, k. 463 ?
- Piano Concerto in A, #23, k. 488
- Piano Concerto in C minor, #24, k. 491
- Piano Fantasy and Sonata in C minor, k. 475/457
- Clarinet Quintet in A, k. ??
- Don Giovanni

Just for a start.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Haffner on September 12, 2007, 08:05:34 AM


What is a good "unknown" work to hear?

PS - I also got the Bach complete edition as well, but that's another thread.





k266...in fact all the string duos and trios. I prefer them over any of his string quartets.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on September 12, 2007, 08:34:24 AM
Most of you know my opinion of Mozart (i.e., a mostly shallow, easy to understand composer whose music is very boring).  Well, my friends, all has changed.  I just bought this:

(http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/81/28/057e228348a04c78c4552110.L.jpg)
 (http://www.amazon.com/Wolfgang-Amadeus-Mozart-Complete-Works/dp/B000BLI3K2/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-3185607-7313713?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1189612552&sr=1-1)
its the complete Mozart.  Everything.  And now that I have some real context for his music, it all seems to make sense.  All those stupid little melodies seem joyous.  I am going to have a magnificent time getting to know his music!

What is a good "unknown" work to hear?

PS - I also got the Bach complete edition as well, but that's another thread.

Huhhh....it that the Brilliant thingie?
The "monster", as Bill affectionately calls it?  ;D
There is quite some HIP on that, isn't there?

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Catison on September 12, 2007, 08:47:52 AM
Huhhh....it that the Brilliant thingie?
The "monster", as Bill affectionately calls it?  ;D
There is quite some HIP on that, isn't there?

Q

Yes it is pretty much all HIP, but that is fine with me, as I prefer the thin (or transparent) sound of the period orchestras.

I like the colors. It looks like a gay pride banner.

If by "gay pride" you mean, happy, joyfully blessed music, then I'd have to agree with you.  I am actually enjoying this set ;).

"What is a good 'unknown' work to hear?" asks Brett.

The problem is, of course, that if I know the work, it's not unknown, and I have no idea who else knows it. So I don't know what works Brett does not know. But if the issue is, what Mozart works are worthwhile ways to upend the cliché that he writes shallow, boring music, I could offer:

- Quartet in D minor, k. 421
- Quintet in G minor, k. 516
- Mass in C minor, k. 427
- Piano Quartet in G minor, k. 478
- Rondo in A minor, k. 511
- Prague Symphony in D (#38)
- Symphony #39, E flat, k. 543
- Piano Concerto in G, #17, k. 463 ?
- Piano Concerto in A, #23, k. 488
- Piano Concerto in C minor, #24, k. 491
- Piano Fantasy and Sonata in C minor, k. 475/457
- Clarinet Quintet in A, k. ??
- Don Giovanni

Just for a start.


Ol' Alban,

Thank you for the suggestions.  I was intentionally trying to sound niave, because I am with regards to Mozart.  I have heard many of the works you mention, but without the context of the other's.  That is the main purpose of getting such a huge box.  My interests have always been much wider than deeper.  Given the choice of hearing more music or hearing a better interpretation of a piece I already know, I almost always go for the new music.  That is what, perhaps, led me to shoot straight toward the unknown contemporary music I was so amazed by several years ago when I started coming to music forums such as these.  (Surely, you remember?)  But now I realize I have overshot many of the classics in my march toward novelty, and I would like to fill in the gaps.  So I will be paying attention to this thread in order to learn as much as I can about Mozart, a composer I've overlooked for far too long.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on September 12, 2007, 03:59:09 PM
What is a good "unknown" work to hear?


Easily the most overlooked (unknown) piece by Mozart is his Adagio in B minor, K540, for solo piano (fortepiano I imagine, here).

It's so expressive it's frightening.

I've yet to hear the work on the fortepiano but its sparse, minimalistic textures should fit the instrument to a tee. In the right hands it comes across as Mozart's most forward thinking work. Chromatic and highly programmatic it hearkens to an age far far in the future.


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: George on September 12, 2007, 05:10:29 PM
Easily the most overlooked (unknown) piece by Mozart is his Adagio in B minor, K540, for solo piano (fortepiano I imagine, here).

It's so expressive it's frightening.

I've yet to hear the work on the fortepiano but its sparse, minimalistic textures should fit the instrument to a tee. In the right hands it comes across as Mozart's most forward thinking work. Chromatic and highly programmatic it hearkens to an age far far in the future.




Whom have you heard in this work, Don?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on September 12, 2007, 05:41:09 PM
Whom have you heard in this work, Don?

I've heard Schiff and Uchida but I prefer Uchida by far. Heavier on the mystery.




Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: George on September 13, 2007, 04:37:27 AM
I've heard Schiff and Uchida but I prefer Uchida by far. Heavier on the mystery.

Thanks.  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gabriel on September 13, 2007, 06:13:54 AM
Mozart's Adagio KV 540 is superb and you should take it seriously right now, Catison! Arrau's recording is very fine too.

Among piano works, a "hidden" eccentricity by Mozart is the delightful Minuet in D major, KV 355.

Among the concert arias, Popoli di Tessaglia, KV 316; Ch'io mi scordi di te?, KV 505; Alcandro, lo confesso, KV 512; Bella mia fiamma, addio!, KV 528; and Chi sa, chi sa qual sia, KV 582. In Un bacio di mano, KV 541 you can find the prototype of one of the subjects of the first movement of the Jupiter symphony.

Among the Lieder, I would say two are above the rest: Das Veilchen, KV 476, and - most of all - Abendempfindung an Laura, KV 523. In Sehnsucht nach dem Frühling, KV 596 you find a melody that is exceptionally close to the first subject of the last movement of the Piano Concerto KV 595.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Guido on February 23, 2008, 08:14:59 AM
I seem to remember reading somewhere about a reconstruction or rather completion of a piece that Mozart intended to write but never finished - a sinfonia concertante for violin, viola, cello and orchestra. Has it been recorded?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ron Hunter on March 10, 2008, 03:31:30 AM
Sinfonia concertante in A major for violin, viola, cello and orchestra, left unfinished by Mozart in 1779, variously completed by a succession of people starting with Otto Bach in 1870 and more recently Philip Wilby in (or about) 1990. The Mozart fragment can be heard on Denon CD 33C37-7505, and the Wilby completion on Philips 422508-2.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: BachQ on March 10, 2008, 05:01:38 AM
Sinfonia concertante in A major for violin, viola, cello and orchestra, left unfinished by Mozart in 1779, variously completed by a succession of people starting with Otto Bach in 1870 and more recently Philip Wilby in (or about) 1990. The Mozart fragment can be heard on Denon CD 33C37-7505, and the Wilby completion on Philips 422508-2.

When it comes to Philip Wilby, we demand exactitude .........
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Varg on April 01, 2008, 11:29:16 PM
I need the help of Mozart experts.

I saw the movie Amadeus recently, and i was intrigued by a piece or two.

At the begining, when Salieri, walking in the crowd trying to guess who is Mozart, gives a look at a mozart score, he tell the priest, while the music is playing, that he heard the voice of God, or something like that. And later in the movie (i think it's when Mozart's wife brings him a score), he says pretty much the same thing. What are those two pieces?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: FideLeo on April 02, 2008, 12:48:56 AM
I need the help of Mozart experts.

I saw the movie Amadeus recently, and i was intrigued by a piece or two.

At the begining, when Salieri, walking in the crowd trying to guess who is Mozart, gives a look at a mozart score, he tell the priest, while the music is playing, that he heard the voice of God, or something like that. And later in the movie (i think it's when Mozart's wife brings him a score), he says pretty much the same thing. What are those two pieces?

I only remember the piece played in the first instance you mentioned above.  It's the Adagio from Gran Partita (a serenade-suite for 13 woodwind instruments) K. 361.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: FideLeo on April 02, 2008, 12:56:41 AM
I seem to remember reading somewhere about a reconstruction or rather completion of a piece that Mozart intended to write but never finished - a sinfonia concertante for violin, viola, cello and orchestra. Has it been recorded?

An older recording on Channel Classics also, featuring Vera Beths, Jurgen Kussmaul, and Anner Bylsma as soloists.  Amsterdam Mozart Players (HIP but not period instruments in this case) is the orchestra.  On the same disc are a very nice Sinf. concertante K. 364 (Jurgen and Rainer Kussmaul soloists) and the concertone K. 190.  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 18, 2009, 10:16:02 AM
Was grooving to the K.504 just yesterday.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bulldog on May 18, 2009, 10:19:01 AM
Was grooving to the K.504 just yesterday.

That's okay as long as you realize that Mozart didn't write a note of it. ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 18, 2009, 10:44:33 AM
So, Süssmayr really wrote the whole of the Requiem, didn't he?

Or was it Walsegg?

Van Swieten?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brian on May 18, 2009, 10:45:10 AM
So, Süssmayr really wrote the whole of the Requiem, didn't he?

Or was it Walsegg?

Van Swieten?
Salieri, of course. By Mozart's bedside.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 02:58:26 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Amadé Mozart
I still have to finish 6 Trios—which will bring me good money—and I still have to get my money from Le Gros and Duc de Guines—and, finally, the Mannheim court will be moving to Munich at the end of the month, and I would like to get there at the same time so that I can personally present my sonatas to the Electress. . . . I will also sell my 3 Concertos, the "Jeunehomme" and the "Litzau," as well as the one in B Minor, in cash to the engraver who did my sonatas.  I'll do the same with my 6 difficult sonatas if I can;  I won't get much, but it's better than nothing.  One needs money on a trip.  As far as my Sinfonias are concerned—most of them are not in the taste of the Parisians;  if I have time I'll rearrange the violin Concertos—that is, I'll shorten them—because in Germany the taste is for longer concerts, but, in fact, short and good quality is better. . . .

— from Paris, a letter to his father in Salzburg, dated 11 September 1778
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on May 19, 2009, 05:43:03 AM
Thanks for the excerpt from Mozart's letter to his father, Karl.  I particularly enjoyed the last statement:
Quote from: Mozart
if I have time I'll rearrange the violin Concertos—that is, I'll shorten them—because in Germany the taste is for longer concerts, but, in fact, short and good quality is better. . . .
Some things never change.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 07:44:05 AM
Quote from: Wolfgang Amadé Mozart
Mon trés cher Pére! [sic]

I beg you not to be angry with me for not having written for such a long time;—surely you know how busy I am these days!—I have gained much honor for myself with my 3 subscription concerts.—The concert I gave at the Theater was very successful as well.—I composed two grand Concertos and then a quintet which was extraordinarily well received;—I myself think it’s the best I’ve written in my entire life.—It is written for 1 oboe, 1 Clarinetto, 1 Corno, 1 fagotto, and the Piano forte (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,9.msg309270.html#msg309270);—I so wished you could have heard it!—and how beautifully they played it! . . .

— from Vienna, a letter to his father in Salzburg, dated 10 April 1784

(I'm guessing that the erroneous diacritics are from the source, and are not editorial errors on Speathling's part . . . in both cases, they should be accents graves, and not aigus.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 19, 2009, 08:35:28 AM
— from Vienna, a letter to his father in Salzburg, dated 10 April 1784

(I'm guessing that the erroneous diacritics are from the source, and are not editorial errors on Speathling's part . . . in both cases, they should be accents graves, and not aigus.)

Well, then this clearly means Wolfie did not compose it.  $:)  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on May 19, 2009, 08:42:50 AM
Who was it used to post things like,

"Mozart was an overrated transitional figure between Haydn & Beethoven."  Discuss.

?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 19, 2009, 08:45:46 AM
Well, then this clearly means Wolfie did not compose it.  $:)  8)

Quite the antithesis, my dear Ray. Mozart's spelling in French was nearly as bad as it was in German. Leopold's was worse, pretty much phonetic. So the fact that he got an accent at all is a breakthrough!  :D  (if they were perfect, I would be very suspicious!)

That said, how can we trust anything involving the alleged Mozart allegedly putting pen to paper? Maybe Haydn did it for him? :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brian on May 19, 2009, 08:46:11 AM
Who was it used to post things like,

"Mozart was an overrated transitional figure between Haydn & Beethoven."  Discuss.

?
I don't know, but I think Beethoven was an overrated transitional figure between Ernst Wilhelm Wolf and Joseph Joachim Raff.  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 19, 2009, 08:46:38 AM
Who was it used to post things like,

"Mozart was an overrated transitional figure between Haydn & Beethoven."  Discuss.

?

Ah, the lovely and talented Michel. Splendid young man!  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 08:55:24 AM
Quite the antithesis, my dear Ray. Mozart's spelling in French was nearly as bad as it was in German. Leopold's was worse, pretty much phonetic. So the fact that he got an accent at all is a breakthrough!  :D  (if they were perfect, I would be very suspicious!)

There are plenty of dubious spellings in the letters . . . chap was schooled at home (and, as you note, dad wasn't the most punctilious orthographer in the tray).  Getting an accent of any sort (just the wrong direction, after all) on the correct vowels . . . well, he did go to Paris with his maman.

So much more interesting to read the letters, than to read bloviatory reviews of the letters, wot?  0:) ;D 8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 19, 2009, 08:58:21 AM
There are plenty of dubious spellings in the letters . . . chap was schooled at home (and, as you note, dad wasn't the most punctilious orthographer in the tray).  Getting an accent of any sort (just the wrong direction, after all) on the correct vowels . . . well, he did go to Paris with his maman.

So much more interesting to read the letters, than to read bloviatory reviews of the letters, wot?  0:) ;D 8)

Absolutely. I have 1 volume of Andersen, but I would really like to get Späthling, he did it right, no whitewash on the fence there. Nor should there be. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on May 19, 2009, 09:09:04 AM
Ah, the lovely and talented Michel. Splendid young man!  :)
Gone but not missed forgotten.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 19, 2009, 09:14:04 AM
While we are on the topic of books filled with letters written by Mozart, I'd like to know if anyone has read this (http://www.amazon.com/Life-Letters-Penguin-Classics/dp/0141441461/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242756385&sr=1-1)? If you have, I'd be grateful if you could post a brief review. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 09:14:55 AM
Gone but not missed forgotten.

Who could forget the fellow who really wrote Mozart's "Symphony № 37" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._37_(Mozart))?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 09:26:30 AM
While we are on the topic of books filled with letters written by Mozart, I'd like to know if anyone has read this (http://www.amazon.com/Life-Letters-Penguin-Classics/dp/0141441461/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1242756385&sr=1-1)? If you have, I'd be grateful if you could post a brief review. :)

Looks very good, and includes correspondence from those near & dear to Wolferl.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 10:01:19 AM
Quote from: Robt W Gutman
In this apartment [in the Rauhensteingasse] took place a legendary reading of Mozart’s string quintet in D, K.593 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,9.msg309339.html#msg309339), of December 1790, with, tradition represents, Haydn and Mozart on the violas.  Johann Tost, once a violinist in the Esterházy orchestra and, thanks to an inheritance, become a factory owner, commissioned the work, perhaps at Haydn’s suggestion.  A refined and intricate contrapuntal masterpiece, K.593 reflects Haydn-like material and devices to the point of constituting a homage to him (no less the case with regard to Mozart’s next string quintet, the superb K.614 in E-flat, to be completed the following April).

(Gutman, Mozart: A Cultural Biography, pp.716-717)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 19, 2009, 10:11:56 AM
(Gutman, Mozart: A Cultural Biography, pp.716-717)

A book that I heartily recommend, BTW. It will edify you and keep you amused. What more can one ask of a book? :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2009, 10:13:04 AM
A book that I heartily recommend, BTW.

Moi, aussi. It's right here on the shelf  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 20, 2009, 08:25:12 PM
I still can't find the "real" Mozart thread on the search engine. Anyone?

I have just started listening to Mozart's late SQs, many for the first time, but ALL for the first time as a serious study mode. Haydn I can follow, but I was blown away by Mozart's "too many notes" florid style and really got the sense that I need to be told HOW to listen to them studiously. Is it me, or does he have LOTS of little quirks that keep things intersting? He just seems to pack so much stuff into 6-7 mins. What's the secret of listening to these SQs? I still can't tell them apart, mostly (my un-classical bias shows :-[ :-X :P), and I'm having trouble picking up that Mozartean happy melancoly. You can get technical with me, I'll pick it up. My set (ABQ) starts with K387, the "Sunrise."

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 20, 2009, 08:36:18 PM
oy...I posted my inquiry in the "hated" Mozart thread. umm, it's kind of long (I just don't want to write it again). If you could read it there and answer here, that would be nice! Thanks. Otherwise, I'll reiterate.

It's fixed now, snipper, no problem. :)  GB
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on May 20, 2009, 08:44:15 PM
I still can't find the "real" Mozart thread on the search engine. Anyone?

I have just started listening to Mozart's late SQs, many for the first time, but ALL for the first time as a serious study mode. Haydn I can follow, but I was blown away by Mozart's "too many notes" florid style and really got the sense that I need to be told HOW to listen to them studiously. Is it me, or does he have LOTS of little quirks that keep things intersting? He just seems to pack so much stuff into 6-7 mins. What's the secret of listening to these SQs? I still can't tell them apart, mostly (my un-classical bias shows :-[ :-X :P), and I'm having trouble picking up that Mozartean happy melancoly. You can get technical with me, I'll pick it up. My set (ABQ) starts with K387, the "Sunrise."

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. :)

If i were you, i'd pay attention to the harmony. Mozart's tonal language is much more chromatic then either Haydn or Beethoven, always sounds on the verge of braking apart. Yet, it almost never does. That's the genius of it i think. The overtly chromatic introduction to the last quartet indicates that he knew very well what he was doing, it's just not an indirect feature of his melodic sensibility. He is actually stretching the harmonic boundaries of his works without making it look like he is doing anything. I believe Mozart to be a considerably greater composer then Haydn and a far more sophisticated one. Stick with it for a while and you'll see what i mean.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 21, 2009, 01:21:21 AM
Snyppr, if you just keep listening you'll soon be able to tell Mozart's six Haydn quartets apart, and the four wonderful quartets that come after, too. They are indeed the ultimate in SQ writing, even the Hunt and the Hoffmeister (499) that are a little less complex harmonically. Each of 'em has a distinct character.

There is no need IMO to relegate Haydn to a lesser status, just because Mozart's quartets are so *#@! good. !) Mozart couldn't have written his without the model Haydn provided 2) Haydn wrote a lot more great quartets than Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Valentino on May 21, 2009, 01:23:42 AM
I guess I have to put on Superwoman and her Sidekicks in K. 421 now. Desert island stuff, that!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 21, 2009, 04:19:04 AM
Snyppr, if you just keep listening you'll soon be able to tell Mozart's six Haydn quartets apart, and the four wonderful quartets that come after, too. They are indeed the ultimate in SQ writing, even the Hunt and the Hoffmeister (499) that are a little less complex harmonically. Each of 'em has a distinct character.

There is no need IMO to relegate Haydn to a lesser status, just because Mozart's quartets are so *#@! good. !) Mozart couldn't have written his without the model Haydn provided 2) Haydn wrote a lot more great quartets than Mozart.

Well said withal, Herman.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 21, 2009, 04:51:23 AM
They are indeed the ultimate in SQ writing

Please correct me if I have misunderstood you, but do you mean to say that no other string quartet or set of string quartets has/have exploited the medium to a greater extent?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on May 21, 2009, 06:33:49 AM
Mozart couldn't have written his without the model Haydn provided

Faulty logic is faulty. Haydn couldn't have written anything like the Opus 76 or his London symphonies without the model provided by Mozart. To really understand how ahead of his time Mozart really was you have to pay attention to the time line. The "hey day" of high classical music were the 1790s. Mozart wrote most of his best works during the 1780s. Think about it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 21, 2009, 06:40:38 AM
Faulty logic is faulty. Haydn couldn't have written anything like the Opus 76 or his London symphonies without the model provided by Mozart. To really understand how ahead of his time Mozart really was you have to pay attention to the time line. The "hey day" of high classical music were the 1790s. Mozart wrote most of his best works during the 1780s. Think about it.

... basing his quartets directly on the model provided by Haydn's Op 33 (1781). I would be edified to have you show me where Haydn's later quartets owed any debt whatsoever to Mozart's quartets.... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 21, 2009, 07:15:14 AM
Quote from: Herman
Mozart couldn't have written his without the model Haydn provided.

Faulty logic is faulty.

And a tautology is a tautology!  Your remark is a puzzling 'response' to Herman here, viz.:

Quote
Haydn couldn't have written anything like the Opus 76 or his London symphonies without the model provided by Mozart.

Two contemporary artists, in a state of mutual influence.  This does not in the least 'negate' Herman's remark;  you have added the dimension that Mozart was an influence upon Haydn, too.  To offer that as a supposed 'contradiction' to the fact of Haydn's influence upon Mozart, is faulty logic.

Once again, the fact that you start the post out with a comment on faulty logic, is ironic, and amusing.

And I thank you!

Quote
To really understand how ahead of his time Mozart really was you have to pay attention to the time line. The "hey day" of high classical music were the 1790s. Mozart wrote most of his best works during the 1780s. Think about it.

This whole bit is predicated on the peculiarity, the nicety, of designating the 1790s as a "heyday" in 'distinction' to the decade earlier.  Since there seems no memo in existence to such a curious effect, your statement is entirely self-serving, rather than anything in service of historical truth. Think about it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 21, 2009, 07:21:53 AM
It's fixed now, snipper, no problem. :)  GB
Snipper?  uh...uh...snipper??? oh, woe is me... ;D ;D ;D

ok, ok ::), I feel better now...

On the Haydn vs Mozart debate: who made who vis a vis Haydn's "Sunrise" (76/4) vs. Mozart K575? They're both in "D" and seem to have a similar flavor. I mean, by THAT time, there must have been some cross pollination.

I've also noticed many of Mozart's openings are...mm...mellifulous? The only quartet that opens with some sort of unison seems to be the last in "F' K590. Is it Beethoven that made the "heavy/cool" union intro his own?

Standouts for me right now are the "Sunrise" K387, the "Hoffmeister" (reminds me of Hindemith's last SQ!!!), and the last K590. But the whole cycle seems like a giant garden with cubbyholes of glory everywhere!

Also, per Haydn SQs, why does talk about them always center around Op.76, Erdody? When people pick their favorite Haydn SQs we always get something from that set or Op.77? I went through most of the Naxos set years ago seeking "snyprrr's personal favorite" (and I thought there must be one in THAT many SQs, perferrably in minor key), but I just found Haydn (or the Kodaly Qrt.), well, frankly boring. But don't get me wrong, I have all his minor key symphonies which I love, and the piano trios and piano sonatas I like a lot. Perhaps it is the smooth homogenized SQ sound in Haydn that seems to put me to sleep. But when I heard the Alban Berg Quartet (Teldec box) play "The Rider", I realized that the performer certainly makes a difference. This was quite an exciting, razor sharp performance, and I don't remember the Kodaly making that kind of impression on me. And I am really eager to hear some Festetics?? HIP.

I recently heard what may finally be my favorite Haydn SQ, Op.33/5 in f minor (of course). I saw it on youtube, and it had an almost baroque sound to it I really liked. I noticed also that Haydn didn't really take off on the SQs until after his Sturm und Drang period (of course my fav Haydn period), the Op.33 however falling squarely into this period. So, perhaps if and when, I would certainly like to hear the Festetics?? in Op.33.

...perhaps Boccherini or Albrechtsberger (is this a father/son team?...there seems to be two of them???)....
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on May 21, 2009, 07:40:06 AM
Faulty logic is faulty. Haydn couldn't have written anything like the Opus 76 or his London symphonies without the model provided by Mozart. To really understand how ahead of his time Mozart really was you have to pay attention to the time line. The "hey day" of high classical music were the 1790s. Mozart wrote most of his best works during the 1780s. Think about it.
This whole bit is predicated on the peculiarity, the nicety, of designating the 1790s as a "heyday" in 'distinction' to the decade earlier.  Since there seems no memo in existence to such a curious effect, your statement is entirely self-serving, rather than anything in service of historical truth. Think about it.

More hilarity: the delicious irony of JdP suggesting to anyone else that he should "Think about it."   ;D  Thanks for the chuckles.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Valentino on May 21, 2009, 07:53:06 AM
(Mosaïques for Haydn, snyprrr.)

The mere suggestion that Haydn and Mozart were not influenced by each other makes me chuckle.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 21, 2009, 07:57:02 AM
On the Haydn vs Mozart debate . . . .

O Freunde! Nicht diese töne!

The two artists had the highest regard for one another, and it would look juvenile on our part to couch the matter in one-or-the-other terms.

From p.16 of Mozart: The Golden Years

Quote from: H.C. Robbins Landon
The three symphonies of this period [i.e., When he returned to Salzburg and began composing in 1779 and 1780, from earlier the same paragraph] are all uniquely beautiful works of quite different kinds […] The next work, the lyrical B-flat Symphony № 33 (K.319), is in that Austrian tradition of chamber symphony perfected by Haydn (and by his followers, such as J.B. Vanhal).  In keeping with the general tradition, the orchestration omits trumpets and drums and the entire score is of a feathery lightness.  The third symphony, № 34 (K.338), is, again, totally different—a grand work in C major with trumpets and drums, in the key associated with spiritual and temporal power.  We notice that Mozart has made something of a speciality of this incisive and brilliant use of C major:  one of the characteristics of his music in general, but especially of this pageantry in C, is the use of the dotted rhythm in 4/4 time [mus. ex.: quarter-note, dotted-eighth + sixteenth-note, quarter-note, quarter-note]. This particularly Mozartean marching motif pervades the first movement in a quite extraordinary way, announcing itself in the horns and trumpets in bar 3, but proceeding to the whole orchestra in bars 7, 11, 13, and so forth, thus making us almost continuously aware of its presence, sometimes for bars on end.  Haydn had made a great specialty of such C major pageantry, and had composed a dozen symphonies with trumpets and drums and (an Esterháza specialty) horns in C alto, an octave above normal, culminating in his Symphony № 56 of 1774, a work widely diffused in manuscript copies and several printed editions and hence probably well known to Mozart.  Mozart, as was his wont, assimilated this C major style of Haydn’s and made it even more brilliant and penetrating.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 21, 2009, 08:29:02 AM
From p.133 of Mozart: The Golden Years

Quote from: H.C. Robbins Landon
The Haydn-Mozart relationship has been the subject of much comment, most of it (as far as nineteenth- and twentieth-century Mozart scholarship is concerned) of a slightly surprised nature, considering that Mozartians—but not Mozart himself—have always tended to consider Haydn a second-rate composer and unworthy of the loving attention with which the younger master treated him and his music.  That Mozart actually did revere Haydn is attested in many contemporary and near-contemporary documents, for instance in Franz Xaver Niemetschek’s Mozart biography of 1798, based on information given by Constanze Mozart and other authentic sources.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 21, 2009, 08:45:26 AM
O Freunde! Nicht diese töne!

bitte, bitte, neine, meine shones kraftmeister! gesuntheit!! ;D

I should have used quotes! und how bout that Deutschereinzechtgersprackt? ::)

...uber alles...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on May 21, 2009, 09:28:10 AM
Two contemporary artists, in a state of mutual influence.  This does not in the least 'negate' Herman's remark;

The comment regarding Mozart's influence upon Haydn wasn't meant to negate Herman's remark, it was just an addition to my claim that his logic was faulty. The fact Haydn influenced Mozart and that without the first we wouldn't have the other doesn't have anything to do with whether Mozart was in fact a greater or more "sophisticated" composer. This is so obvious i didn't feel any need to expand on his statement other then calling his logic defective. Herman's quip and your hearty support of it is a clear example of knee-jerk feel good sentimentality overriding logical consideration. If he wanted to prove that Haydn was not a lesser genius he should have attempted to do so directly. I don't know how you people can lead an existence made up entirely of coffee klatch pleasantries.

This whole bit is predicated on the peculiarity, the nicety, of designating the 1790s as a "heyday" in 'distinction' to the decade earlier.  Since there seems no memo in existence to such a curious effect, your statement is entirely self-serving, rather than anything in service of historical truth. Think about it.

Historical truth being defined entirely according to the mainstream academic interpretation of it, right? No way an individual should ever develop their own opinion on a given subject, God forbid! When Haydn first introduced his opus 33 quartets, i don't see a great deal of acknowledgment in the musical culture of his time. Only Mozart was able to seize upon those new ideas, and he almost instantly went beyond them. The standard he set was so high even Haydn had to play catch up, and that despite the fact he was allegedly leading the new style. Most of his best works were written after Mozart was already dead, and if we juxtapose Mozart's achievements during the period he was most active with what was going on around him the gab is so wide that it doesn't even appear to be possible.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gabriel on May 21, 2009, 02:16:16 PM
When Haydn first introduced his opus 33 quartets, i don't see a great deal of acknowledgment in the musical culture of his time. Only Mozart was able to seize upon those new ideas, and he almost instantly went beyond them.

While Haydn, at the same time, was going beyond them by his own means. I don't see here any superiority of Mozart over Haydn.

The standard he set was so high even Haydn had to play catch up, and that despite the fact he was allegedly leading the new style.

This sentence is true only in a relative way. In fact the genres in which Haydn didn't match Mozart were mainly opera and concerto.

Most of his best works were written after Mozart was already dead...

This statement is false. Haydn's masterpieces written before Mozart's death can be counted for dozens, if not by hundreds, in most if not all musical genres.

Personally, I think that the exercise of deciding objectively if Haydn or Mozart was a greater composer than the other is vain and sterile. And concerning the concept of "musical genius", I think that the fact of being born in the countryside, in an environment that was not precisely the best for developing a musical talent, and then to struggle in Vienna through the most difficult economical and social conditions for finally becoming the greatest composer of his time (with Mozart) is a Haydnian accomplishment that I can't qualify but of "genius" and that I admire as deeply as Mozart's almost unparalleled precocity.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 21, 2009, 03:23:42 PM
This sentence is true only in a relative way. In fact the genres in which Haydn didn't match Mozart were mainly opera and concerto.

And Haydn graciously (and humbly) conceded Mozart's superiority in opera.

Quote from: Gabriel
This statement is false. Haydn's masterpieces written before Mozart's death can be counted for dozens, if not by hundreds, in most if not all musical genres.

Personally, I think that the exercise of deciding objectively if Haydn or Mozart was a greater composer than the other is vain and sterile. And concerning the concept of "musical genius", I think that the fact of being born in the countryside, in an environment that was not precisely the best for developing a musical talent, and then to struggle in Vienna through the most difficult economical and social conditions for finally becoming the greatest composer of his time (with Mozart) is a Haydnian accomplishment that I can't qualify but of "genius" and that I admire as deeply as Mozart's almost unparalleled precocity.

Quoted for truth.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 05:21:59 AM
Quote from: 'Josquin'
Yeah, they don't like radical crypto-Marxists trying to undermine the prestige of European history and by extension ruining tourism to their city. Cant blame them.

I guess Mr Newman doesn't like the inconvenience of historical fact undermining his attempts to make a name for himself by the wacko method of sling mud and see what sticks.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 05:23:35 AM
Centuwian, why do they . . . titter so? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,12654.msg310314.html#msg310314)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 22, 2009, 09:03:07 AM
Wolferl


Could anyone enlighten me on the use of the suffix -- assuming it is one -- 'erl.' There was Wolfgang's sister, Maria Anna, who was also known as Nannerl, but I don't recollect seeing the name Nann, or Nanngang even! But I do seem to recollect that letters among family members used Wolferl often. So was it a pet-name?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 09:22:48 AM
Wolferl


Could anyone enlighten me on the use of the suffix -- assuming it is one -- 'erl.' There was Wolfgang's sister, Maria Anna, who was also known as Nannerl, but I don't recollect seeing the name Nann, or Nanngang even! But I do seem to recollect that letters among family members used Wolferl often. So was it a pet-name?

I will gladly bow to correction by our German speakers, but what I understand is that it would translate into "Dear little Wolfgang". If in fact it has a direct translation. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 22, 2009, 09:32:08 AM
I will gladly bow to correction by our German speakers, but what I understand is that it would translate into "Dear little Wolfgang". If in fact it has a direct translation. :)

8)

Ah, I see. Thanks, Gurn. :)

I wonder how it should work for Nannerl. Dear little... ?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 09:33:57 AM
Ah, I see. Thanks, Gurn. :)

I wonder how it should work for Nannerl. Dear little... ?

Marianne. Hey, I don't make 'em up, I just write 'em down... :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 22, 2009, 09:36:48 AM
Oh, okay. ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 10:24:10 AM
Even in the English of roughly that era, "Nan" was an affectionate form of Ann(e).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 22, 2009, 10:26:09 AM
Never knew that. Danke. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 10:29:17 AM
In German, the "erl" ending is a diminutive, much like the "y" in English, as in Teddy and Joey and Kathy.

Haydn's nickname was "Sepperl," which comes from Jo-seph. (Strange, in Englush "jo" seems to be the root of Joseph. In German, it seems to be the opposite.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
Never knew that. Danke. :)

Al vostro servizio!

Meanwhile . . . so who taught this Mozart guy, anyway?

Quote
Johann Georg Leopold Mozart (November 14, 1719 – May 28, 1787) was a composer, conductor, teacher, and violinist. Mozart is best known today as the father and teacher of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and for his violin textbook Versuch einer gründlichen Violinschule.

Hmm . . . let's see . . . Mozart's father was a composer . . . Mozart was taught by his father . . . ergo, Mozart studied composition with a composer!

Count on us to state the obvious where needed . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 10:30:44 AM
I will gladly bow to correction by our German speakers, but what I understand is that it would translate into "Dear little Wolfgang". If in fact it has a direct translation. :)

8)

More like "Wolfy," which is the way it was presented in Amadeus.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 22, 2009, 10:38:29 AM
In German, the "erl" ending is a diminutive, much like the "y" in English, as in Teddy and Joey and Kathy.

Haydn's nickname was "Sepperl," which comes rom Jo-seph. (Strange, in Englush "jo" seems to be the root of Joseph. In German, it seems to be the opposite.)

More like "Wolfy," which is the way it was presented in Amadeus.

Ah...yes, it all makes sense now.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 10:39:07 AM
More like "Wolfy," which is the way it was presented in Amadeus.

But not Wolfi-poo. That's right out.

Separately:

Quote from: the tabloid writer-in-training
1. Where, if at all, Mozart went to school before the age of 21
2. Where, if at all, he made detailed study of orchestration, harmony and instrumentation under a recognised/skilled teacher of the same.

1.  Mozart went to school, at home.  His father, a composer, conductor, violinist and pedagogue, taught him.

Let's all state the obvious again, that this has been common knowledge, and indisputible, for centuries.  The idea that stating such a ridiculous question, with any notion that it "undermines" the fact that Mozart was a world-class composer, is purest idiocy.

2.  The idiocy of this question is only a bit milder.  His tuition with his father, and his extensive experience performing on both violin and piano, are answer enough.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 10:41:02 AM
In German, the "erl" ending is a diminutive, much like the "y" in English, as in Teddy and Joey and Kathy.

Haydn's nickname was "Sepperl," which comes rom Jo-seph. (Strange, in Englush "jo" seems to be the root of Joseph. In German, it seems to be the opposite.)

And Schubert's was "Schwammerl" which means, roughly, "Little Mushroom", presumably a reference to his stature. :D

8)

PS - Mozart's dog's name was Bimperl.... ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 10:42:37 AM
Quote from: the tabloid writer-in-training
What sort of answer do you want to such a sprawling mass of questions ? The best thing is to say we've had 200 years of Mozart propaganda.

There you have it:  the shovel, itself.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 10:43:41 AM
Al vostro servizio!

Meanwhile . . . so who taught this Mozart guy, anyway?

Hmm . . . let's see . . . Mozart's father was a composer . . . Mozart was taught by his father . . . ergo, Mozart studied composition with a composer!

Count on us to state the obvious where needed . . . .

Yeah, the whole argument about WAM's education is kind of stupid. To say someone needs a degree to do anything is a modern academic prejudice. It's also grossly illogical to conclude that Mozart can't have written anything because the attribution of some early pieces is in question. It's a blunt, bricklike reasoning that is more appropriate to conspiracy theories than to reasonable discourse: He didn't write some of the things attributed to him. Therefore he wrote nothing attrbuted to him.

All wood burns, claims Sir Bedevere. Therefore he concludes all which burns is wood. This is of course pure bull****. Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted. For example, all of Alma Kogan is dead, but only some of the class of dead people are Alma Kogan. Whoever Alma Kogan is.

There was a lot of false Haydn going around in the 18th century, too, but that was only because publishers knew Haydn's name sold, and it wouldn't have sold if he hadn't already been known as a composer. In my own lifetime, scholarship --- that is, real scholarship --- has discovered misattributions, but it has also left Haydn's real achievement intact. Yelling "fraud!" on the basis of a few course corrections is the height of irresponsibility and arrogance.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 10:49:19 AM
Yeah, the whole argument about WAM's education is kind of stupid. To say someone needs a degree to do anything is a modern academic prejudice. It's also grossly illogical to conclude that Mozart can't have written anything because the attribution of some early pieces is in question. It's a blunt, bricklike reasoning that is more appropriate to conspiracy theories than to reasonable discourse: He didn't write some of the things attributed to him. Therefore he wrote nothing attrbuted to him.

All wood burns, claims Sir Bedevere. Therefore he concludes all which burns is wood. This is of course pure bull****. Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted. For example, all of Alma Kogan is dead, but only some of the class of dead people are Alma Kogan. Whoever Alma Kogan is.

There was a lot of false Haydn going around in the 18th century, too, but that was only because publishers knew Haydn's name sold, and it wouldn't have sold if he hadn't already been known as a composer. In my own lifetime, scholarship --- that is, real scholarship --- has discovered misattributions, but it has also left Haydn's real achievement intact. Yelling "fraud!" on the basis of a few course corrections is the height of irresponsibility and arrogance.

All true, Joe. Your last reference is rather unfortunate; however, how could you know? Robert's next assertion (which presumably hasn't made it into book form yet, so is on the back burner) is that Haydn didn't write any of his own music. He can wax poetic, and at length, on this topic. I've seen it. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 10:54:30 AM
All true, Joe. Your last reference is rather unfortunate; however, how could you know? Robert's next assertion (which presumably hasn't made it into book form yet, so is on the back burner) is that Haydn didn't write any of his own music. He can wax poetic, and at length, on this topic. I've seen it. :)

8)

Yeah, I saw he was making the same case about Haydn, which is precisely why I mentioned it. Sort of a preemptive strike. the thing about Haydn is that he did study with someone. But then there was all that on the job traning. You write symphony after symphony, and eventually you get the hang of it.

Poetic? I don't know. More like hysterical, from what I've seen.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 22, 2009, 10:56:44 AM
And concerning the concept of "musical genius", I think that the fact of being born in the countryside, in an environment that was not precisely the best for developing a musical talent, and then to struggle in Vienna through the most difficult economical and social conditions for finally becoming the greatest composer of his time (with Mozart) is a Haydnian accomplishment that I can't qualify but of "genius" and that I admire as deeply as Mozart's almost unparalleled precocity.

I think so too.

I was also a little baffled by the contention that Haydn's best work was composed after WAM's death. However I'm just not getting involved in these kinds of discussions, or, rather, not with someone like JdP. N offense, life is just too short.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 11:03:09 AM
I was also a little baffled by the contention that Haydn's best work was composed after WAM's death.

Nothing new here. It's a common prejudice. Mozart died in 1791. Haydn's last trios and piano sonatas, the London Symphonies the last great masses and oratorios were all written after that date. No controversy. The exception would be the string quartetes. The Op. 76 and 77 were written int he 1780s, I believe.

Someone on these boards once asked what musical event in history we would have like to be present for. For me, it would be the Vienna soirees wheer Haydn and Mozart and a couple of their friends got together and played string quartets.

Oh, wait, no --- Mozart couldn't have played viola in a string quartet. We can't name his teacher ...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 22, 2009, 11:16:42 AM
Nothing new here. It's a common prejudice. Mozart died in 1791. Haydn's last trios and piano sonatas, the London Symphonies the last great masses and oratorios were all written after that date. No controversy. The exception would be the string quartetes. The Op. 76 and 77 were written int he 1780s, I believe.

Op. 76 and 77 were composed in the late 1790s, after Mozart's death. However Haydn's op 64 is from 1790-1 and op. 50 is from 1787. And of course there are numerous great symphonies and piano works from an earlier date.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 22, 2009, 11:17:35 AM
Op. 76 and 77 were composed in the late 1790s, after Mozart's death. However Haydn's op 64 is from 1790-1 and op. 50 is from 1787. And of course there are numerous great symphonies and piano works from an earlier date.

Not to mention the fabulous Op. 20 quartets!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 11:20:54 AM
And of course there are numerous great symphonies and piano works from an earlier date.

True, bu I think the argument is not that Haydn did not write great music before Mozart died, but rather, that he reached his peak of perfection afterward. That is, he werote his best work. Of course, with the Haydn riches, who can be sure?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 11:23:53 AM
Op. 76 and 77 were composed in the late 1790s, after Mozart's death. However Haydn's op 64 is from 1790-1 and op. 50 is from 1787. And of course there are numerous great symphonies and piano works from an earlier date.

Yes, I was going to mention Op 50 myself. It was the first Op that Haydn wrote after Mozart's "Haydn Quartets", and in fact there is no apparent debt to Mozart being repaid in these works. Vis-a-vis Mozart, they are on a totally different road. Apropos of nothing whatsoever, they are my favorite Haydn SQ's... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 22, 2009, 12:24:23 PM
True, bu I think the argument is not that Haydn did not write great music before Mozart died, but rather, that he reached his peak of perfection afterward.

The London Symphonies are more monumental than symphonies from earlier phases but that doesn't necessaily make them more perfect, let alone more enjoyable.

And perhaps this is also a good point to ask what the big deal is. There is no doubt Haydn wrote all of his work after JS Bach died. Does that mean he really should thank JS Bach for what he composed? Haydn and Mozart inspired each other at some point, sure, but that doesn't mean their music sounds alike.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on May 22, 2009, 12:28:48 PM
Yes, I was going to mention Op 50 myself. It was the first Op that Haydn wrote after Mozart's "Haydn Quartets", and in fact there is no apparent debt to Mozart being repaid in these works. Vis-a-vis Mozart, they are on a totally different road. Apropos of nothing whatsoever, they are my favorite Haydn SQ's... :)

8)

I never said Haydn was influenced by Mozart. I said Mozart set an higher standard which Haydn was forced to catch up to. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on May 22, 2009, 12:31:41 PM
Nothing new here. It's a common prejudice. Mozart died in 1791. Haydn's last trios and piano sonatas, the London Symphonies the last great masses and oratorios were all written after that date. No controversy. The exception would be the string quartetes. The Op. 76 and 77 were written int he 1780s, I believe.

I'm not sure why you used the word prejudice when you are stating a simple fact here. BTW, the Opus 76 was written in 1799 and the Opus 77 in 1802.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on May 22, 2009, 12:37:09 PM
The London Symphonies are more monumental than symphonies from earlier phases but that doesn't necessaily make them more perfect, let alone more enjoyable.

Non sequitur. Nobody has ever said the London symphonies were more perfect because they were more monumental. I say that they were greater then any other symphony Haydn had written before, but not as great as the last symphonies of Mozart, and those, when compared to the model upon which they were based, namely, the first two Paris symphonies, demonstrate plainly that the younger composer was ahead of his mentor.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 22, 2009, 12:39:34 PM
It would have been interesting if Mozart had lived another 10+ years or even beyond, in terms of the string quartet medium.  I'm sure he would have returned to it, and probably to the string quintet medium too.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on May 22, 2009, 12:40:34 PM
Gone but not missed forgotten.

I see Michel/Paul on an occasional basis and am in frequent contact, so certainly not missed or forgotten by me.

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 22, 2009, 01:18:45 PM
I'm not sure why you used the word prejudice when you are stating a simple fact here. 

To say that Haydn's best work dates from the 1790s is not prroperly a fact. It is an opinion, though admittedly a common one.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 01:57:12 PM
I'm not sure why you used the word prejudice when you are stating a simple fact here. BTW, the Opus 76 was written in 1799 and the Opus 77 in 1802.

Umm, 1796-97. Don't let Robert catch you out in a factual error like that, it will prove all his points, game, set, match! :o

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Ingo Goritzki - CPE Bach Concerto in c for Oboe and Violin 1st mvmt - Allegro
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gabriel on May 22, 2009, 03:58:02 PM
Umm, 1796-97. Don't let Robert catch you out in a factual error like that, it will prove all his points, game, set, match! :o

Indeed.(*) The publication (at least of op. 77) was later because Haydn was trying to complete another set of six quartets. Alas, he just finished the two op. 77 and the two movements known as op. 103.

(*) Now I'm thinking of Lethe while writing this very useful word. ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2009, 04:03:14 PM
Indeed.(*) The publication (at least of op. 77) was later because Haydn was trying to complete another set of six quartets. Alas, he just finished the two op. 77 and the two movements known as op. 103.

(*) Now I'm thinking of Lethe while writing this very useful word. ;)

Indeed, indeed. :D

Op 76 - 1796-97 (that was what I was referring to, he was right about...)
Op 77 - 1799 (the last instrumental works that were totally completed)
Op 103 - most likely 1803.

8)

----------------
Listening to: Boston Baroque / Pearlman - Bach Concerto #1 in F BWV 1046 4th mvmt
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gabriel on May 22, 2009, 04:05:13 PM
Indeed, indeed. :D

Op 76 - 1796-97 (that was what I was referring to, he was right about...)
Op 77 - 1799 (the last instrumental works that were totally completed)
Op 103 - most likely 1803.

Indeed, Gurn. ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 06:01:14 PM
Oh, wait, no --- Mozart couldn't have played viola in a string quartet. We can't name his teacher ...

 ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 22, 2009, 08:56:23 PM
I say that they were greater then any other symphony Haydn had written before, but not as great as the last symphonies of Mozart, and those, when compared to the model upon which they were based, namely, the first two Paris symphonies, demonstrate plainly that the younger composer was ahead of his mentor.

Yes, that's what you say. You're rather deftly mixing up fact and opinion. Even the use of the term "mentor" for Haydn is rather tendentious.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 25, 2009, 01:36:03 PM
Indeed—Newman has yet to let facts interfere with his fantasies.  Everyone else here understands the difference between facts and inane opinions.

edit:  Correction:  Almost everyone!

Most prudent emendation, viz.:

Yes, that's what you say. You're rather deftly mixing up fact and opinion. Even the use of the term "mentor" for Haydn is rather tendentious.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 25, 2009, 01:37:15 PM
BTW, thanks to Herman for putting the Prussian quartets back on my radar . . . I've had the discs for a while, had listened to them on first picking them up, but haven't dug into them properly until this past week.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 25, 2009, 01:43:57 PM
BTW, thanks to Herman for putting the Prussian quartets back on my radar . . . I've had the discs for a while, had listened to them on first picking them up, but haven't dug into them properly until this past week.

Splendid works, aren't they, Karl? I think that no matter who composed them, he did a hell of a job. ;)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
La Real Cámara - G 117 Trio in d for 2 Violins & Cello 2nd mvmt - Minuetto con moto
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 25, 2009, 01:51:53 PM
I've had them in fairly heavy rotation these past few days, Gurn . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 03:50:24 AM
. . . In broad terms, if one is new to first-hand experience with Newmanry (as opposed to hearsay) there appear to be two main classes of reaction: fairly instant dismissal . . .

Viz.:

Nothing to see here, folks. Move on.

One is gratified to have gotten it right, straight off, of course.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 04:04:57 AM
In this earlier post (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,46.msg309951.html#msg309951) I cited Robbins Landon . . . a citation which I abbreviate here:

Quote from: H.C. Robbins Landon
We notice that Mozart has made something of a speciality of this incisive and brilliant use of C major:  one of the characteristics of his music in general, but especially of this pageantry in C, is the use of the dotted rhythm in 4/4 time [mus. ex.: quarter-note, dotted-eighth + sixteenth-note, quarter-note, quarter-note]. This particularly Mozartean marching motif pervades the first movement in a quite extraordinary way . . . .

[emphases added]

And, well, lookie here:

(http://www.themorgan.org/collections/images/highlights/mozart_cary483_2.jpg)

. . . from the autograph of the ‘Haffner’ Symphony, K.385. Glance at mm.4,6,8,10 . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 04:10:23 AM
The Robbins Landon citation above was from a paragraph discussing the K.338, composed a couple of years earlier than the K.385.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 05:26:44 AM
Quote from: H.C. Robbins Landon
Some time had elapsed since Mozart had worked on string quartets in a concentrated fashion; the last of the ‘Haydn’ series had been completed in 1785.  After that, he composed a single quartet in 1786, possibly commissioned by the publisher F.A. Hoffmeister.  Although this work (in D major, K.499) is in some ways less complicated and less difficult of interpretation than those of the ‘Haydn’ series, it is nonetheless both beautiful and profound (and contains one of the most original minuets in all eighteenth-century music).  The last three quartets, written for the royal cellist, subtly flattered the king by allotting a much more prominent cello part than is usual, and this led the composer to re-think the whole layout.  Mozart was trying to create a new popular style, similar in scope (but not in content) to that which Haydn had perfected and with which he had already won the hearts of musical Europe.  So in a real sense, the ‘Prussian’ quartets—as they are called—are ‘easier’ and more approachable than the austere ‘Haydn’ series.  One aspect of the difference has been suggested by the late Hans Keller:

On the one hand, there is no doubt that [in the ‘Haydn’ quartets] Mozart made, if the phrase be permitted, a special effort in view of his expert dedicatee, to whom he would also be psychologically prepared to confide his deepest secrets.  On the other hand, His ’cello-playing Majesty created very particular and grave textural problems with which any composer, including probably Haydn and Beethoven, would have been unable to cope at a high creative level.  Mozart’s solutions show an almost incredible capacity for adjustment, a mastery of the medium in circumstances that were nothing short of a textural emergency. . . .

This, again, because I have been listening a great deal to the ‘Prussian’ quartets (K.575, 589 & 590) this week.

Only a few of a large number of items which ‘noseth peculiar’ about the recently tempest-in-an-imaginary-teapot is:  Mozart’s mature work is (so far as such things can be ‘objectivized’) undeniably great.  It is staggeringly counterintuitive that any contemporary of his, whose works under his rightful name compare poorly to Mozart’s, should write so astonishingly better, for no recognition.  It is hardly possible that publishers such as Hoffmeister and Artaria would traffic in a sham, when the actual name that goes with musical talent on so exalted an order is of such obvious face value.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 26, 2009, 05:41:02 AM
Splendid works, aren't they, Karl? I think that no matter who composed them, he did a hell of a job. ;)

I believe Mozart's autograph of the wonderful Prussian Qts are still with us.

Which recording were you listening to, Karl?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 26, 2009, 05:45:24 AM
As Woody Allen wrote, Les Miserables is just Coriolanus with a few obvious changes (say them both fast).

Due to all the squabbling on the other thread (I hestite to call it argument), I went back this weekend and listened to the Clarinet and Oboe Concertos, and well probably be listening to a lot more in the near future. Beautiful stuff. In my recordng with Hogwood, a reproduction of the original clarinet is used, with the lower range. To tell the truth, I don't notice a lot of differences, but to do that, I guess I'd have to go back and listen to the two versions back to back.

My own interest in Mozart's authenticity is undeniably economic. The last thing I want to do is re-purchase all my CDs under different names ...  ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 05:47:02 AM
I believe Mozart's autograph of the wonderful Prussian Qts are still with us.

Which recording were you listening to, Karl?

Leipzig Quartet on mdg, Herman.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 05:48:43 AM
Due to all the squabbling on the other thread (I hestitate to call it argument), I went back this weekend and listened to the Clarinet and Oboe Concertos, and well probably be listening to a lot more in the near future. Beautiful stuff. In my recordng with Hogwood, a reproduction of the original clarinet is used, with the lower range. To tell the truth, I don't notice a lot of differences, but to do that, I guess I'd have to go back and listen to the two versions back to back.

Often, the difference is just in arpeggiated passages, where the bottommost stretches available to the basset clarinet are transposed up (and/or altered) to suit the standard clarinet in A.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 26, 2009, 06:19:04 AM
Often, the difference is just in arpeggiated passages, where the bottommost stretches available to the basset clarinet are transposed up (and/or altered) to suit the standard clarinet in A.

The notes also said there wass some connective tissue that was different in the newer "adaptation" as well. The changes were based on a detailed critique of the first publication, written by someone (whose name escapes me) who is said to have known the piece well brefore it was printed.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 06:21:49 AM
The notes also said there wass some connective tissue that was different in the newer "adaptation" as well. The changes were based on a detailed critique of the first publication, written by someone (whose name escapes me) who is said to have known the piece well brefore it was printed.

I haven't been mad for reconstructions of the piece for basset clarinet (my own reasons); but that would be interesting reading.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 06:27:22 AM
Precisely. Then stop parading that assertion of Mozart (that he couldn't remember a iota of the symphony) as if it proves anything. It proves nothing.

Part of the reason it proves nothing, is that it isn't really an assertion on Mozart's part, is it? All the assertions involved, are the Propagandist's.  What Mozart wrote was:

Quote from: W.A. Mozart
The New Hafner Sinfonie has truly surprised me—I didn’t remember anything about it;—I am sure it is very effective.

[ letter from Vienna to his father Leopold, 15 February 1783 ]

Mozart composed the Haffner mid-1782, in a rush of activity;  and the resulting four-movement symphony was a result of ‘paring down’ a more-movemented divertimento.  In a footnote to p.626 of Mozart: A Cultural Biography, Gutman writes:

Quote from: Robt W. Gutman
Leopold had dragooned him into fulfilling the request of a family that had supported his interests since childhood.  As he composed the new Haffner music, he sent it piecemeal to the mail coach.  When Leopold returned the entire composition to Vienna early the following year, Mozart gazed in amazement at what he had conceived under pressure and scribbled as fast as pen could travel: “The New Haffner Symphony has in truth surprised me, for I had forgotten every note of it. Indeed, it must make a good effect.”  The march, K.408, no. 2/385a, opened and closed this original (Salzburg) version, which, it has been argued, also had two minuets and thus the ramshackle layout—compared to a symphony—of a serenade.

I wanted to quote the entire footnote, in part, because the translation that Gutman references contains the phrasing “I had forgotten every note of it,” which is quite equivalent to Spaethling’s “I didn’t remember anything about it.”  Considering the volume of music that Mozart was composing, at a rapid pace—and especially under these ‘chop it out’ circumstances—it does not surprise me, that he may not have remembered the piece, before it was recalled to him by viewing the score (which is an entirely different matter to the eisogetical “I’ve never seen this before!”)  As a composer myself, at times I look at music I had written six or eight months earlier . . . and I have forgotten it.  Often, this is also partly a matter of my awareness of even my own work being further imprinted by witnessing a performance, or (indeed) playing it myself—and lo! Mozart wrote this work, packed it off in the mail coach to Salzburg . . . and out of sight, out of mind (all the while working at a good pace on a number of other projects) until early next year—Mozart himself made use of the score, which (again) Leopold returned to him in Vienna in February, at a concert 23 March 1783.

In short, this is all perfectly sensible, and harmonizes with my own experience as a composer.

Nothing to see here, folks . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 26, 2009, 07:06:05 AM
Leipzig Quartet on mdg, Herman.

I believe I have that one, too. I seem to recall they were very sparing with expressive vibrato, as if HIP-influenced.

I think they're a great quartet.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 26, 2009, 07:09:45 AM
Very nice account;  agility and grace, clear textures.  It's a recording I could almost listen to all day!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 26, 2009, 11:24:11 AM
I listened to the Leipzig's 589 while I was preparing dinner (and then it turned out I had to coax our two-year old into eating her chicken alongside her dessert). It's funny how the Leipzig has these HIP-ish stylings on this record. I heard them in an all Mozart recital in the Concertgebouw (small hall) three years ago (maybe) and they were back to their more traditional style, and I liked that slightly better. Still one of the better new recordings, with the Peterson and the Prazak Qts.

I also played the Haffner Symphony (beats me why) in the Karl Böhm interp. It's never been a favorite of mine, allthough the minuet is really cool. And of course I just love the timpani part.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Valentino on May 26, 2009, 10:37:33 PM
You lot!  ;D

K. 589 next. First Mosaïques, then Hagen.  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 27, 2009, 03:04:43 AM
I also played the Haffner Symphony (beats me why) in the Karl Böhm interp. It's never been a favorite of mine, allthough the minuet is really cool. And of course I just love the timpani part.

I must have a yet-more-HIP-ly one somewhere, but generally I listen to St-Martin-in-the-Fields on the Haffner.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 27, 2009, 04:18:22 AM
So, as a composer, how do you rate the timpani part? Genius or just corporate?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 27, 2009, 04:19:21 AM
So, as a composer, how do you rate the timpani part? Genius or just corporate?

Oh, no way was that timpani part composed by a committee!

For a decade and more, the Haffner and Linz Symphonies have tended to blur together in my memory.  So, I'm taking advantage of the current spike in Mozart interest, to render them again as distinct entities.

Mr. Newman, just in case it slipped your attention:

Please give us the motives of just two persons out of many:

1. Luchesi
2. Cartellieri

It shouldn't be difficult since you've studied them extensively.

Of course, if either of those third-rate composers had been genuinely capable of anything as artful as the K.385, they would not have languished in obscurity all these centuries.

Again: we are here to state the obvious from time to time, as may be serviceable.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 27, 2009, 04:33:13 AM
Quote from: H.C. Robbins Landon
[Constanze & Wolfgang] proceeded to Linz, via Lambach Abbey, arriving there just in time for Wolfgang to take over the organ part in the Agnus Dei. (‘The Prelate was most overjoyed to see me again . . .’)  On Tuesday, 4 November [1783], Mozart gave an academy concert at the Linz theatre, ‘. . . and since I didn’t have a single symphony with me, I’m writing a new one at great speed’.  This was to be the much-loved ‘Linz’ Symphony (K.425), written in five days at the most, and containing a quiet, but for musicians highly dramatic, innovation — the introduction of trumpets and drums into the slow movement.  This gives a note of solemn splendor to the quietly radiant Andante.

[ Mozart: The Golden Years, pp. 95-96 ]

Luminous timpani here, Herman.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 27, 2009, 05:05:37 AM
Quote from: Mozart
The Prelate was most overjoyed to see me again . . . .

This from a letter dated 31 October 1783.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 27, 2009, 06:39:59 AM
Yes the use of trumpets and drums in the Linz slow mvt is exquisite, and was later used in the same luminous fashion by Beethoven.

Unless of course one assumes these works were written by one and the same 3d rate composer we totally forgot about.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 27, 2009, 07:10:52 AM
Yes the use of trumpets and drums in the Linz slow mvt is exquisite, and was later used in the same luminous fashion by Beethoven.

Unless of course one assumes these works were written by one and the same 3d rate composer we totally forgot about.

Loochey-, Loochey- . . . Loochey-something.

Did someone already mention the Haydn relationship?  How did Haydn suckered by Mozart, & who wrote Mozart's Haydn quartets?

given the time they spent together performing and discussing music, could Haydn not have smelled a rat?

There you have it:  Haydn and Mozart played Mozart's music together.  And in December of 1787, Haydn wrote in a letter:

Quote from: F.J. Haydn
If I could only impress on the soul of every friend of mine, and on high personages in particular, how inimitable are Mozart's works, how profound, how musically intelligent, how extraordinarily sensitive!

I wonder if Haydn had a comparable opinion of those 3rd-raters who have been proposed as the "true" composers of these inimitable, profound, musically intelligent & extraordinarily sensitive works, hmmm?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Joe Barron on May 27, 2009, 07:45:48 AM
I wonder if Haydn had a comparable opinion of those 3rd-raters who have been proposed as the "true" composers of these inimitable, profound, musically intelligent & extraordinarily sensitive works, hmmm?

You miss the point. At this stage, Haydn was already part of the conspiracy.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 27, 2009, 07:58:53 AM
You miss the point. At this stage, Haydn was already part of the conspiracy.

Haydn never left Esterháza.  The "Haydn" in Vienna was a spy in the pay of The Grand Turk.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 27, 2009, 08:00:07 AM
Haydn never left Esterháza.  The "Haydn" in Vienna was a spy in the pay of The Grand Turk.

Was he hidin'?

(oof)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 10:18:04 AM
Quite a bit of evidence has been presented to you. You've just chosen to ignore it.

Apparently you have no knowledge of the relevant primary and secondary sources: rather strange for a so-called Mozart scholar, no?

And by the way--you have still failed to present any evidence whatsoever of anything. And given that it's you who're making the controversial claims, it is *you* who needs to present evidence to show that you have any case whatsoever, not us.

Still no there there; it’s all dog-&-pony show.

================================================================================================

Interesting (I thought) article on Der neue Köchel. (http://www.mozartproject.org/essays/zaslaw.html)

Quote from: N. Zaslaw
The solution in the three earlier editions of Köchel (1905, 1937, and 1964) avoided the latter of these inconveniences, but added another in its place: many works have two or even three numbers, as in the case of Mozart's Symphony No. 24, in B-flat major, which goes by K. 182, 166c, and 173dA.

Nice to read actual scholarship on the topic, for a change . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 10:34:27 AM
Of course Todd could lock the notorious thread, if he wanted to...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 10:38:32 AM
Revisiting the 'Haydn' Quartets after a long absence.  The Ysaÿe are all I've really heard play these.  What recordings are your preferences, Herman?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 28, 2009, 10:39:46 AM
Of course Todd could lock the notorious thread, if he wanted to...

No, that wouldn't do at all, Herman. We are keeping things well-controlled by keeping it all right there. However, if people would merely read and run instead of stopping to bicker and argue, then the source of your irritation (or one of them, anyway) would soon sink away. :-\

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 28, 2009, 10:42:00 AM
Revisiting the 'Haydn' Quartets after a long absence.  The Ysaÿe are all I've really heard play these.  What recordings are your preferences, Herman?

I know you asked Herman, Karl.  8)  But, I have the Alban Berg Quartet Teldec recording of these.   :)  Excellent works!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 28, 2009, 10:43:06 AM
Still no there there; it’s all dog-&-pony show.

================================================================================================

Interesting (I thought) article on Der neue Köchel. (http://www.mozartproject.org/essays/zaslaw.html)

Nice to read actual scholarship on the topic, for a change . . . .

By sheer coincidence, since I couldn't know that Newman would show up here when he did, I am reading Zaslaw's "Mozart's Symphonies" right now. As you say, there is considerable scholarship involved, and also a nice element of readability. I also have his "Compleat Mozart" which is simply indispensable for basic information about each work. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 10:43:52 AM
I know you asked Herman, Karl.  8)  But, I have the Alban Berg Quartet Teldec recording of these.   :)  Excellent works!

But you well know, I trust, Ray, that your input is most welcome!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 28, 2009, 11:02:49 AM
We are keeping things well-controlled by keeping it all right there. However, if people would merely read and run instead of stopping to bicker and argue, then the source of your irritation (or one of them, anyway) would soon sink away. :-\

8)

If the sane ones among us (that would be the Universal set - robenewman) stopped posting there, there wouldn't even be anything of worth to read. It would be a pretty fast death for the thread from then on. I just don't understand why it's being stretched to so many pages.  :-\
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 11:09:40 AM
I just don't understand why it's being stretched to so many pages.  :-\

Because of the annoyance factor; and also because the perp is very deft: he's really anxious to bump 'his' thread to the top whenever he can (he clearly spends all day monitoring the topic  -  even when he announces he'll be off).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 28, 2009, 11:14:39 AM
How about ignoring him? It's certain that he's an attention seeker, then why bother replying to the posts? He'll be bored after a week or so and begin to look for some other board to unload all the trash. (All this stuff must be quite obvious to you...)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 11:15:33 AM
How about ignoring him?

Yes, Herman has been advocating just such a sane course of [in]action.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 11:21:29 AM
For a decade and more, the Haffner and Linz Symphonies have tended to blur together in my memory.  So, I'm taking advantage of the current spike in Mozart interest, to render them again as distinct entities.

I've always loved the Linz symphony,which really sounds like a big step forward after the Haffner.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 28, 2009, 11:23:00 AM
Yes, Herman has been advocating just such a sane course of [in]action.

You can't stop all of the people from posting all of the time.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 11:23:52 AM
Apart from that, how was the play, Mr Lincoln?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: not edward on May 28, 2009, 11:28:08 AM
I'm pretty much done with playing with Mr Newman. It's been a bit like playing with one's own food (or shooting fish in a barrel) and the entertainment value is rapidly tailing off.

I'd like to think that the last couple of reviews I posted might rattle his self-belief, but I'm quite sure that no amount of conclusive evidence can.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 11:30:25 AM
Re: Mozart's Haydn Quartets: as it happens both the Amadeus Qt's early sixties recording and the one by the Alban Berg Qt on Teldec were the first sets I owned on LP. When I purcheased the latter on cd much later I was a little over the ABQ. I still like the Amadeus.

The best recent one IMO is the Capriccio set by the Petersen Qt who also managed to put the three Prussian Qts one a single cd. On RCMR (I never get it right) lots f other people are quite excited about this one too, I found.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41sm2d9agdL._SS400_.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on May 28, 2009, 11:31:30 AM
I'd like to think that the last couple of reviews I posted might rattle his self-belief, but I'm quite sure that no amount of conclusive evidence can.

HA!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 11:38:13 AM
Here's the other one. Never mind the violist's hairdo. The music is great.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510sDqZJD5L._SS500_.jpg)

The signature is, of course, Loochey's. ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 11:39:41 AM
Here's the other one. Never mind the violist's hairdo.

Gilligan!!!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 12:03:50 PM
usually there's one guy with funny hair in every string quartet
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 28, 2009, 01:45:28 PM
(http://www.born-today.com/btpix/howard_moe.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: not edward on May 28, 2009, 03:04:23 PM
I've a great idea:

Let's get Mr Newman to post on rmcr. That way his trolling can meet the combined obnoxiousness of Tom Deacon, Jeffrey Powell and of course our own M Forever.

Now I've got the giggles. ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 03:46:40 PM
Timing can, on occasion, be so strikingly peculiar, that one suspects a Divine Hand in all things.  I was driving back into Cambridge to fetch my Maria from her work, and tuned in to WCRB, and with improbable timeliness, I had the opportunity to listen to a Vanhal symphony in its entirety:
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 28, 2009, 04:00:18 PM
Timing can, on occasion, be so strikingly peculiar, that one suspects a Divine Hand in all things.  I was driving back into Cambridge to fetch my Maria from her work, and tuned in to WCRB, and with improbable timeliness, I had the opportunity to listen to a Vanhal symphony in its entirety:

I hope you enjoyed it as much as I usually do. Vanhal actually is a hugely underrated composer of highly enjoyable music. :)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Renaissance CO / Korchin / Oshiakaev (Oboe) - Marcello Oboe Concerto #2 in c 1st mvmt - Allegro moderato
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 04:07:42 PM
Normally, on hearing a work by, say, Vanhal announced on WCRB (and I apologize in advance to ardent Vanhallians), I tend to retune the radio dial to another station.  But today, I decided to listen, and listen to the whole thing, primarily because it had been suggested that it was "actually" Vanhal who composed works "attributed" to MozartAll right, I thought; setting aside all questions of history and documents, let us consider if the composer of the work I am about to hear, could plausibly have composed mature Mozart.

I am going to consider three questions, and the comparison today was made all the easier by the fact that I have been listening to so much authentic Mozart all week. (And I do apologize to my neighbors who enjoy Vanhal;  I hate to seem to run down a 'grade-B' contemporary of Mozart, who was grade-triple-A fit to beat all grade-As.)

1.  Scoring (use of the orchestra).  I am afraid that on this head, the Vanhal symphony struck me as staggeringly unimaginative, on the whole.  On the plus side, there were some lovely solo-string passages (which modestly recalled the early Haydn symphonies I have been listening to).  But the use of the winds was witheringly dull.  There was not a single point at which the flutes, oboes or horns 'broke free' to play even a single independent measure;  all of the wind writing (without fail) was simply a slavish doubling of something already being covered in the strings.  The piece could have been composed for string orchestra alone, in other words, and the winds just added as an afterthought as a coloristic highlight.  I needn't tell anyone who has read any Mozart score, that the Salzburger could never be accused of such a paint-by-number approach to writing for the winds.

2.  Harmony.  There is a scatologically amusing exchange in Peter Shaeffer's Amadeus, in which Mozart is overheard saying, "Have you heard his [i.e., Salieri's] latest opera, The Chimney Sweep? Dog-shit.  Dried dog-shit. Tonic-and-dominant, tonic-and-dominant, tonic-and-dominant -- not one interesting modulation in the entire piece."  Subtract the tone of stagey scorn, and we have something close to a description of the Vanhal Symphony in F.  All of the harmony, all the chord sequences, all the harmonic motion of every phrase, is dutifully correct, and unexceptional.  There is nothing of the harmonic deftness and agility which can be found in practically any Mozart score which he composed past the age of 20.  He had already milled out all that dutiful harmonic broadcloth as a youth, you see;  so his compositional ear demanded flashes of inspiration.  The difference (if you like) between a square dance, and the tango (harmonically speaking).  The Vanhal is a thoroughly pleasant piece, mind you, but harmonically, it's Mozart as a 15-year-old.

3.  Composition/phrasing.  Essentially the same quarrel as (2.) above.  Nice work, but two orders of creativity beneath the mature Mozart.

I regret to have to report that, based purely on musical considerations, what I have heard of Vanhal takes him out of the running as any possible "ghost-writer" for Mozart.

(Which will take practically no one here by surprise, I trust.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 04:08:03 PM
Gurn, can you forgive me?  0:)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 28, 2009, 04:26:32 PM
Gurn, can you forgive me?  0:)

Absolutely, Karl. I'm the first to admit that Vanhal is no Mozart. In fact, I declare it!  But I will go on to say that his use of winds is absolutely typical for the time (mid-1770's at the latest), and that the use of winds which we cherish s much in Mozart actually originated with him. One of the great debts that music lovers can never fully repay. And the squareness of the beat was also typical (admired in fact), and we owe first Haydn, then Mozart, for making irregularity the hallmark of High Classic style. :)  In one of those rare moments when I feel like paraphrasing Herr Newman: context is the thing, you must know the context!  :D

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Mozarteum Orchestra Salzburg / Graf - K 366 #25 March from Idomeneo
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 04:28:33 PM
Perfectly fair.  We should not normally punish these 'workmen' composers for doing their work stylishly and characteristically;  it is in comparison to the fiery creative spirits such as Haydn and Mozart that their works pale.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 28, 2009, 04:31:17 PM
Perfectly fair.  We should not normally punish these 'workmen' composers for doing their work stylishly and characteristically;  it is in comparison to the fiery creative spirits such as Haydn and Mozart that their works pale.

(Quoted for truth). ;)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Mozarteum Orchestra Salzburg / Graf - K 248 March in F
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2009, 04:39:36 PM
Perfectly fair.  We should not normally punish these 'workmen' composers for doing their work stylishly and characteristically;  it is in comparison to the fiery creative spirits such as Haydn and Mozart that their works pale.

But have you considered the possibility that Vanhal deliberately composed an average symphony to deflect from his participation in The Mozart Conspiracy

If he composed a symphony in his own name with his true Mozart-talent, the jig and the jug would be up!   :o    :o

Calling Dan Brown!!!   $:)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 07:06:08 PM
A few weeks ago I got that ABQ Teldec box, and I admit I've never really "listened" to Mozart in gen., much less SQs 14-23, but in the spirit of all this, I've just been cycling through them. So then, this is my country boy overall first impression of Mozart in general.  And, I will admit, this coincidence of my first serious listen to...any... Mozart, with all this...swooning of late, isn't lost on me. But, this is what I heard when I listened.

The first thing I noticed (No.14 "Sunrise") was that Mozart used much more floral covering for his structures than Haydn...MORE NOTES!!! as the cliche goes. And the accompiment (sic) seemed so much more fleeting, moving from instrument to instrument, the onward...unfolding?... I've ALWAYS had a problem with the Haydn SQs since I plowed through them years ago (Naxos+)...Op.20/Mosaiques now on loan from the library...I don't know, but, Mozart's "sunrise" just made me go, oh...ok, that's it. Total improvised...poof...there it is.

And I'll have to say, for "classical" music, hrhmm, I instandly liked Mozart's No.15 in d minor better than I remember Haydn's 3 in the same key. I was obsessed with finding the perfect "classical" minor key SQ back then... still haven't found it, just my issue... but Mozart definitely has the "inevitable" melody I like... reminds me of Myaskovsky, haha :D ;D!

By the time I get to the famous No.19 "Dissonance" SQ, which seems slightly more special than 16-18, one thing I've noticed is that Mozart can't stay away from sounding "happy" more than anyone I've heard. Well, yea... this is the "Everything you've heard is true" thing where Mozart really HAS become the poster boy for "classical" music. Honestly, I can't tell if one guy wrote 'em, or all "classical" SQ composer's SQs sound something like this (much easier for me to tell, maybe, in minor keys). For me, an ignorant, No.19 and No.23 sound like a different person than the rest, more..."special"? No.23 really has a "late" sound compared to 14-18.

Oh, and I'm not saying nuthin...this is just my literal first impression. All I've heard listened to now is Haydn and Mozart SQs, and I don't have the time to be in a "classical" phase right now, ha!... or $$$!!!

But my old mum likes it... Haydn and Mozart SQs are the only ones she won't complain about. Maybe Glinka...that's it. Oy! Vey!

aaanyhooww... No.19 "Dissonance" is quite some piece of SQ, no? It just all has that "special" sound... not quite this, not quite that...just classic point-your-finger-at-it and say, "That's the way." I hear Webern.

So, as a "set", they're called the "Haydn" SQs, and they were written between 1782-85 according to my index.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 07:20:27 PM
Mozart SQ No.20 "Hoffmeister" jumped out at me from a packed of major key SQs. Besides "Dissonance" and No.23, what is you're favorite major key SQ by Mozart? And why?

And what of No.20 and No.22, both in D major? Any thoughts? No.20 seems to me extrovert, and No.22 sounds like another "sunrise"?

But "Hoffmeister" has a country jaunt to it, perhaps, some up beat quality, that immediately struck me from the rest. It seems if I go between Mozart and... Xenakis/Ligeti/Berio, say... or Brahms, then it helps me pick up on that... "thang" thing better when I'm listening to just basically "classical" era music for long periods.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 07:35:03 PM
Mozart "Prussian" SQs 21-23:

Just to finish up...does No.23 sound different to you, more "special"? It definitely has the most modern sound to me (other than No.19, but...) overall. Is it sleek and smooth and slightly elegiac? Keep in mind I've heard none of these SQs more @4 times so far. These are just first impressions.

21-22 have yet to make any "memory" impact on me, other than I thought No.21 in D major had a typical? "sunrise"? sound. It's very hard with me and major key classical era SQs. I would probably never buy a classical era cd of any kind with only major key works... but, that's my problem as they say... much less finding a classical SQ cd with ALL minor keys, ha. Please prove me wrong! ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on May 28, 2009, 07:48:54 PM
The 20th string quartet is one of my favorite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/mTyhulF5PII


Yes...its good stuff no? Why doesn't this one get as much attention?


I'm also big on number 16 in e flat

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/HwlmFGScUFQ
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 07:54:14 PM
I was just perusing the last page of this thread and noticed the "Mozart" discussion has... "moved", haha...

If he composed a symphony in his own name with his true Mozart-talent, the jig and the jug would be up!

See, all you have to do is put your "Stewey" cap on, and suddenly, all things do seem possible! Keep in mind that they're all frat boys sworn to secrecy! 8)

The more I think about it, the "Unknown Composer's" name HAD to be Luchesi. Think about it. Luchesi...the "lightbringer"...huh?...huh? What could BE more evil? :o Oh, I wish I would have found this ten years ago... :'(

Just think about it, you've all seen enough gangster movies...Don Luchesi... offers him...a deal...he can't... oh, this is too good!!! VitoVito!!!

Believe in Luchesi ???... or THEY will get you! :o :o :o (cue shock music)

He wrote the intro for the Dissonance Quartet whilst communing with...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 28, 2009, 07:59:08 PM
Yes...its good stuff no? Why doesn't this one get as much attention?



It doesn't?




I'm also big on number 16 in e flat

I remember the darkish unison intro.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on May 28, 2009, 08:06:52 PM
Quote
It doesn't?

Being squished between the Haydn and Prussian ones, this poor quartet doesn't get as much praise.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on May 28, 2009, 08:10:04 PM
When I listen to string quartets I get this feeling like this type of music is in a world of its own, and that you have to be totally out of your mind to follow it or even just enjoy it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 28, 2009, 11:21:01 PM
Honestly, I can't tell if one guy wrote 'em, or all "classical" SQ composer's SQs sound something like this (much easier for me to tell, maybe, in minor keys). For me, an ignorant, No.19 and No.23 sound like a different person than the rest, more..."special"? No.23 really has a "late" sound compared to 14-18.

See, this is what's so lamentable about the recent invasion of lies and dishonesty. Some listeners start to wonder about unnecessary things, instead of just enjoying the music. There are Mozart autographs for all these quartets, that are especially interesting as they debunk the early 19th C myth thatthe boy wonder as a grown man just wrote his music in one flash. The autograph for these quartets show much hard and detailed work by the composer. (Any cd booklet of any quality will tell you the same.)

The wonderful thing about Mozarts 10 mature string quartets is each of them inhabit an unique sound world: K387 in G is a powerful, dense, anguished piece (you don't need minor keys by this time to get that unique Mozartean Angst); K421 in D minor is spooky and jolly at the same time; K428 in E flat major is tightwound and yet quite smooth at the same time, with all those strange chromatic tendencies; the 458 B flat major is a rather popular one with a nickname; it's the most lyrical one in the set; the 464 in A flat at first sounds kind of subdued, it's the one with the least dramatic character, and yet it is a composer's favorite; Beethoven used it as a model for one of his op 18 quartets. The 465 is very dramatic. The slow mvt with its stately rhythm is perhaps the only time one thinks of Haydn as a model.

The Hoffmeister 499 in D major used to be a fovorite of mine. Like the Hunt it is very lyrical and really a showcase for the first violin. In some respects the writing is a little less dense than in the other quartets, and maybe it is not quite the same stellar level. Say, like the Hunt it is a piece one can listen to while driving without risking other people's lives.

The three Prussians are amazing. They are different than the Haydn quartets in the same way as all Mozart by that time was less overtly brilliant than previously.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2009, 02:26:38 AM


Believe in Luchesi ???... or THEY will get you! :o :o :o (cue shock music)

He wrote the intro for the Dissonance Quartet whilst communing with...

 >:D   Hoo!  >:D  Ha-HAAA!!!   >:D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 29, 2009, 02:50:38 AM
BTW the moniker "Sunrise" for 387 is new to me. There is a Haydn SQ with that name, but as far as I know the K387 is rightly without a nickname.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 02:53:50 AM
BTW the moniker "Sunrise" for 387 is new to me. There is a Haydn SQ with that name, but as far as I know the K387 is rightly without a nickname.

I've only seen it on the arkivmusic page for the quartets . . . so I took it for an "Internet artifact."
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 04:04:30 AM
The rondo which concludes the K.452 Quintet, now;  I've always liked it, of course.  It just seems especially inspired and rich in graces, after The Supposed "Ghost-Writer."

(Just saying.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 04:47:40 AM
Quote from: Neal Zaslaw
Because of Mozart's status as an archetypal "original genius," those who write about his music have been squeamish about facing up to the not inconsiderable totality of his musical borrowings. It has long been comfortably accepted that Mozart quoted from, paraphrased or alluded to earlier music of his own. The categories that have been proposed to deal with his borrowings from other sources have, however, tended to be restricted to explanations which can be harmonized with notions of originality, autonomy and genius: common coinages, programmatic references, emulation of or tributes to mentors, or clever in-jokes aimed at friends, patrons and colleagues. Consideration of a host of other potentially embarrassing possibilities has generally been avoided (one might even say suppressed); among them are theft, fraud, laziness, failure of inspiration, mockery of colleagues, or an ill-concealed competitive desire to - as Mozart said of Giuseppe Cambini in 1778 - "die Augen ... ausgelöscht." Mozart is a 'genius', geniuses create masterpieces, masterpieces are "perfect”. Many of Mozart's admirers, who seem to want not only his music but his person to be "perfect," have exercised damage control in their naming of possible motivations for his borrowings. In establishing the extent and nature of Mozart's borrowings, my talk will necessarily speculate about both his psychology and the psychologies of those who have been too eager to sanitize his character.

Apart from this not meaning what The Daft Propagandist fondly imagines it to mean, it is telling that the close of this opening paragraph declares (no surprise) that the lecture to follow is at heart speculation.

In our untiring willingness to state the obvious where necessary, we reiterate a few points which have been made many times before, in many contexts:

1. Genius does not 'depend' on every note being 'purely original'.  The near-strawman (IMO) of Zaslaw's paragraph is an offshoot of the "anxiety of influence" bugbear which haunted certain musical circles mid-20th century.  Whether as composer, or as student of music history, I consider this a profound non-issue.

2. The fact that Mozart borrowed (some), alluded to and echoed other sources does not 'diminish' his genius.  Nor is this any matter of "cult of Mozart";  it is the nature of composition.  Why, only yesterday I wrily commented on a Bach-Mozart-Jethro Tull connection.

3. The instances of Mozart's 'borrowings' (even largely interpreted) in no way diminishes the magnitude of his talent or of his accomplishment.  What matters (and what is in genuine admiration) is not "pure originality of every note," but the high quality and brilliant character of the musical result to which Mozart turns it.  To give an analogous counter-example:  not every student graduation-piece which is a setting of Schiller's "Ode to Joy" is the artistic equal to the Beethoven Opus 125.

4. Where Mozart 'copped licks' from lesser contemporaries, this means neither that Mozart's talent or accomplishment is any less, nor that the lesser contemporary is "Mozart's equal" in the question of genius.  Another reverse example:  Is "Full Moon and Empty Arms" as great an artistic achievement as the Rakhmaninov concerto from which it takes its tune?

Having said all that: I have no reason to doubt that Zaslaw's lecture was of entertainment and even of musical interest on its own merits;  and one certainly allows him to frame his lecture in the terms of his opening paragraph.  It isn't the byzantine "gotcha" that The Daft Propagandist shrilly crows.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 29, 2009, 04:51:35 AM
BTW the moniker "Sunrise" for 387 is new to me. There is a Haydn SQ with that name, but as far as I know the K387 is rightly without a nickname.

I've got "Spring" as a moniker for K.387, on the ABQ set I have.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 04:55:39 AM
I've got "Spring" as a moniker for K.387, on the ABQ set I have.

FWIW, neither Robbins Landon nor Gutman (nor Spaethling, in his edition of the letters) alludes to any nickname for the K.387.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 29, 2009, 04:58:29 AM
FWIW, neither Robbins Landon nor Gutman (nor Spaethling, in his edition of the letters) alludes to any nickname for the K.387.

That's OK.  I'll still play it on the Spring Solstice!  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 04:59:47 AM
Well, there's nought wrong wi' that, laddie!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 29, 2009, 05:15:54 AM

1. Genius does not 'depend' on every note being 'purely original'.  The near-strawman (IMO) of Zaslaw's paragraph is an offshoot of the "anxiety of influence" bugbear which haunted certain musical circles mid-20th century.  Whether as composer, or as student of music history, I consider this a profound non-issue.

Indeed. Mozart's genius didn't just consist in 'inventing' new stuff, but also in combining and juxtaposing all kinds of material and tropes he'd met on his way to maturity. The feverish way he absorbed the J.S. Bach material Baron Von Swieten provided him with in the early eighties is a case in point. All really great art geniuses have had this sponge-like capacity.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 08:08:53 AM
These string quintets are so marvelous, it shames me to think all the years I neglected them.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: ChamberNut on May 29, 2009, 08:11:38 AM
These string quintets are so marvelous, it shames me to think all the years I neglected them.

They are, Karl*!  I think they are even better than his string quartets.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 29, 2009, 12:09:08 PM
I recently heard K516, the most celebrated one of the quintets, in concert (Daniel Qt). It's fascinating to watch those shifting combinations -  it starts, for instance as a string trio.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on May 29, 2009, 01:32:24 PM
Don't worry, i'm not getting too wrapped up in recent drama. My comment about "sounding like a different guy" was something like:

early Webern vs. late Webern... truly, one might not be criticized for thinking they were different composers, the change is that great.

Thinking LvB SQs, also, comparing the first and the last, an ignorant might think they were two different people... there is great growth in his work.

On the other hand, I think, Guido? mentioned Goldschmidt as sounding pretty much the same from 1936 through the 70s. Who are other composers who stuck to their style? Spohr?

I'm listening to Mozart SQ No.23 again now. It still sounds more "subdued", but those "dangling floral chromatics", the "perfume" still say "Mozart" to me. So I ask, are "noodly chromatic embellishments" Mozart's trademark? To me, it gives the music a slightly "tipsy" character, like a drunk who doesn't know whether to laugh or cry?
Yea, keep in mind, the above posts were written after my first week of listening, and it was late and I can't listen then. Listening to No.23 now, I can see how my wording was probably ill advised, and perhaps, colored by all the drama. No.23 still "sounds" later, more reserved, and wot not, but yea, it still has enough Mozart-y things where...I mean, if there were only three composers (Haydn, Mozz, LvB), it would be obvious who it was. He does come off as petulant...as if he's constantly making fun of the stiff gentry (those upward chromatics + deft pauses). Haydn's humor comes off differently. And LvB??? Humor?

arrrph!-please don't get stuck on that last comment! YKWIM!

ok... if it has "diddle diddles" and "bum bum bums", it's Mozz!!! ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Valentino on May 29, 2009, 01:36:11 PM
Ripped off Tom Waits:

The viola has been drinkin' (not me).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on May 29, 2009, 09:37:15 PM
I've read many times of the dirty letters Mozart wrote his cousin, but I've never actually read the letter...I'm so curious!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 29, 2009, 10:48:08 PM
think infantile potty humor, only more inventive linguistically.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on May 30, 2009, 02:18:07 AM
and essentially untranslatable, sorry.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 30, 2009, 03:27:29 AM
I've read many times of the dirty letters Mozart wrote his cousin, but I've never actually read the letter...I'm so curious!

If your interest extends beyond that scatological frisson . . . all the letters together are a fascinating and enjoyable read, and not a huge book.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 30, 2009, 04:20:34 AM
I'm listening to Mozart SQ No.23 again now. It still sounds more "subdued", but those "dangling floral chromatics", the "perfume" still say "Mozart" to me. So I ask, are "noodly chromatic embellishments" Mozart's trademark? To me, it gives the music a slightly "tipsy" character, like a drunk who doesn't know whether to laugh or cry?

Yes, those chromatic graces of turn are one of his trademarks.

I tell you, I really missed them in a symphony I recently heard by one of Mozart's contemporaries  ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 30, 2009, 12:38:12 PM
Indeed. Mozart's genius didn't just consist in 'inventing' new stuff, but also in combining and juxtaposing all kinds of material and tropes he'd met on his way to maturity. The feverish way he absorbed the J.S. Bach material Baron Von Swieten provided him with in the early eighties is a case in point. All really great art geniuses have had this sponge-like capacity.

And whether Mozart actually knew this particular Haydn symphony or not, I got a huge kick out of the do-re-fa-mi quasi-cantus firmus in the last movement of the Haydn Symphony № 13.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 30, 2009, 01:56:35 PM
And whether Mozart actually knew this particular Haydn symphony or not, I got a huge kick out of the do-re-fa-mi quasi-cantus firmus in the last movement of the Haydn Symphony № 13.

You can be fairly sure he hadn'[t ever heard it, it was written in 1763 in Esterházy and likely never left there in Mozart's lifetime (most of the earlier ones weren't published until all concerned were dead and gone). But that is a lovely fugato finale, an early prelude to what he would essay in the Op 20 quartets a few years later. :)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
The Rasumovsky Quartet - Boughton Quartet in F for Strings "From the Welsh Hills"  Landscape from the Hilltops
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 30, 2009, 02:16:23 PM
You can be fairly sure he hadn'[t ever heard it, it was written in 1763 in Esterházy and likely never left there in Mozart's lifetime (most of the earlier ones weren't published until all concerned were dead and gone). But that is a lovely fugato finale, an early prelude to what he would essay in the Op 20 quartets a few years later. :)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
The Rasumovsky Quartet - Boughton Quartet in F for Strings "From the Welsh Hills"  Landscape from the Hilltops

Invertible counterpoint?  :)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Austro-Hungarian Haydn Orchestra / Fischer - Hob 01 013 Symphony in D 4th mvmt - Finale: Allegro molto
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on May 30, 2009, 02:25:42 PM
Yes, if I had been driven to hazard a guess, Gurn, I should have thought it unlikely that Mozart had known so early a work (particularly) of Papa's.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 30, 2009, 02:32:57 PM
Yes, if I had been driven to hazard a guess, Gurn, I should have thought it unlikely that Mozart had known so early a work (particularly) of Papa's.

I would love to gain access to something like Robbins-Landon's magnum opus in order to be able to see when such things occurred. New Grove has some (but not all) of that sort of info. I guess i could cut loose a thousand or so for the set... :D

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Austro-Hungarian Haydn Orchestra / Fischer - Hob 01 014 Symphony in A 4th mvmt - Finale: Presto
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 01, 2009, 02:40:11 AM
I would love to gain access to something like Robbins-Landon's magnum opus in order to be able to see when such things occurred. New Grove has some (but not all) of that sort of info. I guess i could cut loose a thousand or so for the set... :D

Or come to Boston;  I'll bring you in to the NEC library  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 01, 2009, 03:16:53 AM
Do you know, ten of the messages on p. 1 of this thread are by members who "went guest."

Just a funny thing.

Carry on . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 01, 2009, 03:22:55 AM
It's the Mozart Curse no doubt.

Mozart being presented as a naïve and transcendental 'genius', a person who floats through the alleged artistic episodes of his life 

Reading one recent post of the Postman Who Keeps On Knocking it struck me how hopelessly outdated this strawman Mozart of his is. The research that demonstrated that Mozart, contrary to 19th century wishful thinking, did indeed work really hard on his more ambitious compositions, was done several generations ago.

Nevermind.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 01, 2009, 03:36:04 AM
It's the Mozart Curse no doubt.

Reading one recent post of the Postman Who Keeps On Knocking it struck me how hopelessly outdated this strawman Mozart of his is. The research that demonstrated that Mozart, contrary to 19th century wishful thinking, did indeed work really hard on his more ambitious compositions, was done several generations ago.

Nevermind.

The letter that this myth is based on wasn't written until 1815 and has been proven to be a totally bogus "recollection", yet the myth it engendered appears to be ineradicable. ::)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 01, 2009, 03:37:23 AM
Doesn't help that there are yet more doofi eager to mythologize  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 01, 2009, 03:38:05 AM
Or come to Boston;  I'll bring you in to the NEC library  8)

Oh, bring me in, sure. Who in hell is going to get me out again? And with how many helpers?  No, it's too scary to contemplate;

He may ride forever 'neath the streets of Boston
He's a man who never returned


:D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 01, 2009, 03:39:32 AM
Doesn't help that there are yet more doofi eager to mythologize  8)

Well, the world needs doofi, too. If only to make we, the flawless, more aware of our crystalline omniscience. ;D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 01, 2009, 03:47:47 AM
The letter that this myth is based on wasn't written until 1815 and has been proven to be a totally bogus "recollection", yet the myth it engendered appears to be ineradicable. ::)

Remind me please who wrote this letter?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 01, 2009, 04:09:55 AM
Remind me please who wrote this letter?

Can't remember the name OTTOMH, but it is the one that describes Mozart as going into a trancelike state when he composes, and that from that point it is like "automatic writing" until a finished fair copy is completed. I'll look it up tonight and post it. In any case, within a few years of the publication of it, this myth was totally incorporated into the biography. ::)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on June 01, 2009, 04:26:55 AM
Well, the world needs doofi, too.

Thank you.  As a doofus in several respects, I'm grateful not only to be tolerated, but also to be corrected, educated, even (insofar as possible) enlightened.  How else could I hope to become less doofy?

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 01, 2009, 04:27:48 AM
Some of my best friends are doofs . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 01, 2009, 04:55:56 AM
Thank you.  As a doofus in several respects, I'm grateful not only to be tolerated, but also to be corrected, educated, even (insofar as possible) enlightened.  How else could I hope to become less doofy?



Such a wonderful attitude; would there were more like you... ;D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 01, 2009, 04:56:52 AM
Some of my best friends are doofs . . . .

We're all doofi, and I am your king! :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 01, 2009, 05:01:12 AM
I'm looking out for watery tarts!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dr. Dread on June 01, 2009, 05:01:51 AM
HOLY CRAP! GURN CHANGED HIS AVATAR!!!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on June 01, 2009, 01:27:12 PM
HOLY CRAP! GURN CHANGED HIS AVATAR!!!
I want to see one with Haydn riding his lawn tractor!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on July 08, 2009, 08:34:16 AM
Quote from: Robt W. Gutman
Unpredictable, he could be winning—the diary of Johann Karl, Count von Zinzendorf, spoke of a “child of spirit, lively, charming”—or he could treat with people de haut en bas: when a German prince, meaning well, soothing invited him to forget the presence of his august auditors and put aside all nervousness, Wolfgang reacted by confidently settling himself at the harpsichord and announcing that he had already played before the German Empress.  Indeed, at the Imperial court, just before starting a concerto by Wagenseil, he had called out to this famous composer to come forward to turn pages.

[ Mozart: A Cultural Biography, p. 61 ]
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on July 08, 2009, 09:07:21 AM
Karl's new avatar is full of win.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on July 09, 2009, 02:21:48 AM
Can't remember the name OTTOMH, but it is the one that describes Mozart as going into a trancelike state when he composes, and that from that point it is like "automatic writing" until a finished fair copy is completed. I'll look it up tonight and post it. In any case, within a few years of the publication of it, this myth was totally incorporated into the biography. ::)

8)

Under present circs, one must be careful about use of the m.-word in connection with Gottlieb.  But after all, since almost the beginning George Washington's cherry tree has happily been known for a myth, but no one yet suggests that he did not really serve as first president of these United States.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on July 14, 2009, 11:34:49 AM
I just listened to the quinttet K 407 for (French) horn, violin, two (!) violas and cello in E flat major. Have I ever heard this piece before? If so I do not recall. It's pretty much another one of those horn concertos WAM wrote for the friend of his, except its a little less rambunctious. Very nice middle mvt.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on July 14, 2009, 11:37:53 AM
I just listened to the quinttet K 407 for (French) horn, violin, two (!) violas and cello in E flat major. Have I ever heard this piece before? If so I do not recall. It's pretty much another one of those horn concertos WAM wrote for the friend of his, except its a little less rambunctious. Very nice middle mvt.

Gosh, I don't know if I've ever heard that!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on July 14, 2009, 11:40:00 AM
I just listened to the quinttet K 407 for (French) horn, violin, two (!) violas and cello in E flat major. Have I ever heard this piece before? If so I do not recall. It's pretty much another one of those horn concertos WAM wrote for the friend of his, except its a little less rambunctious. Very nice middle mvt.

Forgot to mention: the hornist was Franticek Langweil plus the Panocha Quartet on an old (AAD) disc with the Clarinet Qt and the Oboe Qt
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on July 15, 2009, 12:09:25 PM
Listened to the Prague Quartet perform a great, vigorous version of WAM's last string quartet in F major, 590. (Supraphon Archives) Great violist.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on July 18, 2009, 12:56:47 PM
...oh, I know I'm going to get raked over the coals for this one, but seriously... I've been listening to these SQs lately, and I just noticed something that I really thought I heard, that struck me:

Does Mozart have a tendency to end mvmts. abruptly, or, without any ado? I seem to recall the last SQ ending very nonchalantly, and also another mvmt. in another SQ (don't remember).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mozart on July 18, 2009, 02:33:43 PM
The d minor one has an interesting ending...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on July 18, 2009, 06:51:34 PM
...oh, I know I'm going to get raked over the coals for this one, but seriously... I've been listening to these SQs lately, and I just noticed something that I really thought I heard, that struck me:

Does Mozart have a tendency to end mvmts. abruptly, or, without any ado? I seem to recall the last SQ ending very nonchalantly, and also another mvmt. in another SQ (don't remember).

You're probably, in your usual chaotic way, referring to the K590 quartet, in which the first mvt ends quite softly, rather than with a couple of chords. This is also the quartet that starts with a unisono, which you queried as unusual, whereas it's really quite normal.

As I said before, the advice is: eat more, think less. Or rather: just listen to the music and listen to it again.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on July 23, 2009, 09:19:01 AM
Two new pieces for piano have now been attributed to Mozart. No more details until the second of August.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8165645.stm
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on July 23, 2009, 09:33:51 AM
I wrote one of them; and I just want to take this moment to say how very pleased and honored I am at this attribution to Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on July 23, 2009, 10:41:40 AM
Two new pieces for piano have now been attributed to Mozart. No more details until the second of August.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8165645.stm

So are you suggesting that Mozart actually wrote Take the A Train and Time Out?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on July 28, 2009, 08:45:20 AM
i called it. this thread is mine. mine, i tell you!

anyway, mozart is awesome, no?

Yes, the sublimely non-fraudulent Mozart is, indeed, awesome.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Haffner on August 05, 2009, 12:36:32 PM
Yes, the sublimely non-fraudulent Mozart is, indeed, awesome.



Aw, shucks, he (or the person who wrote his stuff ;)), was just swell!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on August 11, 2009, 11:22:19 AM
This one's for the Bobster:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/arts/music/11mozart.html?_r=1
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 11, 2009, 11:56:32 AM
This one's for the Bobster:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/arts/music/11mozart.html?_r=1

Good lord! :o  Fan-boys are worse than enemies. That sort of purple prose hasn't been in vogue for a good half-century or more. We don't care for it. Clearly, the reviewer didn't either. :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Szykneij on August 18, 2009, 07:34:55 AM
Strep?

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MensHealthNews/story?id=8349038 (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MensHealthNews/story?id=8349038)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on August 18, 2009, 08:00:42 AM
This one's for the Bobster:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/arts/music/11mozart.html?_r=1

Quote from: Jas Oestreich
. . . confusingly and repetitively assembled, it stirred only vague curiosity.

Ah, we see the master at whose feet the Bobster tutelaged!  ;D

Quote from: Jas Oestreich
. . . what I had originally stumbled on was one of the most egregious examples of strained puffery . . .

And Pinkie, for that matter  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 17, 2009, 08:44:25 AM
I might be alone in this but I think that Marriner is flat out great in Mozart.  I still remember buying the tape (yeah it was those days ;D) of the 25th and 29th and in that opening movement of the 25th the flames were just flying off the violins it was so heated, so passionate. ;D  And the 29th was charming, sublime but not indulgently romantic, just excellent.  After that I bought some of the serenades and some other things that also did not disappoint.  For me Marriner can be pretty dull with other composers, but I feel that he has an affinity for Mozart. :)


I like Marriner for many of his baroque recordings.  I also like many of his Mozart recordings since I am not hung up on whether a recording is HIP or not HIP.  This Mozart Violin Concertos by the ASMIF with Iona Brown is one of my all-time favorites ...



Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 04:13:40 AM
This is an experience I have yet to sample (too many CDs asking me to buy them, and too little cash to do it with), but I am enormously hopeful about it, if it's as revelatory as his Beethoven.

Elgarian,  Most of us have this problem, don't we?  BTW, Mozart is no Mr. Handel.  While I now have most of the Handel operas on CD, which were mostly acquired this year in spite of the fact that I already have a good many of them on LP, I doubt I will do the same for Mozart operas.  I will not get Don Giovanni, Magic Flute and Idomeneo, etc on CD since I already have the LP sets.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on October 18, 2009, 06:07:57 AM
Elgarian,  Most of us have this problem, don't we?  BTW, Mozart is no Mr. Handel.  While I now have most of the Handel operas on CD, which were mostly acquired this year in spite of the fact that I already have a good many of them on LP, I doubt I will do the same for Mozart operas.  I will not get Don Giovanni, Magic Flute and Idomeneo, etc on CD since I already have the LP sets.

Can we quote you on that..........
I recall not too long ago in the Handel thread you were saying a similar thing about not needing Handel operas on CD  >:D

What could be more glorious and fullfilling than collecting the great Mozart operas, perhaps his crowning achievement?
Even today they are among the most beloved and treasured operas ever composed by anyone



Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 06:16:48 AM
Can we quote you on that..........
I recall not too long ago in the Handel thread you were saying a similar thing about not needing Handel operas on CD  >:D

What could be more glorious and fullfilling than collecting the great Mozart operas, perhaps his crowning achievement?
Even today they are among the most beloved and treasured operas ever composed by anyone





Mozart barely makes it into my top 5 composers list.  While I have over 100 LP's/CD's/open-reels of his works, I own them since no serious classical collections can afford not to have his works represented.  If I do get some of his operas on CD, it will be very selective.  My most recent purchase of Mozart works is the 19-CD set by Christopher Hogwood and the AAM.  I hope to start listening to the set before the weekend is over ...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bulldog on October 18, 2009, 07:39:48 AM
Mozart barely makes it into my top 5 composers list.  While I have over 100 LP's/CD's/open-reels of his works, I own them since no serious classical collections can afford not to have his works represented. 

So if a person has a fantastic collection of pre-baroque recordings, it's not a "serious" collection without any Mozart?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on October 18, 2009, 08:02:56 AM
BTW, Mozart is no Mr. Handel.

Well ... not so long ago I'd have agreed with you, but I'm currently undergoing the same kind of Mozartian transformation as I experienced with Handel during the last year. In fact I think my Handel explorations have been largely responsible for the change. Coming at Mozart from a Handel/Baroque perspective is a very different experience to approaching him from Wagner and the Romantics (which is how I'd previously attempted it, unsuccessfully). But I now find that, having steeped myself in Handel operas and cantatas, I'm being overwhelmed by Mozart's operas, and all my previous notions about Mozart are being knocked out of the building. Already I can see that I'll have to acquire several versions of the major Mozart operas, both on CD and DVD. Frankly, I never expected to be in such a position.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on October 18, 2009, 09:22:32 AM
Well ... not so long ago I'd have agreed with you, but I'm currently undergoing the same kind of Mozartian transformation as I experienced with Handel during the last year. In fact I think my Handel explorations have been largely responsible for the change. Coming at Mozart from a Handel/Baroque perspective is a very different experience to approaching him from Wagner and the Romantics (which is how I'd previously attempted it, unsuccessfully). But I now find that, having steeped myself in Handel operas and cantatas, I'm being overwhelmed by Mozart's operas, and all my previous notions about Mozart are being knocked out of the building. Already I can see that I'll have to acquire several versions of the major Mozart operas, both on CD and DVD. Frankly, I never expected to be in such a position.

Indeed........something tells me Coop will soon have a similar transformation
Although he seems to not appreciate Mozart as a major music composer on any level, but that can change.
There was an old thread here that asked whether people preferred Bach or Mozart and I was surprised how few people
preferred Mozart (like me) vast majority strongly preferred Bach and almost looked down on Mozart

One thing you come to realize is that Mozart often displays a playful and whimsical nature, this should be just under the surface of all great performances. This is one of his endearing features compared to say Bach or Handel

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 09:49:06 AM
So if a person has a fantastic collection of pre-baroque recordings, it's not a "serious" collection without any Mozart?

You are discussing this topic with him right now ...    ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 09:53:58 AM
Indeed........something tells me Coop will soon have a similar transformation
Although he seems to not appreciate Mozart as a major music composer on any level, but that can change.
There was an old thread here that asked whether people preferred Bach or Mozart and I was surprised how few people
preferred Mozart (like me) vast majority strongly preferred Bach and almost looked down on Mozart

One thing you come to realize is that Mozart often displays a playful and whimsical nature, this should be just under the surface of all great performances. This is one of his endearing features compared to say Bach or Handel



I am not counting on it.  My early interests in classical music were for the classical and romantic periods.  Then I went through the transformation to go for baroque and early music and have not looked back ...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bulldog on October 18, 2009, 12:41:38 PM
You are discussing this topic with him right now ...    ;D

Nice job of ducking my question, but that doesn't alter your statement that a serious record collection must have Mozart included.  I wonder why you said that, since it sounds so alien to me (the notion that a serious collection must have particular composers).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 01:11:57 PM
Nice job of ducking my question, but that doesn't alter your statement that a serious record collection must have Mozart included.  I wonder why you said that, since it sounds so alien to me (the notion that a serious collection must have particular composers).

I ducked no question.  With 7000+ LP's/CD's/tapes (both cassettes and open-reels) in my classical music collection, I believe I qualify to be a serious collector.  This is just my opinion.  If you don't like that, so be it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 01:17:48 PM
I ducked no question.  With 7000+ LP's/CD's/tapes (both cassettes and open-reels) in my classical music collection, I believe I qualify to be a serious collector.  This is just my opinion.  If you don't like that, so be it.

Clearly the question is not whether you think you're a serious collector (obviously you do), it's why do you think you need any Mozart in order to qualify for that? For example, I don't have any Händel, or probably any number of other good composers. And yet, I'm serious as a heart attack.  0:)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 01:32:43 PM
I also don't have any Handel (or very much early music or 20th century classical music for that matter.) As a result, I would never call my collection comprehensive, perhaps that's what Coop meant? He said serious, but perhaps he meant comprehensive?

Well, you may be right there, George. Yes, comprehensive would be more suitable in the context. Of course, it doesn't require 7000+ pieces of media to be comprehensive either. So maybe he means serious AND comprehensive? Can you grade these thing numerically?   :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 01:41:09 PM
I also don't have any Handel (or very much early music or 20th century classical music for that matter.) As a result, I would never call my collection comprehensive, perhaps that's what Coop meant? He said serious, but perhaps he meant comprehensive?

George,  You are absolutely correct.  Serious means comprehensive in my reference.  That is why I actually have a Mahler cycle in my collection, even if Mahler music remains a tough nut for me to crack.  But then even the term comprehensive may be ambiguous.  Just how comprehensive is comprehensive?     0:)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 02:02:53 PM
Me, I am not a comprehensive collector. I collect what I like. If I didn't love Mozart, I wouldn't own more than a few CDs of his.

Me too. I collect what I like, seriously and comprehensively. ;D

Also, I don't collect what I don't like. ;)


8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 02:04:36 PM
Me too. I collect what I like, seriously and comprehensively. ;D

Also, I don't collect what I don't like. ;)


8)

I do not collect "modern" classical music, period.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 02:05:51 PM
I do not collect "modern" classical music, period.

And rightly so. The oxymoron has always put me off... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on October 18, 2009, 02:54:16 PM
I do not collect "modern" classical music, period.

Coop where is your cut off point when music becomes too modern.........
Do you have any music beyond 1900 like Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Sibelius?

I assume Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert are still within your target range.......right?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 03:00:21 PM
Coop where is your cut off point when music becomes too modern.........
Do you have any music beyond 1900 like Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Sibelius?

I assume Mozart is still within your target range.......

I have a good number of recordings of Sibelius' and Nielsen's works and   about a dozen each for Prokofiev and Shostakovich.  I am in the process of building up my Shostakovich collection ...

Yes, I have close to 150 CD's/LP's/tapes of various Mozart works, which include 2 complete symphonies cycles.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bulldog on October 18, 2009, 03:13:16 PM
George,  You are absolutely correct.  Serious means comprehensive in my reference.  

I often get those two words mixed up.  ::) ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on October 18, 2009, 03:20:55 PM
If I have understood rightly: seriousness (sober sincerity in our tastes) and selectiveness (the ability to distinguish, especially to recognize small differences or draw fine distinctions) are essential for all good collector; the comprehensiveness (or ability to understand a broad range of topics) is just optional…  :D

BTW, for some strange reason I have never seen my discs as a "collection"; therefore, I don't consider me a "collector", just a humble "music lover".  0:)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on October 18, 2009, 03:41:29 PM
I have noticed another universal truth of classical CD collectors........

The more you read and post at this forum the faster your collection seems to expand   ::)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 04:08:20 PM
I have noticed another universal truth of classical CD collectors........

The more you read and post at this forum the faster your collection seems to expand   ::)

I will be the first one to give Q the credit for often mentioning Glossa and Alia Vox, two labels I never had paid attention to until a few months ago.  I have discovered lots of great music offered by these two labels that the old standby such as the Polygram family of labels have never bothered to record ...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on October 18, 2009, 04:59:33 PM
I do not collect "modern" classical music, period.

And rightly so. The oxymoron has always put me off... :)

8)

 >:(

Okay, I don't want to hear any more complaints about my not preferring the fortepiano.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 05:04:15 PM
>:(

Okay, I don't want to hear any more complaints about my not preferring the fortepiano.

AFAIK, this conversation hadn't even the vaguest connection with you. ???

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Rhorer, Jérémie/Le Cercle de l'Harmonie - K 201 Symphony #29 in A 4th mvmt - Allegro con spirito
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on October 18, 2009, 05:08:44 PM
AFAIK, this conversation hadn't even the vaguest connection with you. ???

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Rhorer, Jérémie/Le Cercle de l'Harmonie - K 201 Symphony #29 in A 4th mvmt - Allegro con spirito

No, but I was taking note of the limitations of your taste.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 05:18:50 PM
No, but I was taking note of the limitations of your taste.

Actually, they are the limitations of Stuart's taste, but I really don't expect great things from you reading comprehension-wise... ::)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Quatuor Festetics - Hob 03 75 Quartet in G for Strings Op 76 #1 2nd mvmt - Adagio sostenuto
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on October 18, 2009, 05:21:36 PM
I have a good number of recordings of Sibelius' and Nielsen's works and   about a dozen each for Prokofiev and Shostakovich.  I am in the process of building up my Shostakovich collection ...

You might want to try Martinu sometime, I think you'll enjoy his music. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coopmv on October 18, 2009, 05:27:20 PM
>:(

Okay, I don't want to hear any more complaints about my not preferring the fortepiano.

I have no problems with real (not modern) classical music performed on modern piano ...    ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on October 18, 2009, 05:46:55 PM
Actually, they are the limitations of Stuart's taste, but I really don't expect great things from you reading comprehension-wise... ::)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Quatuor Festetics - Hob 03 75 Quartet in G for Strings Op 76 #1 2nd mvmt - Adagio sostenuto

My, you are prickly.  Okay, I got the heavy handed hint.  No more banter with Gurn. ::)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 05:57:44 PM
My, you are prickly.  Okay, I got the heavy handed hint.  No more banter with Gurn. ::)

8)

Actually, I am a brilliant and perceptive guy, although I am occasionally held back from really shining by an overabundance of humility that I have been trying to peddle off to others over the years, to little avail. However, despite all the talent I possess in this vein, even I am not infallible when it comes to recognizing whether it is banter or not. Since your only 'smiley' in there was one of these " >:( ", I had to take you seriously, so I let you piss me off. Give me a heads up next time and I promise not to do it again. :D

8)


----------------
Listening to:
Quatuor Festetics - Hob 03 76 Quartet in d for Strings Op 76 #2 4th mvmt - Finale
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on October 18, 2009, 06:06:31 PM
My, you are prickly.  Okay, I got the heavy handed hint.  No more banter with Gurn. ::)

8)

It's hard to be a strict pianophile these days.  :'(  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 18, 2009, 06:15:39 PM
It's hard to be a strict pianophile these days.  :'(  ;D

;D

Yes, times are tough, mi amigo. These are the times that try men's souls...  0:)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Quatuor Festetics - Hob 03 78 Quartet in Bb for Strings Op 76 #4 3rd mvmt - Menuet
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on October 18, 2009, 07:35:21 PM
My, you are prickly.  Okay, I got the heavy handed hint.  No more banter with Gurn. ::)

Hey, Gurn is one of the bantiest of guys. I can certainly attest to that.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on October 18, 2009, 07:37:51 PM
For example, I don't have any Händel...

Except for that Handel opera a friendly GMGer sent you awhile back. ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on October 19, 2009, 12:18:05 AM
Okay, the current discussion has veered far away from Mozart (hey, it's about Gurn now :D) to warrant another move, to this place (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1446.0.html). Mods? ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wanderer on October 19, 2009, 12:48:10 AM
Me, I am not a comprehensive collector. I collect what I like. If I didn't love Mozart, I wouldn't own more than a few CDs of his.

The really incomprehensive thing to do would be to dispense with him altogether.  :D

Actually, I am a brilliant and perceptive guy, although I am occasionally held back from really shining by an overabundance of humility that I have been trying to peddle off to others over the years, to little avail. However, despite all the talent I possess in this vein, ... :D
8)

;D
This reminds me of the old joke: "If humility was a virtue, I'd have it too".
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on October 19, 2009, 11:39:06 AM
Been listening a lot to 614 lately. What a beautiful piece of music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on October 19, 2009, 01:28:31 PM
I've been making slow progress on the last 10 SQs. It's just that they are so dense, and longer than anything comparable (Haydn, Boccherini, Pleyel, etc...). I've been systematically breaking them down, and hearing things now that I never heard before (funny how that happens).

I was listening to the last one, 590, last night, and really listening, and I heard this exchange (in the first mvmt., I believe) that ended with the stereotypical musical figure that is used for "laughing" (ha-ha-ha... down the chromatic scale); but, instead of being cheesy or anything, it was just so poignant. Mozart's emotion is the thing that I notice between him and, say, Haydn. The lines of his music really are people, characters, with human emotions, which I can't say I hear in any of the other SQs of the era.

The slow mvmts. of 428 and 458 have also surfaced as the most placid depictions of what a truely awesome slow mvmt. should be, especially I like 458.

Plus, I've just been grooving on that floating type harmony he uses with those slithering chromatic runs that make everything sound like a garden! I keep imagining the flick of his pen on the paper, when I hear a little flourish, how it seems to come stream of consciousness at times.

One thing that has bothered me, though, is, some of his endings. Sometimes they just peeter out, or there seems to be an "oh, well" ending, or, it just ends. I've mentioned this before, but I keep noticing it, and it keeps making me go, "huh."


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: listener on January 26, 2010, 11:22:49 PM
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MOZART

It's the birthday of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, born in Salzburg, Austria (1756). His whole life was devoted to music. He was a child prodigy: by the time he was five he could perform difficult pieces on both piano and violin. He made a name for himself as a composer when he was in his teens, and he went on to write some of the most popular operas of all time, including The Marriage of Figaro (1786), Don Giovanni (1787), and The Magic Flute (1791).

Mozart spent most of his adult life in Vienna, and made a living by teaching, publishing music, giving concerts, and composing. He was always pretty well off for a musician — he had a carriage and servants, and lived in a nice apartment — but he spent money faster than he made it, and he often had to borrow from friends and relatives. He stayed close to his father throughout his life, and when his father died, Mozart fell into a deep depression. He stopped performing in public and relied on teaching to make ends meet.

He died four years later, at the age of 35, while he was in the middle of composing his last piece, Requiem in D, which he wrote as his own funeral march.

       a reminder from The Writer's Almanac

The Writer's Almanac is produced by Prairie Home Productions and presented by American Public Media.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on January 27, 2010, 07:10:29 AM
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MOZART

It's the birthday of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, born in Salzburg, Austria (1756). His whole life was devoted to music. He was a child prodigy: by the time he was five he could perform difficult pieces on both piano and violin. He made a name for himself as a composer when he was in his teens, and he went on to write some of the most popular operas of all time, including The Marriage of Figaro (1786), Don Giovanni (1787), and The Magic Flute (1791).

Mozart spent most of his adult life in Vienna, and made a living by teaching, publishing music, giving concerts, and composing. He was always pretty well off for a musician — he had a carriage and servants, and lived in a nice apartment — but he spent money faster than he made it, and he often had to borrow from friends and relatives. He stayed close to his father throughout his life, and when his father died, Mozart fell into a deep depression. He stopped performing in public and relied on teaching to make ends meet.

He died four years later, at the age of 35, while he was in the middle of composing his last piece, Requiem in D, which he wrote as his own funeral march.

       a reminder from The Writer's Almanac

The Writer's Almanac is produced by Prairie Home Productions and presented by American Public Media.

That's just what "they" want you to believe. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 27, 2010, 07:41:51 AM
That's just what "they" want you to believe.

:)

Well yes, they DO want you to believe that. Oddly, there are quite a few factoids of the mythological variety in that statement, but overall we'll go with it, if only to piss off Newman and Tobago... :D

Herzlichen Glückwunsch zu Ihrem Geburtstag, Wolfgangerl!

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on January 28, 2010, 07:57:56 AM
Didn't the Quartetto Italiano have the "Early Quartets" on a seperate release from the bigger box? I could have sworn I'd seen it.

If not, who does one like in the EarlySQs?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 28, 2010, 08:26:28 AM
Didn't the Quartetto Italiano have the "Early Quartets" on a seperate release from the bigger box? I could have sworn I'd seen it.

If not, who does one like in the EarlySQs?

I have the Talich on Calliope, I rather like it. 3 disks, includes the non-orchestral versions of K 136-138 and K 525 (quintet with Baß). Modern instruments, I'm afraid, but I never ran across one made using gut strings. It is a modestly modern recording (early 1990's) so they are not oblivious to performance trends. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on January 28, 2010, 09:02:28 AM
Didn't the Quartetto Italiano have the "Early Quartets" on a seperate release from the bigger box? I could have sworn I'd seen it.

If not, who does one like in the EarlySQs?

I've only seen the Italiano in the Complete Mozart edition box. 

I like these a lot, for early and late quartets:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/519qu05F-yL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)

Not tame, very energetic, and the price is right.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on March 03, 2010, 01:03:36 AM
The following is quoted from the Wikipedia page on K. 183 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._183), Mozart's symphony numbered 25.

Quote
The opening rising arpeggiated sequence was quoted by Beethoven in his first Piano Sonata as the principal subject of the first movement.

Isn't it usually said that the opening of the sonata is similar to the other G minor, rather than this one?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Lethevich on March 14, 2010, 08:24:30 AM
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/88/frontxu.jpg)

This makes my head hurt. Why do some symphonies have multiple K numbers? Is this something that a new catalogue edition could fix if they change the prefix so there are no duplicates (maybe to KN? - Neu Köchel), or does it reflect different versions/movements used or something (I believe some of the symphonies have alternate movements amongst all the scraps)?

The reason I care - when tagging music files, could I just call it K.161, or does it need all that other stuff? :-\

Edit: this one reads like a chemical recipe -

(http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/3862/frontcnz.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 09:19:14 AM
(http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/88/frontxu.jpg)

This makes my head hurt. Why do some symphonies have multiple K numbers? Is this something that a new catalogue edition could fix if they change the prefix so there are no duplicates (maybe to KN? - Neu Köchel), or does it reflect different versions/movements used or something (I believe some of the symphonies have alternate movements amongst all the scraps)?

The reason I care - when tagging music files, could I just call it K.161, or does it need all that other stuff? :-\

Edit: this one reads like a chemical recipe -

(http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/3862/frontcnz.jpg)

If you are only going to use 1 number (and why not?) then use the last one (in this case, K 141a), since this is the number given by the most recent Köchel catalog and thus the most chronologically correct number. I have that particular piece marked as "K 141a_161_163 Symphony in D". FYI, the reason for having 2 numbers from K1 are because the first 2 movements (K 161) are modified from the overture to the opera "Il Sogno di Scipio" which he got together in March of 1772, while the 3rd movement finale was composed in October 1772 in Milan, thus it is K 163. I know, bizarro, but there it is. :D

8)

----------------
Listening to:
Wiener Philharmoniker / Schmidt-Isserstedt - Beethoven Op 125 Symphony #9 in d 4th mvmt - Presto, "O Freunde, Nicht Diese Töne!", Allegro assai
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on March 14, 2010, 09:27:31 AM
FYI, the reason for having 2 numbers from K1 are because the first 2 movements (K 161) are modified from the overture to the opera "Il Sogno di Scipio" which he got together in March of 1772, while the 3rd movement finale was composed in October 1772 in Milan, thus it is K 163.

Wouldn't it better to use the P. numbers from the Pastiche catalogue? ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 09:29:44 AM


Edit: this one reads like a chemical recipe -

(http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/3862/frontcnz.jpg)

Oh yes, well in this case you have something entirely different. The first number (Anh(ang) C11.03) is the most recent number in Köchel. Anhang means "appendix". Works in the appendix are either known to not be by Mozart or else not at all known who wrote them but they have been attributed at some time in history. In K6, symphonies are placed into appendix C11, and it is the third one on the list. That is the number to use. Now the other numbers parse thusly; Anh.216 is the K1 number. Köchel himself didn't think Mozart wrote it so he put it in the appendix which at that time didn't have those sections, it was just the 216th work in there (so to speak, there were certainly numbers not used, but you get my drift). Finally K3=74g. The editor of the third edition of Köchel, Alfred Einstein, thought that it was authentic and so he moved it to the main body of that edition. It was 74g because chronologically it fit in between 74 & 75, one of 30 or so works that were eventually crammed into that space. Chances are that Einstein was wrong, although who knows? Something definitive could still arise and we could prove one way or the other what the true authorship is. :)

See, it isn't that hard, and makes perfect sense... ;D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 09:31:27 AM
Wouldn't it better to use the P. numbers from the Pastiche catalogue? ;D

Well no, Robert, it isn't a pastiche, it's clever and prudent recycling... :P

:D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on March 14, 2010, 09:42:38 AM
Well no, Robert, it isn't a pastiche, it's clever and prudent recycling... :P

:D

8)

Ah, I see.

-
G1=Robert/Navneeth
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 09:53:28 AM
Ah, I see.

-
G1=Robert/Navneeth

Well, almost. One of R. Newman's favorite topics was pastiche concertos, you reminded me of him. :D

8)

----------------
Listening to:
New York PO / Sinopoli - Resphigi Fountains of Rome pt 1
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on March 14, 2010, 09:57:27 AM
Well, almost. One of R. Newman's favorite topics was pastiche concertos, you reminded me of him. :D

Well, being a Mozart fan -- or follower of the cult, or whatever -- I consider that as a downright insult.  >:( :P ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 10:09:59 AM
Well, being a Mozart fan -- or follower of the cult, or whatever -- I consider that as a downright insult.  >:( :P ;)

Naa, you know what a clumsy git I am with words. :)

8)

----------------
Listening to:
New York PO / Sinopoli - Resphigi Pines of Rome pt 1
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Lethevich on March 14, 2010, 10:26:27 AM
If you are only going to use 1 number (and why not?) then use the last one (in this case, K 141a), since this is the number given by the most recent Köchel catalog and thus the most chronologically correct number.
Danke - the last number seems great now I know what it means. Your other details were very interesting - ta!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Lethevich on March 14, 2010, 12:24:45 PM
Sorry, one more question. Does this layout mean this was "rediscovered", slotted into the catalogue, then found to be spurious and removed?

(http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9425/ffffhm.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 01:32:24 PM
Sorry, one more question. Does this layout mean this was "rediscovered", slotted into the catalogue, then found to be spurious and removed?

(http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9425/ffffhm.jpg)

Sorry, took a nap...  :-[

No, it is testament to the inconsistency of publishers. The Anh.221 is the format of K1. They elected (properly) not to put it first in the name. K45a is the format of K6 (K1 never has a letter after the number) thus more recent. This one is actually in the correct format, as is the second we discussed (most recent first). it is the first one that is reversed, for no good reason beyond sheer stubbornness  or else ignorance on the part of the publisher. The sequence I gave in my explanation is the correct one for that.  0:)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Lethevich on March 14, 2010, 01:58:16 PM
All I can say about these catalogues:

(http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/6750/awsm.jpg)

Thanks once again :)!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 14, 2010, 02:18:23 PM
All I can say about these catalogues:

(http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/6750/awsm.jpg)

Thanks once again :)!



:D  Yup, I sure as heck didn't learn all, that overnight! And the publishers always take it for granted that you already know it all, so they aren't telling either. :-\

8)
----------------
Listening to:
New York PO / Sinopoli - Resphigi Roman Festivals pt 2
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on March 15, 2010, 02:11:16 AM
Newman's catalogue would be much simpler; all works would be labelled thus:

[Title of the work], NBM *


* (Not by Mozart)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 15, 2010, 04:23:12 AM
Newman's catalogue would be much simpler; all works would be labelled thus:

[Title of the work], NBM *


* (Not by Mozart)

;D

True enough, life is simpler for some than for others. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on March 22, 2010, 09:33:43 AM
I spent most of last week in a hospital ward, scared stiff and in pain after a serious emergency operation. I'd like to put on the record two observations.

1. In these conditions, Elvis was totally useless.
2. Mozart was not. Each night I put one of the piano concertos on repeat, on headphones, and he saw me through. It was Brendel/Marriner - not even HIP versions, and in fact my least favourite! No matter. Wolfie did the trick.

[And why is the 13th concerto regarded by Girdlestone as almost without discernable merit? It seemed like a lifesaver, to me.]
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 22, 2010, 09:39:51 AM
I spent most of last week in a hospital ward, scared stiff and in pain after a serious emergency operation. I'd like to put on the record two observations.

1. In these conditions, Elvis was totally useless.
2. Mozart was not. Each night I put one of the piano concertos on repeat, on headphones, and he saw me through. It was Brendel/Marriner - not even HIP versions, and in fact my least favourite! No matter. Wolfie did the trick.

[And why is the 13th concerto regarded by Girdlestone as almost without discernable merit? It seemed like a lifesaver, to me.]

Because Cuthbert is an idjit, that's why.

Sorry to hear you had to spend time in, glad you had Mozart. He saw ME through too, last year. The first things I had up were the fortepiano sonatas by Badura-Skoda. Lifesaver! :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on March 22, 2010, 09:42:46 AM
I spent most of last week in a hospital ward, scared stiff and in pain after a serious emergency operation.

Good to have you back, sir. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Renfield on March 22, 2010, 09:59:34 AM
Elgarian, good to hear you're alright, considering! In fact, I have listened to Elgar's 2nd symphony a couple of times this week, and your comments on Elgar's psyche (not, in this case, Lully's) were never far from my thoughts.


On topic, to contribute something beyond a cursory comment to this forum, for a change, I also listened to Mozart's symphonies nos. 38-41 by Mackerras and the Scottish Chamber Orchestra again yesterday, after a while since I last did so.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514nPqjxJvL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)


And, with apologies for repeating myself from another thread, I really do feel like this is a reference version for me. Which is a big deal, as I don't generally have reference versions of the standard repertory.

Yet here, it all comes together. The music seems to settle into that aesthetic perfection that people so often trumpet about Mozart's work, which so rarely seems to genuinely show itself (to me) on record. An it's all so alive, somehow!

Listening to the Jupiter, for instance, there's this moment in the first movement where the SCO's strings seem to arc above the orchestra like the arms of Jupiter embracing the world, where it really clicked with me how this symphony got its name.

And the fourth movement is nothing short of breathtaking, like taking in the Parthenon, before it got dirty and gritty and half-blown-apart. Not even Harnoncourt has made me feel this much awe over this movement.


All in all, one minor niggle aside (the opening movement of the 39th felt a bit forced), I can't think of a better, and potentially a more representative recording of these works that I've heard.

To my mind, only Szell, in his very different approach, might compete; but he'd still come second.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on March 22, 2010, 12:01:39 PM
Elgarian, glad to hear you're back safe and sound. Hope you'll recover quick!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on March 22, 2010, 12:01:50 PM
I spent most of last week in a hospital ward, scared stiff and in pain after a serious emergency operation. I'd like to put on the record two observations.

1. In these conditions, Elvis was totally useless.
2. Mozart was not. Each night I put one of the piano concertos on repeat, on headphones, and he saw me through. It was Brendel/Marriner - not even HIP versions, and in fact my least favourite! No matter. Wolfie did the trick.

[And why is the 13th concerto regarded by Girdlestone as almost without discernable merit? It seemed like a lifesaver, to me.]
Welcome back, Alan, to the forum and to the living!  Certainly the former--and I suspect the latter, as well--would be diminished without you.

Yep.  Mozart's pretty damned life-affirming.  During my recent hospital stay I tuned into Sibelius (natch!) and Mahler...but Mozart was along, just in case!  (Look for pm.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on March 22, 2010, 12:15:00 PM
On topic, to contribute something beyond a cursory comment to this forum, for a change, I also listened to Mozart's symphonies nos. 38-41 by Mackerras and the Scottish Chamber Orchestra again yesterday, after a while since I last did so.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514nPqjxJvL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

And, with apologies for repeating myself from another thread, I really do feel like this is a reference version for me. Which is a big deal, as I don't generally have reference versions of the standard repertory.

Yet here, it all comes together. The music seems to settle into that aesthetic perfection that people so often trumpet about Mozart's work, which so rarely seems to genuinely show itself (to me) on record. An it's all so alive, somehow!

Listening to the Jupiter, for instance, there's this moment in the first movement where the SCO's strings seem to arc above the orchestra like the arms of Jupiter embracing the world, where it really clicked with me how this symphony got its name.

And the fourth movement is nothing short of breathtaking, like taking in the Parthenon, before it got dirty and gritty and half-blown-apart. Not even Harnoncourt has made me feel this much awe over this movement.

All in all, one minor niggle aside (the opening movement of the 39th felt a bit forced), I can't think of a better, and potentially a more representative recording of these works that I've heard.

To my mind, only Szell, in his very different approach, might compete; but he'd still come second.

Indeed one of the very best best set of Mozart 38-41 symphonies, my only reservation is the high price of admission on this hybrid SACD from boutique label........sticker shock also for the newest hybrid SACD MacKerras symphonies also with Linn Records (but it will be mine)
 
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61mbAL0GeqL._SS500_.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Renfield on March 22, 2010, 12:21:47 PM

Indeed one of the very best best set of Mozart 38-41 symphonies, my only reservation is the high price of admission on this hybrid SACD from boutique label........sticker shock also for the newest hybrid SACD MacKerras symphonies also with Linn Records (but it will be mine)
 
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61mbAL0GeqL._SS500_.jpg)

MDT currently has the new issue for £10.50; though obviously international shipping is a factor.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on March 22, 2010, 02:01:33 PM
Because Cuthbert is an idjit, that's why.

Oh! How delicious to see it actually written down like that! Thanks Gurn. Is the other guy - Hutchings, is it? - is he more sensible?

Thanks to you for the good wishes, and also to Navneeth, Renfield, Florestan and Dave.

Certainly there was something mightily companionable about Mozart's whole approach - you know, as if he's saying: 'OK here we are in a miserable bit but don't forget tra-la-la that we can still have a chortle or two at the sheer ridiculousness (serious ridiculousness) of it all, and also have a bit of a weep at the sheer damn beauty of simple things like just these few notes - don't you know?'
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on March 22, 2010, 02:28:27 PM
MDT currently has the new issue for £10.50; though obviously international shipping is a factor.

WOW......that is great sale price at MDT for a 2CD hybrid set, people should go ahead and get both of the MacKerras 2CD sets while on sale
 
Elgarian
Welcome back to this mortal coil.......music will sooth the soul
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on March 22, 2010, 03:05:58 PM
MDT currently has the new issue for £10.50; though obviously international shipping is a factor.

MDT shipping to the US is very reasonable, the charged me £1.50 to ship it, which was somewhat less than the VAT, which gets deducted.  Total cost was £10.44 to me.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bulldog on March 22, 2010, 03:13:06 PM

Indeed one of the very best best set of Mozart 38-41 symphonies, my only reservation is the high price of admission on this hybrid SACD from boutique label........sticker shock also for the newest hybrid SACD MacKerras symphonies also with Linn Records (but it will be mine)
 
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61mbAL0GeqL._SS500_.jpg)

I'm curious as to why you consider Linn a boutique label.  By the way, even ArkivMusic has the set for well under $30.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DarkAngel on March 22, 2010, 03:34:45 PM
I'm curious as to why you consider Linn a boutique label.  By the way, even ArkivMusic has the set for well under $30.

Small catalog of available recordings, very limited number of places to buy in USA, higher prices usually hybrid SACD.....a boutique label apealling to small market of special buyers
 
Only two sellers currently at Amazon USA, older 38-41 set only 4 sellers and 2 are from UK
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bulldog on March 22, 2010, 04:53:22 PM

Small catalog of available recordings, very limited number of places to buy in USA, higher prices usually hybrid SACD.....a boutique label apealling to small market of special buyers
 

Okay, but I think that Linn recordings are available at all the major sales sites for classical music.  I've never had any problem acquiring their releases.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on March 22, 2010, 05:26:03 PM
I spent most of last week in a hospital ward, scared stiff and in pain after a serious emergency operation. I'd like to put on the record two observations.

1. In these conditions, Elvis was totally useless.
2. Mozart was not. Each night I put one of the piano concertos on repeat, on headphones, and he saw me through. It was Brendel/Marriner - not even HIP versions, and in fact my least favourite! No matter. Wolfie did the trick.

[And why is the 13th concerto regarded by Girdlestone as almost without discernable merit? It seemed like a lifesaver, to me.]

Elgarian - don't believe that I've even joined this thread (NOT sure why!) - but I wish you the best for your recovery from recent surgery - not sure 'what' the problem may have been, but wish you the best!  :D

Dave  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on March 22, 2010, 06:22:56 PM
Okay, but I think that Linn recordings are available at all the major sales sites for classical music.  I've never had any problem acquiring their releases.

By some coincidence my copy arrived today from MDT.  $16, including shipping.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on March 22, 2010, 06:24:52 PM
I spent most of last week in a hospital ward, scared stiff and in pain after a serious emergency operation. I'd like to put on the record two observations.

1. In these conditions, Elvis was totally useless.
2. Mozart was not. Each night I put one of the piano concertos on repeat, on headphones, and he saw me through. It was Brendel/Marriner - not even HIP versions, and in fact my least favourite! No matter. Wolfie did the trick.

[And why is the 13th concerto regarded by Girdlestone as almost without discernable merit? It seemed like a lifesaver, to me.]

Sorry to hear of your recent trials, but glad you have come through. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on March 23, 2010, 01:57:14 AM
wish you the best!  :D
Dave  :)

Cheers Dave! And my thanks too to the irrepressible DA and the good Scarpia.

To repeat my earlier question, broadcasting it at random - is Hutchings considered a more reliable guide to Mozart's PCs than Girdlestone?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 23, 2010, 04:34:59 AM
Cheers Dave! And my thanks too to the irrepressible DA and the good Scarpia.

To repeat my earlier question, broadcasting it at random - is Hutchings considered a more reliable guide to Mozart's PCs than Girdlestone?

Unfortunately I wasn't able to answer that, not having read Hutchings. His book is newer, FWIW. Cuthbert Girdlestone (damn, I love that name!) I found to be a post-Victorian holdover sort of a person. And his style made his book onto my Top 10 Most Difficult to Read list. Not to say that many of his perceptions aren't valid; likely they are. But damn, on dark nights I can still feel the headache...  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on March 23, 2010, 07:13:11 AM
Unfortunately I wasn't able to answer that, not having read Hutchings. His book is newer, FWIW. Cuthbert Girdlestone (damn, I love that name!) I found to be a post-Victorian holdover sort of a person. And his style made his book onto my Top 10 Most Difficult to Read list. Not to say that many of his perceptions aren't valid; likely they are. But damn, on dark nights I can still feel the headache...  :)

I can understand that Gurn, though as you say, anyone called Cuthbert Girdlestone does deserve a great deal of the benefit of the doubt. I'll give Hutchings a go, I think.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on April 01, 2010, 04:47:43 AM
I blush to admit it, but when you're wrong, you're wrong.  I finally read Rob Newman's book.  And he's absolutely right.  The odd mistake here and there, but overall, the force of his logic is undeniable.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on April 01, 2010, 06:38:45 AM
I blush to admit it, but when you're wrong, you're wrong.  I finally read Rob Newman's book.  And he's absolutely right.  The odd mistake here and there, but overall, the force of his logic is undeniable.

Too obvious, Karl. ;)

Oh, and here's a date-agnostic statement: I'm in love with K. 543!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: John Copeland on April 01, 2010, 06:46:28 AM
Where did you get Rob Newmans book Karl?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on April 01, 2010, 06:54:06 AM
Where did you get Rob Newmans book Karl?

I guess it's been published by AFD Press (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Day).  :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on April 01, 2010, 08:17:52 AM
Too obvious, Karl. ;)

Ah, well, there's always next year!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on April 01, 2010, 08:18:44 AM
Where did you get Rob Newmans book Karl?

It was overemployed as a doorstop in the Fresh Pond Whole Foods.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on April 01, 2010, 09:15:25 AM
I blush to admit it, but when you're wrong, you're wrong.  I finally read Rob Newman's book.  And he's absolutely right.  The odd mistake here and there, but overall, the force of his logic is undeniable.
According to a story in Variety, Tom Hanks has optioned the movie rights and hired Dan Brown to tweak the screenplay starring Hanks as a misunderstood independent scholar struggling to get off his mom's sofa and prove Mozart's music was actually written by Elgar! 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on April 01, 2010, 09:17:19 AM
No doubt this will involve a lot of violent death. Anyone we know at all?

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on April 01, 2010, 09:26:47 AM
No doubt this will involve a lot of violent death. Anyone we know at all?

We can only hope.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: John Copeland on April 01, 2010, 09:54:50 AM
I guess it's been published by AFD Press (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools%27_Day).  :D

I am so naieve.    :-[
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: John Copeland on April 02, 2010, 12:49:51 AM
If Rob Newman does get his book(s) published, I'm going to read them.  Unless Herr Newman is completely deluded and hopelessly wrong, there must be something driving him nuts about Herr Mozart.   :o
Like I said, I'm so naieve.   :-[

Can't wait until next April Fools day you bastards!   ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on April 02, 2010, 01:13:42 AM
Because Cuthbert is an idjit, that's why.
Hey, don't you insult my girl!

(http://i40.tinypic.com/28w2zuu.jpg)

Elgarian, wish you all the best with your health!
And yes, Mozart's a great help in difficult times!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on April 02, 2010, 04:48:44 AM
Hey, don't you insult my girl!

(http://i40.tinypic.com/28w2zuu.jpg)

Elgarian, wish you all the best with your health!
And yes, Mozart's a great help in difficult times!
So is the photo you posted! Health is very rapidly improving I'm happy to say. Cheers!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on April 02, 2010, 06:14:45 AM
Hey, don't you insult my girl!

(http://i40.tinypic.com/28w2zuu.jpg)

My.  Donno who she is, but my pulse is racing.  (Nannerl Mozart?) Maybe it's the peaked eyebrow.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: 71 dB on April 02, 2010, 06:58:50 AM
Donno who she is
Elisha Cuthbert, actress. Plays Jack Bauer's daughter Kim in "24".
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on April 02, 2010, 09:17:16 AM
So is the photo you posted! Health is very rapidly improving I'm happy to say. Cheers!
Me and my girl are always glad to be of any help. :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on June 12, 2010, 05:53:52 PM
*bump*
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 12, 2010, 06:39:32 PM
*bump*
From "Does an Avatar affect your perception of the poster"

Responding to Brahmsian: "Teresa, What makes you say he is the 'worst' composer, and 'boring'?  What are some of the works that you have listened to of Mozart?"

And responding to kishnevi: "Your clarification is a bit confusing.  Could you expand on what you mean by "musically he is a very bad composer"?  Don't understand what you mean by "musically".   Everything I can think of--inventiveness and flow of melody, use of harmonic structure and organization of his compositions, etc.--under that rubric makes him out to be a superior composer.  Are you using the term to signify something else, and if so, what is it?  Or do you mean those things, and simply hold a (very) minority opinion on his talents?"

What I mean is I studied Mozart in school so I know his writing is technically correct, however the arrangement of the notes and the melodies used are not musically pleasing to me and most are sickening sweet.  In addition Mozart uses repeats and repetition too much for my tastes. I am having a real challanging time with the English language today, perhaps I should have said: "musically he is a very bad composer, to me" as he is clearly not a bad composer to others.  Unlike technique, I believe musicality is very personal and unique in each individual listener. 

Here are some of Mozart's compositions that have been part of my library over the decades, currently I own ZERO compositions by Mozart:

Clarinet Concerto in A major, K. 622 (1791)
Clarinet Quintet in A major, K. 581 (1789)
Don Giovanni, K. 527 (1787)
Flute Concerto No. 1 in G major, K. 313 (1778)
Flute Concerto No. 2 in D major, K. 314 (1778)
German Dances
Horn Concerto No. 1 in D major, K. 412 (1791)
Horn Concerto No. 2 in E-flat major, K. 417 (1783)
Horn Concerto No. 3 in E-flat major, K. 447 (c. 1784–87)
Horn Concerto No. 4 in E-flat major, K. 495 (1786)
Marches
Piano Concerto No. 19 in F major, K. 459
Piano Concerto No. 20 in D minor, K. 466
Piano Concerto No. 21 in C major, K. 467
Piano Concerto No. 23 in A major, K. 488
Requiem Mass in D minor, K. 626 (completed by Franz Xaver Süssmayr after Mozart's death)
Serenade No. 6 ("Serenata Notturna") in D major, K. 239
Serenade No. 7 ("Haffner") in D major, K. 250
Serenade No. 9 ("Posthorn") in D major, K. 320
Serenade No. 10 for twelve winds and double bass ("Gran Partita") in B-flat major, K. 361
Serenade No. 11 for winds in E-flat major, K. 375
Serenade No. 12 for winds in C minor, K. 388
Serenade No. 13, "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" for String Quartet & Bass in G major, K. 525
Sinfonia Concertante for Violin, Viola and Orchestra K. 364 in E-flat major (1779)
Symphony No. 6 in F major, K. 43
Symphony No. 7 in D major, K. 45
Symphony No. 8 in D major, K. 48
Symphony No. 25 in G minor, K. 183 (173d B) (1773)
Symphony No. 28 in C major, K. 200 (1774)
Symphony No. 31 "Paris" in D major, K. 297 (K. 300a) (1778)
Symphony No. 35 "Haffner" in D major, K. 385 (1782)
Symphony No. 36 "Linz" in C major, K. 425 (1783)
Symphony No. 38 "Prague" in D major, K. 504 (1786)
Symphony No. 40 in G minor, K. 550 (1788)
Symphony No. 41 "Jupiter" in C major, K. 551 (1788)
Violin Concerto No. 1 in B-flat major, K. 207 (1775)
Violin Concerto No. 2 in D major, K. 211 (1775)
Violin Concerto No. 3 in G major, K. 216 (1775)
Violin Concerto No. 4 in D major, K. 218 (1775)
Violin Concerto No. 5 in A major, K. 219 (1775)
Rondo for violin and orchestra in B-flat major, K. 269
Rondo for violin and orchestra in C major, K. 373
Die Zauberflöte, K. 620 (1791)

There are thousands of composer's I like considerable better.  That is one nice things about Classical music, the gigantic array of music to choose from.  One only needs to listen to what one likes.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 12, 2010, 11:55:54 PM
There are thousands of composer's I like considerable better.  That is one nice things about Classical music, the gigantic array of music to choose from.
No one I think would sensibly argue with what you say here, which is a clear statement about you and your personal taste. The problems arise when we project our personal feelings 'outwards', as if they were attributes of the object under discussion, rather than attributes of ourselves. (It calls to mind the term in literary criticism called 'the pathetic fallacy', whereby the state of mind of a writer is projected onto what he's writing about - such as in phrases like 'the cruel sea'.)

'I dislike Mozart's music' (which tells us something about your personal taste) means something completely different to 'Mozart is a bad composer' (which seems to be telling us something about Mozart, but which, as you've explained above, is actually a projection of your personal taste). It's the second statement that causes the trouble, not the first.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Szykneij on June 13, 2010, 03:18:25 AM
No one I think would sensibly argue with what you say here, which is a clear statement about you and your personal taste. The problems arise when we project our personal feelings 'outwards', as if they were attributes of the object under discussion, rather than attributes of ourselves. (It calls to mind the term in literary criticism called 'the pathetic fallacy', whereby the state of mind of a writer is projected onto what he's writing about - such as in phrases like 'the cruel sea'.)

'I dislike Mozart's music' (which tells us something about your personal taste) means something completely different to 'Mozart is a bad composer' (which seems to be telling us something about Mozart, but which, as you've explained above, is actually a projection of your personal taste). It's the second statement that causes the trouble, not the first.

Very well said.

Another example:

Teresa is a bad poster. She's the worst poster on the board.

vrs.

I generally don't agree with the posts Teresa makes.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 13, 2010, 12:16:14 PM
Another example:
Teresa is a bad poster. She's the worst poster on the board.
vrs.
I generally don't agree with the posts Teresa makes.
A perfect illustration. Thank you!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 13, 2010, 03:23:17 PM
No one I think would sensibly argue with what you say here, which is a clear statement about you and your personal taste. The problems arise when we project our personal feelings 'outwards', as if they were attributes of the object under discussion, rather than attributes of ourselves. (It calls to mind the term in literary criticism called 'the pathetic fallacy', whereby the state of mind of a writer is projected onto what he's writing about - such as in phrases like 'the cruel sea'.)

'I dislike Mozart's music' (which tells us something about your personal taste) means something completely different to 'Mozart is a bad composer' (which seems to be telling us something about Mozart, but which, as you've explained above, is actually a projection of your personal taste). It's the second statement that causes the trouble, not the first.

I am sorry for the misunderstanding, however whither one likes a composer or believes a composer is not technically or musically a good composer are separate things.

In the case of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart:

Hope this helps to clarify. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 13, 2010, 03:52:06 PM
I am sorry for the misunderstanding, however whither one likes a composer or believes a composer is not technically or musically a good composer are separate things.

In the case of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart:
  • I do not like Mozart's music. (Personal opinion based on listening to his compositions)
  • I believe he is technically a very good composer as he follows the rules of composition.  Although IMHO he uses too much repetition and repeats.   Also it is important to note some of my favorite composers are NOT technically good composers as they purposely break most of the rules of composition. (Personal observation based on composition studies) 
  • I also believe he is MUSICALLY the worst composer I have ever heard in my life.  Just because one follows the rules of composition DOES NOT guarantee a satisfactory outcome musically.   There are composers whose music I hate who are musically good composers.  So personal likes and dislikes are different than personal perception of the musicality of a composer. (Personal opinion based on how he applies his craft)

Hope this helps to clarify.

The only thing it clarifies is how deeply you have fallen into the trap that Elgarian described.   
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 13, 2010, 04:14:30 PM
QFT  8)

Now if we could only find a third we could christen the three stooges of the board.   :P
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on June 14, 2010, 12:03:35 AM
Hope this helps to clarify.
There's nothing to clarify. You dislike Mozart's music, period. It is a personal, "gut" feeling that has nothing objective, your crippled attempt to rationalize it notwithstanding. Please don't delude yourself into thinking that musical likes or dislikes can be quantified.

Besides, as it has been repeatedly pointed out to you, too much hate will kill you in the end.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 14, 2010, 07:35:57 AM
1. I do not like Mozart's music. (Personal opinion based on listening to his compositions)

3. I also believe he is MUSICALLY the worst composer I have ever heard in my life.
I think Scarpia is right about the trap you're stuck in. Your point no. 3 is an example of the 'pathetic fallacy' I was talking about earlier, in which your own feelings are projected outwards onto the music, instead of being recognised as arising within yourself. Point 3 adds nothing of substance to what you said in point 1. All it achieves is to emphasise your dislike in the particular way that the pathetic fallacy encourages.

The difficulty is that many people find Mozart's music to have positive qualities very different to the negative ones you describe, and these positive qualities are communicable. I gave an illustration some time ago in another thread to demonstrate the characteristically inventive way he writes his music to express a multiplicity of feelings almost simultaneously in his operas. I used one of Fiordiligi's arias in Cosi as an example. I'll quote it here:

"One of the things that I find so attractive about the [Mozart] operas is how much of the feel of real life is in them - that is, the complex ever-changing feeling of life-as-we-live-it. It doesn't matter how daft the plot is; what counts is what the music tells us about the changing situations. I'm thinking, for example, of Fiordiligi's 'Like a fortress' aria, where she's adopting such a noble, admirable stance, and the music is taking us along with this so wonderfully, except ... there are little orchestral passages that seem to cast doubt on all this; that there's something a bit over the top about all this nobility, which may not be quite what it seems. That's the sort of thing I mean - that mix of the noble with the absurd; the idea that we're never so vulnerable as when we're seeming the opposite. No one expresses those little fleeting moments, musically, like Mozart."

This kind of boundless creativity is to be found throughout the great Mozart operas - that is, the representation of a wide diversity of feelings by presenting a parallel diversity of musical ideas almost simultaneously. You may not like it; you may not think there's any value in doing this sort of thing with music. But to describe what Mozart is doing as 'musically bad' suggests not that you've perceived it and rejected it, but rather that you haven't actually perceived it in the first place.

Well, that's regrettable but understandable. That failure of perception is something we're all prone to, especially with music we dislike. But that's why it's so important to recognise when we're trapping ourselves in pathetic fallacies.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 14, 2010, 08:04:26 AM
. . . I gave an illustration some time ago in another thread to demonstrate the characteristically inventive way he writes his music to express a multiplicity of feelings almost simultaneously in his operas. I used one of Fiordiligi's arias in Cosi as an example. I'll quote it here:

"One of the things that I find so attractive about the [Mozart] operas is how much of the feel of real life is in them - that is, the complex ever-changing feeling of life-as-we-live-it. It doesn't matter how daft the plot is; what counts is what the music tells us about the changing situations. I'm thinking, for example, of Fiordiligi's 'Like a fortress' aria, where she's adopting such a noble, admirable stance, and the music is taking us along with this so wonderfully, except ... there are little orchestral passages that seem to cast doubt on all this; that there's something a bit over the top about all this nobility, which may not be quite what it seems. That's the sort of thing I mean - that mix of the noble with the absurd; the idea that we're never so vulnerable as when we're seeming the opposite. No one expresses those little fleeting moments, musically, like Mozart."

Excellent observations, Alan.  And we are apt to forget this in our day, but this was outstanding mastery and a deepening of the genre in Mozart's day.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 08:15:09 AM

My favorite example along that vein is La ci darem la mano, from Don Giovanni.  It is an example of Mozart not following the rules, but making his own rules.  It was customary at the time for Arias to be set pieces where characters commented on their feelings, separate from the dramatic action.  Mozart places Zerlina's submission to Don Giovanni's seduction in the middle of the aria.  Don Giovanni's charming solicitations, Zerlina's lamenting of her own weakness, and her ecstasy at having accepted Don Giovanni's offer are all deliciously painted in the music.  A wonderful piece.



Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 08:18:45 AM
And you're completely entitled to this view & stating it. Love it. ;D

Teresa is also on record as saying the J.S. Bach is the worst composer of all time.  (Evidently there can be more than one worst composer of all time.)  Interesting to what lengths you have to go to find someone you can agree with concerning Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 14, 2010, 08:20:05 AM
James is not shy of navel-gazing indulging in pathetic fallacy, himself ; )
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 08:43:26 AM
Oh and there is PLENTY of people who dont give 2 shits about him, believe me.

The incorrect grammar and vulgar language certainly further your argument.

There are plenty of people who are not interested in Mozart.  But that does not prevent them from understanding that he was a composer of rare talent that produced a lot of extraordinary music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 09:06:30 AM
Ah, the cruel truth is revealed of the Mozart Haters Underground.  Plenty - plenty, I tell you! - of people HATE & CAN'T STAND his music. 

After all this time, Mozart can still sitr the pot.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 09:17:06 AM
No, it's not that .. it's just certain fans of him are so easily riled up & shocked when people express another view. That's all we're really seeing here.

Quite so, probably we are to blame for responding at all to your blathering on about Mozart.  But you volunteer to be the site punching bag and it is hard to resist sometimes.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 14, 2010, 09:21:37 AM
I am sorry for the misunderstanding, however whither one likes a composer or believes a composer is not technically or musically a good composer are separate things.

In the case of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart:
  • I do not like Mozart's music. (Personal opinion based on listening to his compositions)
  • I believe he is technically a very good composer as he follows the rules of composition.  [...]
    • I also believe he is MUSICALLY the worst composer I have ever heard in my life.  Just because one follows the rules of composition DOES NOT guarantee a satisfactory outcome musically. 

      Hope this helps to clarify.
Teresa, I'm perfectly happy with your not liking Mozart. More pie for me!

However, your idea that WAM just followed the current rules and consequently was not really groundbreaking, is, I'm sorry, historically incorrect.

1) Everybody thinks, oh that's just a sonata form, it's just paint by numbers. In reality sonata form was not an established form in Haydn and Mozart's time. They were experimenting with the form, which was only taken as a holy mold after their time, by composers we have forgotten about (except Gurn and GAbriel, of course).

2) Mozart was a rather controversial composer (unlike Salieri and other composers we have mostly forgotten) for the very reason he was f*cking with the formula (to quote one of the Beach Boys).

3) Mozart's catalogue lists some 625 compostions. About half of them, or even more, are fomulaic Gebrauchsmusik. Kid had to make a living. However, his major compositions, and there are so many of them, all are unusual, strange, and disturbingly intense. And never formulaic.[/list]
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 09:23:24 AM
Fantastic!  A Mike Love reference in a Mozart thread.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 09:42:38 AM
lol compared to today's standards, to the 21st century person?

Not to you, obviously.  Again, as Elgarian said above, you attribute your shortcomings to the music itself.  You are a colorblind person trying to convince us that Picasso painted only in shades of grey.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 14, 2010, 09:48:44 AM
lol compared to today's standards, to the 21st century person?

To me, yes. Maybe not to you.

Go to a good performance of Don Giovanni or the 491 piano concerto, or the 575 quartet and I have no doubt many people will be deeply moved. Not you, of course. You're a tough guy.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 14, 2010, 10:08:01 AM
I didn't know that disturbing was necessary for greatness! :D  I would have to throw alot of music in the dumpster if that were the case. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 10:22:10 AM
Mozart's problem is that he did not write a string quartet with heliocopter,or instruct the members to perform naked, or to play their instruments in any way except in the manner they were trained to play them.

Hence his simple, light, safe, polite & tame pieces fail to disturb.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 14, 2010, 10:49:14 AM
but fanboy Elgarian's wordy defensive indulgent blathering still doesnt change things for us tho ...


James, Please stop writing like a brat. Stick to the issues would you and leave the personal comments out. It just attracts like for like traffic which does nothing to further the discussion.

Knight
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 11:00:00 AM
It is the issue tho ... when someone states another viewpoint people should just except it, no need for long preachy replies etc... like that's going to change things? It simply won't.

You're arguing that you can't learn?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 14, 2010, 11:01:37 AM
Elgarian's reply....as always, discussed the issues and was not even vaguely abusive.

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on June 14, 2010, 11:03:25 AM
It is the issue tho ... when someone states another viewpoint people should just except it, no need for long preachy replies etc... like that's going to change things? It simply won't.

In the hope that this thread will return to the discussion of or carefully thought-out criticism of Mozart's works, I present to you this (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,15489.msg396982.html#msg396982).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 14, 2010, 11:06:21 AM
I've heard those ... but I mean come on man ... this is the 21st century, let's get real here. You guys definitely have to get out more. Mozart is not strange, unusual or disturbingly intense now. No, he's more simple, light, safe, polite & tame. And if you guys like that sort-of thing, that's cool - but you can't expect that to register with everyone, and it doesn't. True fact.

I can live with that, and I congratulate you on your self-declared coolness.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 14, 2010, 11:34:50 AM
It's your trip to require disturbing intensity of Mozart, James. You need to be a great deal cooler: live and let live.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: snyprrr on June 14, 2010, 11:41:52 AM
I sent RN a PM. The book's coming along fine, and I'm sure he sends his regards.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 11:51:36 AM
Mozart's problem is that he did not write a string quartet with heliocopter,or instruct the members to perform naked, or to play their instruments in any way except in the manner they were trained to play them.

Hence his simple, light, safe, polite & tame pieces fail to disturb.

I'm not the largest fan of Mozart by any stretch of the imagination, but ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq_S1zzGQck&feature=related

is that not haunting?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 12:13:39 PM
I'm not the largest fan of Mozart by any stretch of the imagination, but ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq_S1zzGQck&feature=related

is that not haunting?

Unfortunately, there's no particular evidence that it is by Mozart.  It was assumed to be, largely because people thought it was too good to be by anyone else.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 14, 2010, 12:17:31 PM
I'd like to state that I'm not even slightly shocked, upset, or in any way disturbed by Teresa's (or anyone else's) dislike of Mozart's music. It disturbs me no more than would someone else's dislike of beer or butter. I was concerned only with:
1 - explaining why a mere expressed dislike of certain music doesn't imply that the music is bad;
2 - explaining the concept of the pathetic fallacy for anyone who may not be familiar with it;
3 - offering an illustration of why, in fact, Mozart's music might reasonably be considered to have merit, even by those who aren't fond of it.

Controversial stuff, I admit. Of course I see now that it could be construed as a vicious attack on all Mozart-dislikers, everywhere. (There are an awful lot of them, you know. A lot more than you might think!)




Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 12:27:23 PM
I think, and this merely my own view, that what goes into being well educated is knowing what is good and why.  To reduce all of the history of art to what "I" like is so self absorbed as to separate yourself from the rest of humanity.  Mozart is good, his music is not only technically masterful but his creative genius is undeniable.  When someone announces that Mozart is one of the worst composers all that's been demonstrated is the speaker is very limited in education and exposure to art or very limited in their ability to appreciate great music from a period divorced from our own. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: MN Dave on June 14, 2010, 12:28:46 PM
If I disliked Mozart and saw a thread titled "Mozart", I wouldn't go near it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 14, 2010, 12:29:35 PM
If I disliked Mozart and saw a thread titled "Mozart", I wouldn't go near it.

Unless you were a troll... ;)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 14, 2010, 12:30:39 PM
Mozart is good, his music is not only technically masterful but his creative genius is undeniable.

QFT.

Not that (as others have observed) that means that everyone is obliged to like it.

 
If I disliked Mozart and saw a thread titled "Mozart", I wouldn't go near it.

You're a good man, Dave.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 14, 2010, 12:35:56 PM
Clearly you are upset though.
Not by Teresa's dislike of Mozart, I'm not. Several of your posts (not only about me) are personally offensive though, and that upsets me somewhat.

Quote
Again, no matter HOW a person wants to state their dislike for the kind of music he did shouldn't be an issue. Deal with it. They aren't obligated to explain why in great detail esp. to touchy & preachy hardcore fans like yourself (or anyone else for that matter)
James, you haven't actually understood what the discussion was about. It never was about Teresa's (or anyone else's) dislike of Mozart. The fact that you think it was tells us more about you than you realise, but I'll spare you yet more discussion of the pathetic fallacy.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 12:37:14 PM
Oh so people who merely state here that they don't like his music now are self-absorbed, uneducated, limited, a-troll etc ...

Puh-lease.

No, a person can say they do not like Mozart's music.  It just when they go from there to saying Mozart is one of the worst composers, they cross over into uneducated, or so pathetically self-absorbed to think that only what they like is good.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 14, 2010, 12:40:23 PM
James,

I told you to stop the personal attacks. Whether or not you are incapable of discerning logical argument from some kind of evil determination to thrust a viewpoint at you; you are going to have to either take a break from responding, or alter your tone so as not to be offensive.

Consider this as a formal warning. I have also deleted your shoddy remarks about Karl.

BTW, do not alter this post, if you do I will systematically delete 10 of your posts at random.

Knight

In case you should miss the action I have taken James, I quote my remarks here.

Knight
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 12:41:00 PM
No, a person can say they do not like Mozart's music.  It just when they go from there to saying Mozart is one of the worst composers, they cross over into uneducated, or so pathetically self-absorbed to think that only what they like is good.

I think that sums it up.  Maybe it is time to stop feeding the troll.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 14, 2010, 12:42:42 PM
If I disliked Mozart and saw a thread titled "Mozart", I wouldn't go near it.
There are times, Dave, when you make posts that are close to being perfect.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 14, 2010, 12:45:14 PM
Maybe it is time to stop feeding the troll.
Well said. Enough's enough.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 14, 2010, 12:47:05 PM
And no matter how you want to slice and dice it, when people state they don't care for the sort of 18th century music he produced that's not abusive either. fans have to remember that, so need to for them to say silly stuff like "you're trapped", "you have short-comings" etc etc

You don't seem to be able to read. It is not about whether people like things....the 'so what' to that has been repeated several times. No one has disputed the issue of likes and dislikes.

There has been an attempt to sort out the wheat from the chaff of knowledge or opinion. The knowledge side of the argument seems only to attract abuse from you and the opinion side gets your best ya boo sucks. So really, best leave this stage altogether; as your disintigrating costume exposed your backside some time ago.

Knight 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 12:49:20 PM
Unfortunately, there's no particular evidence that it is by Mozart.  It was assumed to be, largely because people thought it was too good to be by anyone else.

FINE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDKdrQgp_q0&feature=related
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 12:50:08 PM
In all fairness to Teresa, she first wrote (my bold)

What I mean is I studied Mozart in school so I know his writing is technically correct, however the arrangement of the notes and the melodies used are not musically pleasing to me and most are sickening sweet.  In addition Mozart uses repeats and repetition too much for my tastes. I am having a real challanging time with the English language today, perhaps I should have said: "musically he is a very bad composer, to me" as he is clearly not a bad composer to others.  Unlike technique, I believe musicality is very personal and unique in each individual listener.

which no one could fairly dispute.  It was her "clarification" which did anything but clarify, which got people's hackles up.  That was where the demented distinction between a "technically good" composer and a "musically good" composer was introduced and the to me was dropped..
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Drasko on June 14, 2010, 01:12:23 PM
FINE!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDKdrQgp_q0&feature=related

That is some of my favorite Mozart. Fine choice son of Poeas.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 01:14:54 PM
That is some of my favorite Mozart. Fine choice son of Poeas.

Yes, when Mozart put's aside the gallant pleasantries and writes a proper fugue it is something special.  The Kyrie from the Requiem I consider to be as good a piece of music as has ever been written.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 14, 2010, 01:24:20 PM
It is easy to turn things up with the search function.  Another quote from Teresa:

Quote
As I see it pleasure and greatness as two different things.  I love orchestral music written from the Romantic period forward and many people misunderstand the pleasure I get from such music means I don't think composers of previous eras wrote great music.  And nothing can be further from the truth!  For example I derive no pleasure from the works of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart but I believe he was a great composer and indeed even influenced many of the composers I do love, yet for me I cannot stand his music.  But my inability to derive pleasure from Mozart's music does not lower the stature of his greatness in any way.

from this thread
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,8161.msg199054.html#msg199054


Who could disagree with that? 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 01:26:15 PM
It is easy to turn things up with the search function.  Another quote from Teresa:

from this thread
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,8161.msg199054.html#msg199054


Who could disagree with that?

Gould?
Callas?

http://blogcritics.org/music/article/why-mozart/
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 14, 2010, 01:51:24 PM
On another thread recently I mentioned that over the years I had encountered a number of orchestral players who hated Mozart. I remembered about Callas, she hardly performed any Mozart. But the Gould I did not know about.

As far as composers are concerned, I often think their ire is in a special category. Britten detested Brahms, Stravinsky loathed various folk, ditto Wagner, who was denigrated by Debussy and so on. But when you are writing music, I think the path you take means you have to shrug off alternatives and focus on your own path as being the right path. That has sometimes meant composers have reviled one another.

But because Debussy thought so little of Wagner, does it make either of them lesser composers? No.

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 14, 2010, 02:09:30 PM
As far as composers are concerned, I often think their ire is in a special category. Britten detested Brahms. . . .

And that was a reversal!  As a student, he adored Brahms.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 14, 2010, 02:12:39 PM
Occasionally in later life he even played Brahms and programmed him at Aldeburgh.

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 14, 2010, 02:19:39 PM
Your larger point is intact; one must allow artists their likes and dislikes, which in any event is apt to change over time.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 04:13:01 PM
Teresa is also on record as saying the J.S. Bach is the worst composer of all time.  (Evidently there can be more than one worst composer of all time.) ...
:o No there can be only ONE worst composer and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart has earned that right.  :)

Here is what I said in the Bach is the very best composer thread:

"I voted decidedly not , I do think Bach is technically a good composer, I just cannot tolerate listening to most of his music.  I find none of it enjoyable with the exception of Leopold Stokowski's orchestration of Toccata and Fugue in D Minor and Jethro Tull's jazzed-up version of Bouree.  I hate the Art of the Fugue, the Brandenburg Concertos, the Harpsichord Concertos, the Cantatas, the Orchestral Suites and just about everything else Bach composed.  I can easily name 1,000 composers I like better! "

Another of my comments further down in the thread:

Well, as you gathered I like Bach a tiny bit more than Mozart.  Hate is the only word I can find to adequately describe how I feel about their music though, dislike is not strong enough.  As an example I merely dislike the music of Schumann and Schubert. 

On the positive side, there are thousands of Classical composers I dearly love.


Here is the tally so far in the voting

Bach is the very best composer Right?
Of course. 13 (25%)
Could be. 8 (15.4%)
Decidedly not. 16 (30.8%)
Sometimes. 7 (13.5%)
Bananafanamomana 8 (15.4%)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 14, 2010, 04:44:00 PM
I think some people have ingested internet subjectivity so deep they cannot see a difference between saying "I do not like Mozart's music" and "Mozart is the worst composer ever", especially when you add specious "technical' reasons for the latter statement.

I do not understand why Teresa moved form the statement that was just dug up from a previous thread, to the strange junior-high dismissal on this thread, but it is no move forward n terms of quality of thinking and expression.

There are tons of composers  -  some of the first rank  -  I have no appetite for. That's just because they are doing something I do not need or like at that point. One of my hobbies, perhaps annoying to other folks, is pointing out that people are mistaken in regarding Beethoven as the alpha and omega of CM. I'm living proof that a classical music lover can function healthily without listening to Beethoven more than once a year. But that doesn't mean I think he's a bad composer. That would be completely silly, and also somewhat philistine.

The idea espoused by James that older music kind of fades and becomes fuddy duddy because of more recent schools of composing is equally philistine, even though it sounds cool. Some people overdo it, but one of the great things of music, visual art, literature is that in a relentlessly now world it gives us access to the past in a visceral way.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 05:18:17 PM
If I disliked Mozart and saw a thread titled "Mozart", I wouldn't go near it.
Neither would I! I only arrived here as my comment was "bumped" from the Does an Avatar affect your perception of the poster? thread by Brahmsian

Here is the post I responded to:
Quote from: Scarpia on June 08, 2010, 12:37:13 PM
Mozart is a really, really bad composer. 
(http://www.sbarnabas.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/sacredheart.jpg)
--------------------

Ok, let's see what happens.   

My response:

Works for me and it is nice to have such an authority figure confirming! 
Although personally I think Mozart is a very good composer, just too boring for my tastes.   
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 05:27:51 PM
No, a person can say they do not like Mozart's music.  It just when they go from there to saying Mozart is one of the worst composers, they cross over into uneducated, or so pathetically self-absorbed to think that only what they like is good.
There are many composers I do not like that I believe are good composers.  Indeed I believe that Mozart is technically a very good composer, I just FIRMLY believe that musically he is the absolute worst, bottom of the barrel.  For example I believe Gerald Finzi is an excellent composer I just happen to not like his music.  We are discussing two different things, talent and personal enjoyment, this seems to have went over your head completely!  :o 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 05:31:54 PM
There are many composers I do not like that I believe are good composers.  Indeed I believe that Mozart is technically a very good composer, I just FIRMLY believe that musically he is the absolute worst, bottom of the barrel.  For example I believe Gerald Finzi is an excellent composer I just happen to not like his music.  We are discussing two different things, talent and personal enjoyment, this seems to have went over your head completely!  :o

Is English not your first language?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 05:39:20 PM
Is English not your first language?
English is my ONLY language, was there something grammatically wrong with my post.  If so let me know and I will correct it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 05:44:42 PM
English is my ONLY language, was there something grammatically wrong with my post.  If so let me know and I will correct it.

The way you are using some words is odd like someone who was not a native English speaker, e.g. this sentence is confusing to me:

Quote
Indeed I believe that Mozart is technically a very good composer, I just FIRMLY believe that musically he is the absolute worst, bottom of the barrel.

What does "musically" mean to you?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 05:50:25 PM
James, will you shut up? - I am genuinely trying to understand what she is saying. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 05:50:37 PM

What does "musically" mean to you?
Hopefully what it means to everyone else. 

Have you ever studied music?  If so you know that you can follow the rules of composition and produce very non musical results and on the other hand you can break the rules and produce very moving music.  Technique and musicality are totally different things IMHO, thus one can be technically good while being musically poor. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 05:53:47 PM
Hopefully what it means to everyone else. 

Have you ever studied music?  If so you know that you can follow the rules of composition and produce very non musical results and on the other hand you can break the rules and produce very moving music.  Technique and musicality are totally different things IMHO, thus one can be technically good while being musically poor.

Not to be rude, and I do share in your general dislike of Mozart's music, save for some choice pieces, but are you serious?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 14, 2010, 06:03:40 PM
Hopefully what it means to everyone else. 

Have you ever studied music?  If so you know that you can follow the rules of composition and produce very non musical results and on the other hand you can break the rules and produce very moving music.  Technique and musicality are totally different things IMHO, thus one can be technically good while being musically poor.

Yes I have studied music, but no, I do not think we understand the word "musically" the same.   

First, I do not put much importance on so-called "rules of composition".  There are pedagogical rules of harmony, or counterpoint, or orchestration, or rules of 12-tone composition, but these are learned by students for the purpose of an introduction to the skills, but not really employed by composers for serious music making.  So, I suppose if someone were an inexperienced composer and relied on "rules" then their work would sound derivative and crude and unmusical if one were to use that word in that context (I wouldn't). 

Of course Mozart was none that.

Musicality, to my way of thinking, is more apt to be used to describe a performance, when someone plays a piece with a sensitive musical sense for what the composer was trying to get at.

To say Mozart was technically a good composer but the worst musically is nonsense to me.

All I can figure is that for you musically has a meaning that is linked to your own personal preference in a composition.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 06:08:17 PM
All I can figure is that for you musically has a meaning that is linked to your own personal preference in a composition.

You want 'not' musically?!

I give you... Richard Nanes.

http://www.nanes.com/recordings_videos.htm
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 06:13:32 PM
Not to be rude, and I do share in your general dislike of Mozart's music, save for some choice pieces, but are you serious?
100%
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 06:15:33 PM
100%

Then I think I have to side with a lot of the others with the notion that your terminology is being used in a strange fashion, and that you seem to not be able to clarify what you actually mean.

You should have simply stuck with what seems to have been your first position, in simply stating your dislike for Mozart, although, I'll be honest, that seems like a rather gross overstatement.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 06:22:47 PM
You want 'not' musically?!

I give you... Richard Nanes.

http://www.nanes.com/recordings_videos.htm
Great example, I agree!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 06:28:28 PM
Musicality is a noun that means sensitivity to, knowledge of, or talent for music. The word also refers to the quality or state of being musical (aka melodiousness.) A musical person has the ability to perceive differences in pitch, rhythm and harmonies. One usually differentiates between three types of musicality: To be able to perceive music (musical receptivity), to be able to reproduce music as well as creating music (musical creativity).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musicality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musicality)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 06:29:43 PM
Musicality is a noun that means sensitivity to, knowledge of, or talent for music. The word also refers to the quality or state of being musical (aka melodiousness.) A musical person has the ability to perceive differences in pitch, rhythm and harmonies. One usually differentiates between three types of musicality: To be able to perceive music (musical receptivity), to be able to reproduce music as well as creating music (musical creativity).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musicality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musicality)

Mozart would seem to fit under that definition.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 06:34:41 PM
Mozart would seem to fit under that definition.
:) I agree musically poor.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 06:36:25 PM
:) I agree musically poor.

Honestly, I don't know how you'd hold that thought in conjunction with the definition you presented. Perhaps you could say that you dislike Mozart, or find his music boring, etc., but as bold a statement as you're making just doesn't seem to add up, especially seeing the definition that you've now presented.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 14, 2010, 06:50:13 PM
Honestly, I don't know how you'd hold that thought in conjunction with the definition you presented. Perhaps you could say that you dislike Mozart, or find his music boring, etc., but as bold a statement as you're making just doesn't seem to add up, especially seeing the definition that you've now presented.
All off the above

Other posters have also provided you with the difference between technique and musicality.  Perhaps it is time for you to reflect?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 14, 2010, 06:55:15 PM
All off the above
  • I do not like Mozart
  • I consider his music boring
  • I FIRMLY believe he is musically a poor composer, according to the definition I just posted
  • I also believe technically he is a very good composer

Other posters have also provided you with the difference between technique and musicality.  Perhaps it is time for you to reflect?

While reflection is always good, perhaps you should reread the definition that you posted, and then consider Mozart's music in relation to that definition. I think the objections arose from your seeming inability to see the contradiction in your assertions.

I mean even if you dislike Mozart, using the definition that your provided, he fits under the one you bolded, among the rest of it. I mean I don't care for any of his operas, save these versions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF7ocNl6nXo), but it would have taken an inordinate amount of creativity, to use such a crude term, to construct such pieces, and of course the technique as well, but I think part is agreed upon.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: WI Dan on June 14, 2010, 08:37:28 PM
  • I do not like Mozart
  • I consider his music boring
  • I FIRMLY believe he is musically a poor composer, according to the definition I just posted
  • I also believe technically he is a very good composer

Other posters have also provided you with the difference between technique and musicality.  Perhaps it is time for you to reflect?

Hmmmm .....

(http://vvoice.vo.llnwd.net/e9/raw-and-uncensored.44176.40.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 01:17:10 AM
Have you ever studied music?  If so you know that you can follow the rules of composition and produce very non musical results and on the other hand you can break the rules and produce very moving music.  Technique and musicality are totally different things IMHO, thus one can be technically good while being musically poor.

As one who has studied music, I'll go ahead and repeat what several others have already said on this thread, Teresa:  That Mozart is both technically good and musically excellent;  and that you are externalizing your musical preferences when you take the fact that you happen not to like Mozart, but try to claim that it is a matter of Mozart's being "musically poor."

The statement that Mozart is "musically poor" is as arrant a musicological absurdity as one ever saw on the internet.  However, no one can argue with the fact that you don't like Mozart.  I agree that part of the time your use of terms confuses the issue.  There is no such thing as Mozart being "a bad composer" for you; Mozart's quality as a composer (which, to say it the thousandth time, is of hte highest excellence) does not depend on the vagaries of any individual.

Do you know something, Teresa?  It is quite possible that I know absolutely nothing about your musical tastes, apart from this dead horse you're whipping about how you don't like Mozart, and that if you had been at God's elbow at the Dawn of Time, you would have suggested giving Wolferl a miss.

Please, we all get that you don't bloody like Mozart. How about giving it a rest for a millennium?

TIA.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 02:32:27 AM
Here I shall adopt the radical position that this thread is actually about Mozart, and not about the people who cannot stand Mozart.

On the bus ride into town, I continued reading Ernst Toch's The Shaping Forces of Music. It is (I am sure) by the purest coincidence that my reading included the chapter "Ornamental and Fermentative Counterpoint."  It is a brief chapter, with marginally more page space devoted to two ten-measure orchestral music examples in full score, than to text.  The two composers of the excerpts are Wagner and Mozart.  It is a chapter worth reading, so I shan't excerpt from it;  but in sum (for our purposes here) Toch certainly regards Mozart as one of the masters at the very summit of the art of composition.

 
Read the book. (It's available in an economical Dover reprint.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 03:38:22 AM
Always? I think not.

 ... and not compared to other music I've experienced.

With music of the classical era what I miss is polyphony and Mozart's music doesnt really offer enough challenges to this listener. For instance with Bach, there are at least 2 independant, equally important voices together. Where in most classical era stuff you often get one melody and its servant, the accompaniment, as a general rule. It's music that is too predictable and most of all obviously simplified, which leaves very little to the imagination.

Even for performers, this doesn't really allow much room to create so much, because everything is just so simplified already, its mostly predictable harmonies, scales and arpeggios.

With Bach there are more voices, more dark passages, it requires more work & creativity ... more to listen to and think about. Same applies to something like oh say Schoenberg ... where something may seem absurd at first but becomes more clear and understandable, there is more to dig into there for the performer & listener.

With Mozart there isn't much there to decifer, translate or clarify, there is nothing visibly dark.

For me, Mozart doesn't offer enough mental stimulation or intellectual work, or harmonies. Plus it's all too poofed up, repetitive and too theatrical, not very sincere imo. There isn't much intensity and it all seems a bit obvious & superficial esp. with it's overt theatricality. In part probably because the short-lived & busy composer needed income & an audience, he rarely had helpful patrons, so couldn't afford failures, nor could he risk composing unattractive concert pieces.  It seems most of his more intellectual & complex pieces weren't that profitable. So the times and settings for his full potential were never that encouraging. I can appreciate the greatness of the best of the late work but he's very very over-rated imo, exceedingly so ...and not so above & beyond the rest. There are composers who offer up so much more ...

In this hand we have an orange. Behold the orange, juicy, a bit tart, exactly to my taste. In this hand we have a bunch of grapes. Tiny little things, no challenge to pop off and swallow down, at least not for me. ::)

In your exposition above, Mozart doesn't even enter into it. You are inditing classical era music in general, not Mozart at all. I'm sure you must realize it, although it doesn't enter into your agenda to just nut up and say so. It is far more fun to rag people who have different tastes.

::)

8)

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on June 15, 2010, 03:47:49 AM
Mozart, although not my favorite composer (is still within my Top 5 or 10 composers).  I do have to be 'in the mood' to listen to Mozart though.

If someone pointed a gun to my head and said who are the greatest creators of music, the first two names that would pop into my head are Mozart and Bach.  Regardless of whether I like their music or love it.

There are many, many people who hate classical music.  Fine.  There are many, many people who love classical music, but hate Mozart's music.  That is fine also.  However, to say that Mozart is the worst composer musically, is insane.

The fact remains that Mozart, musically, is one of the greatest composers that ever lived.  Whether you enjoy his music or loathe, does not change that.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on June 15, 2010, 03:54:42 AM
I dare anyone name a composer who was more versatile and successful across the board in so many different areas of classical music:

Mozart's touch was golden in solo piano, concerti, symphony, opera, chamber music, sacred music, etc.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 03:55:35 AM
Hopefully what it means to everyone else. 

Have you ever studied music?  If so you know that you can follow the rules of composition and produce very non musical results and on the other hand you can break the rules and produce very moving music.  Technique and musicality are totally different things IMHO, thus one can be technically good while being musically poor.

Have you ever studied Mozart? Including glancing at a book or two about the composer? If so you would not have written the above. Mozart, as soon as he is in twenties (he was very young when he started), was not a follower of the rules. He broke the rules. That's why he kept getting into problems.

Look I'm perfectly happy with your not liking Mozart, in fact I don't think Mozart needs a confused person like you. But the way you explaining and, as it were, objectifying, your dislike of Mozart is just plain silly.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 03:58:05 AM
Always? I think not.

 ... and not compared to other music I've experienced.

With music of the classical era what I miss is polyphony and Mozart's music doesnt really offer enough challenges to this listener. For instance with Bach, there are at least 2 independant, equally important voices together. Where in most classical era stuff you often get one melody and its servant, the accompaniment, as a general rule. It's music that is too predictable and most of all obviously simplified, which leaves very little to the imagination.


Just like Teresa you seem to have no idea of the hundred or more mature works in Mozart's catalogue that are brimming with harmonic challenges and polyphony.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 03:58:32 AM
How so?

Well, your entire post that I quoted, based on what is lacking in Mozart's music, is equally true of all music of the classical era, with the exception of church music. It's just the way it is. The exact same arguments can be made about Haydn, or Vanhal, or any other composer you choose who worked between 1760 and 1800. So there is no need to single out Mozart unless you are picking the top of the heap and singling him out for special abuse, since he didn't change things by reverting to polyphony or whatever you are missing that attracts your ear.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: MN Dave on June 15, 2010, 03:59:13 AM
GMG CLASSICAL MUSIC FORUM:
Fightin' About Music

 ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 04:28:22 AM
True I suppose, but Mozart is the one that gets all the credit and is mostly lauded & praised with an inordinant amount of ridiculous, not-so-level headed, grandiose, philosophical rambling & mythology...

Yes it is is wrong!  We've had enough of this!  Give credit where it's due-- Luchesi!! ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 04:30:51 AM
You know, that's a myth ... his popularity now is pretty much a late-20th century invention perpetuated via mass mainstream marketing that really took off during the distorted film Amadeus. Up until the 20th century (and for a great deal of it) he was only liked and known for a small handful of works, and they were more or less deemed "pretty" & "enjoyable", but certainly not "profound".

How about saying that he is an over-rated composer? Is that still too crazy for you?

Actually, Mozart's popularity took off in the period immediately after his death. Much of his music, including the last 3 symphonies, the d minor and c minor piano concerti, Don Giovanni and the Magic Flute, for example, were staples of the concert house from 1795 til the present. In addition, chamber groups, which arose about 1830 in Germany and spread exponentially throughout Europe, consistently included his string quartets in their performances. Beethoven idolized him, and even Wagner, whose sensibilities were decidedly introspective, wrote that Mozart was the progenitor of German opera. So it is fallacious and revisionist to say or believe that Mozart is a late 20th century phenomenon. Simply isn't true.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 04:33:56 AM
True I suppose, but Mozart is the one that gets all the credit and is mostly lauded & praised with an inordinant amount of ridiculous, not-so-level headed, grandiose, philosophical rambling & mythology...

Well, every composer has his fanboys. Some of the Bachians make me want to puke on my keyboard. :P However, even as a Haydn fanboy, I can see that much of the praise heaped on Mozart is well-deserved, while some is just plain over the top. I have never seen the thinking-level validity of blaming a person for what is said about him. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 05:05:35 AM
Much of his music?!? Still, reading this ... seems like he was loved for a tiny tiny fraction of his enormous output. And further still, nowhere near the Big Mac marketing that was to come in the late 20th century and the further perpetuating of mythology, bad scholarship... and overall bogusness initiated with that awful Amadeus flick ... or how recently most of the operas (22 in all - the only area where he broke new ground) have entered the repetoire.

Much of this post is irrelevant, e.g. breaking new ground is not the best or only or most significant gauge for determining the importance of a composer - it can be important but there are many great composers who did not break new ground as much as bring to an apogee the developments just preceding or during their working lives. 

Many of Mozart's operas were of his youth and are not major works, in fact about half of his music is of his youth and not as important as his mature works.  The fact remains that there are easily dozens of masterpieces from among these mature works and I'd say that his entire catalog is of a high level that puts him well above the average for his time.  He was of his time but just a lot better than his contemporaries.

For me the bottomline is that Mozart is one of a handful of composers whose music transcends his era and continually enriches the lives of people and more importantly musicians who derive meaning and enjoyment from his music and no doubt will continue to do so as long as people are around. 

This is true of Mozart but not true of 99% of composers whose music is almost entirely inconsequential during their own lifetimes.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:08:30 AM
Another composer James isn't interested in.

Must be good.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:18:54 AM

Quote from: Stockhausen fanboy
Much of his music?!? Still, reading this ... seems like he was loved for a tiny tiny fraction of his enormous output. And further still, nowhere near the Big Mac marketing that was to come in the late 20th century and the further perpetuating of mythology, bad scholarship... and overall bogusness initiated with that awful Amadeus flick ... or how recently most of the operas (22 in all - the only area where he broke new ground) have entered the repetoire.

Much of this post is irrelevant . . .

Yes, even the parts which are not whingeing exaggerations. As Franco says, "breaking new ground" is not the most important thing, let alone the only thing . . . but most level-headed musicians find that Mozart "broke ground" in genres other than opera.  The masterworks constitute a substantial part of his catalogue (though one is grateful for the eruption of laughter prompted by the sheer wilful ignorance embodied in the phrase "a tiny tiny fraction" here).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:21:49 AM
Yes, I thought I had in fact posted earlier . . . .
 
Here I shall adopt the radical position that this thread is actually about Mozart, and not about the people who cannot stand Mozart.

On the bus ride into town, I continued reading Ernst Toch's The Shaping Forces of Music. It is (I am sure) by the purest coincidence that my reading included the chapter "Ornamental and Fermentative Counterpoint."  It is a brief chapter, with marginally more page space devoted to two ten-measure orchestral music examples in full score, than to text.  The two composers of the excerpts are Wagner and Mozart.  It is a chapter worth reading, so I shan't excerpt from it;  but in sum (for our purposes here) Toch certainly regards Mozart as one of the masters at the very summit of the art of composition.

 
Read the book. (It's available in an economical Dover reprint.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 05:39:00 AM
Technically dazzling but often lacking real substance - the product of prodigiously adept boy.

Well which is it: "technically dazzling" or "simplistic"?  What works of Mozart have you heard anyway, and how long has it been? :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 05:39:14 AM
Nothing is for everyone.

I guess it is fun for some people to play the role of the Mozart curmudgeon.  The dogs bark; the caravan passes by.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:41:03 AM
Well which is it: "technically dazzling" or "simplistic"?  What works of Mozart have you heard anyway, and how long has it been? :)

Why listen, when he's already formed his opinion?  It's like asking pinkie to listen to Carter je-je-je
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: MN Dave on June 15, 2010, 05:41:29 AM
What's your favorite Mozart recording of the moment?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:42:17 AM
The Amadeus Quartet (plus) doing the viola quintets, Dave.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 05:44:05 AM
What's your favorite Mozart recording of the moment?

Jacobs doing Mozart 38th and 41st is a desert island recording.  In fact it blew me away, I've been listening to nothing but Mozart since that time. 8)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EBJNRWJEL._SS400_.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 05:45:31 AM
Currently, because I just got it a week or so ago, my favorite is Gidon Kremer playing the Violin Concertos.

I like almost everything he records, I realize that his interpretations are not universely lauded - but I like them, quirky, somewhat a-stylisitc, but nonetheless, his recordings almost always bring a smile to my lips.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 05:47:13 AM
Currently, because I just got it a week or so ago, my favorite is Gidon Kremer playing the Violin Concertos.

I like almost everything he records, I realize that his interpretations are not universely lauded - but I like them, quirky, somewhat a-stylisitc, but nonetheless, his recordings almost always bring a smile to my lips.

I thought I was the only one that liked that recording! :D  I'm about to see how it stands up to the PI ones that recently arrived in the mail. :)  Still it's a terrific recording.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:54:02 AM

Currently, because I just got it a week or so ago, my favorite is Gidon Kremer playing the Violin Concertos.

I like almost everything he records, I realize that his interpretations are not universely lauded - but I like them, quirky, somewhat a-stylisitc, but nonetheless, his recordings almost always bring a smile to my lips.

I thought I was the only one that liked that recording! :D  I'm about to see how it stands up to the PI ones that recently arrived in the mail. :)  Still it's a terrific recording.

Do you know, the violin concertos have been entirely off my radar . . . knowing that Kremer has recorded them could just change that . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 05:56:17 AM
BTW, the violinist who is taking part in the 21 June Henningmusick concert, Alexey Shabalin, was the violin soloist in the second-ever performance of the "newly unearthed" triple concerto, in 1995.

First I've heard about this piece . . . anyone got more word?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 05:59:07 AM
I thought I was the only one that liked that recording! :D  I'm about to see how it stands up to the PI ones that recently arrived in the mail. :)  Still it's a terrific recording.


Do you know, the violin concertos have been entirely off my radar . . . knowing that Kremer has recorded them could just change that . . . .

They are worth hearing!  Don't be put off by the KV #.  They are masterpieces some of the finest violin concertos of the classical era, I never tire of listening to them. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 06:03:02 AM
BTW, the violinist who is taking part in the 21 June Henningmusick concert, Alexey Shabalin, was the violin soloist in the second-ever performance of the "newly unearthed" triple concerto, in 1995.

First I've heard about this piece . . . anyone got more word?


Which "triple concerto"? An early Henning work, mayhap?

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 06:03:33 AM
Well, your entire post that I quoted, based on what is lacking in Mozart's music, is equally true of all music of the classical era, with the exception of church music. It's just the way it is. The exact same arguments can be made about Haydn, or Vanhal, or any other composer you choose who worked between 1760 and 1800. So there is no need to single out Mozart unless you are picking the top of the heap and singling him out for special abuse, since he didn't change things by reverting to polyphony or whatever you are missing that attracts your ear.

8)

Except what you're saying is not true, Gurn. Haydn and especially Mozart were not on top of the heap because some levitational freak accident. They were on top of the heap because they composed a lot of works that are nore complicated than the melody + accompaniment model. Mozart was and still is in many of his works a way too busy composer to please the mass audience: chromatics and polyphony etc.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 06:10:09 AM
Which "triple concerto"? An early Henning work, mayhap?

No! ; )

I cannot find any other info about this, apart from Alexey's bio.  I doubt that Alyosha invented it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 06:11:18 AM
What's your favorite Mozart recording of the moment?

I'm listening to Mozart violin sonatas these days (and Prokofiev's 5th Piano Cto).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 06:15:49 AM
Except what you're saying is not true, Gurn. Haydn and especially Mozart were not on top of the heap because some levitational freak accident. They were on top of the heap because they composed a lot of works that are nore complicated than the melody + accompaniment model. Mozart was and still is in many of his works a way too busy composer to please the mass audience: chromatics and polyphony etc.

Not untrue, Herman, I just made it more simplistic than reality to enable discussion. Yes, there are plenty of way advanced features in late Mozart and Haydn works, and that is what sets them above the others. However, my point is that the essence of the music is entirely different than that which preceded it (polyphonic Baroque), and the entire style is what seems to be at issue here. IMO, there is not nor ever will be a question over which 2 are at the top of the heap, but if someone doesn't like the heap, that scarcely matters does it?  Both of those composers are rooted firmly in the galant style, but they were each in their way able to rise above that, which is something that most others weren't able to do.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Sergeant Rock on June 15, 2010, 06:18:20 AM
What's your favorite Mozart recording of the moment?

The C minor concerto from this new CD:

(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/feb2010/MozCleUch2324.jpg)

Yes, she's trying to levitate the piano.

Sarge

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: MN Dave on June 15, 2010, 06:23:11 AM
The C minor concerto from this new CD:

Yes, she's trying to levitate the piano.

Sarge

I can get that one from my library. I think I'll check it out.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 15, 2010, 06:26:17 AM
Quote from: Hermna
Haydn and especially Mozart were not on top of the heap because some levitational freak accident. They were on top of the heap because they composed a lot of works that are nore complicated than the melody + accompaniment model. Mozart was and still is in many of his works a way too busy composer to please the mass audience: chromatics and polyphony etc.

That's exactly true, Herman. And, though as has been pointed out, these things aren't exactly necessary for a composer to be important, or 'great', or whatever, it is in these areas, and others - in chromatic harmony, phrase-structure, form and structure and, yes, polyphony too, in his own way (it doesn't have to be like Bach to be polyphony......) - that Mozart was doing new things, things that transformed the art of composition (can we really imagine the subtleties of Brahms, or Faure, for instance, without Mozart? His innovations are subtle, they aren't obvious, they aren't blaring, they are to do with the nitty-gritty of actually writing notes on paper, and I get the feeling that this sort of subtlety isn't something James has a great deal of time for, but they are profound, and intelligent, and they work their way deeply under the skin. I loved what you said a few pages ago about Mozart being unsettling (or whatever it was you said). James' denial of this, or his insistence that they weren't unsettling enough for 21st century listeners, spoke volumes, I think. Mozart isn't about bigger, faster, louder, newer, weirder....his depth, his power, comes from the sheer quality of the music, where every note speaks volumes and a single subtle dissonance or breathtaking bit of voice-leading, or varying of articulation, or whatever it is, has a power way beyond its seeming scale. But you have to be prepared to listen for it.

(And here I ought to admit that for many years I wasn't prepared to listen for it, and so I missed it, like James and Teresa do.....but when I did finally learn to listen, I felt I'd been very foolish, and was glad I'd never really spoken my misgivings out loud!)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 06:28:42 AM
Sarge it looks like Uchida is doing her best Karajan impression! :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: MN Dave on June 15, 2010, 06:34:04 AM
Sarge it looks like Uchida is doing her best Karajan impression! :D

I ordered the Jacobs from the library too. Thanks.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 06:34:15 AM
. . . Mozart isn't about bigger, faster, louder, newer, weirder....his depth, his power, comes from the sheer quality of the music, where every note speaks volumes and a single subtle dissonance or breathtaking bit of voice-leading, or varying of articulation, or whatever it is, has a power way beyond its seeming scale. But you have to be prepared to listen for it.

QFT
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 06:35:44 AM
Ah James that work is sublime!  I heard that in concert.  And you get nothing from it?  Ah well. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 15, 2010, 06:37:24 AM
My favorite Mozart is Lortie playing the Piano Concertos, such crispness is a delight.

My most recent listen was Beecham conducting Mozart's Symphony No. 41 paired with Beethoven's Second Symphony. I much preferred the latter to the former.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 15, 2010, 06:40:30 AM
I ordered the Jacobs from the library too. Thanks.

Nice!  I hope that you enjoy it. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 06:46:49 AM
Jacobs doing Mozart 38th and 41st is a desert island recording.  In fact it blew me away, I've been listening to nothing but Mozart since that time. 8)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41EBJNRWJEL._SS400_.jpg)
I heard what you've said about those a while back, and I want those Jacobs CDs of the late symphonies. I shall buy them soon. I shall.

Most recent Mozart listening: vol 6 of Rachel Podger and Gary Cooper's series of the Mozart violin sonatas, received as a gift a couple of days ago. It'll take me a couple more listenings yet before I have any opinion about them worth mentioning.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 06:48:27 AM


(And here I ought to admit that for many years I wasn't prepared to listen for it, and so I missed it, like James and Teresa do.....but when I did finally learn to listen, I felt I'd been very foolish, and was glad I'd never really spoken my misgivings out loud!)

Well, the advantage of this is that later in life you get to discover a whole new (old) composer.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 07:09:12 AM
(And here I ought to admit that for many years I wasn't prepared to listen for it, and so I missed it, like James and Teresa do.....but when I did finally learn to listen, I felt I'd been very foolish, and was glad I'd never really spoken my misgivings out loud!)
That's pretty close to my situation too, though I did occasionally express my bafflement at what all the fuss was about. It was the dramatic creativity that he brought to the operas that eventually won me over. Suddenly (I still don't understand what brought about the difference) I was able to hear so much more of what was going on in the music, and most especially the way it related to the drama. Being exposed to the sheer richness of that swept all my prejudices away, and confirmed yet again my long-held view that whether I 'like' or 'don't like' a particular work of art is an unreliable guide to its merits. Indeed, if I find myself talking about 'liking or 'disliking' art, I can be pretty sure I've lost my grasp of the point of it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 15, 2010, 07:54:26 AM
For instance, Philoctetes posted this little item earlier ..

http://blogcritics.org/music/article/why-mozart/

I think one should be quite cautious if you plan to use that to bolster your ideas. It's a very specific kind of website, with some amusing anencdotes but little beyond that to substantiate the overall tenor.

Which is not to say that I disagree with your general notion, of not liking Mozart. I personally don't care for him, but that is not what the argument is about anymore, it seems.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: MN Dave on June 15, 2010, 08:01:59 AM
Okay, James doesn't like Mozart.

Next WAM-related topic?
Title: HOW JEWISH WAS MOZART?!
Post by: Philoctetes on June 15, 2010, 08:08:41 AM
Okay, James doesn't like Mozart.

Next WAM-related topic?

http://www.jewishjournal.com/travel/article/curtain_rises_on_mozarts_jewish_tie_20060120/
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Lethevich on June 15, 2010, 08:12:18 AM
Most recent Mozart listening: vol 6 of Rachel Podger and Gary Cooper's series of the Mozart violin sonatas, received as a gift a couple of days ago. It'll take me a couple more listenings yet before I have any opinion about them worth mentioning.
I love that series - the performers opened up the works to me after reactions of varying degrees of ambivolence from the various recordings I had previously heard.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 08:20:48 AM
James, let me put it like this.

I don't want you to like Mozart.

It's very good for you to dislike Mozart.

Some people have a special gift, others have a big car, you dislike Mozart.

I'm happy for ya.

And of course the 250 anniversary was overdone. However you can't blame Mozart for what silly marketeers do two centuries later. Personally I think there's a interesting bifurcation in Mozart's reputation. The mass audience listen to Mozart in the commute or while they preparing breakfast like the rhythmic serenadish stuff from Mozart's early years, and they like Mozart was a teenager when he churned out this stuff. They like the a minor sonata because he supposedly wrote it when his mother died, and the A major sonata because of the variations.  And there are the people who love the Da Ponte operas, the piano concertos, the string quintets and quartets, who also like those piano sonatas and symphonies, but are more familiar with the dark heart of Mozart's music. The first group of listeners could possibly find equal satisfaction in other composers of the era.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 08:25:06 AM
I'm not using it to bolster my ideas - though there are many serious musicians who dislike his music too, and state it out loud.

I wouldn't call the talking Gould (as opposed to the shutup Gould behind the keyboard) a serious musician.

The talking Gould was a mix of fifties' comedian and canny self-marketeer. Remember he stopped touring, so he had to sell his stuff in some other way, i.e. by making outrageous statements that were bound to get the media's attention.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on June 15, 2010, 08:35:16 AM
Ah James that work is sublime!  I heard that in concert.  And you get nothing from it?  Ah well. :)

David, I agree (RE:  K.361 Gran Partita).  Sublime indeed.  Probably still my favorite Mozart work.  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 08:55:52 AM
Okay, James doesn't like Mozart.

Well, but that has only dominated about ten pages of the thread so far.
 
I worry about James that he has so little to do with himself, that he trolls a Mozart thread to sing to the world how he dislikes Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 08:58:31 AM
Considering Gould recorded all the sonatas and fantasies and at least one of the concertos, he seemed to devote significant attention to a composer he did not think highly of.

Of course, his performances are not considered to be very good Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: karlhenning on June 15, 2010, 08:59:38 AM
Of course, his performances are not considered to be very good Mozart.

Word.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 15, 2010, 09:42:53 AM
Not quite sure what you're wanting me to answer, James.... it doesn't mean a thing that Gould, or whoever, didn't care for Mozart. Mike already made a nice little list of much better musicians than Gould who didn't care for [insert composer here] (Britten didn't like Brahms and all that), but none of that means anything, just as I doubt it shakes your own tastes to consider that Bach would, presumably, have hated Stockhausen and Zappa, or whatever. And even if you want, somehow, to argue that the composer of the St Matthew Passion would have just adored FZ's 'I promise not to come in your mouth', the point remains -  no two people will have the same tastes and opinions and nor should they, and nor should the fact that Admired Musician A dislikes Admired Musician B necessarily cast doubt on Admired Musician B. And when you then remember that Admired Musicians C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y and Z disagree with Admired Musician A's disparagement of Admired Musician B, it might be worth paying some attention to them too......

No, this isn't about Gould's opinion (one which I always take with a plateful of salt anyway). It is about, as you have said, individual tastes, I agree with you. So to just add something to what I said earlier which I didn't think needed saying - I can imagine, in another life, having 'learnt' how to hear Mozart.....and yet still not liking him. I just found, once I knew how to listen, once I stopped dismissing him, that he was to my tastes after all. He might well not have been, I suppose.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 15, 2010, 11:09:44 AM
It's time to stop feeding the troll. 

This thread should be about the wonderful things we have discovered listening to or playing works by Mozart.  Let our resident Mozart denier pipe up about how the piece of music that sends us into transports of ecstasy is actually boring and of poor quality.  These statements are just cries for undeserved attention, and not worth replying to.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 11:27:27 AM
I love that series - the performers opened up the works to me after reactions of varying degrees of ambivolence from the various recordings I had previously heard.
Yes. I already had the first five volumes in the series; a feature of them is that Podger and Cooper seem to convey how much they're enjoying the whole business, somehow.

What I haven't yet attempted is to compare them with the other collection I have:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61TAAJQ0NVL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Have you heard these? It was the first time I'd heard the sonatas, and this box knocked me for six. I can't explain why it made such an impact, though I felt that the sheer sense of 'presence' of the sounds that Devos and Kuijken were producing had a lot to do with it. Podger and Cooper seem a bit more 'polite', a bit 'smoother', but this may be arising from the character of the individual instruments they're using as well as the recording technique. And my memory may be playing tricks, as I recall the Golden Days of discovering the violin sonatas! I'm still feeling my way, and at some point I'll have to compare them properly.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 15, 2010, 11:33:45 AM
Yes. I already had the first five volumes in the series; a feature of them is that Podger and Cooper seem to convey how much they're enjoying the whole business, somehow.

What I haven't yet attempted is to compare them with the other collection I have:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61TAAJQ0NVL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Have you heard these? It was the first time I'd heard the sonatas, and this box knocked me for six. I can't explain why it made such an impact, though I felt that the sheer sense of 'presence' of the sounds that Devos and Kuijken were producing had a lot to do with it. Podger and Cooper seem a bit more 'polite', a bit 'smoother', but this may be arising from the character of the individual instruments they're using as well as the recording technique. And my memory may be playing tricks, as I recall the Golden Days of discovering the violin sonatas! I'm still feeling my way, and at some point I'll have to compare them properly.

I wouldn't, but then, that's just me. I have this Kuijken/Devos set, and also Breitman/Rivest and Banchini & (damn, can't remember the pianist right now :'( ) and a whole lot of PI   F & V sonatas. I know that comparative listening is all the rage, but for whatever reason I get more pleasure by far in just listening to them as they come along, no matter the results of my (inevitably subjective) comparisons. All of these people are great musicians, and the music matches; enjoy them. As for Podger and her pianist, I'm sorely tempted to give them a try too. Not sure if they could have stretched the set over more disks than they have, though. ::)  :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 11:49:53 AM
I wouldn't, but then, that's just me. I have this Kuijken/Devos set, and also Breitman/Rivest and Banchini & (damn, can't remember the pianist right now :'( ) and a whole lot of PI   F & V sonatas. I know that comparative listening is all the rage, but for whatever reason I get more pleasure by far in just listening to them as they come along, no matter the results of my (inevitably subjective) comparisons. All of these people are great musicians, and the music matches; enjoy them.
I had to smile, Gurn, reading this - because of course as you could probably guess from my post, my inclination has been NOT to sit down and compare them, work for work, but to do exactly what you suggest, and just enjoy each for what it is. Fact is that I haven't really wanted to do the comparative listening thing in this case, despite plenty of opportunity to do so. I just felt a vague misplaced sense of duty that I ought: as if there were a question that I really needed to answer. Well, sometimes there really is. There are pieces of music where I've felt excited at the prospect of comparing different interpretations; but the Mozart violin sonatas don't seem to be among them, at present. I've no idea why.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 15, 2010, 11:51:19 AM
Feltsman's playing Mozart on his very own Fortepiano, PLUS ONE! !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83yVM64pBXY
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 11:55:13 AM
I am another one who does not try to compare recordings (except very rarely), and always feel a put little on the spot when I'm asked which of two or three different recordings I prefer, and why.  I am more of a "love the one I'm with" kind of listener.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 12:10:37 PM
I am another one who does not try to compare recordings (except very rarely), and always feel a put little on the spot when I'm asked which of two or three different recordings I prefer, and why.  I am more of a "love the one I'm with" kind of listener.
Yes, and yet I remember becoming really excited some months ago when I was comparing versions of the Mozart 25th piano concerto by Brendel, Schmidt, and Sofronitzki. The process opened up the music to me in a way I'd never have managed to achieve just by listening in my usual way, and what I learned about PC 25 was far more significant to me than what I learned about the differing interpretations. But generally speaking, each listening is like a walk in the countryside; I may recognise that the weather was different yesterday, and the day before, but I don't need a meteorological analysis in order to appreciate today's walk for what it is.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brewski on June 15, 2010, 12:16:10 PM
But generally speaking, each listening is like a walk in the countryside; I may recognise that the weather was different yesterday, and the day before, but I don't need a meteorological analysis in order to appreciate today's walk for what it is.

Now that is quite beautifully put, thank you.

--Bruce
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Teresa on June 15, 2010, 12:37:27 PM

http://blogcritics.org/music/article/why-mozart/

James thanks for the link, I enjoyed it immensely.

"Mozart was a bad composer who died too late rather than too early."
Glenn Gould

"most of Mozart's music is dull."
Maria Callas

"If a man tells me he likes Mozart, I know in advance that he is a bad musician."
Frederick Delius

Perhaps I have been too easy on the hack Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart?  Perhaps he is not technically a very good composer at all?  Perhaps he is a bad composer both technically and musically?

Even though he followed most of the rules, not all and he even wrote new rules of composition, it is the results that are important and taking that into consideration I withdraw my support of WA Mozart as a technically very good composer.  After a lot of soul searching and reading of this thread I am now convinced he is a terribly bad composer through and through. 

It's not just that I do not like his music (I don't) and think his talents are not there and neither is his compositional abilities.  As I have said "raw" technique does not produce profound music either in the written or performance end of the spectrum.   There is talent I can hear in the work of composers I do not like and I can find NONE of this in the works of Mozart.

In short there are many composers I do not like and most of them are musically good composers.  But Mozart is different and unacceptable in every definition of the word.  I will no longer try to find anything nice to say about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozazt, as he is undeserving.

In additional I firmly believe he has been a negative influence on some of my favorite composers, as I believe their music would be even better if Mozart had never been born! 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Philoctetes on June 15, 2010, 12:40:58 PM
James thanks for the link, I enjoyed it immensely.

"Mozart was a bad composer who died too late rather than too early."
Glenn Gould

"most of Mozart's music is dull."
Maria Callas

"If a man tells me he likes Mozart, I know in advance that he is a bad musician."
Frederick Delius

Perhaps I have been too easy on the hack Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart?  Perhaps he is not technically a very good composer at all?  Perhaps he is a bad composer both technically and musically?

Even though he followed most of the rules, not all and he even wrote new rules of composition, it is the results that are important and taking that into consideration I withdraw my support of WA Mozart as a technically very good composer.  After a lot of soul searching and reading of this thread I am now convinced he is a terribly bad composer through and through. 

It's not just that I do not like his music (I don't) and think his talents are not there and neither is his compositional abilities.  As I have said "raw" technique does not produce profound music either in the written or performance end of the spectrum.   There is talent I can hear in the work of composers I do not like and I can find NONE of this in the works of Mozart.

In short there many composers I do not like and most of them are musically good composers.  But Mozart is different and unacceptable in every definition of the word.  I will no longer try to find anything nice to say about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozazt, as he is undeserving.

In additional I firmly believe he has been a negative influence on some of my favorite composers, as I believe their music would be even better if Mozart had never been born!

The link wasn't from James, nor do I think that you read the link carefully or with a critically eye. It's a very specific type of webpage, as I pointed out to James, and should not be used to try and bolster an argument.

The rest of your post is undeserving of attention.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 12:46:07 PM
Oh. Does Teresa not like Mozart, then?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 12:53:00 PM
Here is a special passage from Mozart; Marriage of Figaro, the Countess forgives her husband, music of reconcilliation, genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjQFYaCwOvM

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 12:57:30 PM
This thread has become so odd, quite remarkable to say the least.  I don't think I've ever read such strange and weird comments about Mozart.  I can't quite believe what my eyes see - the sentences are just so bizarre it defies reason.

But, it is funny, in a sad kind of way.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brewski on June 15, 2010, 01:01:20 PM
Here is a special passage from Mozart; Marriage of Figaro, the Countess forgives her husband, music of reconcilliation, genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjQFYaCwOvM

Mike

Beautiful clip, Mike.  Like that brisk tempo in the finale!  (PS, I recognize a very young Bryn Terfel but not many of the others...)

--Bruce
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 01:02:02 PM
Franco,

You must have forgotten the Newman-Mozart-Fraud saga; the stuff there went where the buses don't run.

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 15, 2010, 01:02:18 PM
Here is a special passage from Mozart; Marriage of Figaro, the Countess forgives her husband, music of reconcilliation, genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjQFYaCwOvM

Mike
A perfect choice. It makes all of what's been said here, by all parties, superfluous.

So does this, from Cosi:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wi7UsXW1As (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wi7UsXW1As)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 01:04:10 PM
Beautiful clip, Mike.  Like that brisk tempo in the finale!  (PS, I recognize a very young Bryn Terfel but not many of the others...)

--Bruce

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41S0H9ABC6L._SS500_.jpg)

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 01:08:15 PM
A perfect choice. It makes all of what's been said here, by all parties, superfluous.

So does this, from Cosi:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wi7UsXW1As (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Wi7UsXW1As)

Agreed, It transports me, very beautiful. This is the version I have on DVD.

Then this from one of the best Mozart singers I know of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJJT108WZ7o

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brewski on June 15, 2010, 01:10:22 PM
Thanks, very nice! 

And like that Cosi fan tutte clip, Alan--thanks for that, too.

--Bruce
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 15, 2010, 01:14:07 PM
A beautiful performance from an unexpected source.  The soprano really made an impression on me, in music reportedly Mozart wrote for his own wife.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4SFkmthygU&feature=related

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 01:24:27 PM
A beautiful performance from an unexpected source.  The soprano really made an impression on me, in music reportedly Mozart wrote for his own wife.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4SFkmthygU&feature=related

Thanks for that, also very good choral work with excellent phrasing.

Now let's not neglect this, it may explain whay one artist criticises another.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMXX2A5pIac

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 01:32:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9x8LzNb6Nk&feature=PlayList&p=66CECFA1C4CDA1B3&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=48

Same piece different singer and more the sound and approach we are accustomed to.

Mike
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: knight66 on June 15, 2010, 02:28:28 PM
I guess we can't help you thinking like a juvenile, perhaps you can't help it either. Those clips are for our pleasure and I am well past interest in your comments, well past. I am not trying to convince you, I assume you did not listen to the clips. Often the music can be left to speak for itself.

But if you want your posts left visible, step away from the line of insult.

Knight
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 15, 2010, 02:48:19 PM
Yesterday listened to a rare piece by Mozart remains largely unfamiliar to me.  The Divertimento for string trio in E-flat, K 563.   A wonderful piece.  It brings home what I consider a key point of Mozart's genius, the ability to make something special from something which is ostensibly very simple.  In this case, the constraints are the relatively light character expected from a Divertimento, and the sparse texture imposed by the string trio.  Still, I find there is something magical going on.

The recording I am listening to is probably the most well known of this piece, by the Grumiaux trio on Philips.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 15, 2010, 03:19:12 PM
Seriously, what is so odd or sad about it though?

I find it odd that you both persist in expressing your dislike of Mozart and even seem to get a charge from saying something for shock value like a Robin Williams bit where he impersonated a Frenchman saying "Yes, the baby is smoking, does it make you angry?" - but not as funny or nearly as clever.

We get it: you don't like Mozart's music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 15, 2010, 03:22:29 PM
I find it odd that you both persist in expressing your dislike of Mozart and even seem to get a charge from saying something for shock value like a Robin Williams bit where he impersonated a Frenchman saying "Yes, the baby is smoking, does it make you angry?" - but not as funny or nearly as clever.

We get it: you don't like Mozart's music.

Please don't feed the troll. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 15, 2010, 03:31:32 PM
Alright then ...

Gould was just an example picked out by another member, and not really the heart of what i was asking you ...you did make some 'interesting' claims there earlier about folks disliking Mozart, and all i was asking is if you would offer the same sort-of "advice" to those major musicians who hate it aswell. Does the "missing it", "not ready to listen" "not interested in subtlety" "needing to learn how to listen to it" etc. criteria & short-comings you laid out for "us" also apply for them? Yes or No.

Firstly, I'm not offering advice, nor am I making claims about people who dislike Mozart. It's nothing to do with me. I'm saying what happened for me. Specifically, what happened initially was that I read books which made me aware of intricacies in the music which had passed me by until then....and once I had seen them, other examples seemed to spring up all over the place, and I wondered why I hadn't noticed them before, and I revelled in this new aspect to musical craft which I hadn't really appreciated before. My issue; no one else's, don't get paranoid!  ;)

When a composer like Delius rejects Mozart, well, fine, composers often do that sort of thing, it's part of the establishment of their own aesthetic stance. I love Brahms even more than I love Mozart, but Britten's dismissal of him bothers me not a jot, even though I love Britten's music deeply too. Once again, rejecting the once-beloved Brahms was necessary for Britten in establishing himself, setting his own boundaries - Brahms came to represent something to which fundamentally, on an aesthetic level, he was opposed, even though he knew that the music itself was sheer quality through and through. As to the idea that I would try to suggest to these composers that they weren't listening properly- well, that's clearly rubbish; I know full well that Britten knew everything there was to admire in Brahms; and I assume that Delius knew the same about Mozart. The fact that they knew it, but still distanced themselves from the music, is very interesting, in and of itself, it tells us alot about them, but it doesn't affront my sensibilities or any such rubbish, and nor does it cause me to reconsider my own opinions of either them or Mozart/Brahms/whoever.

As for the

' "missing it", "not ready to listen" "not interested in subtlety" "needing to learn how to listen to it" etc. criteria & short-comings you laid out for "us"

....these weren't criteria I was laying out for anyone, or 'claims I was making' about people who dislike Mozart, as you said earlier. No, they were just me describing myself at the time I disliked him myself - I was the one missing it, I was the one who hadn't learnt how to listen etc. The only one of those which wasn't describing me, actually, was the 'not interested in subtlety' bit. There, I was thinking specifically of you, or at least the persona you present to the outside world. And I realise it reads as an insult, but actually it isn't meant to, not at all. It's meant as a precise description of the way you come across, very strongly indeed, to me at any rate, and I'm not saying it is a bad/wrong way to be; I am, however, saying that it is probably not a way to be that is going to lead to a love of Mozart. I apologise if you take this as an insult - as I say, it really isn't meant that way.

BTW, the exception to this which has really struck home with me is when you talk about Faure, who is a composer of extreme precision and subtlety as you know, and I admire the way you talk about him greatly. It strike me that the kind of quiet, subtle way in which Faure writes music which actually touches the extremes without making a fuss about it, simply by means of choosing precisely the right notes at the right time is exactly what I love most in Mozart (it's what Faure loved most in Mozart too - 'It is music in which all the notes must be heard'). I find it odd, perhaps, that you can appreciate such an ellusive and subtly-fragranced masterpiece as the late B minor Nocturne of Faure, but not such a similarly subtle masterpiece as the late B minor Adagio of Mozart!

And since you seem to think youre a big musician who's put in a lot of time etc, let me ask you this ...  have ever encountered or even know serious musicians-friends-colleagues you respect that don't like Mozart's music at all for whatever reason? If so, do you also say the same things you have said to us, to them?

Not sure how you get the 'seem to think youre a big musician who's put in a lot of time' from anything I've posted on this thread - but, you know what, to be honest, no, I can truthfully say that I've never encountered any such person, not among composers, performers or academics. And if I had, and if it had arisen in conversation, yes, seeing as it would have been pertinent I suppose would probably have described my own rapprochement with Mozart, how it took place - why the hell not? That wouldn't consitiute me advising them, or patronising them, though, as you like to think. It would be part of a discussion between interested parties.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 15, 2010, 04:37:58 PM
James thanks for the link, I enjoyed it immensely.

Perhaps I have been too easy on the hack Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart?  Perhaps he is not technically a very good composer at all?  Perhaps he is a bad composer both technically and musically?

Or, alternatively, this shows you have very limited intellectual ability, just plain incapable of seeing the problem is you, not Mozart? For pages people have been nicely trying to explain to you you're mixing up this "technical" "musical" thing and it just flows off you like water off a duck's back. Too difficult. It requires a little distance from one's vain assumptions. Can't be done. The pride with which you expose your thickness is a little disturbing. However, just enjoy it. Mozart will be shaking in his unmarked grave at your rejection, no you don't just dislike his music, you have established (for yourself) he's a really lousy composer. And got a lot of attention for it. Teehee!!!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 15, 2010, 04:40:01 PM
Fair enough Luke, I do feel you are slightly changing your position from what you had originally said, or perhaps I was reading too far into what you were saying & implying, happens .... you're off with the odd assumption about me not being suited to pick up on subtlety merely based on forum activity...but other than that, if you were merely talking about yourself & your own experience - I have no problems with that at all.

Cool. And I'm glad I'm off about the subtlety thing - I hoped I was, and as I said, it's only an impression given by the slant many of your posts take. But belied by posts such as yours on Faure, as I also said...

(Though, I should repeat, I wouldn't in fact have any issue with someone whose tastes tend towards the broader sweep, the more expansive gesture, the more extreme reach, and less towards the small subtle detail or the exquisite semi-hidden touch - takes all sorts, after all. Although it's possible to love both, of course)

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on June 15, 2010, 11:18:42 PM
That such a predictible and boring troll managed to stir up a "debate" of a dozen pages is in itself an achievement of Mozartean proportions.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gabriel on June 16, 2010, 12:15:22 AM
Everybody thinks, oh that's just a sonata form, it's just paint by numbers. In reality sonata form was not an established form in Haydn and Mozart's time. They were experimenting with the form, which was only taken as a holy mold after their time, by composers we have forgotten about (except Gurn and GAbriel, of course).

In fact, Herman, if I remember correctly it was Antonín Rejcha who, in the beginning of the nineteenth century (I seem to recall it was in the 1820s) examined the "sonata form" as a whole for the first time. For classical composers of the age of Haydn and Mozart the "formulas" were given by older music (v. gr., Fux's Gradus ad Parnassum): sonata form had more of an adventure than of repetition.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 16, 2010, 12:58:10 AM
Right.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 16, 2010, 01:24:51 AM
And of course that's why so many sonata form structures of the 19th century seem formulaic and for-the-sake-of-it (as structures; I'm not talking about the character or quality of the material of the music itself) - because they were constructed around the letter of this sacrosanct 'Mozartian' sonata form which had in reality been determined after-the-fact. Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven and so on composed in the spirit of sonata, not the letter of sonata form (which is why Teresa's talk of the 'laws of musical composition' was misplaced, which is where this point arose, I know).

I'm thinking of someone like Tchaikovsky, at the moment - and I'm thinking this as a Tchaikovsky lover. T adored Mozart above all other composers, idolised him (that little Mozartiana Suite is a gem....) and yet, formally, to me he seems not to have profited from the subtleties of Mozart's writing (and he's not alone in this). Tchaikovsky's formal thunderblows - his recurring fate themes, his slow finales and so on - are big and bold; but on the smaller scale , which is where Mozart's formal genius is displayed, (things such as interactions of phrases and phrases lengths, play with balance and meaning, puns of opening and closing gestures and so on and on) his music is rather less strikingly inflected. That's part of his style, of course - any different and he wouldn't be Tchaikovsky. But it's just an observation....
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 19, 2010, 05:31:13 AM
Now that the storm has blown over, I want to mention again a wonderful little piece I've rediscovered, the Divertimento for violin, viola and cello in E-flat K 563.  It is a six movement piece with two minuets and two slow movements (one a theme and variations).  It is definitely an overtly light-weight piece, but Mozart effortlessly invests it with so many beautiful touches, it is a minor gem.

One feature throughout is how effortlessly Mozart makes the harmonic texture seem so rich with only three voices at his disposal.  The first movement, a typical sonata allegro, begins with a charming exposition of themes, but the development leads us back to the opening material with some surprisingly dark harmonies.  The first slow movement is a miracle of delicate gestures, a miniature scene from a tragic opera.  The melodies Mozart gives us in the trios of the two dance movements (three in all) are inspirations of the highest level, particularly those in the second menuet.  Of course the finale is a tight rondo with wonderful melodies in the main theme and episodes and little fugato outbursts.  An example of how a seeming trifle from Mozart can contain little nuggets of pure gold. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gabriel on June 20, 2010, 03:36:10 AM
Now that the storm has blown over, I want to mention again a wonderful little piece I've rediscovered, the Divertimento for violin, viola and cello in E-flat K 563.  It is a six movement piece with two minuets and two slow movements (one a theme and variations).  It is definitely an overtly light-weight piece, but Mozart effortlessly invests it with so many beautiful touches, it is a minor gem.

One feature throughout is how effortlessly Mozart makes the harmonic texture seem so rich with only three voices at his disposal.  The first movement, a typical sonata allegro, begins with a charming exposition of themes, but the development leads us back to the opening material with some surprisingly dark harmonies.  The first slow movement is a miracle of delicate gestures, a miniature scene from a tragic opera.  The melodies Mozart gives us in the trios of the two dance movements (three in all) are inspirations of the highest level, particularly those in the second menuet.  Of course the finale is a tight rondo with wonderful melodies in the main theme and episodes and little fugato outbursts.  An example of how a seeming trifle from Mozart can contain little nuggets of pure gold.

Beautiful comment. However, I disagree in one point: I think it is a major gem, not a minor gem. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 20, 2010, 05:01:03 AM
Beautiful comment. However, I disagree in one point: I think it is a major gem, not a minor gem. :)

Indeed, it is considered to be one of his greatest chamber works. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 20, 2010, 08:15:45 AM
Beautiful comment. However, I disagree in one point: I think it is a major gem, not a minor gem. :)

Well, what would be a major gem for some composers might be minor for Mozart. 

I listened to the piece again, and one of the wonderful things about it is how Mozart will suddenly interrupt a simple melody and accompaniment texture with a vigorous fugato, and after much heavy going, will pull up into a charming gallant cadence.   The juxtaposition of contrasting styles can be quite bracing, although in such passages Mozart never allows his counterpoint to sound "academic."   The theme and variations also begins with a very simple melody and texture, but contains a variation of very dense contrapuntal development. 

I've been listening to some of Mozart's adaptions of Bach fugues and it is interesting where he draws his influence.  He was evidently familiar with the organ trio sonatas, as well as the WTC and the Art of the Fugue.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 20, 2010, 08:20:55 AM
Like 99.9% of his music ...he displays technical formal skill but it's often lean, boring & soft, and never intense.

What's brought on this fresh bout of trolling, James? Feeling bored? Fancying winding a few people up? Provocative and unprompted posts on all three current Mozart threads within minutes of each other - rarely seen a clearer instance of deliberate stirring round these parts!

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 20, 2010, 08:59:55 AM
Yea .. he dabbles but he's nowhere near the Grand Master (Bach) - and of course, the music itself is always light and vivacious in character, a simplification  ... nothing like the great intensity Bach so often achieves.

But then perhaps he wasn't looking for that, though he was certainly capable of it when he chose, as he often did. Could easily put the issue the other way round - 'Bach's music itself is always so heavy, intense and complex - nothing like the lightness and vivacity Mozart so often achieves'.

Of course, neither is true, really, but I suppose there might be a grain of something in them, taken as a huge generalisation. My point is - so what? Why is one 'better' than the other? Why can't music be light and at the same time be wonderful?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2010, 09:12:51 AM
My favorite example along that vein is La ci darem la mano, from Don Giovanni.  It is an example of Mozart not following the rules, but making his own rules.  It was customary at the time for Arias to be set pieces where characters commented on their feelings, separate from the dramatic action.  Mozart places Zerlina's submission to Don Giovanni's seduction in the middle of the aria.  Don Giovanni's charming solicitations, Zerlina's lamenting of her own weakness, and her ecstasy at having accepted Don Giovanni's offer are all deliciously painted in the music.  A wonderful piece.

For those who have/had trouble with certain composers like Bach or Mozart, vocal music can be the key to open the golden door.
At least, it was so for me. The instrumental music made so much better sense after the discovery of Schubert's Lieder, etc.

ZB
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 20, 2010, 09:36:12 AM
Why can't music be light and at the same time be wonderful?

That raises an interesting point.  There seems to be a bias that great art should be tragic, dark, tortured.  It sometimes strikes me that it takes just as great a genius to create something that seems effortless, light and joyful.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on June 20, 2010, 10:11:12 AM
That raises an interesting point.  There seems to be a bias that great art should be tragic, dark, tortured.  It sometimes strikes me that it takes just as great a genius to create something that seems effortless, light and joyful.

I think it has to do with the nature of happiness and pain.

Happiness doesn't usually need "routes of escape", it is self-sufficient, at some degree "paralyzing". On the other hand, pain and tragedy are just the opposite; you need to transform the pain into something else: music, a novel, a short story, a song, a poem. That the reason why, IMO, "tragic" works are infinitely more numerous than works expressing joyful feelings.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Luke on June 20, 2010, 10:16:45 AM
I think it has to do with the nature of happiness and pain.

Happiness doesn't usually need "routes of escape", it is self-sufficient, at some degree "paralyzing". On the other hand, pain and tragedy are just the opposite; you need to transform the pain into something else: music, a novel, a short story, a song, a poem. That the reason why, IMO, "tragic" works are infinitely more than works expressing joyful feelings.

Infinitely more what? - I think you missed out the crucial word in your post! 'interesting'? 'important'? 'appreciated'? 'highly-regarded'? The general point you make is a very interesting one, though.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 20, 2010, 10:33:38 AM
I disagree.  People that are happy or joyful feel the need to share it, and it can rub off.  I don't see how pain would be unique in that regard whatsoever.  And tragedies are not necessarily expressions of pain either.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on June 20, 2010, 10:40:20 AM
Well, what would be a major gem for some composers might be minor for Mozart. 

I would not call the 563 Divertimento a light piece, nor a minor gem.

It is major Mozart, even though it was not intended for public performance, and it is one of those utterly shattering pieces that seem to come out of nowhere. Its mix of the grotesque and comic with the tragic intensity makes it one of the greatest pieces of Mozart's chamber music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on June 20, 2010, 10:43:12 AM
Like 99.9% of his music ...he displays technical formal skill but it's often lean, boring & soft, and never intense.

Mozart music is neither lean, nor boring and soft, and most definitely intense. Very much so.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 20, 2010, 11:11:44 AM
There is a saying in the theater: "Tears are easy; comedy is hard."
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on June 20, 2010, 11:28:39 AM
Infinitely more what? - I think you missed out the crucial word in your post! 'interesting'? 'important'? 'appreciated'? 'highly-regarded'?

"Numerous". I was just thinking in terms of numbers, quantitatively. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: sTisTi on June 20, 2010, 11:41:00 AM
I suppose I'm not the only one who is sick of James' attempt to derail seemingly every Mozart thread on this board with his trolling, so PLEASE everyone stop replying to his silly and provocative posts, otherwise we will spend page after page arguing with this person  ???  instead of spending our time in a more useful way, like e.g. uncovering great recordings of Mozart's many masterpieces  ;D

Here's one, for starters:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/419CEN2Nw-L._SS400_.jpg)
The Clarinet Quintet played by Wolfgang Meyer & Mosaïques Quartet, very cheap at the moment e.g. at Amazon.co.uk ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on June 20, 2010, 11:52:45 AM
I disagree.  People that are happy or joyful feel the need to share it, and it can rub off.

I guess there are different kinds of happiness, but, in general, I believe that happiness is not naturally expansive, but rather selfish. Think, just to mention one case, in the happiness of lovers. Is there anything more selfish? They only exist each for the other, regardless of the rest of the world.

It is a bit disheartening, but I believe that the whole world history shows that happy people are not concerned about the happiness of the others, just excepting those cases when very specific social, religious or political ideas are involved. On the contrary, people are always eager to "share" their problems, needs, etc.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on June 20, 2010, 12:30:16 PM
I guess there are different kinds of happiness, but, in general, I believe that happiness is not naturally expansive, but rather selfish. Think, just to mention one case, in the happiness of lovers. Is there anything more selfish? They only exist each for the other, regardless of the rest of the world.

You're talking about love not happiness.

Quote
It is a bit disheartening, but I believe that the whole world history shows that happy people are not concerned about the happiness of the others, just excepting those cases when very specific social, religious or political ideas are involved. On the contrary, people are always eager to "share" their problems, needs, etc.

That is not the world that I live in.  Your perception of people is that they are selfish brutes, well that is your own failing.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on June 20, 2010, 08:57:54 PM
I've been listening to some of Mozart's adaptions of Bach fugues and it is interesting where he draws his influence.  He was evidently familiar with the organ trio sonatas, as well as the WTC and the Art of the Fugue.

In that regard, you might find this article -- Bach, Mozart and the 'Musical Midwife' (http://www.schillerinstitut.dk/bach.html) -- interesting to read (assuming you haven't already read it, of course).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Elgarian on June 22, 2010, 06:47:38 AM
There seems to be a bias that great art should be tragic, dark, tortured.  It sometimes strikes me that it takes just as great a genius to create something that seems effortless, light and joyful.
Spot on, this, and I agree wholeheartedly. We're not talking here about something flimsy or fanciful, but something no less rooted in the human spirit - the expression of a joy that permits us to transcend ourselves. 'Happiness' is too bland a word to describe it. The kind of perception shifts that great joyful music can bring has the potential to bring us back from the brink of despair on the one hand (if we're unfortunate enough to need it), or to lead us outward and onward into new vitalising experience on the other. I don't regard that as less serious than the anguished thrashings of a tortured musical soul.

Mozart isn't just a great composer - he's a great musical companion: the kind of companion who's at my shoulder all the time, continually pointing out musical observations that I'd never have imagined myself, and - here's the joy of it - helping me feel his delight in it. It's a mistake to think that kind of activity lacks profundity.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 22, 2010, 06:57:17 AM
I generally think profundity is over- and lightness/joy under-rated.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 22, 2010, 07:17:00 AM
I generally think profundity is over- and lightness/joy under-rated.

Ditto.

A specific Mozart work that I have read reams about, with the suggestion that it is profound and sad etc. is the g minor string quintet, K 516. I not only don't hear that, but in fact hear and feel quite the opposite. I find it quite an exhilarating piece, not sad a bit. Oh well, I guess I just don't get it.  ::)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on June 22, 2010, 08:26:11 AM
I generally think profundity is over- and lightness/joy under-rated.

I think it is more pertinent to say lightness/joy can be just as profound as tragedy.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on June 22, 2010, 08:27:17 AM
I think it is more pertinent to say lightness/joy can be just as profound as tragedy.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Franco on June 22, 2010, 08:36:23 AM
I think it is more pertinent to say lightness/joy can be just as profound as tragedy.

I suppose one would say that if they felt that tragedy was necessarily profound, and/or profundity was a high value.  I don't consider tradegy the highest form of theater; I think comedy is the harder form to master, and nor do I consider profundity as important as some other traits a person (and especially an artist) may possess, such as humility and a good sense of humor.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on June 22, 2010, 08:43:56 AM
I think it is more pertinent to say lightness/joy can be just as profound as tragedy.

Christmas and Holy Week Friday (obviously for the believers).  :)

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on June 22, 2010, 11:57:57 PM
I generally think profundity is over- and lightness/joy under-rated.

Ditto.
Thirded.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ugh on September 30, 2010, 01:39:39 AM
I find Mozart's Menuet in D-dur K.355(576b) a fascinating little piece.

The work is shrouded in mystery: Is it Mozart at all? (No autograph exists, etc). When was it written? Was it a study, an experiment? It has been discussed at length by scholars for years and years.

There is an anecdote that Mozart was accosted in the streets of Vienna by a beggar, who made it appear he was related to Mozart. As Mozart had no money he took the beggar to a coffee house and drawing some lines on a sheet of paper composed this Menuet and Trio. He told the beggar to take the composition to his publisher, where he got 5 guineas for it.

Anyway, I love the chromaticism and sudden dissonances in the work - and I think it shows a lot of Mozart's playful character - if it indeed is by Mozart ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on September 30, 2010, 03:39:30 AM
I find Mozart's Menuet in D-dur K.355(576b) a fascinating little piece.

The work is shrouded in mystery: Is it Mozart at all? (No autograph exists, etc). When was it written? Was it a study, an experiment? It has been discussed at length by scholars for years and years.

There is an anecdote that Mozart was accosted in the streets of Vienna by a beggar, who made it appear he was related to Mozart. As Mozart had no money he took the beggar to a coffee house and drawing some lines on a sheet of paper composed this Menuet and Trio. He told the beggar to take the composition to his publisher, where he got 5 guineas for it.

Anyway, I love the chromaticism and sudden dissonances in the work - and I think it shows a lot of Mozart's playful character - if it indeed is by Mozart ;)

The current wisdom (which is all we have, lacking concrete documentation) is that Mozart started a minuet for string quartet in 1782 (possibly related to the Haydn quartet project) and didn't finish it, just stuck it in a pile like so many other fragments. After his death, Maximilian Stadler completed a bunch of those for keyboard at Constanze's request, so they could be published and make her some money. It seems likely that this is one of those.

Mysteries abound, but that doesn't change the fact that, as you say, it is a neat little piece. Thanks for bringing it up. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on December 08, 2010, 07:49:59 AM
Was the opening tune of Notte giorno e faticar, from Don Giovanni, used by Mozart in some other work, or did some other composer quote it in one of his works? Maybe it was used in a movie or something? I'd not heard the aria before, but the tune sounded so familiar on first hearing. :-\


From about 0:02 to 0:13.

http://www.youtube.com/v/o7j9LOHpZbQ
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on January 07, 2011, 10:35:52 AM
Was the opening tune of Notte giorno e faticar, from Don Giovanni, used by Mozart in some other work, or did some other composer quote it in one of his works? Maybe it was used in a movie or something? I'd not heard the aria before, but the tune sounded so familiar on first hearing. :-\

Op. 106, look no further than Op. 120. Beethoven quotes the tune in the Diabelli Variations.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on January 07, 2011, 10:42:37 AM
Here's one, for starters:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/419CEN2Nw-L._SS400_.jpg)
The Clarinet Quintet played by Wolfgang Meyer & Mosaïques Quartet, very cheap at the moment e.g. at Amazon.co.uk ;)

Listened to that one very recently.  The quintet was a delightful performance.  The trio, charming but rather dull, IMO.  More Mozart's fault than the performers.  I am always struck by the fact that the fugato following the Turkish march in Beethoven's 9th symphony seems to quote a triplet figure that appears repeatedly in this charming little work.  Coincidence, or borrowing, I wonder.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Herman on January 07, 2011, 11:00:16 AM
ideally the 498 trio is at least as engaging as the quintet, so I don't know what happened.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 07, 2011, 11:10:52 AM
Op. 106, look no further than Op. 120. Beethoven quotes the tune in the Diabelli Variations.

Oh, yes! Thanks so much. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 07, 2011, 11:11:49 AM
ideally the 498 trio is at least as engaging as the quintet, so I don't know what happened.

As long it's a work by Mozart prominently featuring the clarinet, I'm game.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on January 07, 2011, 12:03:18 PM
ideally the 498 trio is at least as engaging as the quintet, so I don't know what happened.

Well, our reactions to a particular piece can be quite personal.  I vaguely remember enjoying the piece more the previous time I listened,  but I am drawing a blank on what version it was (I have the impression it was a BIS recording).  But K498 has never been among my favorite works by Mozart.


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Antoine Marchand on January 08, 2011, 06:07:56 PM
... but I am drawing a blank on what version it was (I have the impression it was a BIS recording).  But K498 has never been among my favorite works by Mozart.

Maybe this one:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61nxhGehkXL._AA300_.jpg)

... not particularly exciting, indeed.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on January 08, 2011, 06:15:22 PM
Maybe this one:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61nxhGehkXL._AA300_.jpg)

... not particularly exciting, indeed.

I looked, turns out the BIS cd I was thinking of was something else.  I think it was a Harmonia Mundi release featuring Michel Portal
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/218XQ4JBZ8L._AA115_.jpg)
I vaguely recall liking the one I had heard previously more than the newer recording (for the trio, that is).

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on March 23, 2011, 10:25:47 AM



Fischer, Kreizberg, and Wolfgang Gottlieb Mozart (CD Pick of the Week)


(http://www.weta.org/fmblog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/yakovKreizberg_marcoBorggreve480.png)
http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=2914 (http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=2914)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Coco on May 03, 2011, 08:36:02 AM
The wind music is miraculous because of how much Mozart creates with limited means and in a limited form.  Actually, the Trios for three clarinets are unbelievable.   They were prepared by Mozart to be played at various Masonic functions, and are astonishing for their invention with only three voices.  Hard to find recordings of them, but this one is hard to top:

http://www.amazon.com/Sabine-Meyer-Mozart-Chamber-Clarinet/dp/B000LDM95K/ref=sr_1_28?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1304443471&sr=1-28

(http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/c2/bc/3f001363ada01a55e595f010.L._AA300_.jpg)

I've never heard of these at all! I would associate that sort of instrumentation with the 20th Century, but certainly not the 18th Century. Sounds fascinating.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on May 03, 2011, 08:40:45 AM
If you haven't heard the KV 498 trio, ah it is sublime.  Also check out the KV 452 quintet for piano and winds (don't know if it's in that set) it is wonderful. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Rinaldo on September 16, 2011, 11:47:33 AM
Is there a thread discussing Requiem recordings? I've failed to excavate one via search.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on September 16, 2011, 12:10:05 PM
Is there a thread discussing Requiem recordings? I've failed to excavate one via search.

I can't remember one in particular, Rinaldo. If you went to "Great Recordings" and started one, I am quite sure that you would soon have lots of company, this is a popular piece. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on September 16, 2011, 12:33:28 PM
Is there a thread discussing Requiem recordings? I've failed to excavate one via search.

There was one on the old board, combined with a poll:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/forum/index.php/topic,12287.0.html
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Rinaldo on September 16, 2011, 01:56:37 PM
There was one on the old board, combined with a poll:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/forum/index.php/topic,12287.0.html

Exactly what I was looking for, thank you!

If you went to "Great Recordings" and started one, I am quite sure that you would soon have lots of company, this is a popular piece. :)

No doubt! I guess I'm still a little shy here :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on September 17, 2011, 02:54:42 AM
Exactly what I was looking for, thank you!

I did everything 'right' with the search function yesterday, but I only managed to find the upcoming more recent link by adding my own username as entry ??? (because I vaguely remembered a small contribution by yours truly on the new board).

Anyway, here it is. The thread has been bumped:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,15234.0.html
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 04:43:40 AM
These got lost in the impassioned flurry over at the WAYLT thread, but perhaps will find more interest here in Mozart-land.

Some insightful remarks from two 20th-c. composers; can you guess who?

 
Quote from: Composer # 1
It has become the custom to treat this most sublime of all tonal masters as a "rococo artist," to represent his work as the epitome of the ornamental and the playful.  Though it is correct to say that he as one who solved all "problems" before they were even posed, that in him passion is divested of everything earthly and seems to be viewed from a bird's-eye perspective, it is equally true that his work contains — even when transfigured, spiritualized, and liberated from reality — all phases of human experience from the monumental, dark grandeur of the Commendatore's scene in Don Giovanni to the daintiness of the Zerlina arias, the heavenly frivolities of Figaro, and the deliberate ironies of Così fan tutte.
 
With less amplitude, but with no less abundance, the entire gamut of human feeling is expressed in his nondramatic creations. To set up a uniform Mozart style for the reproduction of this infinitely fine a richly organized soul-picture is as foolish as it is superficial.

And:
 
Quote from: Composer # 2
There is still a residuum of music lovers who regard all that Mozart ever wrote as equally inspired.  An old-fashioned, cultured and nice sort of people who meet together and, perhaps, celebrate Mozart's birthday over a cup of tea.  These nice people will then play the slightest of his sonatas and symphonies for one or two performers, and are happy every time they are not surprised.  Of these Mozart worshippers there are not many, and they do neither good nor harm, for they can have no influence on the younger generation.  Then there are the musical people whom I would call conventionally orthodox.  They do not really care for Mozart and prefer to pass him by, though with a reverent raising of the hat and an apologetic bow.  There are many of these, especially among singers, players, conductors, and composers. Finally, among younger musicians, there are a few who realize that for anyone wishing to study music in all its aspects, there is no escaping Mozart.
 
The fact is, Mozart is extraordinarily severe, logical, and consistent in his scoring and modulation, yet, at the same time, freer and less constrained in form than any of the classical masters who have employed the difficult sonata form so favored by composers since Philipp Emanuel Bach — the form on which the symphony is based.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Josquin des Prez on November 09, 2011, 04:49:10 AM
The whining in the second passage would point to Schoenberg, but the writing style doesn't seem to reflect his. No idea who the first composer is, but that passage was very illuminating.

[EDIT] Google revealed the authors of both passages (as well as a very interesting book). Should have guessed the first one, considering the emphasis on the operas.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 04:52:57 AM
Whining? You mean that pointing out that certain collections of people fail to appreciate a composer's genius, is whining? ; )
 
Not Schoenberg; in fact a composer of quite a different musical temperament.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 04:53:59 AM
[EDIT] Google revealed the authors of both passages (as well as a very interesting book). Should have guessed the first one, considering the emphasis on the operas.

Well, no spoilers for those who want to guess without a-Googling.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 05:35:35 AM
Quote from: Composer # 3
Mozart is all music;  there is nothing you can ask from music that he cannot supply.

No problem with profundity there. (Another 20th-c. composer, BTW.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 09, 2011, 05:35:57 AM
Well, no spoilers for those who want to guess without a-Googling.

I can't guess either of them (no surprise given my ignorance of the writings of 20th century composers), but I really enjoyed the statements and the insights they presented. The "whining" that Opie talks about is something I've encountered frequently in specialty groups, although it would be rapidly quashed here. What I find interesting is the revelations offered about the writers in their statements about Mozart. They are more reflective than intended, I suspect.... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on November 09, 2011, 06:19:27 AM
Something tells me that quote No. 2 from an Englishman. Or am I far off? ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 06:23:06 AM
Oh, Lord ; )

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 06:25:17 AM
Something tells me that quote No. 2 from an Englishman. Or am I far off? ;D

Not an Englishman, though some of his forebears sailed there erewhile.

And # 1 is indeed celebrated for his operas, though not exclusively.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on November 09, 2011, 06:26:33 AM


And # 1 is indeed celebrated for his operas, though not exclusively.[/font]

Puccini?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on November 09, 2011, 06:28:50 AM

And # 1 is indeed celebrated for his operas, though not exclusively.[/font]

I would go so far as to suggest that people often forget the operas when they dismiss composer No.1. Especially when they compare him to a famous all-symphonist and colleague and good acquaintance of No.1.

Puccini?

Puccini was known for anything other than operas??

In any case, I think the consensus here is that we don't tell in the forum (not to spoil it for others) but that you will either have to guess or google.  ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on November 09, 2011, 06:30:24 AM

And # 1 is indeed celebrated for his operas, though not exclusively.[/font]

Richard Strauss?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 06:31:05 AM
Richard Strauss?

Ja wohl.
 
Or is that a single word?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brahmsian on November 09, 2011, 06:34:03 AM
Ja wohl.
 
Or is that a single word?

Do I win a prize, Karl?  :D 8)

If so, I'll take the Brilliant Classics complete Tchaikovsky box, a la Johannes Brahms mode.  :) ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 09, 2011, 06:37:26 AM
Like Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me . . . your prize is Karl's voice on your home answering machine . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: PaulSC on November 09, 2011, 07:11:28 AM
Like Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me . . . your prize is Karl's voice on your home answering machine . . . .
Maybe a few clarinet riffs from K. 581?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: max on November 11, 2011, 03:56:30 PM
i called it. this thread is mine. mine, i tell you!

anyway, mozart is awesome, no?

Mozart thought so too...and he wasn't thinking of his old man!!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on November 29, 2011, 07:28:27 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514OV23%2BcXL._SS500_.jpg)

Is anyone familiar with this recording?  Thoughts?

I've had it for a few years and it just doesn't seem to be clicking with me; I'm wondering if the trouble is with Mozart or the Emerson Quartet (and hoping the latter).  Everyone at Amazon seems to love it, so I'm curious to hear opinions from people here.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on November 30, 2011, 03:41:51 AM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/514OV23%2BcXL._SS500_.jpg)

Is anyone familiar with this recording?  Thoughts?

I've had it for a few years and it just doesn't seem to be clicking with me; I'm wondering if the trouble is with Mozart or the Emerson Quartet (and hoping the latter).  Everyone at Amazon seems to love it, so I'm curious to hear opinions from people here.

don't blame mozart or yourself. everyone at amazon seems to love everything the emerson quartet does... but i cannot find the humanity in some of their playing that i need to really feel certain composers... mozart among them.

no need to get a complete set of mozart quartets... (the "Haydn" quartets are sufficient for quite a while) but given how some of the best sets have come down in price...

my favorite is the quatuor mosaiques, but their set is currently oop, hard to get and therefore expensive... though a re-issue is imminent, i reckon. no worries, though... another superb set -- with the Talich String Quartet -- has just been re-issued at bargain price (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00607NW1G/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B00607NW1G).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 30, 2011, 04:56:12 AM
don't blame mozart or yourself. everyone at amazon seems to love everything the emerson quartet does...

Well, I cannot quite answer to that hyperbole.  But the Shostakovich, Bartók, Debussy & Ravel that they've done: yes, I think very highly of those recordings, indeed.  Personally, I don't feel that they lack at all for humanity, in any of those recordings.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on November 30, 2011, 05:24:58 AM
don't blame mozart or yourself. everyone at amazon seems to love everything the emerson quartet does... but i cannot find the humanity in some of their playing that i need to really feel certain composers... mozart among them.

no need to get a complete set of mozart quartets... (the "Haydn" quartets are sufficient for quite a while) but given how some of the best sets have come down in price...

my favorite is the quatuor mosaiques, but their set is currently oop, hard to get and therefore expensive... though a re-issue is imminent, i reckon. no worries, though... another superb set -- with the Talich String Quartet -- has just been re-issued at bargain price (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00607NW1G/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B00607NW1G).

Thanks for the opinion on the matter.

You'll be happy to know that I've ordered this set (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000H6SU9U/ref=oh_o01_s00_i00_details) recently in an attempt to get more out of the Haydn quartets.  I also own this disc (http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-String-Quartets-Complete-Vol/dp/B0000013TQ/ref=sr_1_12?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1322659227&sr=1-12) and am quite fond of it, however, I want to be able to engage with and enjoy the Haydn quartets.  Hopefully the Smithson String Quartet set will make that happen.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 30, 2011, 05:28:56 AM
don't blame mozart or yourself. everyone at amazon seems to love everything the emerson quartet does... but i cannot find the humanity in some of their playing that i need to really feel certain composers... mozart among them.

no need to get a complete set of mozart quartets... (the "Haydn" quartets are sufficient for quite a while) but given how some of the best sets have come down in price...

my favorite is the quatuor mosaiques, but their set is currently oop, hard to get and therefore expensive... though a re-issue is imminent, i reckon. no worries, though... another superb set -- with the Talich String Quartet -- has just been re-issued at bargain price (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00607NW1G/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B00607NW1G).

I'm no Emerson's fan either, Jens. I do think the Talich set that you mention is worth a good rec though. I have had it for years and a bargain re-release is a favor to all. As for the Mosaiques, do you know that to be the case? That it is going to be boxed and re-released? It is also MY favorite, although I am lacking a couple of the disks (have downloads, but would love the real deal). Is there a link that I can check that out? I would pre-order if necessary!

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: chasmaniac on November 30, 2011, 06:33:03 AM
I do think the Talich set that you mention is worth a good rec though. I have had it for years and a bargain re-release is a favor to all. 8)

The Talich on Calliope was one of my earliest classical explorations. I've always enjoyed it, though the recorded sound strikes me as a wee bit boxy.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on November 30, 2011, 06:44:11 AM
I'm no Emerson's fan either, Jens. I do think the Talich set that you mention is worth a good rec though. I have had it for years and a bargain re-release is a favor to all. As for the Mosaiques, do you know that to be the case? That it is going to be boxed and re-released? It is also MY favorite, although I am lacking a couple of the disks (have downloads, but would love the real deal). Is there a link that I can check that out? I would pre-order if necessary!

8)

My favorite Talich release is probably that of the Mozart String Quintets, but the Quartets are not far behind.
(Earlier I accidentally linked to the MP3 version.) Hopefully the Quintets will be re-released, too.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41Yx%2BLSQhpL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
W.A. Mozart
Complete String Quartets
Quatuor Talich
La Dolce Vita (ex-Calliope) (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005LL4TW8/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B005LL4TW8)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ZW1AFV4QL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
W.A. Mozart
Complete String Quintets
Quatuor Talich
Calliope (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000026CY3/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B000026CY3)

As per Mosaiques: I am afraid I do not know when exactly the Mozart set will be re-released... I was thinking in terms of "within the next two years", rather than "February 23rd".

As per Emerson: There are recordings of the group that I like very much... including Bartok (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000025HN5/goodmusicguide-20) (though I have other favorites) and late Beethoven (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000025HN5/goodmusicguide-20) (though I have other favorites) and Prokofiev (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000001GF2/goodmusicguide-20) and their AOF (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00008O8B3/goodmusicguide-20) are top of the line (the latter together with the Keller Quartet on ECM (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000025HN5/goodmusicguide-20) and not to be mistaken with their dreadful and sloppy "Bach Fugues" album)...

I like their Nielsen,  Sibelius,  Grieg disc (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000E6UMKI/goodmusicguide-20), but not their Mendelssohn and not their Haydn and the Shostakovich is annoying not just because of the applause but its lack of grime. Fond of their Webern.  (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000001GOW/goodmusicguide-20)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 30, 2011, 07:19:05 AM
My favorite Talich release is probably that of the Mozart String Quintets, but the Quartets are not far behind.
(Earlier I accidentally linked to the MP3 version.) Hopefully the Quintets will be re-released, too.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41Yx%2BLSQhpL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
W.A. Mozart
Complete String Quartets
Quatuor Talich
La Dolce Vita (ex-Calliope) (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005LL4TW8/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B005LL4TW8)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ZW1AFV4QL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
W.A. Mozart
Complete String Quintets
Quatuor Talich
Calliope (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000026CY3/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B000026CY3)

As per Mosaiques: I am afraid I do not know when exactly the Mozart set will be re-released... I was thinking in terms of "within the next two years", rather than "February 23rd".

As per Emerson: There are recordings of the group that I like very much... including Bartok (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000025HN5/goodmusicguide-20) (though I have other favorites) and late Beethoven (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000025HN5/goodmusicguide-20) (though I have other favorites) and Prokofiev (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000001GF2/goodmusicguide-20) and their AOF (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00008O8B3/goodmusicguide-20) are top of the line (the latter together with the Keller Quartet on ECM (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000025HN5/goodmusicguide-20) and not to be mistaken with their dreadful and sloppy "Bach Fugues" album)...

I like their Nielsen,  Sibelius,  Grieg disc (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000E6UMKI/goodmusicguide-20), but not their Mendelssohn and not their Haydn and the Shostakovich is annoying not just because of the applause but its lack of grime. Fond of their Webern.  (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000001GOW/goodmusicguide-20)

Yes, I think the Talich's Mozart quintets are very fine, so too the early quartets, of which their box is as good as I've heard.

Oh, I wasn't very specific in my statement, what I meant was that I didn't care for the Emersons in Mozart and similar Classical Era music. I like them fine in Bartok and Shostakovitch, for example.

Well, I was hoping on the QM, but still, some day it will happen. I hope they don't lose the dragonfly motif in the process... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 30, 2011, 07:22:47 AM
My favorite Talich release is probably that of the Mozart String Quintets, but the Quartets are not far behind.

Enjoying the quartet samples very well. Thanks, Jens!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on November 30, 2011, 09:38:06 AM
Yes, I think the Talich's Mozart quintets are very fine, so too the early quartets, of which their box is as good as I've heard.

Well, I was hoping on the QM, but still, some day it will happen. I hope they don't lose the dragonfly motif in the process... :)

Also curious about the Talich's Mozart SQ box (have owned their Quintet recordings for a LONG time!) - assume will be more than just the final 10 works like in the QM box that I have (which is 5 discs)? Don't believe that I've even heard the pre-Haydn dedicated SQs of Mozart?

Ah yes - that dragonfly motif is everywhere - 4 on the front of the box & one each w/ the individual CDs - :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on November 30, 2011, 09:51:03 AM
Also curious about the Talich's Mozart SQ box (have owned their Quintet recordings for a LONG time!) - assume will be more than just the final 10 works like in the QM box that I have (which is 5 discs)? Don't believe that I've even heard the pre-Haydn dedicated SQs of Mozart?

Ah yes - that dragonfly motif is everywhere - 4 on the front of the box & one each w/ the individual CDs - :)

Yes, yes... it includes the early Mozart Quartets... the whole 'canonic' set of 23 Quartets, starting with K.73f "Lodi", making its way through the "Milan", "Vienna", "Haydn", and "Prussian" Quartets (+ Hoffmeister, somewhere in there)... but not the early Divertimenti for string quartet.

Insects:

(http://www.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/E8834.jpg)(http://www.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/E8843.jpg)
(http://www.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/E8844.jpg)(http://www.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/E8845.jpg)
(http://www.naxos.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/hires/E8888.jpg)

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on November 30, 2011, 11:21:44 AM
There could never be a problem with Mozart. There are problems with record companies that make it difficult to find great recordings, like the following involving the Barylli Quartet, who perform with fluency, balance and ease:

(http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m465/Phil1_05/MozartBarylli002.jpg)(http://i335.photobucket.com/albums/m465/Phil1_05/MozartBarylli001.jpg)

I certainly agree with that. Here is another excellent quartets disk:

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/41PPtQrGS2BL.jpg)
That's the Heutling Quartet.

Hard to find, and its mates are even harder. No good reason for it. >:(

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on November 30, 2011, 01:40:04 PM
There could never be a problem with Mozart.

Allow me to clarify:  I wondered if I was not 'clicking' with Mozart or not clicking with that particular recording.  That doesn't imply anything is wrong with Mozart's string quartets (or with Mozart in general), just that I wondered if my personal tastes were leaning elsewhere.

Thanks for the recommendation, though.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bogey on December 04, 2011, 02:58:04 PM
I want to do a sweep through Mozart's sacred works using the Wolfie brick.  Starting here:

Litaniae venerabili altaris sacramento KV 243

and

Litaniae de BMV (Laurentanae) KV 109


If you see one that I post and have a favorite disc that has the music, please quote me and post the disc.  Thanks!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 04, 2011, 03:07:54 PM
Hoy, Bill! Great timing: I'm digging the Juilliard Quartet's account of the “Haydn” Quartets!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bogey on December 04, 2011, 03:13:20 PM
Hoy, Bill! Great timing: I'm digging the Juilliard Quartet's account of the “Haydn” Quartets!

Good evening, my friend.  Hah!  I felt the need to add a bit of pixie dust to my Haydn listening.....so Mozart it is!

 (PS: loving that VW set)
Title: Re: Mozart’s Menuetto
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 06, 2011, 05:17:30 AM
The “Hoffmeister” quartet was formerly a most egregious blindspot in my Mozart listening; but thanks in part to Ray's patient table-thumping, I've remedied that oversight.

Curiously, Arkiv Music lists fewer recordings of the K.499 than for any of the “Haydn” or “Prussian” quartets!  Why has this singleton suffered so much (comparative) neglect? . . .
Title: Re: Mozart’s Menuetto
Post by: jlaurson on December 06, 2011, 07:47:53 AM


Curiously, Arkiv Music lists fewer recordings of the K.499 than for any of the “Haydn” or “Prussian” quartets!  Why has this singleton suffered so much (comparative) neglect? . . .[/font]

Bingo!

So lonely, and without group-comfort and group-protection, it always falls by the wayside. I half expected that the situation is at least slightly similar with Beethoven viz. "Razumovsky" vs. "Serioso" vs. "Late Beethoven"... but it's actually the reverse, with Serioso being very well recorded and one of the Razumovskies dropping out.
Title: Re: Mozart’s Menuetto
Post by: Brahmsian on December 06, 2011, 10:36:28 AM
The “Hoffmeister” quartet was formerly a most egregious blindspot in my Mozart listening; but thanks in part to Ray's patient table-thumping, I've remedied that oversight.

Curiously, Arkiv Music lists fewer recordings of the K.499 than for any of the “Haydn” or “Prussian” quartets!  Why has this singleton suffered so much (comparative) neglect? . . .


I'm not sure why Karl.  :) As you already know, it is my favorite of Mozart's String Quartets!  :D  It was also my first Mozart string quartet to hear in live performance, which just blew me away.  I think it has a more delicate, light simplicity to it, and perhaps it isn't quite as 'heavy duty' compared to K.464 and K.465, it perhaps suffers neglect.

It really should not (and does not deserve to be the most neglected of Mozart's final 10 String Quartets, in my humble opinion).

All that really matters to me, in the end, is that I REALLY LOVE this String Quartet.  Long live Hoffmeister K.499!!  8)
Title: Re: Mozart’s Menuetto
Post by: Brahmsian on December 06, 2011, 10:42:36 AM
The “Hoffmeister” quartet was formerly a most egregious blindspot in my Mozart listening; but thanks in part to Ray's patient table-thumping, I've remedied that oversight.

Curiously, Arkiv Music lists fewer recordings of the K.499 than for any of the “Haydn” or “Prussian” quartets!  Why has this singleton suffered so much (comparative) neglect? . . .


By the way, as far as Menuetto's go, the K.499 Menuetto is one of my favourites in the entire music literature.

In some cases, I find classical era Menuetto's a little sleep inducing (not often, but occassionally).  Certainly not the case with K. 499! :)
Title: Re: Mozart’s Menuetto
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2011, 11:02:10 AM
The “Hoffmeister” quartet was formerly a most egregious blindspot in my Mozart listening; but thanks in part to Ray's patient table-thumping, I've remedied that oversight.

Curiously, Arkiv Music lists fewer recordings of the K.499 than for any of the “Haydn” or “Prussian” quartets!  Why has this singleton suffered so much (comparative) neglect? . . .


But you only need one!

This one here, of course:
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=219018

Can be had for a better price elsewhere, but easier to find here. I got it on eBay 6 weeks ago for <$10. Excellent. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on December 07, 2011, 04:23:49 AM
Let's not forget the lovely ladies from the Klenke Quartet, who have a superb (late) Mozart cycle under their (short) belts, which includes the Hoffmeister, available on a single disc:



(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0015I2QHQ.L.jpg)
W.A. Mozart
String Quartets K.499 ("Hoffmeister")
& K575 ("Prussian I")
Klenke Quartet
PROFIL Haenssler
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0015I2QHQ/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=goodmusicguide-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B0015I2QHQ)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 07, 2011, 05:56:47 AM
Those talented young ladies need to do some Henning.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: chasmaniac on December 07, 2011, 06:06:13 AM
Let's not forget the lovely ladies from the Klenke Quartet

Are they sweating? I think they're sweating.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 07, 2011, 06:24:03 AM
They're glowing.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: chasmaniac on December 07, 2011, 06:27:34 AM
They're glowing.


;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 07, 2011, 06:30:47 AM
Those talented young ladies need to do some Henning.

Truly a multiplex sort of a statement. ::)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 07, 2011, 06:35:08 AM
Oh, most assuredly by design, O Gurn.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on December 07, 2011, 06:46:49 AM
Are they sweating? I think they're sweating.

Glistening. They're glistening! Wouldn't you glisten after playing through two Mozart Quartets?
But, yes... perhaps they are in need of a towel more than a Henning.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 07, 2011, 07:05:50 AM
Well, I wield a fine towel, if I do say so myself.

Henning would certainly make them sweat; they wouldn't be the first string players to find it so.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 08, 2011, 06:25:06 AM
Nor are all MI accounts of the quartets created equal (no surprise there, surely) . . . the first movement of the d minor quartet (K.421[417b]) runs 10'47 in the Juilliard Quartet recording of January 1977, but only 5'37 in the Amadeus Quartet recording of May 1966.  Of course, both sections have repeats, and it must likely be a matter of the Amadeus Quartet omitting the repeats (oh, the horror, the horror).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Sergeant Rock on December 08, 2011, 06:31:06 AM
. . . the first movement of the d minor quartet (K.421[417b]) runs 10'47 in the Juilliard Quartet recording of January 1977, but only 5'37 in the Amadeus Quartet recording of May 1966.

And the Italiano come right in between those two at 7:18.

Sarge
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 21, 2011, 07:00:07 AM
I've heard the 38th and the 41st symphonies of Mozart for the first time today. :)

Wait?  What!?  By that I mean though I've heard many recordings of those works, I did not realize how dynamic and expressive they should be.  From powerful crescendos to elegant minuet interruptions to transparent layered sound from the orchestra, the performance of Jacob and the Freiburger Orchestra showed me what Mozart's music really sounds like.  My eyes are opened, I have heard the definitive performance of these works, AND I LOVE IT!!! :) :) :) :)

 8)

Gosh, I miss our Davey.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on December 24, 2011, 11:17:01 AM
Is there a reason why recording Davide Penitente, K. 469 wouldn't be lucrative for the labels? ??? I learnt about this work  just a couple of nights ago -- it's not a mass, but it's an augmented and completed version of the music of K. 427! :o But I don't even need all the fingers in my hand to count the extant recordings -- and one of them is from 1956 (the performance, I mean)! HIPsters, where art thou? Stop trying to complete unfinished works and please record the one already finished.

--Rant Over--
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on December 24, 2011, 04:36:49 PM
Is there a reason why recording Davide Penitente, K. 469 wouldn't be lucrative for the labels? ??? I learnt about this work  just a couple of nights ago -- it's not a mass, but it's an augmented and completed version of the music of K. 427! :o But I don't even need all the fingers in my hand to count the extant recordings -- and one of them is from 1956 (the performance, I mean)! HIPsters, where art thou? Stop trying to complete unfinished works and please record the one already finished.

--Rant Over--

I trust you are aware of the fact that most of it is rehashed music from the Mass in C minor? To be honest: it is more effective in its original setting.

As far as performances go, this HIP one might appeal to you:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51qZsHeyZnL._SS400_.jpg)

Q :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on December 24, 2011, 10:28:41 PM
Quote
As far as performances go, this HIP one might appeal to you:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51qZsHeyZnL._SS400_.jpg)

Q :)


If it's available to me, it may. ;) Thanks, anyway. Perhaps Sony would re-release it in a Big La Petite Band Box some day.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 27, 2012, 04:52:59 AM
It's Wolferl's birthday! Game on!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on January 27, 2012, 05:56:09 AM
It's Wolferl's birthday! Game on!

I celebrated prematurely by visiting the Mozarthaus in Vienna last week. It's where he lived in 1784-87. They've put together a really nice exhibit. And the next night I went to The Magic Flute at the Volksoper  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on January 27, 2012, 05:59:57 AM
I celebrated prematurely by visiting the Mozarthaus in Vienna last week. It's where he lived in 1784-87. They've put together a really nice exhibit. And the next night I went to The Magic Flute at the Volksoper  :)

Sounds like a Magic Week.   :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 27, 2012, 06:30:15 AM
Um... I was just reading a biography of Salieri in BBC Music Magazine. :-\
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 27, 2012, 06:36:36 AM
Bad form, Auntie Beeb!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 27, 2012, 06:45:51 AM
Bad form, Auntie Beeb!

Incidentally, it's featured in the one-year-old special Wolferl issue. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on January 27, 2012, 07:08:48 AM
Gosh, I miss our Davey.

Well thanks Karl! ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 27, 2012, 07:09:43 AM
Incidentally, it's featured in the one-year-old special Wolferl issue. :)

Oh, that I took as read. Superlatively bad form, Auntie Beeb.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidW on January 27, 2012, 07:09:58 AM
It's Wolferl's birthday! Game on!

Awesome I have some Mozart on my mp3 player-- oboe concerto, bassoon concerto and that other sinfonia concertante!  Should be great. 8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 27, 2012, 07:10:11 AM
Well thanks Karl! ;D

Good to have you back, laddie!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: eyeresist on January 29, 2012, 05:24:50 PM
Oh, that I took as read. Superlatively bad form, Auntie Beeb.

Well, you know Salieri didn't actually assassinate Our Wolfy?
 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 29, 2012, 05:27:19 PM
I surely did know that, thanks!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 01, 2012, 03:09:52 AM
Osvaldo Golijov claimes to have composed the recently discovered MS. which was believed to be Mozart's . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart: Apollo et Hyacinthus Question
Post by: Cato on July 04, 2012, 08:07:07 AM
I have grade-school Latin students (6th through 8th) and the better 8th Graders are capable of handling original Roman authors, depending on the author.  Selections of Ovid's Metamorphoses are in their Cambridge Latin text.

A few years ago I considered using Mozart's Apollo et Hyacinthus in class, because he was around my students' age (11) when he composed it, and because the text was in Latin.

The story has a theme of homosexuality, which theme in a Catholic grade school would be just a little unacceptable!   0:)  In high schools it would not be a problem (maybe).     :D

Anyway, I have recently discovered that in fact the libretto changes the story away from that theme, focusing Apollo's desires on a woman.

So for the experts here: is the music interesting enough - do you think - for today's 8th Graders...at least somewhat talented ones?  They might find it of initial interest because of Mozart's age when he composed it.  But are at least parts of it capable of sustaining the initial interest?

A difficult question, I know. 
Title: Re: Mozart: Apollo et Hyacinthus Question
Post by: Gurn Blanston on July 04, 2012, 09:48:07 AM
I have grade-school Latin students (6th through 8th) and the better 8th Graders are capable of handling original Roman authors, depending on the author.  Selections of Ovid's Metamorphoses are in their Cambridge Latin text.

A few years ago I considered using Mozart's Apollo et Hyacinthus in class, because he was around my students' age (11) when he composed it, and because the text was in Latin.

The story has a theme of homosexuality, which theme in a Catholic grade school would be just a little unacceptable!   0:)  In high schools it would not be a problem (maybe).     :D

Anyway, I have recently discovered that in fact the libretto changes the story away from that theme, focusing Apollo's desires on a woman.

So for the experts here: is the music interesting enough - do you think - for today's 8th Graders...at least somewhat talented ones?  They might find it of initial interest because of Mozart's age when he composed it.  But are at least parts of it capable of sustaining the initial interest?

A difficult question, I know.

Well, difficult in the sense that only you know what your goals are, and the material you are working with. :)

I am listening to it again (after a couple of years) right now. It's less than an hour and a half, which is a great start!  Opera seria is, in my opinion, an acquired taste. So the real question is whether or not you believe they can accomplish that. There is a certain amount of secco in it, but it isn't overwhelming, plus it happens that he was good at it, even at that age. There are a few arias that are especially good, like Laetari, iocari sung by the Melia character. Problematically, I don't have an libretto, which would not only enhance my enjoyment but also help with an analysis. So it goes.

In short, if you think that these students can deal with opera seria, then this would be a fine place to start. The added interest of one in their age group being the composer can only be a help. It would be especially nice if you could find them copies of the libretto though. Reading along has always been a big help for me. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart: Apollo et Hyacinthus Question
Post by: Cato on July 04, 2012, 12:53:19 PM
Well, difficult in the sense that only you know what your goals are, and the material you are working with. :)

In short, if you think that these students can deal with opera seria, then this would be a fine place to start. The added interest of one in their age group being the composer can only be a help. It would be especially nice if you could find them copies of the libretto though. Reading along has always been a big help for me. :)

8)

Many thanks for taking the time to comment!

Here is the score: no translation of the Latin text, however.

http://dme.mozarteum.at/DME/nma/nma_cont.php?vsep=30&gen=edition&l=1&p1=-99 (http://dme.mozarteum.at/DME/nma/nma_cont.php?vsep=30&gen=edition&l=1&p1=-99)


Which CD do you have?  This seems to be the most recent recording: one would hope a libretto would be included, but these days we are lucky that they bother to record it to begin with!



Title: Re: Mozart: Apollo et Hyacinthus Question
Post by: Gurn Blanston on July 04, 2012, 01:05:17 PM
Many thanks for taking the time to comment!

Here is the score: no translation of the Latin text, however.

http://dme.mozarteum.at/DME/nma/nma_cont.php?vsep=30&gen=edition&l=1&p1=-99 (http://dme.mozarteum.at/DME/nma/nma_cont.php?vsep=30&gen=edition&l=1&p1=-99)


Which CD do you have?  This seems to be the most recent recording: one would hope a libretto would be included, but these days we are lucky that they bother to record it to begin with!



You are welcome, and thanks for the score. No problems, Latin is my second language...   0:)

I have that set that Brilliant put out a few years ago of the Complete Operas. It's true; recordings are thin on the ground. No problem finding a Don Giovanni, however...  :D

I will check out this disk though. I find the singing in the beginning of mine to be a bit too wobbly for me, although, amazingly, it seems to work itself out midway. Go figure. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart: Apollo et Hyacinthus Question
Post by: Florestan on July 10, 2012, 05:26:06 AM
Latin is my second language...   0:)

Rumor has it that a Greek economy professor lecturing in US used only Greek-origin words in his lectures (besides and, or, then a.s.o.) and the audience understood him very well. (Well, don't ask me his name...  ;D). I'm sure the same can be done with Latin-origin words with the same results.  :D...

...because...

...Notiunile economice sunt universale! (this is in Romanian but you should be able to understand it  :) )
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Papy Oli on July 26, 2012, 10:56:20 AM
After seeing Amadeus this week again, I am in the mood for some Mozart but I actually do not have that much on my shelves :

Piano concertos 20-23-24-25 (Moravec)
Piano sonatas (Uchida)
Wind concertos (Concertgebouw Chamber Orch.)
Sonata for 2 Pianos K.448 (Lupu / Perahia)
Eine Kleine Nachtmusik / Serenatta Notturna / Lodron Night Music (Naxos)
Symphonies 35-45 (Bohm)
Solemn Vespers (Naxos)
Requiem (Hickox)/ Ave Verum Corpus / Exsultate, Jubilate

I am happy with the above versions and not looking for alternatives, but are  there any missing major works of his I could add while I am in the mood please ? I am not into operas although I could take a punt on one ....or some hidden gems maybe ?

Thank you  0:)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 26, 2012, 11:03:01 AM
You want the quintet for piano and winds, K.452; and the viola quintets.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Sergeant Rock on July 26, 2012, 12:15:27 PM

I am happy with the above versions and not looking for alternatives, but are  there any missing major works of his I could add while I am in the mood please ? I am not into operas although I could take a punt on one ....or some hidden gems maybe ?

Hey, Papy, you need to hear Piano Concerto #21 C major K.467. The slow movement is one of his most famous (in part due to the film Elvira Madigan). Try to find Anda's version (wonderful performances of 6 & 17 too):

(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/gmgpictures/Elvira.jpg)


Sarge
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mszczuj on July 26, 2012, 12:59:02 PM
You want the quintet for piano and winds, K.452; and the viola quintets.

And Divertimento for string trio.
Title: Re: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 26, 2012, 01:00:44 PM
And Divertimento for string trio.

Post #666! Well played!
Title: Re: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 26, 2012, 01:02:01 PM
(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/gmgpictures/Elvira.jpg)

The cover is a rare picture of Geza Anda!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mszczuj on July 26, 2012, 01:02:51 PM
Hey, Papy, you need to hear Piano Concerto #21 C major K.467. The slow movement is one of his most famous (in part due to the film Elvira Madigan).

You need all Piano Concertos.
Title: Re: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on July 26, 2012, 01:41:19 PM
The cover is a rare picture of Geza Anda!

Oh, I thought he was an old Geza! This must have been back in the day... :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Sergeant Rock on July 26, 2012, 02:11:01 PM
You need all Piano Concertos.

I think so too...but I didn't want to overwhelm Papy with recommendations.

Sarge
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on July 26, 2012, 09:27:24 PM
I'm surprised that no one has suggested the string quartets yet, at least the 'Haydn' set.

The clarinet concerto and the quintet! (Make sure to listen to a basset clarinet hit all those low notes.)

Symphony No. 25 (oh, and you need to get something with a little more verve and joie de vivre (where appropriate) than Herr Böhm's recordings ;))
Sinfonia concertante for violin and viola, K. 364

And even if you're not into operas taken in whole, I'd suggest that you give at least all the famous arias a try. And there are also the concert arias; I like Bella mia fiamma a lot.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Papy Oli on July 26, 2012, 09:33:44 PM
thank you for the recommendations, I'll check these out tonight  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: xochitl on July 26, 2012, 09:42:31 PM
who would you guys recommend conducting the late symphonies besides mackerras and szell?  i have bohm too, but i have to get used to the viennese style like his beethoven
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mc ukrneal on July 26, 2012, 10:01:31 PM
who would you guys recommend conducting the late symphonies besides mackerras and szell?  i have bohm too, but i have to get used to the viennese style like his beethoven
I enjoy Davis if you want something in the 'big band' direction. This one:



As per Papi's request, I'd go with:
Marriage of Figaro, Solti
Mass in C minor, Leppard, Cotrubas and Kiri Te Kanawa (if you can find it)
Piano Concertos: Any of Perahia, Brendel and Ashkenazy (all very good, and first two can be bought in smaller doses if so desired, though sets have price advantage)
Piano Trios: Florestan Trio (Hyperion)
Piano Quartets: Lewis and Leopold String Trio (on Hyperion)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on July 27, 2012, 01:06:38 AM
who would you guys recommend conducting the late symphonies besides mackerras and szell?  i have bohm too, but i have to get used to the viennese style like his beethoven

Krips • Krips • Krips!


"Why Haydn Should Be Mandatory"
http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-haydn-should-be-mandatory.html (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-haydn-should-be-mandatory.html)

(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000OPPSXK.L.jpg)
W.G. Mozart
Symphonies 21-41
J.Krips / Concertgebouw Orchestra
Decca
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000OPPSXK/goodmusicguide-20)
German link (http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000OPPSXK/goodmusicguide-21) - UK link (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000OPPSXK/goodmusicguide-21)

Quote
To illustrate the high quality of music-making that can result from this approach (one we might run the danger of losing), nothing serves better than Josef Krips’ recordings of the Mozart Symphonies with the Concertgebouw Orchestra from 1972 and 73. This is Classical Music at its very finest. You won’t find Mozart anywhere else that is played with such lightness, radiating joy, and so being the epitome of musical tip-toeing. Yes, it sounds very different – luxuriously so – than Mozart coming from smaller, HIP groups, but not heavier per se, nor swooningly romantic.

Krips covers symphonies 21 to 41 and they are finally available separately again after having long shared box-set space with the unnecessary Neville Marriner-conducted early symphonies. Even with the excellent, moderately HIP Charles Mackerras / Prague set (Teldec) available, Krips should still be the first choice of any collection’s allotment for Mozart symphonies.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jwinter on July 27, 2012, 03:42:56 AM
 Quote from: mc ukrneal on Today at 03:01:31 AM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=46.msg647237#msg647237)
I enjoy Davis if you want something in the 'big band' direction. This one:
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000TM0H5C.01.L.jpg)
   
Strongly seconded!  That would be my easy top choice for the late symphonies, followed by Bohm and Szell.  I've also always had a weakness for Marriner's EMI re-recordings of the late symphonies, which can be had for peanuts in various budget incarnations.  Most folks seem to prefer his earlier versions for Phillips, but I think the EMI beneficially picks up the pace a bit, and is well-recorded.

Krips is also excellent, but I don't know if I'd recommend it as an alternative to Bohm -- both of them are beautifully played but can seem rather stately and old-fashioned these days.  Depends on whether one wants a Romantic take on Mozart, or something more modern and HIP-influenced...
 
If you like the Davis, be sure to pick up his disc of Mozart overtures as well, it's absolutely superb:
 


 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on July 27, 2012, 04:07:22 AM


Krips is also excellent, but I don't know if I'd recommend it as an alternative to Bohm -- both of them are beautifully played but can seem rather stately and old-fashioned these days.  Depends on whether one wants a Romantic take on Mozart, or something more modern and HIP-influenced...

Bawk-bawk-whaaat? Boehm, to my ears (it was my first integral Mozart cycle and also my first in many individual Mozart symphonies), fits your description... but Krips sounds like something from a completely different world. To me, that's like comparing a graceful Gnu (Boehm) to a sportive Flamingo (Krips).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jwinter on July 27, 2012, 04:22:57 AM
Different strokes, I suppose.  Though I'll admit that I'm much more familiar with the Bohm than I am with the Krips, which I haven't heard in a while.  But I seem to remember thinking that they were very similar in approach -- maybe I need to give Krips a fresh listen...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mszczuj on July 27, 2012, 12:15:55 PM
I'm surprised that no one has suggested the string quartets yet, at least the 'Haydn' set.

They are of course great but for me they lack something special which makes Mozart one of the greatest composer of al time.

I really think that late String Quintets, String Trio, Wind Quintet and Piano Concertos are his most interesting instrumental works. I would add 3 last Serenades for winds, and Kegelstatt trio in the 2nd tier before the String and Piano Quartets and late Symphonies and two other works for clarinet in the 3rd tier.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mszczuj on July 27, 2012, 12:18:32 PM
Symphonies?

Jacobs, Minkowski, ter Linden.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on August 18, 2012, 06:50:10 PM
Apologies if this is going over ancient ground, but does anyone know if there's any difference between these 2 releases besides the cover?




Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: kishnevi on August 18, 2012, 07:07:11 PM
Apologies if this is going over ancient ground, but does anyone know if there's any difference between these 2 releases besides the cover?





Liner notes in the older version giving a complete rundown of the concertos.  The new series eschews liner notes and limits the track listings and recording data  to the individual CD sleeve.   And the liner notes for the older set have a couple of pictures of Perahia.   The mastering is almost certainly the same--Sony doesn't remaster for these budget sets.

So if having liner notes is worth the extra thirty or so dollars (going by current Amazon MP prices),  go for the older set.  If not (and I suspect it's not worth it), the new one should do just fine.  I bought the older set soon after it came out for about $70US, and consider it money well spent.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on August 18, 2012, 07:38:54 PM
Liner notes in the older version giving a complete rundown of the concertos.  The new series eschews liner notes and limits the track listings and recording data  to the individual CD sleeve.   And the liner notes for the older set have a couple of pictures of Perahia.   The mastering is almost certainly the same--Sony doesn't remaster for these budget sets.

So if having liner notes is worth the extra thirty or so dollars (going by current Amazon MP prices),  go for the older set.  If not (and I suspect it's not worth it), the new one should do just fine.  I bought the older set soon after it came out for about $70US, and consider it money well spent.

Okay, thanks.  So, the older set is actually the one where he looks... older! LOL.

I do actually rather like having liner notes, truth be told. For example, I hunted down the fuller liner notes from Hyperion's series of Vivaldi sacred music, because the cheaper box set cut out so much information about individual pieces.

There is a fairly sharp price difference though.  I'm looking at Prestoclassical now (because they're having a DaCapo sale and I can snare all my Holmboe recordings dirt cheap!) and in Australian dollars one set is $74 and one is $40.  That's close to half price.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: North Star on August 21, 2012, 04:40:49 AM
Okay, thanks.  So, the older set is actually the one where he looks... older! LOL.

I do actually rather like having liner notes, truth be told. For example, I hunted down the fuller liner notes from Hyperion's series of Vivaldi sacred music, because the cheaper box set cut out so much information about individual pieces.

There is a fairly sharp price difference though.  I'm looking at Prestoclassical now (because they're having a DaCapo sale and I can snare all my Holmboe recordings dirt cheap!) and in Australian dollars one set is $74 and one is $40.  That's close to half price.

Maybe you'd like to know that Hyperion has all the liner notes and artwork in PDF's for free at their website
http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on August 21, 2012, 07:00:30 AM
The mastering is almost certainly the same--Sony doesn't remaster for these budget sets.

It's true, but I'm pretty sure that Sony remastered all the old recordings when the big box was released for the first time.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on August 21, 2012, 08:40:58 AM
Listened to the Divertimento K334.



Fantastic work (especial the second movement theme and variations, which gives the impression of being almost a romantic piece).  Performance was good enough to get the point across, but was not entirely satisfying.

Then tried this one



Not HIP, but very nicely done.  Maybe next I will try Karajan's perverted 1960's recording with the Berlin Philharmonic.


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on August 21, 2012, 06:21:42 PM
Maybe you'd like to know that Hyperion has all the liner notes and artwork in PDF's for free at their website
http://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/

Thanks. I did know that - and that's how I got the proper liner notes for Hyperion's Vivaldi box set. It is one of the reasons for frequently visiting the Hyperion website!

(However, it is not of much use in the present case. Hyperion have only recorded a half dozen of Mozart's piano concertos - which doesn't surprise me, as Hyperion's core repertoire is rather different and has a much greater focus on chamber and other small-scale works, not orchestral).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bogey on August 21, 2012, 06:40:09 PM
Apologies if this is going over ancient ground, but does anyone know if there's any difference between these 2 releases besides the cover?





I always thought that the ECO on the recordings I have let M.P. down or the folks on the soundboard were just not putting it all together.  Almost like a soda that has lost its fizz....and Mozart should have fizz in these.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: eyeresist on August 22, 2012, 12:28:32 AM
I always thought that the ECO on the recordings I have let M.P. down or the folks on the soundboard were just not putting it all together.  Almost like a soda that has lost its fizz....and Mozart should have fizz in these.

When I was sampling various piano con sets on Amazon, I thought the Perahia sounded cold (I don't know his other work). In the end my choice was Anda or Ashkenazy.
Title: Mozart
Post by: Leo K. on August 22, 2012, 05:16:39 AM
Perahia was a gradual pianist for my taste, it took some years, but gradually he became one of my favorite pianists.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on August 22, 2012, 06:01:07 AM
I always thought that the ECO on the recordings I have let M.P. down or the folks on the soundboard were just not putting it all together.  Almost like a soda that has lost its fizz....and Mozart should have fizz in these.

I agree that the ECO sounded drab in the recording I had from this set.  I think it is not attributable to the ECO, which typically sounds great, but to the fact that Perahia is directing from the piano.  I have the same issue with Ashkenazy's set, where the piano performance is brilliant but the orchestra sounds like an overstuffed pillow of sound.  Unless the pianist is a first rate conductor (like Barenboim) better to go with a conductor.   Schiff and Barenboim (Berlin) are my current favorite cycles.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on October 06, 2012, 03:23:32 AM
Rumor has it that a Greek economy professor lecturing in US used only Greek-origin words in his lectures (besides and, or, then a.s.o.) and the audience understood him very well. (Well, don't ask me his name...  ;D). I'm sure the same can be done with Latin-origin words with the same results.  :D...

...because...

...Notiunile economice sunt universale! (this is in Romanian but you should be able to understand it  :) )
And also because the English language is omnivorous, constantly acquiring words and concepts from every other culture it rubs up against.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on October 06, 2012, 03:37:38 AM
who would you guys recommend conducting the late symphonies besides mackerras and szell?  i have bohm too, but i have to get used to the viennese style like his beethoven
Jacobs, Minkowski, ter Linden
Yes and yes! (I don't know ter Linden's)
Wish they would do more, but at least they've covered the best!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 16, 2012, 06:09:18 AM
You know, somehow to-day I am wondering how R— N— fares in his quest to uncover The Great Mozart Conspiracy . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: DavidRoss on October 16, 2012, 07:16:51 AM
You know, somehow to-day I am wondering how R— N— fares in his quest to uncover The Great Mozart Conspiracy . . . .
Given the subsequent disappearance of both from our hallowed halls, I suspect that he and Teresa took my suggestion to heart and found a match made in ... well ... somewhere.  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 16, 2012, 07:30:15 AM
... a match made in an undisclosed location!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 16, 2012, 09:31:34 AM
Aside from my relief that you deem Mozart of some value, despite the lack of intensity, I find this puzzling.  Is there any music of the period more 'intense' than the close of Don Giovanni, where the Don is dragged to the horrors of hell?  The two minor-key piano concerti also contain passages of harrowing intensity, to my ears.  The fuge on Kyrie eleison from the Requiem is another place where I hear an intensity in Mozart's transformation of the 'academic' style of Bach.  And aside from these broad examples, what I find thrilling about Mozart is that an intense moment can spring up in the most unexpected place.  For instance, the exposition of the symphony No 41, 1st movement, ends with a charming tune that suddenly become the subject of an intense fugato as the development section begins. 

Let us note, to start,  that I used such phrases as by and large and [not] much of anything to do with.

Don Giovanni (and the Requiem) are obvious and notable exceptions. The first is an opera (and even among his operas, a notable exception dramatically) and the second is sui generis.

Perhaps we are quibbling about terms.  I find plenty of energy in Mozart (that fugato passage you mention I should have called energetic rather than intense).  Personally, I find nothing at all harrowing in any of the concerti.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on October 16, 2012, 09:45:03 AM
The first movement of K. 491. It's doomier and gloomier than 466. While I find pent-up aggression exploding in the D minor, the C minor, to my ears, is bordering on hopelessness. And that last movement, unlike the D minor -- which has a D major ending, doesn't it? -- provides no sign of reprieve. And the feelings that I associate with this music are to some extent intense; and it's not simply a case of extended fortissimo passages.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on October 16, 2012, 10:03:56 AM

I'm afraid, the part of my post on the Sibelius thread that I considered most significant was omitted.  In full:


Quote
Aside from my relief that you deem Mozart of some value, despite the lack of intensity, I find this puzzling.  Is there any music of the period more 'intense' than the close of Don Giovanni, where the Don is dragged to the horrors of hell?  The two minor-key piano concerti also contain passages of harrowing intensity, to my ears.  The fuge on Kyrie eleison from the Requiem is another place where I hear an intensity in Mozart's transformation of the 'academic' style of Bach.  And aside from these broad examples, what I find thrilling about Mozart is that an intense moment can spring up in the most unexpected place.  For instance, the exposition of the symphony No 41, 1st movement, ends with a charming tune that suddenly become the subject of an intense fugato as the development section begins. 

Aside from these considerations, my remark about intensity mainly dealt with performance practice.  Harnoncourt's Mozart style changed in later recordings, but in the Concertgebouw recordings he cultivated a more aggressive style.  They are the opposite of the stereotypical polite Mozart style (think Neville Marriner).  Strings play with bite.  Brass and horns, instead of providing gently accompaniment with rounded tones, bark agressively.  Large modern timpani played gently with soft mallets are replaced by the twack of smaller drums played with hard mallets.  Hearing these recordings completely changed my view of Mozart.  Recent recordings by Minkowski and Rene Jacobs have brought a similar energy to performance of Mozart's late symphonies, but I do not think they exceed what Harnoncourt accomplished in those Concertgebouw recordings from the 80's.

Application of "intense" to music is a metaphor, or an assumption about the composers intent, in my view.  My main point is that a lot is missed when Mozart's music is played in uniformly gentle, polite, dignified manner (i.e., in any recording by Neville Marriner).  After listening to Harnoncourt's performances of the late symphonies, I came to see Mozart as a composer who relished the sound of the orchestra, including the power and intensity of it, and wanted to exploit it to the maximum extent possible.   That's what I feel Harnoncourt conveys in his Concertgebouw performances.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on October 16, 2012, 10:13:54 AM
I'm afraid, the part of my post on the Sibelius thread that I considered most significant was omitted.  In full:


Application of "intense" to music is a metaphor, or an assumption about the composers intent, in my view.  My main point is that a lot is missed when Mozart's music is played in uniformly gentle, polite, dignified manner (i.e., in any recording by Neville Marriner).  After listening to Harnoncourt's performances of the late symphonies, I came to see Mozart as a composer who relished the sound of the orchestra, including the power and intensity of it, and wanted to exploit it to the maximum extent possible.   That's what I feel Harnoncourt conveys in his Concertgebouw performances.

I have wanted to hear those recordings but they are not easy to find other than used (at least from Amazon).  I have heard his recordings of the early symphonies with the Concentus Musicus Wien, which are enjoyable - but the late works would be nice to have.

Hogwood does a very good job and has recorded about everything Mozart wrote that could be called a symphony. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 16, 2012, 10:15:57 AM
I'm afraid, the part of my post on the Sibelius thread that I considered most significant was omitted.  In full:

Application of "intense" to music is a metaphor, or an assumption about the composers intent, in my view.  My main point is that a lot is missed when Mozart's music is played in uniformly gentle, polite, dignified manner (i.e., in any recording by Neville Marriner).  After listening to Harnoncourt's performances of the late symphonies, I came to see Mozart as a composer who relished the sound of the orchestra, including the power and intensity of it, and wanted to exploit it to the maximum extent possible.   That's what I feel Harnoncourt conveys in his Concertgebouw performances.

Thanks for the elucidation, Scarps. I quite agree.

The first movement of K. 491. It's doomier and gloomier than 466. While I find pent-up aggression exploding in the D minor, the C minor, to my ears, is bordering on hopelessness. And that last movement, unlike the D minor -- which has a D major ending, doesn't it? -- provides no sign of reprieve. And the feelings that I associate with this music are to some extent intense; and it's not simply a case of extended fortissimo passages.

Very nice counter-example, Nav. There are indeed some tutti passages in the opening Allegro which would not be mischaracterized as intense.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on October 16, 2012, 10:26:35 AM
I have wanted to hear those recordings but they are not easy to find other than used (at least from Amazon).  I have heard his recordings of the early symphonies with the Concentus Musicus Wien, which are enjoyable - but the late works would be nice to have.

Hogwood does a very good job and has recorded about everything Mozart wrote that could be called a symphony.

Before the iDeals incident, this would have been considered cheap



or

http://www.mdt.co.uk/mozart-symphonies-and-overtures-royal-anniversary-edition-warner-classics-8cds.html
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on October 16, 2012, 10:34:27 AM
Before the iDeals incident, this would have been considered cheap



or

http://www.mdt.co.uk/mozart-symphonies-and-overtures-royal-anniversary-edition-warner-classics-8cds.html

Interesting; I have the chamber works from that set - many thanks for the info. I have dropped a copy into my Shopping Cart.

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on October 17, 2012, 08:28:49 AM
Below is a post that I left in the 'Listening Thread' which quickly was buried!  :D

But for those looking for a set of Wolfie's Piano Trios on modern instruments and recorded recently, the Florestan Trio is a recommendation; also for those who use BRO, both discs were available for $7 each when purchased (have not checked lately) - short but excellent review reprinted HERE (http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=170205); excellent comments also on the Hyperion website - :)

Quote
Mozart - Piano Trios w/ the Florestan Trio on two single Hyperion CDs (not a Dyad yet, but a bargain purchase from BRO yet again) - I've lived w/ my PI set w/ Steven Lubin (added below, right) for years, and having none other; so after reading some excellent reviews of the Susan Tomes & gang's performances on these discs, I decided to add a modern instrument one; on first hearing, a good decision!  :)


(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-W7kqm8g/0/S/MozartFlorestan2-S.jpg)  (http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-zNRcRsd/0/S/MozartFlorestan1-S.jpg)  (http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-B3m2Zv6/0/S/MozartPianoTrios1-S.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on October 17, 2012, 08:46:07 AM
After Scarpia mentioned Harnoncourt's Mozart yesterday, it occurred to me that Harnoncourt hasn't recorded any of the PCs (read further). Now having searched with Google, it seems that there is just this once CD containing Nos. 23 and 26, with Gulda as the soloist. It seems rather strange that someone like NH, who has conducted a lot of the symphonies, the operas and at least some of the choral works, has hardly touched upon this important part of Mozart's oeuvre in his recordings.

C'mon, Herr Harnoncourt, all of Schubert's symphonies, but only two Mozart PCs? :(
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scarpia on October 17, 2012, 10:54:50 AM
C'mon, Herr Harnoncourt, all of Schubert's symphonies, but only two Mozart PCs? :(

I have that disc, and it certainly makes me wish there were more.  But given the number of recordings Harnoncourt has given us, it strikes me as unwise to complain.  Aside from recordings, I wonder if he has performed the PCs in concert, and with whom.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 18, 2012, 07:08:45 AM
Before the iDeals incident, this would have been considered cheap



Very nice. I do call that reasonable . . . ka-ching . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: kishnevi on October 18, 2012, 07:32:12 PM
Thanks for the elucidation, Scarps. I quite agree.

Very nice counter-example, Nav. There are indeed some tutti passages in the opening Allegro which would not be mischaracterized as intense.

I also agree with Scarpia;  there are some intense passages in Mozart,  although I don't find as many as other people do.   But for a composer of his era,  Mozart was certainly not afraid of emotion; it's just that compared to later eras he comes across as having a stiff upper lip, so to speak.   

Also, I'm not sure it's fair to judge the Requiem by its 'emotional intensity'.  Mozart completed a substantial portion of it, but he left a substantial portion undone.  We know how he started off the Requiem;  but we don't really know how he would have finished it.  All we have is the efforts of one of his students to complete the work using in part reworked material from the portion Mozart did compose.  (And that use of reworked material itself changes the emotional profile of the work, even though we can be fairly sure that Mozart himself would probably not have used the material in that way.)

But certainly playing Mozart as shining surfaces and polite conversation over tea does grave disservice to his music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on October 18, 2012, 10:22:17 PM
...for a composer of his era,  Mozart was certainly not afraid of emotion; it's just that compared to later eras he comes across as having a stiff upper lip, so to speak.   

Hoffmann, I believe, described Mozart as a Romantic.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: xochitl on October 18, 2012, 10:50:37 PM
i actually find minor mode mozart the darkest of all music ive ever heard

it even makes me a little bit sick inside

things like the slow movement of symphony 41 as well.  there's something so unspeakably deep and sad about them
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on November 09, 2012, 07:30:10 AM
Is the scoring for woodwinds in K. 491 goodness, or what? It's almost like he wrote the concerto for piano, woodwinds and orchestra... perhaps not as virtuoso as for the piano, but oh-so-wonderful nevertheless.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on November 21, 2012, 07:23:32 AM
After Scarpia mentioned Harnoncourt's Mozart yesterday, it occurred to me that Harnoncourt hasn't recorded any of the PCs (read further). Now having searched with Google, it seems that there is just this once CD containing Nos. 23 and 26, with Gulda as the soloist. It seems rather strange that someone like NH, who has conducted a lot of the symphonies, the operas and at least some of the choral works, has hardly touched upon this important part of Mozart's oeuvre in his recordings.

C'mon, Herr Harnoncourt, all of Schubert's symphonies, but only two Mozart PCs? :(

Ah, Herr H. has acquiesced! :D


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: xochitl on November 21, 2012, 06:58:55 PM
oooh! can't wait to hear that
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on November 23, 2012, 09:08:37 AM
After Scarpia mentioned Harnoncourt's Mozart yesterday, it occurred to me that Harnoncourt hasn't recorded any of the PCs (read further). Now having searched with Google, it seems that there is just this once CD containing Nos. 23 and 26, with Gulda as the soloist. It seems rather strange that someone like NH, who has conducted a lot of the symphonies, the operas and at least some of the choral works, has hardly touched upon this important part of Mozart's oeuvre in his recordings.

C'mon, Herr Harnoncourt, all of Schubert's symphonies, but only two Mozart PCs? :(

Harnoncourt recorded PC 10 with the Concertgebaouw, Gulda and Corea.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on November 23, 2012, 09:38:45 AM
Harnoncourt recorded PC 10 with the Concertgebaouw, Gulda and Corea.

Thanks for letting us know! Have you listened to it?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on November 23, 2012, 11:11:12 AM
It's Harnoncourtesque. I love it, but I'm Harnoncourt's biggest fan.

In Monika Mertl's study of Harnoncourt, she writes about how  the original VCM musical philosophy placed tremendous importance on two things:  detecting all  the points in the music which rub you up, the irregularities, the irritants, things which present unevenly, unsmoothly. And exposing all the possibilities for playing the music as debate, as argument, as a drama of opposing points of view.

Well I think that Harnoncourt must have convinced these musicians to follow him with the same ideas. Even the two soloists seem to have bought in to it. Anyway that's how I hear it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on November 24, 2012, 12:25:34 AM
It's Harnoncourtesque. I love it, but I'm Harnoncourt's biggest fan.

In Monika Mertl's study of Harnoncourt, she writes about how  the original VCM musical philosophy placed tremendous importance on two things:  detecting all  the points in the music which rub you up, the irregularities, the irritants, things which present unevenly, unsmoothly. And exposing all the possibilities for playing the music as debate, as argument, as a drama of opposing points of view.

Well I think that Harnoncourt must have convinced these musicians to follow him with the same ideas. Even the two soloists seem to have bought in to it. Anyway that's how I hear it.

That's a nice titbit. Thanks for sharing. :)
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: Cato on January 15, 2013, 03:55:50 PM
Greetings, Mozart Mavens!   8)

One of my 7th Graders has put together a psychology experiment based on the so-called "Mozart Effect."

He plays various types of music in the background while his classmates take a timed test on Geography.

For classical he chose Mozart's Piano Concerto #12 and played the opening movement twice, while the students worked.

Anyway, I mentioned a few things about Wolfie, e.g. about how he was composing when he was their age, and one of my students wanted to know what would be Mozart's "first great work."

A job for the incredible experts at the Good-Music-Guide!!!   ;)

Is anything which he composed, say, before age 14, eligible for "greatness" ? 

(Of course, simply being able to compose a competent symphony or whatever at that age is great, but...)

What say ye?
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 15, 2013, 04:15:02 PM
Greetings, Mozart Mavens!   8)

One of my 7th Graders has put together a psychology experiment based on the so-called "Mozart Effect."

He plays various types of music in the background while his classmates take a timed test on Geography.

For classical he chose Mozart's Piano Concerto #12 and played the opening movement twice, while the students worked.

Anyway, I mentioned a few things about Wolfie, e.g. about how he was composing when he was their age, and one of my students wanted to know what would be Mozart's "first great work."

A job for the incredible experts at the Good-Music-Guide!!!   ;)

Is anything which he composed, say, before age 14, eligible for "greatness" ? 

(Of course, simply being able to compose a competent symphony or whatever at that age is great, but...)

What say ye?

Well, that's a toughie, but in looking at the works he composed before 1770, there is one standout, conceded (by people who knew) to be a masterpiece. It is this;

K047a_139   Missa [solemnis]   Waisenhaus Messe   c minor   
Composed most likely Dec 7, 1768 in Vienna for dedication of Orphanage in Renneweg.

Beyond that, one has to do as you say; well, for a 13 year old, this is brilliant!!  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: OrchestralNut on January 15, 2013, 04:37:02 PM
Greetings, Mozart Mavens!   8)

One of my 7th Graders has put together a psychology experiment based on the so-called "Mozart Effect."

He plays various types of music in the background while his classmates take a timed test on Geography.

For classical he chose Mozart's Piano Concerto #12 and played the opening movement twice, while the students worked.

Anyway, I mentioned a few things about Wolfie, e.g. about how he was composing when he was their age, and one of my students wanted to know what would be Mozart's "first great work."

A job for the incredible experts at the Good-Music-Guide!!!   ;)

Is anything which he composed, say, before age 14, eligible for "greatness" ? 

(Of course, simply being able to compose a competent symphony or whatever at that age is great, but...)

What say ye?

How about.................


K.1
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: Cato on January 15, 2013, 07:36:50 PM
Well, that's a toughie, but in looking at the works he composed before 1770, there is one standout, conceded (by people who knew) to be a masterpiece. It is this;

K047a_139   Missa [solemnis]   Waisenhaus Messe   c minor   
Composed most likely Dec 7, 1768 in Vienna for dedication of Orphanage in Renneweg.

Beyond that, one has to do as you say; well, for a 13 year old, this is brilliant!!  :)

8)

Many thanks for the recommendation of the Orphanage Mass!

One source claims that the Piano Concerto #9 in E-flat Major, K. 271 is his first great work.  Another says the Symphony #25 is the first great work.

Yes, no?  Other candidates?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 15, 2013, 10:26:01 PM
Just this morning, while on my way to the bus stop, I was listening to K. 181/ Sym No. 23 and simultaneoulsy wondering why this work wasn't better known. It's likely to score low on the Masterpiece Scale; however, the piece is brilliant, in the sense that it was very upbeat and melodious (as are many of the early syphonies, I can hear you saying), but I felt that this had some extra spice added, what with the S&D influences and all that. It's also a relatively short work (three movements only), all the more reason to be on the 'oft-played' list -- yet, it isn't.

Checking online, I find that this was written in 1773. Wolfie, unless a terrible student, which he wasn't, wouldn't have been in class 7 at the time. But as long as you're including K. entries in the 200s, I might as well throw this into the hat.


Or... maybe I was just in a good mood. Whatever...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 03:11:35 AM
Just this morning, while on my way to the bus stop, I was listening to K. 181/ Sym No. 23 and simultaneously wondering why this work wasn't better known. It's likely to score low on the Masterpiece Scale; however, the piece is brilliant, in the sense that it was very upbeat and melodious (as are many of the early syphonies, I can hear you saying), but I felt that this had some extra spice added, what with the S&D influences and all that. It's also a relatively short work (three movements only), all the more reason to be on the 'oft-played' list -- yet, it isn't.

Checking online, I find that this was written in 1773. Wolfie, unless a terrible student, which he wasn't, wouldn't have been in class 7 at the time. But as long as you're including K. entries in the 200s, I might as well throw this into the hat.


Or... maybe I was just in a good mood. Whatever...

Many thanks for the recommendation!  One of the mothers stopped in yesterday: her son is a wide-eyed and very silent type, probably Asperger's Syndrome to a low degree, and of average intelligence.  She mentioned that he plays at home anything that I play in our Latin class : Allegri, Bruckner, Mahler, Holst etc.

He had never mentioned this at all, but it was nice to know!  So I will mention this symphony to him and the others.
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 16, 2013, 05:35:12 AM
Many thanks for the recommendation of the Orphanage Mass!

One source claims that the Piano Concerto #9 in E-flat Major, K. 271 is his first great work.  Another says the Symphony #25 is the first great work.

Yes, no?  Other candidates?

Well, if you are abandoning the 14 years old requirement, it gets a lot harder (and more subjective!). For every nomination of the 'Little g minor symphony', for example, you will have someone else say that it is only the first movement that is truly original and unique. Generally, people who say "the 9th Piano Concerto" are people who like piano concertos. It IS a fine work, but his first masterpiece?  Maybe not. His last three violin concertos (3 - 5) are superb little works. The Haffner Serenade is, too. He also had a great basketful of masses, operas, other sacred music;  Just a whole lot of things that, if one defines 'masterpiece' as 'something which is superior to its peers in quality', then these will qualify.

:-\

8)
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 07:50:20 AM
Well, if you are abandoning the 14 years old requirement, it gets a lot harder (and more subjective!). For every nomination of the 'Little g minor symphony', for example, you will have someone else say that it is only the first movement that is truly original and unique. Generally, people who say "the 9th Piano Concerto" are people who like piano concertos.

Yes, I am discovering that via Internet searches!  All kinds of disagreements, often based on the type of composition.

There seems not to be a consensus on one work where the budding Mozart suddenly bursts forth with a "Ta-DA!" great work!

Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 16, 2013, 07:56:27 AM
Moazrt only wrote one GREAT work in his life - the Great Mass in C Minor (K427)! A bit cheeky - I know...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 16, 2013, 08:12:19 AM
There seems not to be a consensus on one work where the budding Mozart suddenly bursts forth with a "Ta-DA!" great work!

Maybe it didn't happen that way! :o
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 09:16:48 AM
Maybe it didn't happen that way! :o

Yes, as Gurn noted above, he thinks the opening movement of the Symphony #25 qualifies for greatness, but not the rest of the work.

I have been listening to the Beethoven Piano Sonatas from #1 to #32, and the early ones I am hearing for the first time in my life.  It is interesting that Beethoven sounds like Beethoven, but he was in his mid-20's at that time (mid-1790's).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 16, 2013, 09:25:16 AM
Yes, as Gurn noted above, he thinks the opening movement of the Symphony #25 qualifies for greatness, but not the rest of the work.

If I might discreetly emend, Gurn noted that such an opinion fares abroad, without specifically endorsing the opinion.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 10:18:28 AM
If I might discreetly emend, Gurn noted that such an opinion fares abroad, without specifically endorsing the opinion.

Ah yes, that was not his personal opinion.

I will be visiting the library this afternoon to find some of these works, especially the "Orphanage Mass."   0:)
Title: Re: Mozart: First Great Work?
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 16, 2013, 10:23:46 AM
Yes, I am discovering that via Internet searches!  All kinds of disagreements, often based on the type of composition.

There seems not to be a consensus on one work where the budding Mozart suddenly bursts forth with a "Ta-DA!" great work!

I used to post frequently on the Mozart Forum, and in fact I posed this question once; i.e. - what was Mozart's first masterpiece?  My own answer was the Haffner Serenade, but despite many other endorsements, there was no definitive first choice. This by people, many of whom listen to nothing but Mozart. I think if we could bring ourselves to listen to much opera seria we would probably realize that a few of his earlier efforts in that genre were superb. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 16, 2013, 10:29:52 AM
Ah yes, that was not his personal opinion.

I will be visiting the library this afternoon to find some of these works, especially the "Orphanage Mass."   0:)



This is the version I have (Harnoncourt) and I only thought to post it because it is accompanied here by the motet 'Exsultate jubilate', one of the 'other sacred works' that was going through my mind earlier. It really IS a masterwork, albeit a rather brief essay...

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 16, 2013, 10:48:20 AM
I have been listening to the Beethoven Piano Sonatas from #1 to #32, and the early ones I am hearing for the first time in my life.  It is interesting that Beethoven sounds like Beethoven, but he was in his mid-20's at that time (mid-1790's).

Shortly after he had been under the tutelage of one Franz Joseph Haydn. András Schiff in his lectures often keeps reminding the audience, especially when talking about the early sonatas, that despite Beethoven's rather haughty remark to the contrary, there was plenty of the master's influence in his music, especially with regard to musical humour.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on January 16, 2013, 10:51:29 AM
Shortly after he had been under the tutelage of one Franz Joseph Haydn. András Schiff in his lectures often keeps reminding the audience, especially when talking about the early sonatas, that despite Beethoven's rather haughty remark to the contrary, there was plenty of the master's influence in his music, especially with regard to musical humour.

Another reason why I generally prefer the early sonatas to the late ones.

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 16, 2013, 10:59:25 AM
. . . the motet 'Exsultate jubilate', one of the 'other sacred works' that was going through my mind earlier. It really IS a masterwork, albeit a rather brief essay...

And a piece which has practically never left the singers' repertory.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on January 16, 2013, 10:59:38 AM
Another reason why I generally prefer the early sonatas to the late ones.

 :)

It certainly presents a side that is not generally associated with Beethoven, and one finds him -- dare I say -- at his melodious best in some of these pieces. Still, the late sonatas represent a different world from which I don't want to be separated.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 11:11:31 AM
It certainly presents a side that is not generally associated with Beethoven, and one finds him -- dare I say -- at his melodious best in some of these pieces. Still, the late sonatas represent a different world from which I don't want to be separated.

Amen!

And many thanks to Gurn for the Waisenhaus Messe recommendation!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 16, 2013, 11:12:13 AM
Huzzah for our Waisenheimer!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 01:49:13 PM
Huzzah for our Waisenheimer!

Das erinnert mich an folgendes: mögliche Titeln für Opern!

Der Weise Waise

Die Taube Taube

(and more of a stretch)

Der Heimliche Unheimliche

Der Unheimliche Heimliche
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 17, 2013, 08:02:08 AM
Well, our local libraries do not have the Waisenhaus-Messe by the young Mozart.

Concerning this CD:



The two reviews on Amazon are not really very positive.  One calls it "so-so" but the other... :o
Quote

Sadly, this performance of the Waisenhaus Mass could almost be titled `Missa Ferus Homo de Borneo'. It is well recorded and sung (indeed, the soloists are afforded a surprising degree of latitude, vibrato-wise). Harnoncourt adopts sensible speeds throughout. Where the text calls for high drama - the Qui Tollis and the Crucifixus - it is duly supplied. In the negative, the performance is laced with clipped phrasing - it's almost the "Bonfire of Cadential Endings". Many a time Harnoncourt is heavy-handed, if not pugnacious, in the response he elicits from the Concentus Musicus Wien - to wit, the orchestral outburst that follows the adagio opening of the Kyrie - it sounds an excerpt from the "Ride the Rough Beast Rodeo". Such eruptions are common and it has to be said that on a bad day, the CMW is laborious to behold.

Notwithstanding all the care and energy that Harnoncourt lavishes upon the score, this is a haymaker which misses the target. This performance does not bespeak liturgy to me. It could almost be a madrigal set to the classical idiom.

(My emphasis above)

But it only costs c. $10.00 used, so...



Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 17, 2013, 08:09:43 AM
Well, our local libraries do not have the Waisenhaus-Messe by the young Mozart.

Concerning this CD:



The two reviews on Amazon are not really very positive.  One calls it "so-so" but the other... :o
(My emphasis above)

But it only costs c. $10.00 used, so...

:)  Well, I'm sure you have seen previously that some reviewers there are drama queens over the oddest things. All I can say is that if you want to, you will have to make up your own mind about it. I personally found it quite enjoyable (last summer when I last listened to it). Since I can be a harsh critic of Harnoncourt's Mozart, I think I would well remember if this was anywhere near as bad as all that!   :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Cato on January 17, 2013, 08:47:51 AM
:)  Well, I'm sure you have seen previously that some reviewers there are drama queens over the oddest things. All I can say is that if you want to, you will have to make up your own mind about it. I personally found it quite enjoyable (last summer when I last listened to it). Since I can be a harsh critic of Harnoncourt's Mozart, I think I would well remember if this was anywhere near as bad as all that!   :)

8)

Which is why I ordered it!  So, thanks for the recommendation!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 17, 2013, 09:04:18 AM
Which is why I ordered it!  So, thanks for the recommendation!

You're most welcome. And if you really want some bad Harnoncourt Mozart, try the "Overtures" disk. Some of them are damned near unrecognizable!! :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mc ukrneal on January 17, 2013, 09:14:22 AM
You're most welcome. And if you really want some bad Harnoncourt Mozart, try the "Overtures" disk. Some of them are damned near unrecognizable!! :D

8)
Yeah - I never listen to that disc.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Leo K. on January 26, 2013, 10:18:45 AM
Going to explore K.452 more this year, starting with Mozart's birthday.

(http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/dc/be/e0ae81b0c8a07c62f2129110.L._AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51t7mvN5HpL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61f7XuISkHL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61mFk2mMwJL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61oImEFarhL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61p7Df0SW5L._SL500_AA280_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51kmodNwg8L._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51PKla2Q-iL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51XHxtgcPSL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on January 26, 2013, 12:12:54 PM
Going to explore K.452 more this year, starting with Mozart's birthday.



There are good old ones with the Philadephia Woodwinds, one with Robert Casadesus and the other with Rudolf Serkin. The Serkin is very good in the last part.

And there are  very very old ones with Edwin Fischer if you're into that sort of thing, from 1943 with members of the Berlin P O, and and equally venerable one with Gieseking and Denis Brain somewhere in the ensemble.

Of the ones you list I know just the one with Robert Levin  and I thought it was splendid. It's a long time since I listened to the winds quintet though.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 26, 2013, 03:14:03 PM
Going to explore K.452 more this year, starting with Mozart's birthday.


I have a few of those, Leo, agree with Mandrake, the Levin is very good (used to be hard to find and expensive though, don't know if it still is). I found this one here and there (can't remember where I bought it! :o );

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/BeethovenMozartHeliconWinds5tetscover.jpg)

and it satisfies no end. Good players (Hoeprich is King of the Mountain in the Clarinet category, not to mention Kelley & Godburn!), and they just hit everything right, IMO. A solid suggestion. :)  I'll dig a bit more, I am quite sure I have another that you would like. BTW, I also have that Barenboim / Cleveland disk .....  zzzzzzzz......  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on January 26, 2013, 06:00:24 PM
Which is why I ordered it!  So, thanks for the recommendation!

I rate it rather high, too, FWIW. It's a very enjoyable performance.

The negative Amazon reviewer is claiming there is no 'liturgical' atmosphere in this performance. But to me, with some exceptions of course (later works like Ave verum Corpus and the Requiem Mass), that's exactly the 'problem' with Mozart's sacred music, which apparently was captured by Harnoncourt and his forces.

From his childhood on, Mozart didn't long to compose religious music, he wanted to write secular opera's. And it's audible. Even a 'movingly devout' aria like the Et incarnatus est from the unfinished great C minor Mass is nothing but a virtuoso opera aria for a skilled soprano voice, as Mozart had been writing so often for his earlier operae seria.

Well, all this just my tuppence worth, of course.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 26, 2013, 06:21:52 PM
I rate it rather high, too, FWIW. It's a very enjoyable performance.

The negative Amazon reviewer is claiming there is no 'liturgical' atmosphere in this performance. But to me, with some exceptions of course (later works like Ave verum Corpus and the Requiem Mass), that's exactly the 'problem' with Mozart's sacred music, which apparently was captured by Harnoncourt and his forces.

From his childhood on, Mozart didn't long to compose religious music, he wanted to write secular opera's. And it's audible. Even a 'movingly devout' aria like the Et incarnatus est from the unfinished great C minor Mass is nothing but a virtuoso opera aria for a skilled soprano voice, as Mozart had been writing so often for his earlier operae seria.

Well, all this just my tuppence worth, of course.

AAAaaaa...mennnn!.   0:)    One of the lasting impressions that I came away with when researching that thread I had on Austrian Sacred music was that their perception of what constituted propriety in church music was way different from what contemporaneous Catholics in other countries and Protestants anywhere believed!  Only the Italians came close, or perhaps exceeded them. I always get a knot in my knickers when I read someone judging something (particularly music) based on values and mores that are nowhere near the culture that the music sprang from.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on January 26, 2013, 06:48:01 PM
AAAaaaa...mennnn!.   0:)    One of the lasting impressions that I came away with when researching that thread I had on Austrian Sacred music was that their perception of what constituted propriety in church music was way different from what contemporaneous Catholics in other countries and Protestants anywhere believed!  Only the Italians came close, or perhaps exceeded them. I always get a knot in my knickers when I read someone judging something (particularly music) based on values and mores that are nowhere near the culture that the music sprang from.

Not to mention the bonus problem for poor mr. Mozart, the still existing association of his music with angels and with sweetness. Damn those Mozart Kugeln! >:(

I was puzzling the last, say, half hour about Mozartian music containing 'religious awe' and I came up with a.o. the Kyrie in D minor (KV 341), the Maurerische Trauermusik (KV 477), the Qui tollis from the C minor Mass (KV 427) and the Kyrie fugue from the Requiem Mass.
After that, I felt pretty satisfied with these findings .... but then I thought: why not the closing chorus to the first act of La Clemenza di Tito? Why not the duetto of the armoured men in Die Zauberflöte? Why not the Ouvertüre to Don Giovanni? Religious or secular awe: what's the difference? It's all part of human life.

And I also realized that, compared to Bach during the first half of the 18th century, who always wanted to create the most ingenious music to honour his God, no matter if it were religious or secular, the music of Haydn and Mozart's Enlightenment period was also meant to be understandable for the mortal. And that both starting points led to the same thing in one way or the other: not much conceptual and atmospheric differences between religious and secular music. Laß Fürstin = Geh Jesu and Agnus Dei = Dove sono. Bach honoured God with his secular music and Mozart honoured man (AND WOMAN! :)) with his religious music.

Let it be.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on March 30, 2013, 07:48:09 AM
It is accepted knowledge that there is a small body of works among Mozart's output which comprise his true "masterpieces"  But one of the wonderful things about listening to Mozart is that you can find the most extraordinary gems hidden within his most "minor" works.   Recently I listened to Mozart's Divertimento for Winds in B-flat, KV270.  The second movement, Andantino, struck me very strongly.  It is a short movement of 2 minutes or so, it seems to hold the place of the "slow" movement in this four movement work.  But it sounded to me as though it could have been a dance movement in one of Bach's orchestral suites.  A simple melody, effortless counterpoint, exquisitely managed harmonic progression, but beyond those tangible virtues an undefinable quality.  A small treasure, easily overlooked.  I was listening to a performance by the Danzi quintet released by Seon.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 30, 2013, 08:44:21 AM
It is accepted knowledge that there is a small body of works among Mozart's output which comprise his true "masterpieces"  But one of the wonderful things about listening to Mozart is that you can find the most extraordinary gems hidden within his most "minor" works.   Recently I listened to Mozart's Divertimento for Winds in B-flat, KV270.  The second movement, Andantino, struck me very strongly.  It is a short movement of 2 minutes or so, it seems to hold the place of the "slow" movement in this four movement work.  But it sounded to me as though it could have been a dance movement in one of Bach's orchestral suites.  A simple melody, effortless counterpoint, exquisitely managed harmonic progression, but beyond those tangible virtues an undefinable quality.  A small treasure, easily overlooked.  I was listening to a performance by the Danzi quintet released by Seon.

Welcome in, Parsifal. Thanks for making me slide over and listen to that again. You're right, it is a little gem, as is a lot of Mozart's wind writing. I am interested in that disk you mention (SEON is a guaranteed winner of a label for me), I need to go find that rascal. In the meantime, I will hang with Ensemble Philodor, they are very fine too. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 05, 2013, 04:01:23 AM
Man!

I've just waded through the first 18 pages of this thread and feel drained!

Very little indeed about Wolfie, there was far too much about some chap named Haydn and then several pages of argument, primarily with two protagonists.

What I'm after, are chats and suggestions about which rendition of which piece of music is best, and  I see some on this page, which is a relief.  ;D

Now, how far back dare I go...?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 05, 2013, 04:15:38 AM
Man!

I've just waded through the first 18 pages of this thread and feel drained!

Very little indeed about Wolfie, there was far too much about some chat named Haydn and then several pages of argument, primarily with two protagonists.

What I'm after, are chats and suggestions about which rendition of which piece of music is best, and  I see some on this page, which is a relief.  ;D

Now, how far back dare I go...?

I can't remember the precise setup with this particular composer, but a thread in this section is not supposed  to be for recording recs, but for discussion of the composer himself. Since nothing goes as planned  on this forum, and getting forumites to follow even the most general guidelines is like herding cats, you are likely to find what yu want just about anywhere. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 05, 2013, 04:19:32 AM
. . . and getting forumites to follow even the most general guidelines is like herding cats . . . .

8)

Not to say mangy cats in heat ; )
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 05, 2013, 04:33:21 AM
Heh heh!

Well, I am now cheered up and ready to tackle a few more pages, albeit backwards.  ;)

BTW Is this the correct forum to establish, say, who is the best conductor/tenor/violinist for Wolfie's work or do I use the 'Recommended Recordings' forum?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 05, 2013, 04:48:39 AM
You can search for the term Mozart in threads in the recordings board and find numerous threads about Mozart performance.  One I came up with is this:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,232.msg3313.html#msg3313
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 05, 2013, 05:18:04 AM
Now that does look good - thanks, Parsifal!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on April 05, 2013, 05:47:38 AM
BTW Is this the correct forum to establish, say, who is the best conductor/tenor/violinist for Wolfie's work or do I use the 'Recommended Recordings' forum?

Well, if you consider that realistically possible, then yes.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 05, 2013, 05:54:38 AM
Heh heh!

Well, I am now cheered up and ready to tackle a few more pages, albeit backwards.  ;)

BTW Is this the correct forum to establish, say, who is the best conductor/tenor/violinist for Wolfie's work or do I use the 'Recommended Recordings' forum?

I would do it in the recordings section. Unless you mean his own contemporaries, of course. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 05, 2013, 06:09:09 AM

[/quote]

Well, if you consider that realistically possible, then yes.


Yes to which part?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on April 05, 2013, 06:15:08 AM
Well, if you consider that realistically possible, then yes.

Yes to which part?

To the one about posting in the recordings section of the forum.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 05, 2013, 06:17:43 AM
I'm on a roundabout. >:(

Fortunately I can understand Gurn's reply.  ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 05, 2013, 06:23:38 AM
I'm on a roundabout. >:(

Fortunately I can understand Gurn's reply.  ;)

I think he means, "if you consider it reasonably possible to establish that any recording is the best."  The one thing you are guaranteed to get from a debate over which recording is "the best" is a partial list of recordings that exist. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 05, 2013, 06:42:14 AM
Aha. Thanks for the clarity, and yes, I agree totally.

However, I certainly have less Mozart knowledge than those on a Mozart-specific forum so every snippet I collect improves my position.  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on April 06, 2013, 12:18:10 AM
Aha. Thanks for the clarity, and yes, I agree totally.

However, I certainly have less Mozart knowledge than those on a Mozart-specific forum so every snippet I collect improves my position.  ;D

Go to the forum's home page, click "search", enter "Mozart", and make sure to tick the box "Search in topic subjects only" before commencing the search. Do a second search with "Mozart's"

Some of the results (which are admittedly somewhat of a mess - there's no coherent approach in picking topic...)

Mozart's Piano Sonatas (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3507.msg84172.html#msg84172)

Mozart's String Quartets and Quintets. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,21479.msg696664.html#msg696664)

Mozart's Requiem K. 626 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,15234.msg371861.html#msg371861)

Mozart's Great Mass in C minor, K.427 (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,21540.msg700577.html#msg700577)

Mozart Piano Concertos (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,3279.msg78685.html#msg78685)

Mozart Symphonies (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,19310.msg563219.html#msg563219)

Mozart: String Duos, Trios, & Quintets (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18512.msg513378.html#msg513378)

Mozart Violin Sonatas (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1290.msg30459.html#msg30459)

Collecting Mozart (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,4885.msg117051.html#msg117051)


Have fun... 8)

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on April 06, 2013, 12:26:35 AM
Que, I cannot believe you missed the all-important Mozart in Period Performances (HIP) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,232.0.html). ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 06, 2013, 12:47:35 AM
Ah....

Lots of Wolfie homework for me. I love it!

Thanks Q&O...!  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on April 06, 2013, 12:59:54 AM
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)For Amusement Only(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,10960.0.html

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)For Amusement Only(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on April 06, 2013, 01:12:07 AM
Que, I cannot believe you missed the all-important Mozart in Period Performances (HIP) (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,232.0.html). ;D

I didn't, but you already mentioned it. ;D It is interesting however that most Mozart talk outside the realm of the "war horses" is done by HIPpies*! :)

*people that are interested in period performances.

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 06, 2013, 02:23:41 AM
That Newman thread really opens up a can of worms.  ???

Going to take me weeks to wade through it all, but read it I shall!  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2013, 04:58:25 AM
That Newman thread really opens up a can of worms.  ???

He is an iconic Conspiracy Theory nut. Everyone else's proof is suspect, but his proof is unassailable.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 06, 2013, 06:37:29 AM
That Newman thread really opens up a can of worms.  ???

Going to take me weeks to wade through it all, but read it I shall!  ;D

Well, as ling as you realize up front that all of those "proofs" are simply made up to match the situation, then you can read it with a clear conscience and an internal grin.   :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on April 06, 2013, 05:42:34 PM
Well, as ling as you realize up front that all of those "proofs" are simply made up to match the situation, then you can read it with a clear conscience and an internal grin.   :)

8)

A teacher I had describes that kind of rhetoric akin to shooting your arrows into the side of a barn and then later drawing bull's-eyes around them.
Title: Re: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2013, 05:56:36 PM
A teacher I had describes that kind of rhetoric akin to shooting your arrows into the side of a barn and then later drawing bull's-eyes around them.

Hah!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on April 06, 2013, 07:46:45 PM
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)For Amusement Only(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,10960.0.html

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)For Amusement Only(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-J8V_jRAhvOA/UClFzN81WYI/AAAAAAAABYA/5dV4-zwo7_g/s1600/warning-icon-png.png)

89 pages? Oh my. I'm not THAT in need of entertainment...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 07, 2013, 01:35:20 AM
I've just finished all 29 pages from http://www.talkclassical.com/1697-controversy-over-true-musical.html and my eyeballs are spinning...! (I got the address from a post in your link Opus106)

I see no reason for locking the thread, though. A couple of members could have been warned and then blocked from the thread which was not inflammatory in itself. Only from p10 or so when a Manuel entered with blazing guns did things start to go awry.

Anyhoo, I still love Wolfie's stuff, regardless of who wrote what.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on April 07, 2013, 05:10:07 AM
I've just finished all 29 pages from http://www.talkclassical.com/1697-controversy-over-true-musical.html and my eyeballs are spinning...! (I got the address from a post in your link Opus106)

I see no reason for locking the thread, though. A couple of members could have been warned and then blocked from the thread which was not inflammatory in itself. Only from p10 or so when a Manuel entered with blazing guns did things start to go awry.

Anyhoo, I still love Wolfie's stuff, regardless of who wrote what.

The blazing guns from Manuel were justified.  Rob Newman had tried the same conspriacy theory on another classical music site of which Rob, myself, Manual and some other GMG members were a member of prior to our caravan over to GMG.  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on April 07, 2013, 05:18:39 AM
The blazing guns from Manuel were justified.  Rob Newman had tried the same conspriacy theory on another classical music site of which Rob, myself, Manual and some other GMG members were a member of prior to our caravan over to GMG.  ;D

In fact, it was Manuel's controversially 'banning' off the mentioned classical music site that angered several former members and Manuel, myself and others 'migrated' onto GMG.  :)

A blessing in disguise (for me at least) as it was my discovering GMG.  A wonderful site, and I'm happier here!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 07, 2013, 02:11:39 PM
I've just finished all 29 pages from http://www.talkclassical.com/1697-controversy-over-true-musical.html and my eyeballs are spinning...! (I got the address from a post in your link Opus106)

I see no reason for locking the thread, though. A couple of members could have been warned and then blocked from the thread which was not inflammatory in itself. Only from p10 or so when a Manuel entered with blazing guns did things start to go awry.

Anyhoo, I still love Wolfie's stuff, regardless of who wrote what.

No, you don't see a reason, because all of the inflammatory posts, pages of them, are now languishing in digital limbo, destined to never see the light of day again. What remains is merely enough to get a flavor for the nature of the arguments.

You give Newman far too much credit even if you only casually mean what I bolded above. The argument is totally specious, without a shred of supporting evidence. I can make assertions all day long and avoid showing you any proof, and it means little or nothing in the real world. It is, in fact, a slap in the face to anyone with the smallest reverence for accurate history.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 07, 2013, 10:30:20 PM
Morning Gurn -

I'm totally new to classical music and know less than nothing about the composers, works, or even orchestral positions, and I joined this forum to expand that knowledge wherever it takes me.

I found that Newman thread to be, for the most part, very interesting. Period.

What was even more interesting for me on this particular thread were the links kindly supplied by fellow members to other threads on GMG which I'm sure will add mightily to my scant knowledge of WAM.

 ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Opus106 on April 07, 2013, 11:05:47 PM
Morning Gurn -

I'm totally new to classical music and know less than nothing about the composers, works, or even orchestral positions, and I joined this forum to expand that knowledge wherever it takes me.

I found that Newman thread to be, for the most part, very interesting. Period.

What was even more interesting for me on this particular thread were the links kindly supplied by fellow members to other threads on GMG which I'm sure will add mightily to my scant knowledge of WAM.

 ;)

There are a couple of documentaries (available on YouTube, for instance) which you can watch to learn more about him. These by no means will offer you a complete picture of the composer or of his oeuvre (and sometimes offer statements which are out-of-date or inaccurate) but nevertheless will give you an idea of his life and times.

Search for the Mozart episode from the BBC series "Great Composers", and another three-part BBC Documentary of the name "The Genius of Mozart", hosted by Charles Hazelwood. The second one is dramatised in parts. (And both series include programmes about a few other composers as well.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 07, 2013, 11:23:02 PM
Great -

Thanks, Navneeth!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 08, 2013, 12:50:59 AM
Watch it!

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: North Star on April 08, 2013, 04:04:35 AM
Watch it!
+1, this is a great documentary.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on April 09, 2013, 01:10:18 PM
Another 'thumbs up' for the Mozart documentary - also bought the one on Haydn - but have not seen the Beethoven, but just noticed that I can watch it for free w/ Amazon Prime! - :)

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQvaNYkzntZvSxZgAi42EG8mBgg6HhevBqR7SbkB9OWC0ZxjKjZ)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: HIPster on April 09, 2013, 06:36:51 PM
Thank you Karl for the "In Search Of Mozart" link to amazon!

Dave - I'm with you; will watch this series on Prime in the very near future.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: huntsman on April 09, 2013, 08:55:03 PM
I've not heard of Amazon Prime, but it sounds like a good idea if you can watch these movies for free!  ;D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bogey on April 10, 2013, 04:08:42 PM
Do any of you other Wolfie fans find these old chamber Philips recordings as wonderful as I do? 

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510jBl3uubL._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

I have a small run on the shelf from ASMF Chamber Ensemble.  They were my first exposure to Wolfie's chamber music, so always a pleasure to revisit.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on April 10, 2013, 04:30:10 PM
Nice, isn't it?

http://www.youtube.com/v/hlOcgxYT_CU

More on YouTube.

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to find recordings by the Ensemble Agláia out of Italy.  :(
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on April 10, 2013, 05:59:26 PM
Do any of you other Wolfie fans find these old chamber Philips recordings as wonderful as I do? 

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510jBl3uubL._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

I have a small run on the shelf from ASMF Chamber Ensemble.  They were my first exposure to Wolfie's chamber music, so always a pleasure to revisit.

I have four or five discs from that ASMF series, Bill. I agree they're a joy all around.

One of my culling nightmares was the box of wind divertimenti from the Philips Complete Mozart Edition that I let go a few years ago featuring the ASMF ensemble. It was one of those head-slapping "what was I thinking" episodes that I vowed never to repeat.

But I certainly enjoyed the time I had with the box. :)

 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 10, 2013, 09:15:07 PM
Do any of you other Wolfie fans find these old chamber Philips recordings as wonderful as I do? 

I have a small run on the shelf from ASMF Chamber Ensemble.  They were my first exposure to Wolfie's chamber music, so always a pleasure to revisit.

+1!  I came to these in that 11cd installment of the Philips COMPLETE edition that DD mentioned.  I'm newer to the Mozart cult than most of you, but I think no number of marvelous recordings of these pieces (HIP and otherwise) will blunt the lightness, charm, and flight of these recordings.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: HIPster on April 11, 2013, 05:44:12 AM
Nice, isn't it?

http://www.youtube.com/v/hlOcgxYT_CU

More on YouTube.

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to find recordings by the Ensemble Agláia out of Italy.  :(

Very nice!

Thank you, Gordon.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on April 11, 2013, 01:54:31 PM
Very nice!

Thank you, Gordon.

You're welcome, HIPster!  :)

These guys of the Ensemble Agláia and their director the violinist Cinzia Barbagelata deserve some promotion.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bogey on April 11, 2013, 02:54:24 PM
Do any of you other Wolfie fans find these old chamber Philips recordings as wonderful as I do? 

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510jBl3uubL._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

I have a small run on the shelf from ASMF Chamber Ensemble.  They were my first exposure to Wolfie's chamber music, so always a pleasure to revisit.

Now playing:

(http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_250/MI0001/045/MI0001045563.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

Note how St. Martin-in-the Fields has been omitted from this disc.  The only difference in make up of ensemble is that Denis Vigay plays the violoncello and Raymund Koster the double bass, while on this disc Vigay is absent and Grahm Sheen adds the bassoon touch.  i find their playing seamless.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Bogey on April 11, 2013, 02:55:30 PM
I have four or five discs from that ASMF series, Bill. I agree they're a joy all around.

One of my culling nightmares was the box of wind divertimenti from the Philips Complete Mozart Edition that I let go a few years ago featuring the ASMF ensemble. It was one of those head-slapping "what was I thinking" episodes that I vowed never to repeat.

But I certainly enjoyed the time I had with the box. :)

Those boxes are prized at this end as well....the few I have.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 14, 2013, 01:22:52 AM
QUESTION #1:
Apropos the mention of the ASMF collection, I'd like to get some recommendations for recordings of the Serenade for Winds No. 10 in B flat major, K361 (370a) "Gran Partita".  I'm fan-tod raving for it, but I only know a small handful of recordings, including:
1. Furtwängler w/Vienna Phil soloists (~12/1947)...from the Membran megalith, vouchsafed probably not the best available transfer; I love this performance, so I might need to invest in the Naxos Historical or another, more loving transfer.
2. Collegium Aureum (from the DHM/Sony MOZART EDITION box, and my only HIP version)
3. Mehta w/Berliner Phil soloists (Sony) [now only 'new' as a burn-to-order CDR?]
4. De Waart w/Netherlands Wind Ensemble (Philips)
5. Marriner/ASMF (Philips, from the Divertimenti/Serenades for Winds installment of their 'Complete' edition)

Please someone re-direct me if this has been gone over and over and over already; I did a little bit of searching.  Already mentioned recently (in the Listening thread) was the HIP Eric Hoeprich w/Nachtmusique on Glossa (which Que likes and Mandryka is more ambivalent about).  Any suggestions would be appreciated, not just HIP.

As an aside, I am already interested in Herreweghe; Eric Baude w/Ensemble Philidor (Calliope); Harnoncourt; Richard Edlinger w/German Wind Soloists (Naxos); Mackerras; Orpheus CO; Boulez; Klemperer/London (EMI).  And these just the ones I've heard a little about and/or sampled a tiny bit of!  It's out of hand.  There's something about the instrumentation that excites me before anyone starts playing.

QUESTION #2:
The Harnoncourt Gran Partita on Teldec/Warner is of great interest, but seems to be entirely OOP and rather expesnive, save this 250th Anniversary installment, which is not dirt cheap, altogether, and makes me buy a lot of stuff I was not necessarily wanting.  Can anyone vouch for the other stuff in this box?  I think I already have all the Alban Berg Quartett recordings, which dents the value of the box a bit.
It might be better to cross my fingers and hope for a cheap used copy of the GP, or an Apex reissue, etc.  Fat lot of luck!


(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ykDCev%2BkL.jpg)

A Musicweb review of this set with full info including legible personnel, disc by disc:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Dec05/Mozart_Chamber_256462335-2.htm  (http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Dec05/Mozart_Chamber_256462335-2.htm)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on April 14, 2013, 01:48:48 AM
Like I stated on the listening thread, this is the one I would recommend:



I would choose it over: the Netherlands wind ensemble, Brüggen, Ensemble Zefiro and Ensemble Philidor (Calliope).

Of those Brüggen and Ensemble Philidor would be the most eligible for comparison IMO.

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on April 14, 2013, 02:07:26 AM
I have nothing even approaching a discographic or 'library-building' amount of Gran Partitas under my belt, so any recommendations are in lieu of vast experience-lacunae and I can't make any pseudo-definitive claims of which I am so fond in many another bit of repertoire.  ;)  Still, it might help in some small way:

If you want to avert overt sentimentality, true to stereotype, Pierre Boulez delivers and delivers (given the parameters) very well:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71OlO5ldS6L._SY300_.png)Boulez (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B001DHUJK0/goodmusicguide-20)

Kloecker & Consortium Classicum (MDG):

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/517zyvBnOJL._SY300_.jpg)Kloecker & Co. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005Q77L/goodmusicguide-20)

De Waart is an old classic that I find is overrated. Similarish, but holding up better is the Mehta/BPh version... which was, however, my first Gran Partita and may hold some 'first-exposure' sway on me that I'm unaware but potentially suspect to. If you get a used copy, you'll get the original rather than the CDR. I'd certainly do that, if you wanted that particular version.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61tmPtfbEvL._SL500_AA280_.jpg)Mehta (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000029KS/goodmusicguide-20)

Barthold Kuijken and Octophorus on Accent are very lively and never make you aware of how the piece is really too long by ten, fifteen minutes.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61B1758R7SL._SY300_.jpg)Kuijken & Co. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000FIGGNW/goodmusicguide-20)

I have not at hand, but positive memory-associations of the spunky, edge-of-the-seat, occasionally imperfect Marlboro Festival release
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61efrmBQ2GL._SY300_.jpg)Marlboro (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00000275K/goodmusicguide-20)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 14, 2013, 02:11:57 AM
I have nothing even approaching a discographic or 'library-building' amount of Gran Partitas under my belt, so any recommendations are in lieu of vast experience-lacunae and I can't make any pseudo-definitive claims of which I am so fond in many another bit of repertoire. 

That is an Octave Sentence!  The style is Pseudowallacean.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on April 14, 2013, 02:13:25 AM
That is an Octave Sentence!  The style is Pseudowallacean.

Pseudowallacean is redundant.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 14, 2013, 02:15:13 AM
Pseudowallacean is redundant.

No, or, yes, it's Kantian-tautological.
EDIT: thanks for those recommendations.
EDIT EDIT: Brian will be no-doubt-thrilled to hear that "redundant" comment.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on April 14, 2013, 03:01:38 AM
Can we all just celebrate the fact that I've just managed to hang five quite large and heavy pictures in a straight line, same distance between each picture and all of them level. I have surpassed my own expectations, though I say so myself.

Re GP I've looked into this one a bit. There are some very good oldies, like Klemperer and Furtwangler. There are some very good modern instrument performances, like Harnoncourt and Giulini. And there are some very good PI performances, like Bruggen. I have a recording by Herreweghe somewhere,  but I can't remember anything about it. I'll listen this afternoon, while admiring the pictures.


If you want to avert overt sentimentality, true to stereotype, Pierre Boulez delivers and delivers (given the parameters) very well:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71OlO5ldS6L._SY300_.png)Boulez (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B001DHUJK0/goodmusicguide-20)


It's not so much sentimentality that the piece needs, it's tension. For me tension has become a major part of what I'm looking for in Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 14, 2013, 03:20:31 AM
That Boulez disc is outstanding, for the Berg as well.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 14, 2013, 07:47:57 AM
These 2 are tops on my list;

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/GranpartittaOAE-BBC_zpsd8d4bc2f.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/GranpartittaOAE-BBC_zpsd8d4bc2f.jpg.html)

which is, as you can see, a BBC magazine disk that may be hard to get. They never released a regular commercial version, AFAIK.  :-\

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/MozartAmadeusWinds-Serenadescover_zps01de01f8.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/MozartAmadeusWinds-Serenadescover_zps01de01f8.jpg.html)
And this one, which 'shame on you' if you don't already have it, this is some wonderful playing, and if you are (like me) especially partial to the unique sounds of period wind instruments, this is a must have. 


Also have this one, which I apparently like more than most;

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/MozartPhilodorcover-1_zpsa4504251.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/MozartPhilodorcover-1_zpsa4504251.jpg.html)

This group has their own idiom (they're French, you know?),  like it or don't. This is a nice box to have though, and I got it for a song ($15) on the Marketplace about a year ago.

I got more too, if you want to talk. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 14, 2013, 08:41:38 AM
I have nothing even approaching a discographic or 'library-building' amount of Gran Partitas under my belt, so any recommendations are in lieu of vast experience-lacunae and I can't make any pseudo-definitive claims of which I am so fond in many another bit of repertoire.  ;)  Still, it might help in some small way:

If you want to avert overt sentimentality, true to stereotype, Pierre Boulez delivers and delivers (given the parameters) very well:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71OlO5ldS6L._SY300_.png)Boulez (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B001DHUJK0/goodmusicguide-20)

I got that recording for the Berg, but found the Mozart astonishingly boring.

This one is interesting, as non-HIP as it comes



This one is probably my favorite among many versions:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/610cV7lpL0L._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

I don't know if you can get it anymore.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on April 14, 2013, 08:44:48 AM
This all started with me mentioning that I was listening to the Nachmusique performance, and then saying that I had reservations.

Well, the thing about the Nachmusique performance is this: it's serious and it's objective. The first movement allegro is played with no  rumbustuous joyfulness whatsoever. The Romance is played completely dry eyed. There's not a hint of sentimenality in the whole performance. In short, this is modernist Mozart. Matter of fact Mozart.

So the question becomes, is there a soul to the performance? Or is it just drudgery?  A beautifully executed, beautifully recorded rendition on lovely sounding period instruments, which ultimately lacks life, humour, spirit?

I'm not sure what the answer is to that question. Every time I listen I try to find passages which show depth of feeling, storm and stress, passion. But I'm not sure I really hear any of that.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 14, 2013, 05:17:44 PM
Thanks everyone for these Grand Partita recs.  I was happy to see the following...

Also have this one, which I apparently like more than most;
(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/MozartPhilodorcover-1_zpsa4504251.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/MozartPhilodorcover-1_zpsa4504251.jpg.html)

This group has their own idiom (they're French, you know?),  like it or don't. This is a nice box to have though, and I got it for a song ($15) on the Marketplace about a year ago.

A couple of the constituent Capriccio titles can still be had cheaply via BRO, though not cheap enough to make them a better deal, exactly.  Also, I think I like La Dolce Volta's packaging, based on that nice Mozart Quintets box; I hope they didn't excise any of the recordings from the Capriccio discs, as they removed the clarinet quintet from their quintets box...I was unhappy to hear about that.   :(
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: kishnevi on April 14, 2013, 06:42:12 PM
On modern instruments,  I have this one featuring Sergio Azzolini* that I've always liked enough that I've never felt motivated to look for another one, although I have the Marriner and the Collegium Aureum recordings as part of larger sets (the CA in fact is not yet listened to).  I may also have the Herreweghe, but I'd need to go searching for it to be sure.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51p34DDcslL._SY300_.jpg)(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Jqk3TQCuL._SY300_.jpg)

The first issue shown is apparently made from platinum or gold, to judge by the Amazon pricing.
But the form in which I have it is this EMI budget triple,  which also includes wind serenades 11 and 12, the Harmoniemusik from Abduction from the Seraglio, and the Clarinet and Horn Quintets.


I have no idea why EMI thought a piano was involved in any of these recordings....

*as bassoonist; the official name of the ensemble and official star of the recording is of Sabine Meyer, who plays in everything except, of course, the Horn Quintet.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on April 17, 2013, 10:19:07 AM
This is great
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/512T3DJJ6WL._SY300_.jpg)

Which leaves me sorely tempted to get this next month:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41I9Fxg4btL._SX300_.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on April 17, 2013, 10:29:37 AM
This is great
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/512T3DJJ6WL._SY300_.jpg)

Which leaves me sorely tempted to get this next month:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41I9Fxg4btL._SX300_.jpg)

Both very good recordings, especially the Neidich disc.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 17, 2013, 10:32:26 AM
Both very good recordings, especially the Neidich disc.

I agree on both counts. I wouldn't hold back; if opportunity arises to get both, you won't be disappointed at all. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 17, 2013, 10:56:11 AM
I agree on both counts. I wouldn't hold back; if opportunity arises to get both, you won't be disappointed at all. :)

8)

I'd say the finest recording I've hear of that work is this one:


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on April 17, 2013, 11:10:35 AM
I'd say the finest recording I've hear of that work is this one:



That is also a very fine recording of those quintets.

I am of the opinion that one cannot have too many recordings of these works.  It does not get much better than late Mozart or Brahms.

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 17, 2013, 11:19:55 AM
I'd say the finest recording I've hear of that work is this one:



Indeed, that looks interesting. I've liked the Melos strings in whatever they've played. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 17, 2013, 11:21:46 AM
Indeed, that looks interesting. I've liked the Melos strings in whatever they've played. :)
8)

...and de Peyer is my favorite clarinetist.

I believe it is included in the EMI Icon box for the Melos Ensemble.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 17, 2013, 11:30:10 AM
I'd say the finest recording I've hear of that work is this one:



FWIW, these recordings are also available in that nice Melos Ensemble EMI ICON box, which I found very useful as a cross-section of essential repertoire and many pieces a bit more off the beaten track.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on April 17, 2013, 01:00:54 PM
I suspected as much.  After all, I doubt the Quatuor Mosaiques would tarnish their sterling reputation by working with an inferior clarinettist. ;)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on April 17, 2013, 01:27:14 PM

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/MozartAmadeusWinds-Serenadescover_zps01de01f8.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/MozartAmadeusWinds-Serenadescover_zps01de01f8.jpg.html)
And this one, which 'shame on you' if you don't already have it, this is some wonderful playing, and if you are (like me) especially partial to the unique sounds of period wind instruments, this is a must have. 

8)

+1

The merits and beauty of this set cannot be exaggerated. It is strictly mandatory, IMHO.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 17, 2013, 02:41:39 PM
+1

The merits and beauty of this set cannot be exaggerated. It is strictly mandatory, IMHO.

Amen. Although it doesn't say in the notes, I believe that the 'Amadeus Winds' are, in fact, the wind soloists of the Academy of Ancient Music, who number among the finest period instrumentalists in the world. Every Mozart fan...etc. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 17, 2013, 02:45:42 PM
Speaking of Mozart (as indeed we must!), I am currently searching for a set (even one made of several disparate disks) of the orchestral serenades and divertimenti performed on PI. Even ones on MI are thin on the ground, it seems, but they can be had. I have 2 different sets (AAM & Tafelmusik) of the 'symphonies from serenades', but as for the full serenades, a couple by Collegium Aureum are as far as I've got. Is there something out there that I've missed?  ???

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 17, 2013, 03:00:03 PM
Speaking of Mozart (as indeed we must!), I am currently searching for a set (even one made of several disparate disks) of the orchestral serenades and divertimenti performed on PI. Even ones on MI are thin on the ground, it seems, but they can be had. I have 2 different sets (AAM & Tafelmusik) of the 'symphonies from serenades', but as for the full serenades, a couple by Collegium Aureum are as far as I've got. Is there something out there that I've missed?  ???

8)

What are the K numbers of these elusive serenades?  I thought the big Hogwood box of symphonies contained other "symphonic" works, including serenades.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on April 17, 2013, 03:05:49 PM
BTW speaking of serenades: Do people prefer the original wind serenade K. 388, or its string quintet incarnation, K. 406?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on April 17, 2013, 03:06:43 PM
Speaking of Mozart (as indeed we must!), I am currently searching for a set (even one made of several disparate disks) of the orchestral serenades and divertimenti performed on PI. Even ones on MI are thin on the ground, it seems, but they can be had. I have 2 different sets (AAM & Tafelmusik) of the 'symphonies from serenades', but as for the full serenades, a couple by Collegium Aureum are as far as I've got. Is there something out there that I've missed?  ???

8)

No, apparently not, as far I can recall of a research I did some time ago.

Anyway, your question brought to my mind this beautiful disc:



Is it on your shelves, Gurn? :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 17, 2013, 03:13:11 PM
No, apparently not, as far I can recall of a research I did some time ago.

Anyway, your question brought to my mind this beautiful disc:



Is it on your shelves, Gurn? :)

No, but it will be now. Just the sort of thing I'm looking for. You're The Man, Gordo!!   :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on April 17, 2013, 03:17:59 PM
This is great
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/512T3DJJ6WL._SY300_.jpg)

Which leaves me sorely tempted to get this next month:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41I9Fxg4btL._SX300_.jpg)

Love the Neidich/L'Archibudelli, don't know the Mosaïques, but I'm putting forward another favourite of mine - Jean-Claude Veilhan et al:



And you get an epic performance of the Brahms included.... :)

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on April 17, 2013, 05:42:40 PM
No, but it will be now. Just the sort of thing I'm looking for. You're The Man, Gordo!!   :)

8)

Great!

Walking from the office to home, while I was listening to some Telemann's Essercizii, I suddenly recalled this disc:

(http://c3.cduniverse.ws/MuzeAudioArt/Large/27/1119827.jpg)

Although I'm almost sure you have it; if not, it's more easily available under this form:



(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51VK1hURZeL.jpg)

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on April 17, 2013, 06:40:27 PM

Which leaves me sorely tempted to get this next month:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41I9Fxg4btL._SX300_.jpg)


Some really nice recs, here (for the Clarinet Quintet). The Mosaïques is a front-runner though for some time now my first choice has been a disc by Oxalys. The extra spunk and buoyancy nudges this one out front, but only by a nose.

But the disc's "fillers" shouldn't be overlooked: the performances of the flute quartets are the most impressive I've heard in all my Mozart-listening life. Excellent all around.





Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 17, 2013, 08:12:16 PM
DD, is that Oxalys disc on period instruments?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: HIPster on April 17, 2013, 08:38:47 PM
Speaking of Mozart (as indeed we must!), I am currently searching for a set (even one made of several disparate disks) of the orchestral serenades and divertimenti performed on PI. Even ones on MI are thin on the ground, it seems, but they can be had. I have 2 different sets (AAM & Tafelmusik) of the 'symphonies from serenades', but as for the full serenades, a couple by Collegium Aureum are as far as I've got. Is there something out there that I've missed?  ???

8)

I thought of this one immediately, when I read your post, Gurn:



I've been looking at it for a while now. . .

That Freiburger Barockorchester has also had my eye too, though the price is a bit inflated for my liking.  I keep waiting (ha!) for a Freiburger Mozart Boxed set to appear; of course to include this disc.

The La Petite Bande looks excellent (well done Gordon - nice finds).

Still, the Koopman seems to be a winner from my perspective and I have liked his Mozart previously. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 17, 2013, 09:14:47 PM


That Freiburger Barockorchester has also had my eye too, though the price is a bit inflated for my liking.  I keep waiting (ha!) for a Freiburger Mozart Boxed set to appear; of course to include this disc.

I cannot remember where you live, HIPster, but the Freiburger reissue disc pictured just above can be had for $9 from Arkiv Music (USA), before shipping.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 18, 2013, 03:08:08 AM
I thought of this one immediately, when I read your post, Gurn:



I've been looking at it for a while now. . .

That Freiburger Barockorchester has also had my eye too, though the price is a bit inflated for my liking.  I keep waiting (ha!) for a Freiburger Mozart Boxed set to appear; of course to include this disc.

The La Petite Bande looks excellent (well done Gordon - nice finds).

Still, the Koopman seems to be a winner from my perspective and I have liked his Mozart previously.

Oh, on the Koopman, buy with confidence; I got it several weeks ago and quite enjoy it.

I'm definitely looking at that Freiburg Baroque, now that I know about it. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 18, 2013, 03:11:08 AM
Also recommend this one, which has a very nice Haffner Serenade;



8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on April 18, 2013, 03:20:30 AM
I'm definitely looking at that Freiburg Baroque, now that I know about it. :)

I bought this disc several years ago, but I haven't heard it for years. IIRC, but I could be wrong, it had some extreme dynamic contrasts which I considered a bit weird at first... But it was, as I say, years ago, when I was a little more conservative in these points. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 18, 2013, 03:24:59 AM
I bought this disc several years ago, but I haven't heard it for years. IIRC, but I could be wrong, it had some extreme dynamic constrasts which were a bit weird at first... But it was, as I say, years ago, when I was a little more conservative in these points.

Well, I already have some very interesting versions of all 4 of the works on there, still, if I can pick it up reasonably (Arkiv is looking good if their website gets repaired) I will add a different voice.

I also have the Hogwood / AAM "Posthorn" which is very good. One needs be careful not to end up with the symphony reduction unless that is what is wanted.  But Serenades #3, 4 &  5, so-called, and the big divertimenti, like K 334 ("Robinig") are thin on the ground as of yet. :-\

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on April 18, 2013, 11:43:41 AM
DD, is that Oxalys disc on period instruments?

Apparently with Oxalys pretty much everything is modern:

"The group...likes to make its concerts visually attractive and special and to this end regularly makes use of the creative talent of fashion designers". (From their website).

"They present well known sites to the public in a novel manner and create a symbiosis of architecture, music, and light". (Liner notes).

"The Belgian fashion designer Kaat Tilley was responsible for design and costumes of the women members of the ensemble". (Liner notes).

"A" train stuff! :)

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 18, 2013, 11:44:32 AM
Has anyone heard this disk before?

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/CD%20Covers/Mozartkitelawsonetc_zps01e3e2ca.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/CD%20Covers/Mozartkitelawsonetc_zps01e3e2ca.jpg.html)

I saw a used (like new ::) ) copy of it and scooped it up, it has some of my favorite players on it. Just curious how it pans out. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on April 18, 2013, 11:50:16 AM
Has anyone heard this disk before?

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/CD%20Covers/Mozartkitelawsonetc_zps01e3e2ca.jpg) (http://s202.photobucket.com/user/Gurn_Blanston/media/CD%20Covers/Mozartkitelawsonetc_zps01e3e2ca.jpg.html)

I saw a used (like new ::) ) copy of it and scooped it up, it has some of my favorite players on it. Just curious how it pans out. :)

8)

It is on Spotify and I have listened to it.  You should be happy.  A nice selection, the trios K. 498 & 548 and a hodge-podge of other works.

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 18, 2013, 11:59:44 AM
It is on Spotify and I have listened to it.  You should be happy.  A nice selection, the trios K. 498 & 548 and a hodge-podge of other works.

 :)

Ah, very good. I know Lawson is always a safe choice, and Macintosh too. I'm glad you actually heard it though. Hope it really IS in good shape when it arrives!  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: HIPster on April 18, 2013, 02:09:21 PM
I cannot remember where you live, HIPster, but the Freiburger reissue disc pictured just above can be had for $9 from Arkiv Music (USA), before shipping.

Thank you, Octave!  Yes, the USA.

Is that for a CD or a CDR?

Cheers!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on April 18, 2013, 07:51:07 PM
Thank you, Octave!  Yes, the USA.

Is that for a CD or a CDR?

Cheers!

The FBO/HM Mozart disc appears to be a real CD; afaik all the CDRs are conscientiously marked 'ArkivCD' if they are burn-on-demand.  Here is the link:
http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=108884 (http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=108884)
It's does say 'Import CD....2-3 Days', whatever that means.  I might get it, myself!

The Oxalys flute quartets and clarinet quintet disc that DD recommended is still available from Amazon US-MP for $3+ship, FWIW.  I impulse-bought the hell out of it!  DD's quotes about the group's chic'ness gave me a chuckle.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on April 18, 2013, 08:10:57 PM
I'd say the finest recording I've hear of that work is this one:



That's a nice record. My own favourite for some reason is this one, which has the Mozart quintet with Ronald van Spaendonck.

(http://coverstatic.s3-website-sa-east-1.amazonaws.com/cover/7/3/5/f/1171707_350.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on April 19, 2013, 11:36:07 AM
Here's a minor puzzle, on the Hogwood complete symphony edition (disc 12) there is "Symphony in D major, K 320" which is a 3 movement work.  That's the same K number as the Posthorn Serenade, and the "symphony" consists of 3 movements apparently selected from the serenade (1st, 5th and 7th).   I guess in those days a symphony was a fragment of a serenade.

Hogwood's performance is outstanding, and there is some wonderfully adventurous use of the orchestra in this music. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on April 19, 2013, 11:50:07 AM
Here's a minor puzzle, on the Hogwood complete symphony edition (disc 12) there is "Symphony in D major, K 320" which is a 3 movement work.  That's the same K number as the Posthorn Serenade, and the "symphony" consists of 3 movements apparently selected from the serenade (1st, 5th and 7th).   I guess in those days a symphony was a fragment of a serenade.

Hogwood's performance is outstanding, and there is some wonderfully adventurous use of the orchestra in this music.

Not so much a mystery as a little known fact. The orchestral serenades were 7 or 8 movements long. In order to make a little extra on the side, Leopold (and I'm thinking here that this wasn't confined to the Mozart's alone) had Wolfgang take and extract the opening movement and 2 or 3 others (a slow movement, minuet and finale mostly) and make a symphony that he could sell to publishers outside of Salzburg, where serenades weren't the fashion. In addition, he took the movements with obbligato solo instruments, usually the 2nd & 3rd, sometimes the 4th also, and made a concerto out of them. The "Posthorn Serenade" makes a symphony and an oboe concerto, IIRC. If you explore that box, you ill find several more "Symphonies from Serenades". :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on April 20, 2013, 05:14:04 PM
I don't know if this recording has been mentioned re: the Mozart Clarinet Quintet on PI - but I am listening to it right now and it is very nice.

On original instruments

(http://cdn.naxosmusiclibrary.com/sharedfiles/images/cds/others/CDSAR17.gif)

Alan Hacker
C clarinet by Hart of Hatton Garden;
Bb clarinet by Bilton of Westminster Bridge Road with basset extension by Brian Ackerman;
A clarinet by Thomas Key of Charing Cross with basset extension by Brian Ackerman;
all clarinets early nineteenth century

Lesley Schatzberger
Basset horn in F by Griesbacher of Vienna c.1790.

Simon Standage
Violin by Mariani, Brescia c.1650
Bow by James Dodd

Micaela Comberti
Violin; probably English copy of Stainer c.1740
Bow by Percy Bryant after Dodd

Trevor Jones
Viola by Rowland Ross 1980, after Stradivari
Bow by James Dodd

Jennifer Ward Clarke
Cello; attributed to Dom Nicolo Amati, Bologna c.1730
Bow by Matthew Coltman after Dodd

 :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on April 20, 2013, 09:27:35 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51I7XUTlzpL._SX300_.jpg)

This is a delightful disc and the liner notes are nice.  It's hard to imagine someone successfully busking by playing classical music but the picture Podger paints of using that to scrape by during her college days puts a smile on my face.

EDIT:

This one is a no-brainer, much like his solo sonata discs:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51qYFL3ve9L._SL500_AA280_.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on May 01, 2013, 09:29:09 PM
Interested in these recordings of late symphonies by Harnoncourt with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51aWmEqo7nL.jpg)

I own the Harnoncourt (plus some Koopman/Leppard) 8cd symphonies collection on Telarc/Warner (with the Royal Concertgebouw), and it's exciting.  Curious how his approach to these late symphonies differs between the two recordings; especially curious if having the RCO recordings makes the CoE recording not terribly necessary.  I might have answered my question already with research (see quotes by Scarpia on RCO, Lilas Pastia on COE, and Mandryka on Harnoncourt generally, below); but I thought I'd ask again.

[...]But for me the greatest ever to come down the pike is the Harnoncourt, Concertgebouw (not the Harnoncourt Chamber Orchestra of Europe).  I vividly remember first hearing them and being stunned to hear horns and trumpets barking and timpani whacking in Mozart.  I seem to recall notes written for the recordings by Harnoncourt himself in which he expressed the opinion that Mozart was a brilliant orchestrator who loved the sound of the orchestra, and who was poorly served by the polite style of performance of his music.  It sometimes irks me to see Minkowski's admittedly excellent recordings described as revolutionary, when Harnoncourt was doing the same back in the 80's.  (Well, I'm sure it is revolutionary to the producers at DG, who considered it obligatory to record Karajan's sissified Mozart.)

Of Harnoncourt's Mozart symphonies I have the COA and the COE (the latter is more to my taste, having a better internal flow to them). I also attended a concert in which he played the 25th,  40th and concerto 16 in Amsterdam. I recall how jolting the effect was. [...]
I expect he's  doing it  deliberately, he probably thinks you could do with a good jolting. You know he believes  that romantic interpretations of baroque music make the music too smooth and easy, with the emphasis on luxuriant long lines, legato, and dissonances understated. He thinks that this denudes the  music of some of its meaning, and reduces it to just palatable, easy to eat, ear candy. Pap. At his best, his Bach is full of jolts and dissonances.

 He may well feel the same about Mozart. That's part of what I meant by suggesting that the textures that repel you may be "valid."

One thing that interested me was that the one late Mozart symphony he did record with CMV he didn't record afterwards as far as I know (38).
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on May 02, 2013, 07:03:21 AM
The chamber orchestra sound is  different from the richer concertgebauw sound. The tempos in some some movements are slightly more deliberate with the Concertgenauw than with the COE.  I tend to play the COE more often. i woud say tha COE is smetimes  more severe. You need to also add the CMV 38 into the equation, it's on a DVD.

By the way I only know the COE records through a DG DVD.  i haven't tried to find out if they're the same as what's in that box.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on May 02, 2013, 07:45:28 PM
Thanks for the reply, Mandryka; I'll check the Warner discs out.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 23, 2013, 10:12:02 AM
Could easily cross-post either in opera or the Super Duper Cheap Bargain thread . . . . mp3s of Die Zauberflöte, Le nozze de Figaro, Don Giovanni, & Così fan tutte for $1.99, the lot (http://www.amazon.com/Mozarts-Best-Operas/dp/B003U8Q7NS/ref=pd_rhf_ee_p_t_1_PZ9J)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: TheGSMoeller on May 30, 2013, 05:05:50 PM
http://www.youtube.com/v/WLP6kqcmPRI
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on May 30, 2013, 07:37:46 PM
Beautiful.

I was pleased to see Janeane Garofalo in the chorus.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: LVB_opus.125 on June 14, 2013, 05:22:10 AM
Greetings, GMG! I'm a long time lurker, seldom poster. I don't feel I have the wealth of knowledge to contribute on a regular basis, but I arrive here on Mozart's musings with a question for a book recommendation. I want a book compiling Mozart's letters, and an Amazon search yielded a surprising amount of results! Which individual book should I hone in on? Thanks. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 14, 2013, 05:37:22 AM
Greetings, GMG! I'm a long time lurker, seldom poster. I don't feel I have the wealth of knowledge to contribute on a regular basis, but I arrive here on Mozart's musings with a question for a book recommendation. I want a book compiling Mozart's letters, and an Amazon search yielded a surprising amount of results! Which individual book should I hone in on? Thanks. :)

And back at'cha. Nice to see someone de-lurk from time to time... :)

This is a much recommended book;



The only naysayer among the Amazon reviewers happens to be someone for whom I have much respect (Dr. M. Lorenz), and so I don't know quite what to make of his mini-rant. Emily Anderson was the standard for years, but perhaps her translations, which were rather euphemistic when it came to MY Mozart (the crude little joker), needed some updating. If that one negative review came from a known crackhead, my rec would be unreserved for this book. :-\

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 14, 2013, 05:41:05 AM
I have that edition, and I can recommend it.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on June 28, 2013, 09:35:13 PM
In an old discussion of the Boulez disc with the GRAN PARTITA and Berg's CHAMBER CONCERTO, speaking of favored GPs:
[...]I already have a few K361 that I enjoy - but not the Netherlands Wind ensemble one - is it another one than the early seventies Philips release?? I love the gemütlich Collegium Aureum, the bold and elegant Ensemble Philidor and the luscious, piquant and creamy sounds of the Hungarian Opera winds. The latter is the only one I've heard where the instruments have a distinct corporate personality. Interpretively it's affectionate yet classical in feeling.

I did some searching for the Hungarian Opera Winds recording of the GRAN PARTITA and had trouble finding it.  Could someone help me with this?
(I saw one listing as part of a radio playlist, but the only discog info said 'White Label'.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 29, 2013, 04:24:05 AM
In an old discussion of the Boulez disc with the GRAN PARTITA and Berg's CHAMBER CONCERTO, speaking of favored GPs:
I did some searching for the Hungarian Opera Winds recording of the GRAN PARTITA and had trouble finding it.  Could someone help me with this?
(I saw one listing as part of a radio playlist, but the only discog info said 'White Label'.)

I can only offer a tiny bit of a clue that might advance the cause: 'White Label' is Hungaroton's reissue/budget appendage. So if you check out Hungaroton that might narrow things. I've never heard anything by that ensemble... :-\

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Parsifal on June 29, 2013, 05:22:48 AM
I can only offer a tiny bit of a clue that might advance the cause: 'White Label' is Hungaroton's reissue/budget appendage. So if you check out Hungaroton that might narrow things. I've never heard anything by that ensemble... :-\

8)

Cover is white, and everything.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/419ZvdAAeqL._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000N64JQM/?tag=goodmusicguideco

https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/w.-a.-mozart-wind-serenade/id382298516
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 29, 2013, 05:35:52 AM
Cover is white, and everything.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/419ZvdAAeqL._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000N64JQM/?tag=goodmusicguideco

https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/w.-a.-mozart-wind-serenade/id382298516

There you go! Not my cuppa'Joe, but certainly can be had. Knowing Octave, it will be. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: TheGSMoeller on June 30, 2013, 05:36:15 AM
Cover is white, and everything.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/419ZvdAAeqL._SL500_SX300_.jpg)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000N64JQM/?tag=goodmusicguideco

https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/w.-a.-mozart-wind-serenade/id382298516

iTunes has it for only $6.93, not a bad price, and the samples sound fairly good.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2013, 07:23:16 AM
. . . and of course, one of the 13 wind instruments, is a string bass 8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on June 30, 2013, 07:31:01 AM
. . . and of course, one of the 13 wind instruments, is a string bass 8)

Clearly a faux pas on the part of the production staff. Serenade for 13 Instruments is far more correct since the 13th is indeed a double baß; the score is marked pizz. in several places in Mozart's own handwriting, so there isn't a lot of room to substitute a contrabassoon correctly. :)

If it makes them feel better, I've seen the same mistake many times, made, no doubt, by people who cannot count. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2013, 07:34:22 AM
Oh, truly, a general mistake with which there's no catching up!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Octave on June 30, 2013, 09:49:14 PM
Thanks Scarpia and everyone, but $34 used?
There you go! Not my cuppa'Joe, but certainly can be had. Knowing Octave, it will be. :)
Time for "other means"!

But thanks also for the Itunes option.  Sad to see Hungaroton in decline.   :(
Wish I'd been into their content ~5 years ago.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on June 30, 2013, 11:05:52 PM
. . . and of course, one of the 13 wind instruments, is a string bass 8)

You never know how much wind Mozart assumed a double bass player would ...make or break... during this work.

(His humor was crude enough.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 01, 2013, 01:58:17 AM
Oui.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Geo Dude on July 05, 2013, 03:23:44 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/513bfcbOdxL._SY300_.jpg)

My, this is one hell of a disc.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on July 05, 2013, 04:07:23 PM
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/513bfcbOdxL._SY300_.jpg)

My, this is one hell of a disc.

Kirkby is in top form there, her voice is a thing of beauty. Pretty fine music too, I must say.



This is the only other disk of Mozart sacred music (save the Requiem) that they've done, to my knowledge. Kirkby was then as good as she ever was, and in this disk, that was pretty fine!  The 2 disks are indispensable, IMO.  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: San Antone on July 06, 2013, 05:17:43 PM
I have the Coronation Mass and Requiem recordings by Kirby and Hogwood - both very fine.  I did not know of the other one Gurn suggests and may add it to my collection.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on November 16, 2013, 07:28:57 AM
Thanks to Brian, I am now listening to these marvelous chamber works, and recordings on this 2-fer!  :)

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on November 17, 2013, 05:50:45 AM
While getting up this morning, I haven't been able to stop humming the 3rd mvt. Andante from Mozart's 18th string quartet in A major, K.464

So....here we go!  :)

I'll probably end up listening to the whole set, as I usually do!  ;D

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on November 20, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Listening to an old disc, the first disc I ever bought of Mozart's symphonies.  Haven't listened to it in a long time.  "Un-HIP" Mozart, to be sure.  :D  But it is Szell and The Cleveland Orchestra.  Wonder if Sarge has heard it.  ;D

Can't seem to find the cover art on it.  It has a picture of 'The Topiany Garden', by Peter Szumowski

Mozart

Symphony No. 40 in G minor, K.550
Symphony No. 41 in C major, K.551 "Jupiter"


CBS Records Masterworks (Maestro)

Szell, conducting
The Cleveland Orchestra


No liner notes, but looks like 1956 recording.  Bought it at a used CD shop here in Winnipeg, probably about 5 or 6 years ago.  :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on November 20, 2013, 11:21:18 PM
I'll probably end up listening to the whole set, as I usually do!  ;D
Maybe the best complete Mozart mature SQ set!

Quote
Listening to an old disc, the first disc I ever bought of Mozart's symphonies.
My first Mozart disc (and my first classical music CD) was this:


I bought it 12 years ago.  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: marvinbrown on November 21, 2013, 01:49:45 AM
  Well I can't believe that it has taken me this long to post on this thread. As many of you know I am a opera fanatic and a hopeless and helpless Wagnerian. But what many of you might not know is that it was Mozart that got me into opera!  I too was addicted to the film Amadeus (with its glorious Commendatore Scene)...superb! A real shame that that scene is restricted to that film only (although I do have an mp3 version of it somewhere in my database....but I digress  ::))


  ENJOY:

  http://www.youtube.com/v/yOw1NLizCZA

  I am currently going through this set and enjoying it thoroughly:

 



  These are the operas from the Philips MEGA BOXSET that is now so outrageously expensive that I wonder if it will ever go back in print at an affordable price during my lifetime.  Incidentally that is the same mega boxset that has the Uchida Piano sonatas.

  Anyone interested in Mozart's operas should grab the set I posted above, before it too goes out of print or becomes prohibitively expensive. Other opera recordings I recommend are:

 



  Happy Listening  :)

  marvin
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: marvinbrown on November 21, 2013, 01:50:54 AM
Thanks to Brian, I am now listening to these marvelous chamber works, and recordings on this 2-fer!  :)



  I have had that recording in my shopping basket for many months now.  Perhaps it is now time to pull the trigger!

  marvin
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on November 21, 2013, 02:54:45 AM
  I have had that recording in my shopping basket for many months now.  Perhaps it is now time to pull the trigger!

  marvin

 ;D  Fixed!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Sergeant Rock on November 21, 2013, 04:18:06 AM
Listening to an old disc, the first disc I ever bought of Mozart's symphonies.  Haven't listened to it in a long time.  "Un-HIP" Mozart, to be sure.  :D  But it is Szell and The Cleveland Orchestra.  Wonder if Sarge has heard it.  ;D

The mono recordings of 40 and 41....yeah, I own them. They were included in the Szell/Mozart Original Jacket box. Recorded in November 1955, released in 1956. I prefer them to the stereo remakes.

Sarge
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: LVB_opus.125 on December 22, 2013, 06:19:36 PM
Greetings. I am a long time lurker (since 2007) and I occasionally post, but not much, obviously. Anyways, I felt the need to make a cameo in the Mozart thread because I really feel that after so many years, Wolfie is finally cementing himself into the number three top spot, behind Bach and Beethoven, as my favorite composer.

About a week ago I had a sudden urge to go through my all too miniscule Mozart CD collection and listen through again. The results have really moved me deeply, going as far to say that I had a Maslow-like Peak Experience while listening to the Clarinet Concerto while taking a star lit walk in the late evening winter dark, traversing through a then closed golf course, decorated by many diverse trees, seen only in silhouette. Gazing up into the clear starry night, the sublime adagio unfolded its glowing, serene majesty and I nearly wanted to fall to my knees in a quasi-religious ecstacy.

This all may sound hyperbolic or at worst pretentious, but this is the how and why I listen to music to begin with - to be deeply moved. It's not unusual for me to shed a few tears at a live performance of a beloved work, even if it's not an amazing performance. To move beyond the fantastic and the absurd, describing why I have now fallen deeply for Mozart's work is a task for a non-musician, without an array of technical terms at my disposal, but I'll give it a try.

His melodies are on the surface simple, but as a joyful childlike playfulness, but sometimes allows for darker shades of grey, and occasionally explode in proud triumph, with total confidence and assurance. This music is above all a celebration of being alive. While the main melodic line tends to be simple, it is decorated by wonderful shades and subtle variety in the supporting lines. Example: movement #2 in the PC #21 would seem like one long repetition of a theme to an inattentive listener, but for me it is wound in a calmly flowing support of variety - different melodies, different instrumental colorings. Saying all this doesn't even begin to describe the deep beauty at work.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on December 22, 2013, 06:30:24 PM
Greetings. I am a long time lurker (since 2007) and I occasionally post, but not much, obviously. Anyways, I felt the need to make a cameo in the Mozart thread because I really feel that after so many years, Wolfie is finally cementing himself into the number three top spot, behind Bach and Beethoven, as my favorite composer.

About a week ago I had a sudden urge to go through my all too miniscule Mozart CD collection and listen through again. The results have really moved me deeply, going as far to say that I had a Maslow-like Peak Experience while listening to the Clarinet Concerto while taking a star lit walk in the late evening winter dark, traversing through a then closed golf course, decorated by many diverse trees, seen only in silhouette. Gazing up into the clear starry night, the sublime adagio unfolded its glowing, serene majesty and I nearly wanted to fall to my knees in a quasi-religious ecstacy.

This all may sound hyperbolic or at worst pretentious, but this is the how and why I listen to music to begin with - to be deeply moved. It's not unusual for me to shed a few tears at a live performance of a beloved work, even if it's not an amazing performance. To move beyond the fantastic and the absurd, describing why I have now fallen deeply for Mozart's work is a task for a non-musician, without an array of technical terms at my disposal, but I'll give it a try.

His melodies are on the surface simple, but as a joyful childlike playfulness, but sometimes allows for darker shades of grey, and occasionally explode in proud triumph, with total confidence and assurance. This music is above all a celebration of being alive. While the main melodic line tends to be simple, it is decorated by wonderful shades and subtle variety in the supporting lines. Example: movement #2 in the PC #21 would seem like one long repetition of a theme to an inattentive listener, but for me it is wound in a calmly flowing support of variety - different melodies, different instrumental colorings. Saying all this doesn't even begin to describe the deep beauty at work.

I'm with you.  And Mozart's Clarinet Concerto is as sublime as it gets.  What a fantastic, great late work of his.

Have you heard the Great Mass in C minor?  Or the Gran Partita Serenade? 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 22, 2013, 06:34:08 PM
Greetings. I am a long time lurker (since 2007) and I occasionally post, but not much, obviously. Anyways, I felt the need to make a cameo in the Mozart thread because I really feel that after so many years, Wolfie is finally cementing himself into the number three top spot, behind Bach and Beethoven, as my favorite composer.

About a week ago I had a sudden urge to go through my all too miniscule Mozart CD collection and listen through again. The results have really moved me deeply, going as far to say that I had a Maslow-like Peak Experience while listening to the Clarinet Concerto while taking a star lit walk in the late evening winter dark, traversing through a then closed golf course, decorated by many diverse trees, seen only in silhouette. Gazing up into the clear starry night, the sublime adagio unfolded its glowing, serene majesty and I nearly wanted to fall to my knees in a quasi-religious ecstacy.

This all may sound hyperbolic or at worst pretentious, but this is the how and why I listen to music to begin with - to be deeply moved. It's not unusual for me to shed a few tears at a live performance of a beloved work, even if it's not an amazing performance. To move beyond the fantastic and the absurd, describing why I have now fallen deeply for Mozart's work is a task for a non-musician, without an array of technical terms at my disposal, but I'll give it a try.

His melodies are on the surface simple, but as a joyful childlike playfulness, but sometimes allows for darker shades of grey, and occasionally explode in proud triumph, with total confidence and assurance. This music is above all a celebration of being alive. While the main melodic line tends to be simple, it is decorated by wonderful shades and subtle variety in the supporting lines. Example: movement #2 in the PC #21 would seem like one long repetition of a theme to an inattentive listener, but for me it is wound in a calmly flowing support of variety - different melodies, different instrumental colorings. Saying all this doesn't even begin to describe the deep beauty at work.
When something moves us like this, it is truly a wonderful thing. It's like the world shakes.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on December 22, 2013, 11:47:39 PM
A true appreciation for Mozart came with age for me as well, and through period performances.

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on December 23, 2013, 02:42:30 AM
A true appreciation for Mozart came with age for me as well, and through period performances.
Mozart needed period performance for me too.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: The new erato on December 23, 2013, 02:55:25 AM
If one cannot appreciate the genius that lies in simplicity, one cannot apprecaiate Mozart. For many of us, that comes wuth maturity. I'm putting on the Gran Partita now, a strong candidate for my favorite Mozart work.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on December 23, 2013, 05:58:30 AM
If one cannot appreciate the genius that lies in simplicity, one cannot apprecaiate Mozart. For many of us, that comes wuth maturity. I'm putting on the Gran Partita now, a strong candidate for my favorite Mozart work.

It has long been my favorite Mozart work, even though there are many other close candidates.

Surprising, as I am generally more of a strings guy, than a woods/brass guy.   
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 23, 2013, 06:02:34 AM
Well, and even this woodwind player is a pushover for the viola quintets.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 23, 2013, 06:22:25 AM
If one cannot appreciate the genius that lies in simplicity, one cannot apprecaiate Mozart. For many of us, that comes wuth maturity. I'm putting on the Gran Partita now, a strong candidate for my favorite Mozart work.

In the 'small world' category; I was listening to that when I read this! Herreweghe, in my case. What a superb little work to show off Mozart's talents!  :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on December 23, 2013, 06:27:44 AM
In the 'small world' category; I was listening to that when I read this! Herreweghe, in my case. What a superb little work to show off Mozart's talents!  :)

8)

Not that little, though.  It is one of (if not the) longest Mozart purely instrumental works.  :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 23, 2013, 06:30:35 AM
Not that little, though.  It is one of (if not the) longest Mozart purely instrumental works.  :D

Seems too short...  :D

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: The new erato on December 23, 2013, 06:31:26 AM
Hogwood on Decca here. And I was close to mentioning the viola quintets, as well as some piano concertoes and a couple of the late quartets, as other cadidates,
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on December 23, 2013, 06:49:25 AM
Seems too short...  :D

8)

Agreed!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on December 23, 2013, 09:05:26 AM
If one cannot appreciate the genius that lies in simplicity, one cannot apprecaiate Mozart.
I don't know... For me Mozart's music is not simple but rich. Contemporaries of him sometimes said his music is too difficult and freakish. "There are too many notes in it".

I'm putting on the Gran Partita now, a strong candidate for my favorite Mozart work.
I was at the Concerto Budapest's concert two weeks ago. It was a Mozart-John Cage evening and they performed the g minor wing serenade too. I think it was fabulous. But for me the most interesting was the "Musikalisches Würfelspiel" (musical dice game). 4 listeners played with dice and at the end (when every bars was complete) Gábor Csalog pianist played the newly composed Mozart minuet.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on December 23, 2013, 09:06:42 AM
You have all planted the seed.....listening to:

Mozart

Gran Partita Serenade for Winds in B flat major, K.361


Sir Neville Marriner
Academy of St Martin-in-the-Fields

Philips

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: LVB_opus.125 on December 23, 2013, 11:56:14 AM
I'm with you.  And Mozart's Clarinet Concerto is as sublime as it gets.  What a fantastic, great late work of his.

Have you heard the Great Mass in C minor?  Or the Gran Partita Serenade?

Yes on the Mass, I have heard Gardiner and "New version by Robert Levin." I actually didn't notice that this was a "complete" version when I bought it. I find the idea of finishing other artist's works to be beyond arrogant and a huge distraction in the listening process. What Mozart wrote, of course, is beyond wonderful. I'll put the Gran Partita to the top of my list for next works to hear. Thanks! :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: LVB_opus.125 on December 23, 2013, 11:58:27 AM
When something moves us like this, it is truly a wonderful thing. It's like the world shakes.

Indeed. This is what is so hard for me to communicate to folks in "real life" and have them understand when that even means or feels like. I can't imagine being happy in life without music.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Eli on December 24, 2013, 09:17:34 AM
Is Mozart's piano quartet in g minor (k. 478) the greatest thing ever made, before the invention of sliced bread?

(http://pixhost.me/avaxhome/d5/97/001297d5_medium.jpeg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 24, 2013, 10:36:12 AM
Is Mozart's piano quartet in g minor (k. 478) the greatest thing ever made, before the invention of sliced bread?

(http://pixhost.me/avaxhome/d5/97/001297d5_medium.jpeg)

Hello, Eli. ¡Cuánto tiempo sin verte!

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/CD%20Covers/MozartPianoQuartetsSonneriecover_zpse7db9479.jpg)

Yes, that is a hard piece to surpass. Brilliant on all counts. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on February 01, 2014, 08:40:50 AM
Over the last few days:

Mozart

Symphony No. 36 in C major, K.425 "Linz"  (1966)
Symphony No. 38 in D major, K.504 "Prague" (1960)
Symphony No. 39 in E flat major, K.543 (1966)


Bohm
Berlin Philharmonic

Symphony No. 38 in D major, K.504 "Prague"
Symphony No. 39 in E flat major, K.543


Pinnock
The English Concert
DG

Violin Concerto No. 3 in G major, K.216
Violin Concerto No. 4 in D major, K.218
Violin Concerto No. 5 in A major, K.219


Kremer, violin

Wiener Philharmoniker
Harnoncourt

All top-shelf Mozart, and great performances all-around, especially the Pinnock symphonies and with Kremer for the VCs.  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 03, 2014, 06:45:48 AM
Aye, indeed, I am an unreconstructed Kremer fan!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on April 04, 2014, 02:39:04 PM
Oh thou Wolfgang....I have missed you!  :)

And when I miss you....more often than not, I turn to your final ten string quartets, from this magnificent set:

Listening to disc 2:

String Quartet No. 15 in D minor
String Quartet No. 16 in E flat major
String Quartet No. 20 in D major, K.499 "Hoffmeister"
   paging Karl Henning!!!  :D

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: NJ Joe on April 04, 2014, 04:26:34 PM
Oh thou Wolfgang....I have missed you!  :)

And when I miss you....more often than not, I turn to your final ten string quartets, from this magnificent set:

Listening to disc 2:

String Quartet No. 15 in D minor
String Quartet No. 16 in E flat major
String Quartet No. 20 in D major, K.499 "Hoffmeister"
   paging Karl Henning!!!  :D



I've been on a serious Mozart binge the past week or so.  Haven't gotten to this one just yet, but will be getting to it soon.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on April 05, 2014, 12:14:25 AM
I've been on a serious Mozart binge the past week or so.  Haven't gotten to this one just yet, but will be getting to it soon.

A superb set, you won't regret it. :)

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 05, 2014, 01:13:01 PM
Oh thou Wolfgang....I have missed you!  :)

And when I miss you....more often than not, I turn to your final ten string quartets, from this magnificent set:

Listening to disc 2:

String Quartet No. 15 in D minor
String Quartet No. 16 in E flat major
String Quartet No. 20 in D major, K.499 "Hoffmeister"
   paging Karl Henning!!!  :D



Mm, looks nice, Ray!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on April 08, 2014, 06:07:25 PM
The last 10 quartets are fairly high on my shopping list at the moment, but I haven't decided whose versions I might be getting.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on April 08, 2014, 06:53:33 PM
The last 10 quartets are fairly high on my shopping list at the moment, but I haven't decided whose versions I might be getting.

Nothing from the Quatuor Mosaïques is in print but they've always been the standard for me.

There are any number of individual alternatives from around the classical globe, including the Hagen Quartet, Emerson Quartet, Leipzig Quartet, and the Quartetto Italiano.   


Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on April 08, 2014, 09:49:13 PM
The last 10 quartets are fairly high on my shopping list at the moment, but I haven't decided whose versions I might be getting.
I bought Alban Berg Quartet Teldec set years ago. I tried to find better recordings but this effort was unsuccessful.  :) If you want a complete set I think it is the best choice. I listened to Quatour Mosaiques on YouTube and although I love their Haydn recordings I found their Mozart a little bit less successful. Sometimes I missed the drama and power (compared to ABQ).
And there is a recording which is mandatory for all Mozart fans:


It contains only 2 quartets and a divertimento but played with incredible imagination and passion.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on April 24, 2014, 05:54:21 AM
The last 10 quartets are fairly high on my shopping list at the moment, but I haven't decided whose versions I might be getting.

Listen to them all and then decide!  ;D

I second the ABQ!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 24, 2014, 06:06:43 AM
I second the ABQ!

I've had these playing in the car for two weeks now;  love 'em!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on April 24, 2014, 06:53:55 AM
I've had these playing in the car for two weeks now;  love 'em!

+1!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on April 24, 2014, 07:01:33 AM
Heck, even my good old Penguin Guide (it has to be at least little old to be good, but that's another story) likes the Teldec Alban Berg a lot. Righto then.

It's especially good that they made me aware there is also an EMI Alban Berg set, which isn't up to the same standard.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on April 26, 2014, 07:45:00 AM
The last 10 quartets are fairly high on my shopping list at the moment, but I haven't decided whose versions I might be getting.

Here are some of my favourites:

The Janacek Quartet in K387
The Juilliard's 1957 K 465  on Testment.
The Netherlands Quartet Mozart CD on spotify, especially K499.
the Budapest Quartet's first recording of the Hoffmeister
Melos Quartet Hoffmerster
The Petersen Quartet's Prussian quartets. The others are very good too.
Ebene 465

(You see that it's K 499 that I've explored the most, for no good reason - I don't really think it's up to the same standard as the earlier quartets, but it's still music I like.)

If you just want to buy a box, I think Petersen is outstanding. Certainly ABQ is servicable. Either of their recordings will do the job. Less keen on Mosaiques myself.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on May 10, 2014, 04:30:02 AM
And what about the string quintets?
I have the Amadeus Quartet DG album but haven't impressed so much but their tempos are quite good I think. I had the Salomon Quartet recording on Hyperion CDs and it seemed boring to me but I have sold it years ago. Now I try to find a good alternative to my Amadeus Quartet recording.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on May 10, 2014, 05:25:32 AM
And what about the string quintets?
I have the Amadeus Quartet DG album but haven't impressed so much but their tempos are quite good I think. I had the Salomon Quartet recording on Hyperion CDs and it seemed boring to me but I have sold it years ago. Now I try to find a good alternative to my Amadeus Quartet recording.

Hi Roberto,

I love the recordings of the Talich Quartet w/ Karel Rehak on Viola II.  It is on the French Calliope label.  Haven't listened to Wolfgang's string quintets in quite some time, so I am off to do that right now!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on May 10, 2014, 05:50:15 AM
I love the recordings of the Talich Quartet w/ Karel Rehak on Viola II.  It is on the French Calliope label.  Haven't listened to Wolfgang's string quintets in quite some time, so I am off to do that right now!  :)

Hello Roberto - I have to agree w/ the above - have owned the Talich Quartet performances (also include the Clarinet Quintet - can't have too versions of that work!) shown below for years (10/10 review from ClassicsToday (http://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-3311/)).

Now I've 'culled out' a number of previous sets (cannot quite remember which ones at the moment) - my other (just have the two) one is w/ the Nash Ensemble (includes just the 6 string works on 3 CDs) - review HERE (http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=513778) - but do let us know if you find yet another excellent set - Dave :)

(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-rbRdJ2X/0/O/Mozart_SQs_Talich.jpg)  (http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-QQsqvhd/0/O/Mozart_SQ_NashEnsemble.jpg)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on May 10, 2014, 03:51:54 PM
And what about the string quintets?
I have the Amadeus Quartet DG album but haven't impressed so much but their tempos are quite good I think. I had the Salomon Quartet recording on Hyperion CDs and it seemed boring to me but I have sold it years ago. Now I try to find a good alternative to my Amadeus Quartet recording.
I second the other votes here for Talich.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on May 11, 2014, 04:47:27 AM
Thank you for the suggestions!  :)
I always try to find downloads or youtube upload before I buy CD (samples on Amazon and other shops are sometimes enough sometimes not).
I always prefer HIP recording so I tried Kuijken's recording which seemed good but violins sound too thin for me. Ensemble 415 was good on Harmonia Mundi but they recorded only 2 quintets. Ensemble Villa Musica was quite good on MDG too.
Modern practice recordings: Smetana quartet on Denon was too thin sounding and nothing special. I have to find another samples from Grumiaux's recording because I could not decide. Melos and Éder Quartet (on DG and Naxos) was good but nothing special for me based on the samples. I am curious about Guarneri Quartet's new issue on Sony but I didn't find any sample. Currently the Orlando Quartet recording on BIS was the most successful (partly because their recording available completely on the BIS listening page). Not always the most imaginative and powerful but playing always with good taste and the sound of the recording is warm and full-bodied.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on May 11, 2014, 04:50:53 AM
I found more than one Talich Quartet recording:




Are these the same or what is the difference?
Edited: yes maybe these are the same based on the background image of the first and last: "Original Calliope recording remastered".
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on May 11, 2014, 06:10:37 AM
Hi again Roberto - your first image are Mozart String Quartets - immediately below is the image on the cover of the booklet in my Talich set (outside like the 2nd pic you posted from Amazon); interestingly, there is a number of my added image that does not appear on my booklet cover (and a different number on the side of the jewel box) - SO, I suspect that these recordings have been released a number of times by Calliope (now defunct) w/ different cover art & numbers; now the link that I provided in my previous post stated that these are 1995 recordings (my booklet does not state a recording date) - I suspect these have been released over the years w/ different labels and from different companies (suspect your last pic is an example of the latter) - you'll have to just try to find out the recording dates.  Dave :)

(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-K2p5vgk/0/O/Screen%20Shot%202014-05-11%20at%2010.51.00%20AM.png)

I found more than one Talich Quartet recording:


 


Are these the same or what is the difference?
Edited: yes maybe these are the same based on the background image of the first and last: "Original Calliope recording remastered".
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on May 11, 2014, 06:32:39 AM
Thank you for the suggestions!  :)
I always try to find downloads or youtube upload before I buy CD (samples on Amazon and other shops are sometimes enough sometimes not).
I always prefer HIP recording so I tried Kuijken's recording which seemed good but violins sound too thin for me. Ensemble 415 was good on Harmonia Mundi but they recorded only 2 quintets. Ensemble Villa Musica was quite good on MDG too.
Modern practice recordings: Smetana quartet on Denon was too thin sounding and nothing special. I have to find another samples from Grumiaux's recording because I could not decide. Melos and Éder Quartet (on DG and Naxos) was good but nothing special for me based on the samples. I am curious about Guarneri Quartet's new issue on Sony but I didn't find any sample. Currently the Orlando Quartet recording on BIS was the most successful (partly because their recording available completely on the BIS listening page). Not always the most imaginative and powerful but playing always with good taste and the sound of the recording is warm and full-bodied.

I didn't get much pleasure from Kuijken's  rather measured, rock steady, uninvolved style. And I agree with you about Orlando + Imai and Ensemble 415. I can't suggest another good period one, but maybe if you can find it try The Tatrai Quartet + 1, and the Smetana Quartet + Suk. Best of all, if you can download, get the Leipzig Quartet + Helmut Roeder.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Roberto on May 11, 2014, 08:51:14 AM
Hi again Roberto - your first image are Mozart String Quartets - immediately below is the image on the cover of the booklet in my Talich set
You are right, I made a mistake, the first is the string quartets box.
I found samples on jpc.de but compared these to the Orlando Qartet I think the Orlando is still the first choice.

Quote from: Mandryka
but maybe if you can find it try The Tatrai Quartet + 1
I found samples on Hungaroton's webshop. It seems good but recorded sound is not so good.  :(
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on June 10, 2014, 02:03:16 PM
Some delicious early Mozart - Disc 1 of this great set!  :)

Mozart

Sonata in C major, K. 46d
Sonata in F major, K. 46e
Sonata in C major, K. 279
Sonata in F major, K. 280
Sonata in B flat major, K. 281
Sonata in E flat major, K. 282


Eschenbach, piano

DG

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Leo K. on June 12, 2014, 12:23:17 PM
Some delicious early Mozart - Disc 1 of this great set!  :)

Mozart

Sonata in C major, K. 46d
Sonata in F major, K. 46e
Sonata in C major, K. 279
Sonata in F major, K. 280
Sonata in B flat major, K. 281
Sonata in E flat major, K. 282


Eschenbach, piano

DG



I agree, I LOVE Eschenbach's Mozart. Aces!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: calyptorhynchus on July 03, 2014, 01:21:50 PM
Whilst engaged in a Mozart chamber binge I have disocovered K580a (Adagio for Cor Anglais and string trio). It seems almost too good to be true, a beautiful piece for an unusual (and beautiful) instrument in "Mozart's ripest style" (as Tovey would have said).

Is anything known about this piece, why did Mozart write it? Was he thinking of writing a Cor Anglais Quartet?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: calyptorhynchus on July 04, 2014, 01:12:37 PM
And here's another one of my finds

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61kvLYMgpnL._SY300_.jpg)

Seems to be a contemporaneous arrangement for String Quartet of Mozart's last Piano Trio and two of his 4 hand Piano Sonatas. The playing is really good, and the arrangements also seem good to me, IMHO they bring out new facets of the originals, whilst not losing any notes or sounding un string quartetish.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on July 09, 2014, 01:48:31 AM
Whilst engaged in a Mozart chamber binge I have disocovered K580a (Adagio for Cor Anglais and string trio). It seems almost too good to be true, a beautiful piece for an unusual (and beautiful) instrument in "Mozart's ripest style" (as Tovey would have said).

Is anything known about this piece, why did Mozart write it? Was he thinking of writing a Cor Anglais Quartet?

Well, the Allmusic / Classical Archives entry says that modern scholars believe Koechel got the instrumentation wrong, and that it should actually be a clarinet and 3 basset horns.

Which would, in a way, fit better with K.580b, which is for clarinet, basset horn and string trio (I've a recording of that one). So maybe they both come from a time when Mozart was fiddling with those instruments.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: calyptorhynchus on July 11, 2014, 05:24:15 PM
That makes sense, because Mozart never elsewhere wrote for Cor Anglais. However, it is a very beautiful mistake!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on July 27, 2014, 08:09:04 AM
Time for some Mozart!  :)

String Quartet No. 20 in D major, K.499 Hoffmeister




**Paging Karl Henning..............paging Karl Henning.......paging Karl Henning**   :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 27, 2014, 03:41:59 PM
Time for some Mozart!  :)

String Quartet No. 20 in D major, K.499 Hoffmeister



**Paging Karl Henning..............paging Karl Henning.......paging Karl Henning**   :D

I'm in!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Madiel on July 28, 2014, 02:03:58 AM
I'm in!

You couldn't all wait until my Amazon order ships. Grumble.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 28, 2014, 02:46:07 AM
We'll be there for you, dude.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on July 28, 2014, 03:29:43 AM
I'm in!

+1 Karl!  :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 28, 2014, 03:34:23 AM
No one had made off with either the Alban Berg Quartet Mozart, nor the Berglund/Helsinki Phil Sibelius!  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on July 28, 2014, 06:13:00 AM
No one had made off with either the Alban Berg Quartet Mozart, nor the Berglund/Helsinki Phil Sibelius!  8)

Huh?  :)  I am trying to understand what this means.  :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on July 28, 2014, 06:19:23 AM
Huh?  :)  I am trying to understand what this means.  :D
I assume Karl left these in his car upon earlier occasions. Still Karl it would be tempting fate to leave out Gruppen. Sells like hot-cakes on the black market.
Or Mennin's 8th.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 28, 2014, 07:35:33 AM
Berglubnd is still in the glove compartment!

I think I understand now why my Gruppen has gone missing . . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: North Star on July 28, 2014, 12:58:30 PM
Berglubnd is still in the glove compartment!

I think I understand now why my Gruppen has gone missing . . . .
Those no-good car thieves with their awful taste can do some good, too, I suppose.  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on July 28, 2014, 02:44:58 PM
Those no-good car thieves with their awful taste can do some good, too, I suppose.  8)
What was Henny Youngman's joke? "Take Stockhausen. Please."
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on August 10, 2014, 04:28:26 PM
Love this disc, works and performances.  Wish Wolfie would have composed 20+ violin concertos!  :)

Mozart

Violin Concerto No. 3 in G major, K.216
Violin Concerto No. 4 in D major, K.218
Violin Concerto No. 5 in A major, K.219  'The Turkish Delight'


Kremer, violin

Wiener Philharmoniker
Harnoncourt

DG

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 10, 2014, 04:38:44 PM
Love this disc, works and performances.  Wish Wolfie would have composed 20+ violin concertos!  :)

Mozart

Violin Concerto No. 3 in G major, K.216
Violin Concerto No. 4 in D major, K.218
Violin Concerto No. 5 in A major, K.219  'The Turkish Delight'


Kremer, violin

Wiener Philharmoniker
Harnoncourt

DG



Ray,

That's interesting; I have this set by Kremer, entirely different, of course:

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/CD%20Covers/MozartKremerCompleteVCscover_zpsbfea98da.jpg)

I didn't know he had done these more than once, or with the Wiener's either. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: OrchestralNut on August 10, 2014, 05:00:41 PM
Ray,

That's interesting; I have this set by Kremer, entirely different, of course:

(http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa159/Gurn_Blanston/CD%20Covers/MozartKremerCompleteVCscover_zpsbfea98da.jpg)

I didn't know he had done these more than once, or with the Wiener's either. :)

8)

Hmmm, interesting indeed, Gurn.  I did not know he had done one with the Kremerata Baltica!  :o
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on August 10, 2014, 05:02:43 PM
BTW, this recalls me a lovely new release of these concertos:

(http://static.qobuz.com/images/covers/25/86/4260034868625_600.jpg)

Is it just my idea or this cover is particularly sad? With the great Reinhard Goebel nostalgically looking the violin.  :(
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 10, 2014, 05:05:37 PM
BTW, this recalls me a lovely new release of these concertos:

(http://static.qobuz.com/images/covers/25/86/4260034868625_600.jpg)

Is it just my idea or this cover is particularly sad? With the great Reinhard Goebel nostalgically looking the violin.  :(

He certainly looks pensive. And that looks like a great disk! I will be looking it up. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 11, 2014, 12:58:14 AM
Hmmm, interesting indeed, Gurn.  I did not know he had done one with the Kremerata Baltica!  :o

FWIW, that's the one I've got, too.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brian on September 13, 2014, 05:17:44 AM
Question!

Reading the booklet notes of Harnoncourt's new Mozart 39/40/41. Harnoncourt says this in the interview:

"Gambling debts - an oft-adduced argument for his begging letters [to Puchberg] - are highly unlikely, given the content of these letters, and they hardly explain his desperate need for money. Whenever he traveled to Prague or elsewhere, he used his own carriage, or else he hired one. His letters to Puchberg were evidently written for a very different reason, which Mozart did all in his power to conceal. It was presumably hush money demanded by a blackmailer."

My question is WHAT?!?!?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: North Star on September 13, 2014, 05:26:38 AM
Question!

Reading the booklet notes of Harnoncourt's new Mozart 39/40/41. Harnoncourt says this in the interview:

"Gambling debts - an oft-adduced argument for his begging letters [to Puchberg] - are highly unlikely, given the content of these letters, and they hardly explain his desperate need for money. Whenever he traveled to Prague or elsewhere, he used his own carriage, or else he hired one. His letters to Puchberg were evidently written for a very different reason, which Mozart did all in his power to conceal. It was presumably hush money demanded by a blackmailer."

My question is WHAT?!?!?
Salieri is of course the blackmailer.  :D
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 13, 2014, 10:52:12 AM
Has Harnoncourt "jumped the croquet hoop"?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: North Star on September 13, 2014, 11:01:56 AM
Has Harnoncourt "jumped the croquet hoop"?
Perhaps he's just damaged his head after tripping over on the podium.

This is wonderful, btw:  :laugh:
Question!
...
My question is WHAT?!?!?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on September 13, 2014, 11:07:38 AM
Question!

Reading the booklet notes of Harnoncourt's new Mozart 39/40/41. Harnoncourt says this in the interview:

"Gambling debts - an oft-adduced argument for his begging letters [to Puchberg] - are highly unlikely, given the content of these letters, and they hardly explain his desperate need for money. Whenever he traveled to Prague or elsewhere, he used his own carriage, or else he hired one. His letters to Puchberg were evidently written for a very different reason, which Mozart did all in his power to conceal. It was presumably hush money demanded by a blackmailer."

My question is WHAT?!?!?

Mine would be who and who? 

A> presumed by who?  Certainly no one with the confidence to publish it (that I've ever heard of)

B> who was the blackmailer? Mozart himself, or was he being blackmailed and thus needed extra cash?

Either way, it is a intellectual leap of Newmanesque proportions to publish such a thing as a 'done deal' in the liner notes of a CD with no further buttressing. ::)  I think Nicky is getting a little bit addled. Hasn't affected his conducting anyway; maybe he needs to stick with what got him here. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on September 13, 2014, 11:22:38 AM
Mine would be who and who? 

A> presumed by who?  Certainly no one with the confidence to publish it (that I've ever heard of)

B> who was the blackmailer? Mozart himself, or was he being blackmailed and thus needed extra cash?

Either way, it is a intellectual leap of Newmanesque proportions to publish such a thing as a 'done deal' in the liner notes of a CD with no further buttressing. ::)  I think Nicky is getting a little bit addled. Hasn't affected his conducting anyway; maybe he needs to stick with what got him here. :)

8)
It sound like he is accusing Mozart. The observation about carriages indicates that Mozart had cash presumably. I'd say    ::) ::)
It's no secret Mozart spent profligately. He actually made quite a lot of money, but lacked restraint.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: TheGSMoeller on September 13, 2014, 11:38:52 AM
Question!

Reading the booklet notes of Harnoncourt's new Mozart 39/40/41. Harnoncourt says this in the interview:

"Gambling debts - an oft-adduced argument for his begging letters [to Puchberg] - are highly unlikely, given the content of these letters, and they hardly explain his desperate need for money. Whenever he traveled to Prague or elsewhere, he used his own carriage, or else he hired one. His letters to Puchberg were evidently written for a very different reason, which Mozart did all in his power to conceal. It was presumably hush money demanded by a blackmailer."

My question is WHAT?!?!?

I was a little disappointed in this release. I generally love Harnoncourt, but these performances felt so far off the rails. I prefer his Mozart symphonies with the RCO.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brian on September 13, 2014, 11:41:36 AM
Yes, I read it as Harnoncourt accusing Mozart of being the blackmailer, and Puchberg the victim.

I was a little disappointed in this release. I generally love Harnoncourt, but these performances felt so far off the rails. I prefer his Mozart symphonies with the RCO.
I was impressed by how well #40 fits in with the end of #39, but overall these performances really remind me of Rene Jacobs: aggressively eccentric, weird, operatic, blazing fast. I was surprised. There are some moments (particularly in #41, or the finale of #40 with those huge pauses) that took it too far, but mostly I liked it. Shocking contrast with Mackerras.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: TheGSMoeller on September 13, 2014, 11:56:09 AM
Yes, I read it as Harnoncourt accusing Mozart of being the blackmailer, and Puchberg the victim.
I was impressed by how well #40 fits in with the end of #39, but overall these performances really remind me of Rene Jacobs: aggressively eccentric, weird, operatic, blazing fast. I was surprised. There are some moments (particularly in #41, or the finale of #40 with those huge pauses) that took it too far, but mostly I liked it. Shocking contrast with Mackerras.

Have you heard his Mozart recordings with Concertgabauw? Still that Harnoncourt style on display, but not as extreme. I just recently purchased their 25, 26 and 28 disc, also fantastic.
I've only heard Jacobs' 38 and 41 disc, and I really do like that.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brian on September 13, 2014, 12:18:28 PM
Have you heard his Mozart recordings with Concertgabauw? Still that Harnoncourt style on display, but not as extreme. I just recently purchased their 25, 26 and 28 disc, also fantastic.
I've only heard Jacobs' 38 and 41 disc, and I really do like that.
Check out the price the Concertgebouw recordings go for on Amazon!!! (http://www.amazon.com/Mozart-Harnoncourt-Late-Symphonies-31-41/dp/B000009IQQ)  ??? No, I have not heard them; may try NML this week.

I really like Jacobs too. Can you articulate why you prefer Jacobs, if you do, or Freiburg vs. Wien?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on September 13, 2014, 12:56:39 PM
It sound like he is accusing Mozart. The observation about carriages indicates that Mozart had cash presumably. I'd say    ::) ::)
It's no secret Mozart spent profligately. He actually made quite a lot of money, but lacked restraint.

Your view is obsolete. I don't have the time or inclination to debate Mozart with you, but there has been a lot of water under the bridge since that viewpoint held sway.

If you can get this book from your library, else it isn't expensive, I highly recommend it for a refreshingly modern explication of Mozart's life, without nearly 2 centuries of biased (better and worse) encrustation grafted on.  :)



8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: TheGSMoeller on September 13, 2014, 01:19:22 PM
I really like Jacobs too. Can you articulate why you prefer Jacobs, if you do, or Freiburg vs. Wien?

To start with I do feel that Harmonia Mundi offers a much better quality recording. Better balance, with a more prominent strings that don't always get drowned out by timpani and trumpets, which with Harnoncourt/Wien it is a little startling. Try the opening of Jupiter's 4th Mvt, when the opening p turns into a f on the ninth bar, both are aggressive, but the Freiburgers just sound like there's a stronger collaboration between the instruments. 
Perhaps the sound plays a big role in my decision, but I always believe that conductors have a say in how a recording portrays their ensemble, so in turn it could be an interpretive choice.

Correction: I HAVE heard Jacob's No. 40, I just don't own it like 38 & 41. No. 40 is tricky for me, (similar to Bruckner's 6th) where all four movements need to align perfectly, one out of place movement and it's shot. I don't prefer Harnoncourt's nonchalant approach to the 4th mvt. Allegro Assei. His still might be considered quite fast, but after his Mach 3 read through of the Menuetto, what follows seems out of place to me. Jacobs, although he is blazing through some of these moments himself, just seems to smooth the entire piece over, from beginning to end. Also, the slow second movement of 40 and 41 From Harnoncourt/Wien go by too quickly.

Another example of Harnoncourt's jumbling of tempos (to my ears) is with Haydn's Farewell, also with Wien. Super fast Menuett followed by a laid back Presto, but for some reason I really enjoy it here. It could be because the Farewell doesn't lead to a grandiose ff type ending, and therefore has the freedom to spread the climaxes and intensity throughout the movements.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on September 13, 2014, 03:13:16 PM
Your view is obsolete. I don't have the time or inclination to debate Mozart with you, but there has been a lot of water under the bridge since that viewpoint held sway.

If you can get this book from your library, else it isn't expensive, I highly recommend it for a refreshingly modern explication of Mozart's life, without nearly 2 centuries of biased (better and worse) encrustation grafted on.  :)



8)
Which part do you dispute? That he earned a lot or that he spent a lot? I read the blurbs, and nothing addresses either question.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on September 13, 2014, 05:19:23 PM
Which part do you dispute? That he earned a lot or that he spent a lot? I read the blurbs, and nothing addresses either question.

Blurbs don't really tell you much. I dispute that he was profligate and irresponsible. He did have unforeseen expenses due to his wife's health, but that wasn't a result of either irresponsibility or profligacy. He was actually comfortably well off with excellent prospects. That is the basic error of the received wisdom. Seriously, that story started with his sister who never forgave him for leaving her in Salzburg with their father. It was never true. One of the traits of his personality which shows in the Puchberg letters is that he was an all-out drama queen, and he felt that playing to the pitying side of Puchberg would get him what he wanted. Look at the bigger picture of what was going on in his life (and in Vienna) at the time and you will see that he hadn't mismanaged anything at all, circumstances overtook him.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Brian on September 13, 2014, 07:38:22 PM
Also, the slow second movement of 40 and 41 From Harnoncourt/Wien go by too quickly.
Those two slow movements were two places I definitely felt he swung and missed. I'm not sure if the 40 is too quick or too long - but there are several pieces where an interpretation can be both at once. You know...pieces where playing it quickly can work and slowly can work, but middlely doesn't work. Admittedly they are rare. 41's slow movement, though, is a clear mistake.

Overall you're right, the Freiburg orchestra simply sounds better, although I don't know if it's the Sony microphones to blame. Time to listen closely again and again! For what it's worth, I very very (much more) strongly disliked Harnoncourt's recent Haffner, which Mandryka called "transcendent." Mandryka and I tend to have opposite views on things. :)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on September 14, 2014, 12:06:39 AM
I was a little disappointed in this release. I generally love Harnoncourt, but these performances felt so far off the rails. I prefer his Mozart symphonies with the RCO.

I haven't heard it but I do like his RCO recordings and disliked with a pasion the Early Symphonies recordingsof a few years ago. It seemed that H. completely lost his way in Mozart: abrasive, agressive even, and disjointed.... :(

This is the most convenient and affordable way to get his RCO recordings:


Q

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mookalafalas on October 01, 2014, 05:03:28 AM
Question!

Reading the booklet notes of Harnoncourt's new Mozart 39/40/41. Harnoncourt says this in the interview:

"Gambling debts - an oft-adduced argument for his begging letters [to Puchberg] - are highly unlikely, given the content of these letters, and they hardly explain his desperate need for money. Whenever he traveled to Prague or elsewhere, he used his own carriage, or else he hired one. His letters to Puchberg were evidently written for a very different reason, which Mozart did all in his power to conceal. It was presumably hush money demanded by a blackmailer."

My question is WHAT?!?!?

  Some years back I read a volume of his letters, with heavy annotation (as in, embedded in a biography), and I remember being convinced (at the time) that mozart must have been being blackmailed.  I don't remember the name of the book, but I strongly suspect that that is what Harnoncourt had been reading as well. 

  By the way, I am listening to Giulini's late Mozart


   Wow.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on October 02, 2014, 06:51:31 AM
I was a little disappointed in this release. I generally love Harnoncourt, but these performances felt so far off the rails. I prefer his Mozart symphonies with the RCO.

The 41 has become my favourite 41 for the moment at least. I very much like its seriousness. I haven't heard the others yet.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on October 02, 2014, 09:42:43 AM
The 41 has become my favourite 41 for the moment at least. I very much like its seriousness. I haven't heard the others yet.

And there's also the 'new' Brüggen recording (bless him).
I'm very short on money .... should I try/buy Klauserl or Franzerl?

(http://111.imagebam.com/download/IayRFjQQ-ZnFDF5n6V1Lfg/35518/355176475/dunno.gif)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on October 03, 2014, 02:05:10 AM
And there's also the 'new' Brüggen recording (bless him).
I'm very short on money .... should I try/buy Klauserl or Franzerl?

(http://111.imagebam.com/download/IayRFjQQ-ZnFDF5n6V1Lfg/35518/355176475/dunno.gif)

Count Nikolaus de la Fontaine und d'Harnoncourt-Unverzagt. You can see by the way it divides opinion that it's an interesting thing he's done.

Having said that, I've only paid attention to 41 - which is not an easy piece of music to get off the page in my opinion.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Marc on October 03, 2014, 02:58:24 AM
Count Nikolaus de la Fontaine und d'Harnoncourt-Unverzagt. You can see by the way it divides opinion that it's an interesting thing he's done.

Having said that, I've only paid attention to 41 - which is not an easy piece of music to get off the page in my opinion.

Yes, and I read/heard some negative stuff about this new twofer .... but somehow the Jupiter seemed to please (or at least seemed to be acceptable to) most people. So, who knows, maybe the other two might shock you, too.
I have Count Unverzagt's Amsterdam recordings and also Brüggen's 40 & 41 from the Philips years.
I know that Klaus is always tickling one's eardrums and I praise him for that, but in this genre I remember I preferred the early (late) Franzerl. With Klaus for instance, I couldn't make a Menuet out of most of 'his' Menuets.
So, in my case, Brüggen would be the safer choice.

But to where will this safety lead me?

(Repetition,
Joy Division,
or Psalm 61?)


Maybe, for the sake of my wallet, I should try the library first.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on October 03, 2014, 03:21:42 AM
Yes, and I read/heard some negative stuff about this new twofer .... but somehow the Jupiter seemed to please (or at least seemed to be acceptable to) most people. So, who knows, maybe the other two might shock you, too.
I have Count Unverzagt's Amsterdam recordings and also Brüggen's 40 & 41 from the Philips years.
I know that Klaus is always tickling one's eardrums and I praise him for that, but in this genre I remember I preferred the early (late) Franzerl. With Klaus for instance, I couldn't make a Menuet out of most of 'his' Menuets.
So, in my case, Brüggen would be the safer choice.

But to where will this safety lead me?

(Repetition,
Joy Division,
or Psalm 61?)


Maybe, for the sake of my wallet, I should try the library first.

Safe!!!!!!!!! This is art.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 03, 2014, 04:03:00 AM
FWIW, I received in yesterday's mail, so unlistened at the moment, a new release from one of my favorite bands; Concilium musicum Wien / Paul Angerer. Along with a half dozen Michael Haydn minuets, and Joseph's Sinfonia concertante there is a Mozart 41. Although I only have 8-10 disks by this group, they are all excellent, so I have every expectation this will be too. It's on Gramola, maybe worth a try. Inexpensive in USA at AMP.  :)



8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Florestan on October 03, 2014, 04:14:09 AM
I have with Angerer and his band an LP with menuets, marches and dances by Mozart. Can be found as cd here: http://www.cdmarket.eu/products/paul-angerer-mozart-menuet-and-dances (http://www.cdmarket.eu/products/paul-angerer-mozart-menuet-and-dances) It's indeed excellent. Great fun!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on October 03, 2014, 05:13:50 AM
I have with Angerer and his band an LP with menuets, marches and dances by Mozart. Can be found as cd here: http://www.cdmarket.eu/products/paul-angerer-mozart-menuet-and-dances (http://www.cdmarket.eu/products/paul-angerer-mozart-menuet-and-dances) It's indeed excellent. Great fun!

Like the look of that one. Hard to find in the States, but I will hunt it down. It would be a nice complement, content-wise, to this one:



(Tafelmusik/Weil - German Dances)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: TheGSMoeller on October 08, 2014, 07:33:45 AM
I'm sure this old news to many of you...but what a gem I discovered in No. 26 in E-flat Major. A three movement symphony that really seamlessly connects creating one movement.

https://www.youtube.com/v/UkO-k6Zn47Y
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on July 11, 2015, 08:02:25 AM


Dip Your Ears, No. 199 (Mozart from Tetzlaff & Vogt)


Mozart Melt

Mozart at once old fashioned and intellectually fresh comes courtesy of
Lars Vogt and Christian Tetzlaff. The title of their album reflects refreshing
honesty:...

(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00925TBLS.01.L.jpg) (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2015/07/dip-your-ears-no-199-mozart-from.html)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Old Listener on July 11, 2015, 03:01:54 PM
Like the look of that one. Hard to find in the States, but I will hunt it down. It would be a nice complement, content-wise, to this one:



(Tafelmusik/Weil - German Dances)

8)

Might this LP have the same music as the angerer CD

.

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: SonicMan46 on July 17, 2015, 08:23:05 AM
Mozart - Horn Concertos & Horn Quintet w/ Pip Eastop on a natural horn - if you're a fan of Wolfie's horn works on a natural instrument, then this 'new' release (2011 & 2013 recording dates) may be of interest - well reviewed in the most recent issue of Fanfare (Jul-Aug 2015) (see PDF attached which includes the review + notes from Eastop about the natural horn; also, a review of a newly acquired Fesca CD which I posted in the listening thread).

There are other 'natural horn' recordings of these works - I own the other three below: 1) RJ Kelly w/ the American Classical Orchestra; 2) Lowell Green w/ the Philharmonic Baroque Orch; and 3) Ab Koster w/ Weil & Tafelmusik - the latter two having been my favorites for years - will do some comparative listening later.  Dave :)

(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-xnDmv5T/0/S/Mozart_HornPieces_Eastop-S.jpg)  (http://assets1.classicfm.com/2015/00/pip-eastop-natural-horn-1420212755-article-0.jpg)

(http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-cGRjk3K/0/S/Mozart_WindConcsAll-S.jpg)  (http://giradman.smugmug.com/Other/Classical-Music/i-gZMVnfZ/0/S/Mozart_Greer-S.jpg)  (http://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_400/MI0000/959/MI0000959235.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Jaakko Keskinen on August 23, 2015, 03:14:38 AM
"I must give you a piece of intelligence that you perhaps already know — namely, that the ungodly arch-villain Voltaire has died miserably like a dog — just like a brute. That is his reward!"

Oh, Wolfie...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 23, 2015, 03:40:03 AM
Well, M. Arouet le jeune knew perfectly well there were many hearts he wasn't winning with remarks like écrasez l'infâme  0:)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Jaakko Keskinen on August 28, 2015, 01:35:36 AM
I just now realized how breathtakingly inventive that variation movement in Divertimento/string trio K563 is! The third variation is in B flat minor, not the most common key with Mozart.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on August 28, 2015, 03:06:13 AM
I just now realized how breathtakingly inventive that variation movement in Divertimento/string trio K563 is! The third variation is in B flat minor, not the most common key with Mozart.

Yes. My favourite set of Mozart variations, though the one in the Gran Paritia give it a good run for its money.
Title: Re: Mozart - on Voltaire
Post by: Scion7 on August 30, 2015, 02:06:47 AM
Ah, a secular humanist, are we, Alberich?   :P
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Jo498 on August 30, 2015, 04:05:59 AM
Mozart was only 22 in 1778 and probably sucking up to his father a little here, to ascertain the old man that he would not stray from traditional christianity. But while Mozart remained a Catholic for all his life he also become a freemason, so he was not traditionalist and would probably not have spoken so ill of Voltaire later on. (IMO, Voltaire was quite brilliant but also a smug bastard and I cannot really forgive him making such evil fun of a far greater mind, Leibniz, whom he pictured as Doctor Pangloss in Candide.)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scion7 on August 30, 2015, 04:44:36 AM
Doubt it.  Voltaire was reviled by much of the population - steeped in the 'ancien regime' - Mozart was no social revolutionary in the way that even Beethoven moderately was.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: (poco) Sforzando on August 31, 2015, 03:07:09 AM
Mozart was only 22 in 1778 and probably sucking up to his father a little here, to ascertain the old man that he would not stray from traditional christianity. But while Mozart remained a Catholic for all his life he also become a freemason, so he was not traditionalist and would probably not have spoken so ill of Voltaire later on. (IMO, Voltaire was quite brilliant but also a smug bastard and I cannot really forgive him making such evil fun of a far greater mind, Leibniz, whom he pictured as Doctor Pangloss in Candide.)

Your unwillingness to forgive aside, I find Candide and its evil fun to be a remarkable little book. There are many Pococurantes in this world.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2015, 03:09:16 AM
Doubt it.  Voltaire was reviled by much of the population - steeped in the 'ancien regime' - Mozart was no social revolutionary in the way that even Beethoven moderately was.

True enough.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2015, 03:10:33 AM
Your unwillingness to forgive aside, I find Candide and its evil fun to be a remarkable little book. There are many Pococurantes in this world.

Yes, kind of a pocket-bucket-list-rant-picaresque  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Jaakko Keskinen on August 31, 2015, 04:00:59 AM
To Voltaire's credit, didn't he fight for some of the most basic human rights that we today take as granted? Of course, those rights weren't achieved during his lifetime, but at least the guy tried to make a difference.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Jo498 on August 31, 2015, 05:16:18 AM
He was a brilliant writer and an important thinker, sure (and some more things as well, e.g. popularizer of Newtonian mechanics in France). He still was a smug bastard to make such cheap fun of a genius like Leibniz.

As Voltaire was very strongly against established religion but still some kind of Deist, I really do doubt that the Freemason Mozart of 1790 would have been so strongly opposed to him.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2015, 05:38:22 AM
He was a brilliant writer and an important thinker, sure (and some more things as well, e.g. popularizer of Newtonian mechanics in France). He still was a smug bastard to make such cheap fun of a genius like Leibniz.

As Voltaire was very strongly against established religion but still some kind of Deist, I really do doubt that the Freemason Mozart of 1790 would have been so strongly opposed to him.

I dunno;  if one is not much in sympathy with a gadfly, the latter can come off as singularly repulsive  8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Wakefield on August 31, 2015, 06:30:08 AM
Mozart was only 22 in 1778 and probably sucking up to his father a little here, to ascertain the old man that he would not stray from traditional christianity. But while Mozart remained a Catholic for all his life he also become a freemason, so he was not traditionalist and would probably not have spoken so ill of Voltaire later on. (IMO, Voltaire was quite brilliant but also a smug bastard and I cannot really forgive him making such evil fun of a far greater mind, Leibniz, whom he pictured as Doctor Pangloss in Candide.)

Apparently Voltaire wasn't so wrong about Leibniz because, as Bertrand Russell proved in A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz, he hid the best of his philosophy because of commercial considerations. So to speak, his "optimism" was far a better business than his real, more obscure and finally hidden philosophy. Therefore, the criticism of Voltaire, making fun of Leibniz, isn't totally undeserved. 
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: mc ukrneal on September 01, 2015, 04:21:43 PM
What are your most joyful Mozart discs (excluding voices)?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 11:45:39 AM
What are your most joyful Mozart discs (excluding voices)?

It's odd, considering how Mozart I have heard, that I have no clear answer to this. The piano concerti, but I know of a lot of great recordings. If I had to pick just one of those,  Kempff doing 23. I like Bohm's symphony 40.

Update. I might have misread. I like the Bohm for being so angst ridden!
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 11:50:29 AM
Your unwillingness to forgive aside, I find Candide and its evil fun to be a remarkable little book.

And it's frickin' hilarious.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Mandryka on September 02, 2015, 08:55:13 PM
What are your most joyful Mozart discs (excluding voices)?

The 14th piano concerto with Bilson and Gardiner, the final movement.
The wedding march from Figaro.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on September 04, 2015, 04:45:28 AM
What are your most joyful Mozart discs (excluding voices)?

sortof off the top of my head. links to reviews and/or sound-samples.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2BLVlLI3VL._AA160_.jpg)
W.T.Mozart, Sonatas for Violin and Piano,
Mark Steinberg & Mitsuko Uchida
Philips (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2005/12/best-recordings-of-2005.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81semhM0kmL._SX522_.jpg)
W.G.Mozart,
String Quintets
Talich Quartet
La Dolce Volta (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2014/01/best-recordings-of-2013-1-10.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41jmaJkQbnL.jpg)
W.A.Mozart, Complete Symphonies, volume 2
A.Fischer / Danish National CO
Dacapo SACD (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2014/01/best-recordings-of-2013-1-10.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31NHTMY7Q9L.jpg)
W.A.Mozart,
Clarinet Quintet
Quatuor Stadler & J.C.Veihan
K617 (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/12/diana-damraus-strauss-sublime.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41Hiuc3BlcL.jpg)
W.G.Mozart, Keyboard Music vol.2,
Kristian Bezuidenhout
Harmonia Mundi (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/03/dip-your-ears-no-107.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61yhftbqosL._SX522_.jpg)
W.A.Mozart, Piano Sonatas,
M.Pletnev
DG (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2007/01/best-recordings-of-2006.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71hbhz2VGQL._SX522_.jpg)
W.A.Mozart, Sonatas for Piano and Violin K454, 379, 526,
L.Vogt, C.Tetzlaff
Ondine
 (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2015/07/dip-your-ears-no-199-mozart-from.html)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 04, 2015, 05:12:44 AM
Vn Cti

Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on September 04, 2015, 07:15:06 AM
sortof off the top of my head. links to reviews and/or sound-samples.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51%2BLVlLI3VL._AA160_.jpg)
W.T.Mozart, Sonatas for Violin and Piano,
Mark Steinberg & Mitsuko Uchida
Philips (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2005/12/best-recordings-of-2005.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81semhM0kmL._SX522_.jpg)
W.G.Mozart,
String Quintets
Talich Quartet
La Dolce Volta (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2014/01/best-recordings-of-2013-1-10.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41jmaJkQbnL.jpg)
W.A.Mozart, Complete Symphonies, volume 2
A.Fischer / Danish National CO
Dacapo SACD (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2014/01/best-recordings-of-2013-1-10.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31NHTMY7Q9L.jpg)
W.A.Mozart,
Clarinet Quintet
Quatuor Stadler & J.C.Veihan
K617 (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/12/diana-damraus-strauss-sublime.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41Hiuc3BlcL.jpg)
W.G.Mozart, Keyboard Music vol.2,
Kristian Bezuidenhout
Harmonia Mundi (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/03/dip-your-ears-no-107.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61yhftbqosL._SX522_.jpg)
W.A.Mozart, Piano Sonatas,
M.Pletnev
DG (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2007/01/best-recordings-of-2006.html)

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/71hbhz2VGQL._SX522_.jpg)
W.A.Mozart, Sonatas for Piano and Violin K454, 379, 526,
L.Vogt, C.Tetzlaff
Ondine
 (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2015/07/dip-your-ears-no-199-mozart-from.html)

Also:

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81V0IFmWa-L._SX522_.jpg)
Andrew Manze’s Mozart Concertos 3-5 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000CPHBQY/nectarandambr-20)

and any Mozart with Clifford Curzon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004U949/goodmusicguide-20), pretty much.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Turner on January 26, 2016, 01:00:08 AM
A recent arrival - the complete / almost complete early symphonies (=37 1/4) with Harnoncourt (7CD). And a delightful surprise; hadn´t thought I´d be enjoying these small works so much - but the playing can´t really be more varied, pompous and engaged, for sure.

Samples/recordings by Arigoni, Linden, Böhm and Leinsdorf from their complete sets I heard didn´t quite contain this.

Am a big fan of Harnoncourt´s grand, late Mozart symphonies with the Concertgebouw too.



Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Eli on January 29, 2016, 05:41:35 PM
What are your most joyful Mozart discs (excluding voices)?

It might be light music but this disk is an absolute delight.

http://www.allmusic.com/album/mozart-serenata-notturna-3-divertimenti-mw0001378077
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Eli on January 29, 2016, 05:43:01 PM
He was a brilliant writer and an important thinker, sure (and some more things as well, e.g. popularizer of Newtonian mechanics in France). He still was a smug bastard to make such cheap fun of a genius like Leibniz.

As Voltaire was very strongly against established religion but still some kind of Deist, I really do doubt that the Freemason Mozart of 1790 would have been so strongly opposed to him.

My question is apart from music, how much of an intellectual was Mozart?
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Jo498 on February 05, 2016, 12:58:10 AM
Mozart was not an intellectual but neither was he only interested in music and ignorant of everything else.

We know that he joined the freemasons and wrote music for them, that he probably generally supported the reforms of Emperor Joseph and like many Germans/Austrians seems to have been horrified by the French revolution but supportive of "enlightened" social reforms (e.g. cutting back privileges of nobility and Church) without completely overturning the "old order".
If you can get hold of Volkmar Braunbehrens' book on Mozart (it's "Mozart in Wien" in German, not sure about translations) it has something about these topics, e.g. which non-music books had been in Mozart's possession etc.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on February 20, 2016, 05:19:21 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbqOFL7WwAAjpuB.jpg:large)
A Survey of Mozart Piano Sonata Cycles
Updated from W.Klien to V.Perlemutter

 (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2016/02/a-survey-of-mozart-piano-sonata-cycles.html)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 09, 2016, 05:12:58 PM

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Keyboard Sonatas vol.8 & 9, Kristian Bezuidenhout (fortepiano), (Harmonia Mundi)

There have been fortepianists before Ronald Brautigam and Kristian Bezuidenhout upon whose shoulders those two might be said to stand. But none had managed to so convincingly bring the fortepiano into the mainstream.

(http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jenslaurson/files/2016/03/Forbes_Classica-CD-of-the-Week_Harmonia-Mundi_Mozart_Bezuidenhout_Sonatas1600-1200x469.jpg)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jenslaurson/2016/03/09/classical-cd-of-the-week-mozart-sonatas-for-fortepiano/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jenslaurson/2016/03/09/classical-cd-of-the-week-mozart-sonatas-for-fortepiano//#2202ad6627f0)

Nice review, Jens. I liked to see the mention of his Sturm und Drang disk, which is, I would say, an underground classic. It is strange, in a way, that the only mentions I seem to see of this series have been negative, and not many of those either. Not really sure why that is, I have liked everything I've heard from Bezuidenhout. That said, I would greatly enjoy to see/hear his take on Haydn.

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Archaic Torso of Apollo on March 09, 2016, 06:13:39 PM
I liked to see the mention of his Sturm und Drang disk, which is, I would say, an underground classic.

I have that disc! I got it a couple years ago when I was learning to play K. 540 on the piano. It's quite fascinating.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on March 10, 2016, 02:59:42 AM
I liked to see the mention of his Sturm und Drang disk, which is, I would say, an underground classic.


Quite! I remember, vaguely, getting that hint from someone when I worked at Tower Records... about that young, unknown forte-pianist and a disc on an equally unknown label. Got it immediately for the store and shortly thereafter for myself.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Gurn Blanston on March 10, 2016, 12:50:42 PM
I have that disc! I got it a couple years ago when I was learning to play K. 540 on the piano. It's quite fascinating.
Quite! I remember, vaguely, getting that hint from someone when I worked at Tower Records... about that young, unknown forte-pianist and a disc on an equally unknown label. Got it immediately for the store and shortly thereafter for myself.

Yes to all of that. I hadn't given much thought to Mozart as a Sturmer or Dranger beyond the frequently mentioned g minor symphonies, but I was pleasantly surprised to see his various minor key keyboard works collected this way, they make rather an imposing resumé if one wants to make that argument. Surprisingly, I had heard of Bezuidenhout already, I had his Beethoven sonatas with Mullova before the solo Mozart, pretty much liked that one too. :)

8)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on April 21, 2016, 01:21:13 AM

Latest on Forbes.com:
Classical CD Of The Week: Living History Mozart (http://bit.ly/CDoftheWeek008)

Paul Badura-Skoda seems like a pianist from another era – t’is almost surprising he
is still alive and busily recording! But he certainly is – and the wealth of his musical
knowledge shows in this latest of his recent Mozart solo-recordings on a 1790s
Anton Weller instrument....

(http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jenslaurson/files/2016/04/Forbes_Classica-CD-of-the-Week_GRAMOLA_Mozart_Badura-Skoda_Sonatas_1200-1200x469.jpg)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jenslaurson/2016/04/20/classical-cd-of-the-week-living-history-mozart/ (http://bit.ly/CDoftheWeek008)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on May 12, 2016, 01:27:28 PM

Latest on Forbes.com:
Classical CD Of The Week: Mozart With Je Ne Sais Quoi (http://bit.ly/CDoftheWeek011)

To say that Mozart wrote some pieces that are greater than others is not to
denigrate the miracle-man from Salzburg. Even to say that he is an overrated
composer – which as the easily most popular classical composer, relative to
his colleagues, he must be – doesn’t put a dent into his magnificent, ravishing
output. So to say that Mozart’s violin concertos are wonderful works but not
of the same complexity and even quality as, for example, the later piano
concertos; to say that three of them are plenty in one sitting, and to say that
it needn’t always be a complete recording of all five to adequately satisfy the
daily dose of Mozart, doesn’t constitute a Lèse-majesté...

(http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jenslaurson/files/2016/05/Forbes_Classica-CD-of-the-Week_HAENSSLER_Mozart_F-P-Zimmerman_Violin-Concertos_Laurson_1200-1200x469.jpg)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jenslaurson/2016/05/12/classicalcdoftheweekzimmermann/ (http://bit.ly/CDoftheWeek011)
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Que on May 12, 2016, 09:18:14 PM
Interesting review, Jens.  :)
I'm glad you mentioned Zehetmair/Brüggen ; for me that recording is a miracle is inspiration, variety of detail and panache...

You mention in the review Zimmerman's tone. For myself the tone of a violinist is of primary concern.
If I don't like the tone, no matter how technically and even musically accomplished the playing.... it is no go... ::)

Q
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on May 12, 2016, 11:37:29 PM
Interesting review, Jens.  :)
I'm glad you mentioned Zehetmair/Brüggen ; for me that recording is a miracle is inspiration, variety of detail and panache...

You mention in the review Zimmerman's tone. For myself the tone of a violinist is of primary concern.
If I don't like the tone, no matter how technically and even musically accomplished the playing.... it is no go... ::)

Q

As such, there is absolutely NO problem with Zimmermann's tone. He's a dead-on, rock-solid violinist with a full, never whiney tone. The instance I mentioned relates to one movement in direct comparison to, say, Steinbacher... and I would never have noticed it... but my girlfriend, perhaps in a slightly ungenerous mood, didn't like it then and there and listening to it with that in mind, I could see where she's coming from. (Though I disagree.) I think she would prefer Zukerman in these, tone-wise... but I hope she wouldn't be able to stand the syrup.
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: king ubu on May 13, 2016, 01:46:06 AM
I like Zimmermann a lot, also his earlier Mozart Cycle (Württembergisches Kammerorchester Heilbronn, rec. 1984-87), have only given the two new discs a cursory listen so far though. Seems I made the right decision to get them!

Other recent favourites include Manze (yes indeed!) and Julia Fischer, who might be a tad too tidy, but still very good.

Of the old generation, I guess it's Grumiaux and Szeryng for me - though I dearly love the Stern/Zukerman/Barenboim KV 364, too. Need to revisit Oistrakh (conducting the Berlin Philharmonic himself, 1971), and yeah, that Zukerman cycle, too. And I guess I'd kill to have a proper cycle by Erica Morini ...
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: Scion7 on May 13, 2016, 02:12:38 AM
"which as the easily most popular classical composer, relative to his colleagues" - what's this statement based on?  Beethoven's works are pretty damned popular. Wolfgang's got the edge in opera, of course . . .
Title: Re: Mozart
Post by: jlaurson on May 13, 2016, 02:34:29 AM
"which as the easily most popular classical composer, relative to his colleagues" - what's this statement based on?  Beethoven's works are pretty damned popular. Wolfgang's got the edge in opera, of course . . .

Based on my opinion, naturally. In a piece somewhere else, I've just called Beetho