Mahler is guaranteed to make me drift into a coma........ I don't dislike Mozart, coopmv, it's just that most of his music doesn't float my boat. I find it too light, dare I say too superficial and with far too much wig powder....... Only my own personal opinion of course
I used to feel exactly the same way about Mozart. Too light and predictable. So I avoided it for years. Then I started listening to the piano sonatas one by one and found myself really enjoying them and finding subtleties I previously missed. Next I went for the symphonies and found myself enjoying them for the exact same reasons I disliked them originally. Light? Maybe. But there are times I just don't want to be challenged and just enjoy well written music and now Mozart fills that need perfectly for me. As you said, opinions may differ! There's mine FWIW..........
Nice post, Eigenvector I think I'm on the very same journey. I don't think I will end up a total Wolfie fan-boy but I think I'm going to appreciate much more of his work than before. Just need to dust off the powder from time to time Ironically possibly, I like Haydn very much. Less frivolous than Mozart, maybe a little more formal (serious?), but with a keen sense of fun (and humour).
It makes me sneeze a bit too often, but I do like some of his works, such as the later symphonies, the later sonatas for piano and violin and some of the piano sonatas, and I'm a big fan of many of his piano concertos.
Excellent! To further expand on my thoughts, like @ibanez_ax and @J.A.W., I greatly prefer Mozart's later symphonies to the earlier ones and I also like many of the piano concertos. For some reason it was the piano sonatas which first drew me in to Mozart (Gieseking, specifically). I also really enjoy Haydn as well! As you said, much less frivolous. I can listen to Haydn just about anytime whereas I need to be in a particular frame of mind for Mozart.
Now @Wugged - about you not liking Mahler........ Just kidding, all of our different tastes make life interesting.
Sorry, ibanez It goes back to the early eighties. I went to a concert of a Mahler symphony (can't remember number) in Sheffield (my Yorkshire homeland). I was relatively new to classical music and I had not heard the piece beforehand. The symphony felt like it lasted one and a half days rather than the official one and a half hours. I think I fell asleep three times and woke up with a beard that wasn't there at the beginning It permanently scarred me, and now I run away screaming whenever the composer's name is uttered.........
I like to give Mozart a lot of leash. Yes, his early works are rather simple-- the first 20 or so of his symphonies written as a teenager. But in his short life he managed to stretch the bounds of the classical era to it's limits, which is what I judge him on. He was quoted towards the end of his life saying something about getting paid "too much for what I do, and too little for what I could do." And I think that points to his own frustration at having to satisfy customers who didn't want to be challenged with anything too "discordant" or (as Emperor Joseph complained) "far too many notes." Arguably (and IMHO), Mozart's last three symphonies--written in the span of only six weeks--structurally and dramatically exceed anything Haydn managed in his lifetime... and I don't believe there is any evidence Mozart ever heard them performed in his lifetime (and was probably not paid). Beethoven broke all bounds with his "Eroica" symphony, but that was over a decade after Mozart's death. So when I look for "Classical" era works, I love Haydn... but I consider most of Mozart's output in the last decade of his life to represent the pinnacle of that era.
To expand upon this, while his earlier works are quite a bit simpler than his later works, Mozart always had a gift for texture and melody. Some of this early works, such as the violin concertos, divertimentos and the like are highly enjoyable. That said, after being introduced to the work of Bach, Handel and the other baroque masters under the tutelage of Baron von Swieten, his works from that time on (early 1780’s) have an increased focus on contrapuntal textures. As such, many of his works from this point going forward - the “Haydn” quartets, the string quintets, clarinet quintet, the late masses (Mass in C minor, Requiem), the later symphonies (35-41), the later piano concertos (19-27), the clarinet concerto, Sinfonia Concertante K364, concerto for 2 pianos K365, to name but a few - represent the apotheosis of the classical form. In light of that, it’s easy to see why Beethoven had to forge a new path. While his early works clearly owe a great debt to Haydn and Mozart, he couldn’t really take to traditional classical form any further.
I don't know about Sibelius' "Finlandia," but the other works sound great in these arrangements. I was initially puzzled as to why it took 3 guitars to play Albenez' "Leyenda," which works fine on one guitar, but this is a wild re-imagining of the piece.
Primephonic. DAVID - Symphonies 1 & 6 CPO 777 741-2 [GH] Classical Music Reviews: August 2014 - MusicWeb-International
I am at best only neutral with Mahler music though I am somewhat fascinated with the origin of the lyrics for his Das Lied von der Erde ...
Now playing CD1 - Symphonies Nos 82 - 84 from the following twofer, a recent acquisition for a first listen ...
Now playing CD2 - Symphonies Nos 85 - 87 from the following twofer, a recent acquisition for a first listen ...
These chamber works by Spanish composer Ramon Lazkano are ideally suited to the immense talents on display by the amazing ensemble recherche, one of the truly great new music ensembles in the world.
