# Mozart's late instrumental music is disappointing.



## GMB (10 mo ago)

I have long been disappointed by Mozart's instrumental music after the two great symphonies k550 & 551 in the summer of 1788.
The chamber works of trios, string quartets and string quintets are not as memorable as the earlier ones. The piano sonatas k570 & 576 and the concerto k595 likewise are pale reminders of the earlier sonatas and concertos.
The only new and memorable works are due to the instrument, the clarinet, being of course, the quintet and concerto k581 & k622.
Even the unfinished Requiem k626 is not as consistantly memorable as the Mass in C minor k427.
I wonder if Mozart reached his peak with the last three symphonies nos 39-41 in the summer of 1788.After that the works seem tired and a poor imitation of the earlier great works in the same forms.
Does anyone agree or have any thoughts about the later works?


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Terms like "pale" or "poor imitation" are overstatements for my money. I also happen to prefer some of the piano concertos and sonatas Mozart composed slightly earlier, for example, but IMO the difference is one of tone and atmosphere, not one of quality.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I mostly disagree. 
But I think the key here is to realize that Mozart usually was very practical. Maybe in rare cases like the quartets dedicated to Haydn or the last three symphonies he had a more "systematic" approach in mind, demonstrating the state of the art. 
But practical demands trumped this most of the time. If something didn't sell or the publisher didn't like it (as in the case of the piano quartets or maybe also the Prussian quartets that remained only 3 etc.) he stopped. When he stopped playing his own piano concertos because he had big opera projects or whatever, he stopped composing piano concerti, so the last one is a kind of "afterthought" and the K 537 was for a particular occasion and an audience not so familiar with/to him. 
The different style of the Prussian quartets (I don't think they are any worse than the 7 before) can be explained along similar lines; probably the same with the two later string quintets (of which I like K 593 as much as K 516 and 614 again seems different on purpose, to try a somewhat more popular? style).
The last piano sonata is actually my favorite but Mozart wrote so few sonatas in his later Vienna years and rather unsystematically that one should not draw any conclusions.

Mozart's great projects 1789-91 were Cosi and Magic flute and he still managed to write a lot of other stuff, including Clemenza di Tito. From what I recall from letters and biographies, opera was of supreme importance for him, not only, but also for business and publicity reasons and would always take preference over instrumental compositions.

I agree wrt the Requiem but here we have the most obvious explanation, it's incomplete because he died.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Personally I rate the clarinet quintet (1789), clarinet concerto (1791) and the requiem (1791) much higher than the three last symphonies (or the Mass in C minor), so no, I don't agree.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

He did write a clarinet concerto which is one of the most sublime utterances ever!


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

Whatever "late" might mean with a composer dying at age of 35 - I would make allowance for other priorities, as Kreisler jr pointed out, and I wouldn't forget that Beethoven wrote a fourth symphony after the Eroica. 

If Beethoven had died after the fourth symphony, would we regard it as "disappointing", "not memorable", "tired and poor imitation"?


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

Philidor said:


> Whatever "late" might mean with a composer dying at age of 35 - I would make allowance for other priorities, as Kreisler jr pointed out, and I wouldn't forget that Beethoven wrote a fourth symphony after the Eroica.
> 
> If Beethoven had died after the fourth symphony, would we regard it as "disappointing", "not memorable", "tired and poor imitation"?


No we would not because the fourth symphony is none of those things, it might not be very original but it's really memorable and definitely not poor imitation by any means


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

EvaBaron said:


> No we would not because the fourth symphony is none of those things, it might not be very original but it's really memorable and definitely not poor imitation by any means


I fully agree! But neither did I say that Mozart's "late" instrumental music was disappointing.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

One might as well argue that Mozart's peak was actually 1786 (Figaro, quartet K 499, Concertos K 488, 491, 503) or 1787 (Don Giovanni, K 504, 515/516...) as he didn't write an opera in 1788 and "only" the trio K 563 as a major chamber work)...

And which 1789-91 piece of Mozart's seems like a "poor imitation" of an earlier one? 

While I don't think they are imitations, the only case where I could understand this charge to an extent are the last two piano concerti (one of which is already from 1788).


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

I think what the OP does not take into account is the history of Mozart’s life in that around the time of his death he was weighed down with work and financial difficulties. He was trying to get two operas finished (one of which is an acknowledged masterpiece) and the Requiem. He also wrote a sublime clarinet concerto around this time. Then he suddenly died. We simply don’t know how he would’ve developed had he lived so it seems to me quite preposterous to assume he had somehow ‘peaked’ and was declining. We know that Beethoven had some fallow years in midlife and then produced some of his greatest masterpieces. So I think the OP is basing his charge on very faulty assumptions


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The difference is that Beethoven composed hardly anything in some years (ca. 1814-17) because of various difficulties whereas Mozart did compose many major works 1789-91, it's just that the OP does not find them as impressive as the ones from 1785-88. I am not looking up the exact biographical circumstances but I think one should take into account that Mozart wrote two operas (and the short Schauspieldirektor) within the 6 years 1783-88 and three within the 3 years 1789-91, so it's hardly surprising that he wrote not quite as many instrumental pieces.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

marlow said:


> I think what the OP does not take into account is the history of Mozart's life in that around the time of his death he was weighed down with work and financial difficulties. He was trying to get two operas finished (one of which is an acknowledged masterpiece) and the Requiem. He also wrote a sublime clarinet concerto around this time. Then he suddenly died. We simply don't know how he would've developed had he lived so it seems to me quite preposterous to assume he had somehow 'peaked' and was declining. We know that Beethoven had some fallow years in midlife and then produced some of his greatest masterpieces. So I think the OP is basing his charge on very faulty assumptions


Maybe someone else can confirm this but someone once said to me that people complained about Mozart's music that it was too dense, that there were too many notes. I think the suggestion was that the Viennese especially had this problem. And some of the later pieces seem to have less notes, seem to be simpler and more lyrical. Of course there are exceptions -- the last piano sonata, that thing for musical clock etc. But still some of the music is maybe an attempt to crowd please, and hence make more $$$$$, by responding to criticism he'd received.

Notwithstanding this, I think it would be hard to make out that there's a decline in his later years. I mean, I just don't see the Prussian quartets and the Hoffmeister as a step down in quality from the op 10 set -- just different.

My experiences is that some of the late pieces are just extremely hard to play! K 547 and K 595 are great favourites of mine -- but that's due to knowing just one performance of each which enlightened me (Frankl and Gilels respectively)


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

You're entitled to your preferences, but to me all this talk about "preferring A over B" in a music forum has no more meaning than "preferring apple over banana", imv. It's subjective. For instance, I appreciate the 3 organ works from 1790~1791, but I don't expect anyone to "agree" with me on those.



GMB said:


> Even the unfinished Requiem k626 is not as consistantly memorable as the Mass in C minor k427.


In these years, maybe Mozart's focus was more on vocal stuff. I've found the requiem more "exotic", due to elements like;
"A soprano solo is sung to the Te decet hymnus text in the _tonus peregrinus_. The choir continues, repeating the psalmtone while singing the _Exaudi orationem meam_ section. The melody used for both parts is based on the German plainchant _Meine Seele erhebt den Herren_. Then, the principal theme is treated by the choir and the orchestra in downward-gliding sixteenth-notes. The courses of the melodies, whether held up or moving down, change and interlace amongst themselves, while passages in counterpoint and in unison (e.g., Et lux perpetua) alternate; all this creates the charm of this movement, which finishes with a half cadence on the dominant."

Also, 3 fugues that blend together as a sort of a fantasia, climaxing dramatically with a dominant pedal, and then a passionate melody in the soprano, and then a recitation of a plainchant that concludes the movement. K.427 doesn't have this, for instance:




(Domine Jesu)

Listen to the explanation at 8:12 







^Also about Die Zauberflöte, btw, I like how Mozart makes up for his conspicuous lack of music for equal voices (which the Salzburg Haydn has in abundance) with this work. So there are always new, special things to discover about his stuff from 1789~1791.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> The last piano sonata is actually my favorite but Mozart wrote so few sonatas in his later Vienna years and rather unsystematically that one should not draw any conclusions.


Also, people tend to forget K.448, K.497, K.521


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Philidor said:


> Whatever "late" might mean with a composer dying at age of 35 - I would make allowance for other priorities, as Kreisler jr pointed out, and I wouldn't forget that Beethoven wrote a fourth symphony after the Eroica.
> 
> If Beethoven had died after the fourth symphony, would we regard it as "disappointing", "not memorable", "tired and poor imitation"?


Beethoven's Fourth Symphony is a masterpiece that keeps the music in motion throughout. It is also longer than his Fifth Symphony, so it's not a "slender maiden." But people don't like it because they're under the impression that great music has to be *dark*. They're wrong.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I love the Clarinet Concerto, Piano Concerto no. 27, String Quintet no. 6, and the Clarinet Quintet. They are some of my favorite works by Mozart.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

No, I don't agree at all that his later works are in anyway less memorable or poor imitations of his early works.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I do agree with you regarding the "memorable" quality of the Clarinet Quintet and Clarinet Concerto. In fact, I consider them far more musically satisfying than any or all of the composer's symphonies. I prefer the sounds of the Divertimento K. 563 over the symphonies as well.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

How anyone could call the first movement of this unmemorable beats me. It's a good example of the late Mozart style which is so problematic. But to me it is masterful stuff, totally charming.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

crunchy dissonances @4:23, 5:20




K.537/i




K.574


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

"Mozart connoisseurs and admirers know of course about what is bizarre in the finale of his very last string quartet, K. 590. In its development the harshness of the tone language is particularly unparalleled in the Mozart oeuvre. But the unsettling already starts shortly before the end of the first section: The otherwise so airily sparkling sixteenth notes stall all of a sudden in an almost stranded-like repetitive three-note kink. It is just this spot that Mozart vehemently corrected in his manuscript. 
This spluttering three-note figure, in itself circular, seized up, as it were, against the meter,








_Mm. 122-125, vln 1_​dominates the whole development after its first occurrence and is, of course, heard once again at the end of the movement. Mozart later scrupulously corrected it wherever and in whichever part it appears as well. And indeed, to be specific, its articulation. If in the first draft he had always put sixteenths together in a large legato phrase, then he later corrected the legato (but did not cross it out or erase it in the autograph) by placing under the respective notes the familiar two-note grouping of slurs and staccatos:








_Autograph, mm. 122-125, vln 1_​To date I have never encountered any other autograph where Mozart made such a striking, systematic change in the articulation. Notes, yes, dynamics, yes, but articulation over such a long stretch? ..."
<The charm of the unsettling. A special autograph correction of Mozart's in the finale of the F-major string quartet K. 590>


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Bearing in mind how prolific Mozart was during all stages of his career it's no surprise that amongst the many gems there are a few mediocrities. Had he lived even just another ten years he would have scaled the heights again and again, and no doubt during that ten years there would also be the pieces of varying difficulty for students, assorted pot-boilers, commissions for which he had little enthusiasm and musical gifts for friends and family just as there always were.


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

This is k526, BEFORE k550-551!


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

I exempted the clarinet works. I think he was captivated by the instrument's range but particularly by Anton Stadler's performances!


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

Had he lived another 10 years Beethoven would have taken over and what would have happened to Mozart? An anachronism? A throw-back from the past? What do Beethoven fans think,I wonder!


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> Personally I rate the clarinet quintet (1789), clarinet concerto (1791) and the requiem (1791) much higher than the three last symphonies (or the Mass in C minor), so no, I don't agree.


The _*2nd mvt.*_ _*adagio*_ of the *Clarinet Concerto in A *is so very fine.






Wasn't the clarinet not all that popular until Mozart embraced it? I mean, weren't oboes the WW of choice?


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

If all or most Mozart 1789-91 was like K 547 (composed already 1788, like K 545, and Kleine Nachtmusik is from 1787, showing that Mozart was not only composing g minor quintets and symphonies in these years...) I'd almost agree with the OP. But this is obviously not the case.


----------



## GMB (10 mo ago)

These works which I love are all BEFORE k550-551, which is just the point I was making!


----------



## FrankinUsa (Aug 3, 2021)

I disagree. And previous posters have provided plenty of examples


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

I don't relate to the sentiment "Late Mozart". All we have is music going from decent to excellent, Early Mozart changing the game up forever. Late Mozart would be a whole other thing.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

GMB said:


> Had he lived another 10 years Beethoven would have taken over and what would have happened to Mozart? An anachronism? A throw-back from the past? What do Beethoven fans think,I wonder!


If Mozart lived a more prosperous life, we would have Late Mozart. Because Mozart began where music was decent, and evolved it to sheer excellence, respectfully I'm afraid my boy would decimate Beethoven's ego. The works produced might be better than anything we currently have, it's hard to estimate exactly how they'd sound, and he would start to gain some popularity with the mainstream. But we also wouldn't have Beethoven forming his exact style at that time, the influences of Mozart and Classicism would have impact a bit further (although I like to think of it as Mozartian Romanticism.)


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

GMB said:


> Had he lived another 10 years Beethoven would have taken over and what would have happened to Mozart? An anachronism? A throw-back from the past? What do Beethoven fans think,I wonder!


You appear not to have realised that within his lifetime Mozart was developing forms himself all the time in much of what he wrote. If he had lived he would have continued to evolve them.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

It's not helpful to get hung up on the word "late". The OP was quite precise, he meant works from late 1788 or early 1789 onwards.

While I disagree with the OP, see above, the position is not totally absurd wrt instrumental music. The quartets dedicated to Haydn from 1782-85 and the quintets from 1787 are a bit more famous than the "Prussian" quartets and last two string quintets (although not by much and many will appreciate the later works as much, and there is of course the popular clarinet quintet as well). 
And compared to the extraordinary series of 15 piano concertos from 1782-86 (K 413 - 503) the clarinet concerto and K 595 can seem like lightweight "afterthoughts". 

It seems that Mozart did lack opportunities in 1789-90 compared to earlier years as Cosi was the only large scale project. He also did 3 Handel arrangements (the first already in 1788), apparently because he could not get anything more lucrative. His last year, 1791, was again considerably more busy with an "Akademie" (concert) with Stadler and later two operas (he had assistants do the recitatives in Tito because he was busy with Magic Flute) and the Requiem.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Kreisler jr said:


> The quartets dedicated to Haydn from 1782-85 and the quintets from 1787 are a bit more famous than the "Prussian" quartets and last two string quintets (although not by much and many will appreciate the later works as much, and there is of course the popular clarinet quintet as well).


All the talk of "fame" and "popularity" is puzzling. If we're using them as objective parameters, K.525 would be the "greatest" work Mozart ever wrote. (And I still stand by what I said in <Why do people consider Beethoven's 9th Symphony one of the greatest compositions ever> regarding Eschberg's writings.)


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Had Mozart lived long enough to hear works by Beethoven, he'd have assimilated it and created something competitive, if not one step beyond. 

Mozart would NOT have stayed in some Classical "rut" after hearing Beethoven; he would have risen to the occasion.

Beethoven would have, no doubt, heard Mozart's new "late" works, and stepped it up a bit as well. Healthy competition.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

pianozach said:


> Had Mozart lived long enough to hear works by Beethoven, he'd have assimilated it and created something competitive, if not one step beyond.


Not to disparage any artist, it's hard to imagine Mozart would have approved of the idioms* of Beethoven, Berlioz, Schubert, etc. He would have dismissed them for not keeping the "rules of good taste". The reason why the later generations appreciated them* is because they grew up with the more "modernist" or "relaxed" ways of musical thinking. It's nonsensical to expect Mozart would have thought the same way as us and approved of Beethoven's way of composing, simply because we do. <If Mozart lived longer how would he have impacted the romantic era?>



pianozach said:


> Mozart would NOT have stayed in some Classical "rut" after hearing Beethoven


Think of Hasse (1699), Richter (1709), C.P.E. Bach (1714), etc, all of whom lived up to the late 18th century, -what they did in their late music. Also, why pigeonhole the style as "some Classical rut", when there are varieties, stylistic phenomena that the label "Classical" (at least people's ordinary conception of "Classical") can't describe or explain fully.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

*Mozart's late instrumental music is disappointing.*

I frowned with surprise when I saw this topic heading.

Had it been posted on April 1, I may have smiled instead.


----------



## Terrapin (Apr 15, 2011)

There's nothing disappointing about the Prussian quartets, the clarinet quintet, and the last two string quintets, all written after his symphonies.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> Not to disparage any artist, it's hard to imagine Mozart would have approved of the idioms* of Beethoven, Berlioz, Schubert, etc. He would have dismissed them for not keeping the "rules of good taste". The reason why the later generations appreciated them* is because they grew up with the more "modernist" or "relaxed" ways of musical thinking. It's nonsensical to expect Mozart would have thought the same way as us and approved of Beethoven's way of composing, simply because we do. <If Mozart lived longer how would he have impacted the romantic era?>
> 
> Think of Hasse (1699), Richter (1709), C.P.E. Bach (1714), etc, all of whom lived up to the late 18th century, -what they did in their late music. Also, why pigeonhole the style as "some Classical rut", when there are varieties, stylistic phenomena that the label "Classical" (at least people's ordinary conception of "Classical") can't describe or explain fully.


I'll respectfully disagree. We really cannot know with any degree of certainty what sort of trajectory Mozart's music might have taken.

BUT, he was a musical genius, and I daresay that he would have seen that "the times they are a-changin'", and would have been at the crest of new idioms.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> Not to disparage any artist, it's hard to imagine Mozart would have approved of the idioms* of Beethoven, Berlioz, Schubert, etc. He would have dismissed them for not keeping the "rules of good taste"... It's nonsensical to expect Mozart would have thought the same way as us and approved of Beethoven's way of composing, simply because we do.


Yup. People have it backwards imo. While I can't argue much of Mozart's misfortune is catalytic to Beethoven, something like the Ode Movement is unparalleled by it's own standard, and I've no qualms whether possible that Wolfgang would've soared beyond that in his own right or not, via opera and whatever modus, fully dependent of course on if he lived a less complicated composer's life (which was the question.) The proof is already there.


----------



## neoshredder (Nov 7, 2011)

Having bad health probably didn’t help things. But amazing how well he did despite that. You can’t always be at your top game. Though Mozart got close.


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

I think Mozart's instrumental music _improved_ after 1788. The late string quintets are richer and more complex than anything he had composed before. And I mean, the Violet quartet alone:






One of the most beautiful works ever composed...


----------

