# Mozart: Piano Concerto #20 in D minor, K. 466



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Mozart: Piano Concerto #20 in D minor, K. 466, is one of the most beloved and popular in the repertoire - at the moment, it is even tied (with Brahms's 2nd) as the most strongly recommended piano concerto on the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works.

Wikipedia's article about it has a little analysis that amounts to a bit of a listening guide. The best source for recording recommendations is probably Trout's blog post on this work:



> Condensed Listing:
> 1.	Serkin, Szell (cond.), Columbia Symphony Orchestra	(1963)
> 2.	Brendel, Marriner (cond.), Academy of St. Martin in the Fields	(1974)
> 3.	Haskil, Markevitch (cond.), Orchestre des Concerts Lamoureux	(1960)
> ...


*Anyway, the main questions are: Do you like this work? What do you like about it? Do you have any reservations about it?*

And of course, what are your favorite recordings?


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

One question to think about here is the best pace to take the second movement


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I love it. There are several really good recordings - I like Brautigam and Andsnes (among those not in your list) - but I think Goode's is the most consistently satisfying. Zacharias in his first set (I haven't heard the second one) is also good but you have to tolerate his very eccentric insertion of a recording of the D minor chord (from Don Giovanni) at the start of the final movement cadenza. In general, and although it is perhaps not "historically correct" I like for there to be a conductor as well as a pianist: you tend to get a greater sense of interplay between the two. Goode at least plays with an orchestra that always works without a conductor.


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> One question to think about here is the best pace to take the second movement


About 48 beats per minute? That gives the quavers a nice sense of direction I think.

What I find more interesting about this concerto is that the piano part is just the skeleton of a more virtuosic solo part to be filled in by the pianist (it was one of the concerto's Mozart composed for himself to play) rather than the more _fully_ written out piano parts in the concertos he wrote for his students. I haven't actually heard more than a couple of recordings of this concerto and I haven't heard it in a long time, so I think it would be a really good concerto to compare performances of to see how different pianists 'complete' the rather empty solo part (which is frankly, rather dull as it is on the page).

I'd appreciate recommendations of performances to get a sense of how the piano part is properly embellished and more _completed_ according to the musical sensibilities of different musicians.......


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I listened to every version up till the last decade and have 11 versions. The most dramatic by far, at least in the 1st movement, is Kovacevich and Davis. A very lyrical version with great technique and control is by Howard Shelley. Gardiner and Bilson also have a dramatic version, but the piano sound is more constricted.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)




----------



## Mifek (Jul 28, 2018)

I like this concerto very much, even though it doesn't make my top ten list. My favorite recording is by Clara Haskil and Otto Klemperer with the Lucerne Festival Orchestra.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

shirime said:


> What I find more interesting about this concerto is that the piano part is just the skeleton of a more virtuosic solo part to be filled in by the pianist (it was one of the concerto's Mozart composed for himself to play) rather than the more _fully_ written out piano parts in the concertos he wrote for his students.


I didn't know this, thanks for pointing it out. Is it more than cadenzas and transitions which are missing from the autograph?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

It just sounds like pleasant background music to me.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

I just don't derive much aesthetic satisfaction from this piece. My preferences are for 13,15,19,21,23 and 25.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

> It just sounds like pleasant background music to me.


It's one of the most dramatic and tension-loaded works by Mozart.

I've accumulated a good deal through the years, on CD and LP, and some weren't mentioned, including famous historical ones.

Lefebure/Furtwängler has better sound than many Furtwängler releases.

Peter Breiner is very interesting IMO, using jazz cadenzas.

- Schnabel,Susskind,Philh/tim 48-01 10cd 205218-303
- Kissin,Spivakov,MoscVirt/sony 25cd 888 75 127202
- A.R.Schmidt,Masur,DresdPO/berlclass 10cd 72-78-10 0300035
- Schiff,Vegh,MozO/decca 95 9cd 448 140-2
- Michelangeli,Caracciolo,NapO/bramante 58-95 blicd7001
- Anda,SalzbCam/dg 8 cd469 510-2
- Michelangeli,Giulini,RAI/artone mono 51-05 222354-254
- M.Meyer,soli/int media 17cd 1953 600.209
- Kempff,Kempen,DresdPO/artone mono 4cd 41 222368-354 etc.
- Peter Breiner,CassPh/linz hnh 93 48102
- Argerich,Rabinovitch,Padova-VenetoO/teldec 99 4509 98407-2
- Serkin,Ormandy,PhiladO/membran 51-05 222369 etc.
- Perahia,ECO/cbs m13 k42055
- B.Walter,WPO/emi 3lp mono 1cd 147 50178-80
- B.Walter,NBC SO/gdi della classica 39-93 93.5116 3/4
- Lefebure,Furtwängler,SuiItRSO/ermitage 54-92 erm 120
- Barenboim,ECO/emi 12lp 1c 197-52249 60
- Richter,Sanderling,NatPO/vox "st" s-pl 316.500
- Rubinstein,Wallenstein,RCAVictSO/rca 3lp ser5716-18
- Casadesus,Szell,ColSO/cbs mono 2lp y2 34641
- Serkin,Szell,O/cbs 64-81 st 60129
- P.Entremont,J.Entremont,FrankSO/concert hall mono 2149
- Haskil,Swoboda,WStOpO/westm mono wl 5054 
- Bashkirov,Sondeckis,LithCO/mel 83 c10 20133 006
- Judina,Gortschakoff,USSRRSO/euro 301 982-445
- Haskil,Markevich,LamO/ph 6747 055
- Han,Freeman,PO/brilliant 170cd 95010


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

shirime said:


> About 48 beats per minute? That gives the quavers a nice sense of direction I think.


When I made that post I was confusing PC20 and PC21! Sorry.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

It's one of my favorite Mozart piano concertos, but together with, not above, Nos. 21, 23, 24 and 27.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

joen_cph said:


> It's one of the most dramatic and tension-loaded works by Mozart.


I learned not to take janxharris seriously. He _likes_ modern pop music Is Pop/Rock music more emotionally shallow than Classical?


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

hammeredklavier said:


> I learned not to take janxharris seriously. He _likes_ modern pop music Is Pop/Rock music more emotionally shallow than Classical?


How provocative hammeredklavier...


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

hammeredklavier said:


> I learned not to take janxharris seriously. He _likes_ modern pop music Is Pop/Rock music more emotionally shallow than Classical?


Sure I love some popular music, though it tends to be the more obscure stuff. None of it would probably feature in my top twenty though...ish....

Music is music for me hammeredklavier - I just happen to love certain classical pieces more than 'popular'.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

hammeredklavier said:


> I learned not to take janxharris seriously. ...


Well, I thought that the work's character at least had to be mentioned here ...


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

hammeredklavier said:


> I learned not to take janxharris seriously. He _likes_ modern pop music Is Pop/Rock music more emotionally shallow than Classical?


Actually, trying to discredit someone's opinion of this Mozart piece based on what other music they like to listen is below the belt.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

It seems to take top spot every time there is a poll of great PCs on TC - and it was the highest placed concerto of any kind in the big poll on TC all genres.

Utterly justified- its no wonder they used the 1st mvt main theme for the bleak Vienna winter street scenes in Amadeus. Its not just dramatic - the music of that 1st mvt has a haunting quality to it and ifyou really love this piece - never tire when the main themes repeat. The piano part - there are passages in the left hand - wild crazy demonic passages that I can imagine must have astonished Beethoven when he played this work. Was this the composer of countless fluffy serenades? The 2nd mvt starts deceptively - a serene world seems to beckon - and boom - out of nowhere a storm. The middle section is a real wonder - finally resolving after what seems like a long working out and the transition back to the opening theme is seamless. The last mvt is sheer entertainment and after what looks certain to be a tragic end the key suddenly changes and the last section is as as jubilant as anything he composed.

THIS is the concerto that confounds all the Mozart naysayers,along perhaps with the C minor - two works that really put all the overblown romantic era welly throwers firmly where they belong.


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

stomanek said:


> THIS is the concerto that confounds all the Mozart naysayers,along perhaps with the C minor - two works that really put all the overblown romantic era welly throwers firmly where they belong.


The two piano concertos Mozart wrote in minor keys were the ones the Romantic composers loved - for the same reasons you mention, I believe...


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Ras said:


> The two piano concertos Mozart wrote in minor keys were the ones the Romantic composers loved - for the same reasons you mention, I believe...


I know - I was referring, perhaps not too flatteringly - to modern listeners.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

stomanek said:


> I know - I was referring, perhaps not too flatteringly - to modern listeners.


BUT...the A major placed first in an Amazon poll.

1 - Piano Concerto #23 in A major, K. 488 (1786)
2 - Piano Concerto #24 in C minor, K. 491 (1786)
3 - Piano Concerto #20 in D minor, K. 466 (1785)
4 - Piano Concerto #19 in F major, K. 459 (1784)
5 - Piano Concerto #25 in C major, K. 503 (1786)
6 - Piano Concerto #22 in E-flat major, K. 482 (1785)
7 - Piano Concerto #9 in E-flat major, K. 271 (1777)
8 - Piano Concerto #21 in C major, K. 467 (1785)
9 - Piano Concerto #18 in B-flat major, K. 456 (1784)
10 - Piano Concerto #17 in G major, K. 453 (1784)


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

KenOC said:


> BUT...the A major placed first in an Amazon poll.
> 
> 1 - Piano Concerto #23 in A major, K. 488 (1786)
> 2 - Piano Concerto #24 in C minor, K. 491 (1786)
> ...


OK - so TC seem to disagree. Maybe some difference in the profile of amazon listeners compared with members of a classical music board. Still - personally speaking I could not split the top 5 Mozart concertos so 23 and 24 in the top 2 spots I have no issues with.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Piano Concerto No. 20 is one of the many works which have been popular ever since its inception. Beethoven and Brahms played it, and it remains one of the most recorded of Mozart’s concertos. 

It is unique for being among the few pieces by Mozart in a minor key. That may be a reason for its popularity, and not so surprising since atypical works have a tendency to enter the repertoire. The best example I can think of is the concerto by Grieg, a composer who otherwise avoided large scale symphonic works (apart from his posthumously published symphony).

I am not so much a fan of sturm und drang Mozart however I agree with the overall consensus that this and the seven concertos which follow are masterpieces - and I don’t use that word lightly. They are of the same caliber as Haydn’s London symphonies (No’s. 93-104).


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Definitely my favorite Mozart piano concerto, and I think this opinion is shared by most.

It’s funny, I first learned it from Serkin/Abbado as a kid. Now as an adult I can hear how his skills had diminished. But my appreciation for Serkin - especially his playing of the Beethoven cadenza - lends itself naturally to his earlier account with Szell, even though the accompaniment is rather straight-laced. I will have to check out the Serkin/Ormandy.

My favorites are E. Fischer and Curzon. I also like Richter, mainly for his use of the Beethoven cadenza.

For some reason I have never warmed up to Haskil. Her playing strikes me as bland.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

KenOC said:


> BUT...the A major placed first in an Amazon poll.
> 
> 1 - Piano Concerto #23 in A major, K. 488 (1786)
> 2 - Piano Concerto #24 in C minor, K. 491 (1786)
> ...


pc 19 should be no 9 on that list and no 18 should be 10


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Sid James said:


> Piano Concerto No. 20 is one of the many works which have been popular ever since its inception. Beethoven and Brahms played it, and it remains one of the most recorded of Mozart's concertos.
> 
> It is unique for being among the few pieces by Mozart in a minor key. That may be a reason for its popularity, and not so surprising since atypical works have a tendency to enter the repertoire. The best example I can think of is the concerto by Grieg, a composer who otherwise avoided large scale symphonic works (apart from his posthumously published symphony).
> 
> I am not so much a fan of sturm und drang Mozart however I agree with the overall consensus that this and the seven concertos which follow are masterpieces - and I don't use that word lightly. *They are of the same caliber as Haydn's London symphonies (No's. 93-104).*


I smile.

You should have said Beethoven's symphonies or Mozart's last 3.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

stomanek said:


> pc 19 should be no 9 on that list and no 18 should be 10


De gustibus etc. etc.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

stomanek said:


> pc 19 should be no 9 on that list and no 18 should be 10


27 should be top 5


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

stomanek said:


> I smile.
> 
> You should have said Beethoven's symphonies or Mozart's last 3.


How rude. Apart from what I said, I shouldn't have said anything.

If it's not clear to you, I was speaking of comparative sets of orchestral works (cycles if you like) of the late 18th century. In any case, if you want to exclude Haydn and elevate Mozart and Beethoven go for it.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

This was a concerto much admired (and played!) by Beethoven who wrote cadenzas for it. Great performance from Serkin / Szell although I have many others


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> I didn't know this, thanks for pointing it out. Is it more than cadenzas and transitions which are missing from the autograph?


Well, yes. Especially in passages where the LH accompaniment is just a couple of notes (or when it doesn't have any notes at all), and basically a lot of the Romanze is just a skeleton. It was common for him to fill out the rest of the music in performance; he knew what he wanted in his head so there was no need to compose much more than shorthand. I have a friend who is a pianist-composer and when he writes his own music he does the same thing; I think it's fairly standard to do this (actually even I do it when playing my own guitar pieces). Furthermore, there's an interesting letter (I think it was to his sister?) about the 21st Concerto where he replies to a question asking how one should 'fill in' a certain passage. He provides a much more elaborate, embellished piano part in response as a possible solution. 21 was also one of the concertos for himself, and the second movement is _especially_ lacking in detail. Different pianists do different things with it, and I'm personally a fan of Gulda's rather eccentric first recording which has rubato galore.

I'm not too familiar with the different interpretations of no. 20, however, so I would love to find out how different pianists approach the rather problematic piano part.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Sid James said:


> How rude. Apart from what I said, I shouldn't have said anything.
> 
> If it's not clear to you, I was speaking of comparative sets of orchestral works (cycles if you like) of the late 18th century. In any case, if you want to exclude Haydn and elevate Mozart and Beethoven go for it.


I respect your opinion that they are on the same level as Haydn's late symphonies and obviously from my reply you will gather that I just think they deserve a better comparison according to my own tastes. No offence was intended.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

shirime said:


> Well, yes. Especially in passages where the LH accompaniment is just a couple of notes (or when it doesn't have any notes at all), and basically a lot of the Romanze is just a skeleton. It was common for him to fill out the rest of the music in performance; he knew what he wanted in his head so there was no need to compose much more than shorthand. I have a friend who is a pianist-composer and when he writes his own music he does the same thing; I think it's fairly standard to do this (actually even I do it when playing my own guitar pieces). Furthermore, there's an interesting letter (I think it was to his sister?) about the 21st Concerto where he replies to a question asking how one should 'fill in' a certain passage. He provides a much more elaborate, embellished piano part in response as a possible solution. 21 was also one of the concertos for himself, and the second movement is _especially_ lacking in detail. Different pianists do different things with it, and I'm personally a fan of Gulda's rather eccentric first recording which has rubato galore.
> 
> I'm not too familiar with the different interpretations of no. 20, however, so I would love to find out how different pianists approach the rather problematic piano part.


From what I understand Mozart filled out the right hand part only for some of the concerti. The 2nd mvt I think this must be the case at least as the piano part in the middle section of the 2nd mvt is so complex.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

stomanek said:


> I respect your opinion that they are on the same level as Haydn's late symphonies and obviously from my reply you will gather that I just think they deserve a better comparison according to my own tastes. No offence was intended.


Thank you for your reply. I didn't interpret it in that way. I could give specific reasons but let's just turn a page on this.

Reading earlier replies to the OP, I have come to the conclusion that it was probably injudicious of me to participate in this thread in the first place. Even on the first page things started to go belly up. That's unique on this forum, as it usually takes more than a few pages to get there.

Carry on discussing the topic, I won't be here to bother you any further.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Sid James said:


> Thank you for your reply. I didn't interpret it in that way. I could give specific reasons but let's just turn a page on this.
> 
> Reading earlier replies to the OP, I have come to the conclusion that it was probably injudicious of me to participate in this thread in the first place. Even on the first page things started to go belly up. That's unique on this forum, as it usually takes more than a few pages to get there.
> 
> Carry on discussing the topic, I won't be here to bother you any further.


I think you expect too much of people.

If you prefer to participate in "perfect" threads that match your expectations of taste and decorum you are certain to be disappointed now and again or maybe most of the time. You also should take into account that your opinions will be contradicted or devalued by those who disagree.

Nobody on the board bothers me - if I was that sensitive I would have bailed out a long time ago.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

stomanek said:


> I think you expect too much of people.
> 
> If you prefer to participate in "perfect" threads that match your expectations of taste and decorum you are certain to be disappointed now and again or maybe most of the time. You also should take into account that your opinions will be contradicted or devalued by those who disagree.
> 
> Nobody on the board bothers me - if I was that sensitive I would have bailed out a long time ago.


I hope that I can be allowed to reflect on what I think are my own limitations. I can't believe that you have the nerve to come back and tell me what I should think, again! It's less a case of me being sensitive but that I don't accept being made fun of and told what to think.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Sid James said:


> I hope that I can be allowed to reflect on what I think are my own limitations. I can't believe that you have the nerve to come back and tell me what I should think, again! It's less a case of me being sensitive but that I don't accept being made fun of and told what to think.


I wouldn't get involved normally, but I took it as the same sort of expression as this:



Brahmsianhorn said:


> 27 should be top 5


Just harmless chatter, and not really making fun of anyone.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2019)

stomanek said:


> From what I understand Mozart filled out the right hand part only for some of the concerti. The 2nd mvt I think this must be the case at least as the piano part in the middle section of the 2nd mvt is so complex.


When Mozart had something specific in mind he would write it in as far as I can tell.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Phil loves classical said:


> I wouldn't get involved normally, but I took it as the same sort of expression as this:
> 
> Just harmless chatter, and not really making fun of anyone.


It's not a good comparison since Brahmsianhorn's reply was simple and to the point. As I said let's turn the page on this. Even if I am overreacting, I have a right to be treated in a civil manner, and the rules of this forum spell this out clearly.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Sid James said:


> It is unique for being among the few pieces by Mozart in a minor key. That may be a reason for its popularity, and not so surprising since atypical works have a tendency to enter the repertoire. The best example I can think of is the concerto by Grieg, a composer who otherwise avoided large scale symphonic works (apart from his posthumously published symphony).


Well, Beethoven's favorite Mozart string quartet is believed to be the A major quartet (K464) and not the D minor (K421),
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...ed-from-k464/D41298CFD2EE4AC1639C8CDB3A887E45 even though Mozart's major-key string quartets also outnumber his minor-key ones.*
I think there are interesting factors that contributed to the D minor concerto's immense success other than the fact it 'starts' in a minor-key. It builds tension by modulation of motifs involving syncopated violins accompanied by rising triplets in the basses. The piano has its own theme independent of the orchestra. Effective woodwind writing - all these factors combined to make it fascinating for Beethoven and Brahms and really 'stand out' from most other orchestral works of the period.

*It's worth noting that Mozart (like his classical contemporaries, ex. Hoffmeister 



) preferred to work in large scale works, start them in major keys and include minor-key sections in them. The second movements of String Quartets Nos. 4~7, piano concertos Nos. 9, 18, 22, 23, Piano Sonata No.2, Sinfonia Concertante for Violin and Viola K364, Flute Quartet No.1 in D major, Divertimento in D major K334 are all in minor keys. All four movements of String Quartet K499 include significant sections in minor key.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Sid James said:


> I hope that I can be allowed to reflect on what I think are my own limitations. I can't believe that you have the nerve to come back and tell me what I should think, again! It's less a case of me being sensitive but that I don't accept being made fun of and told what to think.


I also thought "I smile" was condescending but please don't let it bother you. I would miss you if you take another break!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

hammeredklavier said:


> Well, Beethoven's favorite Mozart string quartet is believed to be the A major quartet (K464) and not the D minor (K421)...


Ludwig must have been fond of Mozart's C major quartet ("Dissonance") as well, judging from the way he opens his own Op. 59 No. 3.

I read a long time ago that Haydn was asked why Mozart opened his C major quartet this way. He answered that he had no idea, but if that was the way Mozart wrote it, then you could be sure it was right.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

KenOC said:


> Ludwig must have been fond of Mozart's C major quartet ("Dissonance") as well, judging from the way he opens his own Op. 59 No. 3.
> 
> I read a long time ago that Haydn was asked why Mozart opened his C major quartet this way. He answered that he had no idea, but if that was the way Mozart wrote it, then you could be sure it was right.


True. But I still think K464 was Beethoven's favorite, looking at various accounts:

The ones he actually copied out in his notebook were the G major K387 and A major K464.
_"When he buckled down to composing his op.18, he copied out works by Haydn (op.20/1) and Mozart (K387, K464)
in order to hone his knowledge of the genre."_ http://www.eclassical.com/shop/17115/art25/4743925-be37e5-3760135100378_01.pdf#page=18

there is also an article: 
_"Beethoven imitated Mozart's String Quartet in A major K464 more openly than any other work by a fellow composer... " _ https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...ed-from-k464/D41298CFD2EE4AC1639C8CDB3A887E45

Also, _"According to Czerny, Beethoven once exclaimed about Mozart's K464: "That's what I call a work! In it, Mozart was telling the world: 'Look, what I could do for you if you were ready for it!' (5: On the Proper Performance of All Beethoven's Works for the Piano, p. 8" (Kinderman: 53)._ http://www.raptusassociation.org/czerny_e2.html


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

science said:


> I also thought "I smile" was condescending but please don't let it bother you. I would miss you if you take another break!


Thank you for your empathy. It's rare as hen's teeth around here where we are supposed to replicate the machines we are facing.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

*It is unique for being among the few pieces by Mozart in a minor key. That may be a reason for its popularity, and not so surprising since atypical works have a tendency to enter the repertoire. The best example I can think of is the concerto by Grieg, a composer who otherwise avoided large scale symphonic works *

Well first off it's obviously not unique as Mozart composed other pieces in a minor key. The Grieg concerto became popular not because Grieg rarely composed large scale works, but because it's a spellbinding concerto. Verdi composed a string quartet which is virtually unknown - on the other hand he composed a requiem made famous by a brilliant Dies Irae. Beethoven's Fidelio would be long forgotten had it not been a great opera. You get the point. So Mozart's most popular concertos - 2 are in a minor key and half a dozen are in major keys. The A major is easily as popular as K466 - more so probably - K466 is rated higher on this board, just. So K466 is loved because of the quality of the music and not because Mozart composed few minor key pieces. Mozart's c minor wind serenade is not that well known - K361 wind serenade for 13 wind instruments is famous - a major key piece.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

I think there are differences between 'being popular' vs 'being influential (among composers and musicians)' vs 'being great'. Bach's Kunst Der Fuge and Musikalisches Opfer aren't as publicly popular as his most publicly beloved pieces. But does that make them 'relative failure' compared to his most beloved pieces? I would say KDF, MO, WTC are just as important as Bach's most popular pieces in music history for the sheer amount of inspiration and influence they had on other composers. I think popularity of a piece among the general public depends on its use in media and popular culture to some degree. Speaking of 'atypical pieces', I'm reminded of Glenn Gould's remark Bach's Italian Concerto in F BWV971 'is for people who don't like Bach.'

'Fugue in D minor' from String Quartet K173: 



Fugue in G minor K401: 



Fugue in G minor K154: 



Fantasy in F minor K594: 



Fantasy in F minor K608: 



Contrapuntal Study in B minor K620B: 



Fantasy (Improvisation) in G minor K528A: 



'Fugue in A minor' from Violin Sonata K402: 




I think these contain melodies as memorable as Mozart's most popular pieces, I think if these had as much attention, most people's perception of Mozart would have been somewhat different. 
https://muswrite.blogspot.com/2013/09/mozart-fantasia-for-mechanical-clock.html
_"Beethoven had a copy of the piece (K608) and made his own version of the fugue section of the work, so while it was written for a mechanical clock, the quality of the piece caused it to have a life separate from its original form. It was a well-known piece in the 19th century and influenced many composers and performers."_


----------

