# Mozart symphonies - Pinnock, Mackerras?



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

Looking to acquire a cycle of the Mozart symphonies after very much enjoying the few I have heard so far. (I often read that the first 20 or so aren't all that worth hearing, but some differ, and I'm curious... plus the best-reviewed cycles are quite affordable).
I'd like something with plenty of verve and energy, a HIP approach and possibly, though not necessarily period instruments too. As such these two are leading contenders for me (I like both conductors in Haydn). Can anyone nod me towards either of these, or another HIP-style cycle (Tate, ter Linden, etc?)
Or should I simply spend my money on Mackerras' later two CDs of the late symphonies, with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra? Thanks!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

My Mozart collection on CD is really poor (I was hoping to change that by buying the Brilliant Classics 170cd box but the guy has sold it). I have quite a few on the hard drive though and the Mozart I play the most are the Mackerras later symphony recordings. I think they sound superb. Highly recommended.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

The Mackerras and Pinnock both look good. Maybe an older analog recording from the 1960s, like Szell? Is there one?


----------



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

Merl said:


> ... the Mozart I play the most are the Mackerras later symphony recordings. I think they sound superb. Highly recommended.


Thanks! That'll be the Scottish Chamber Orchestra recordings, yes?


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

I have the Pinnock set and I like it OK but I prefer Mozart on modern instuments with bigger sound. Not the full set of symphonies but the better ones anyway, I own and love the following:

Colin Davis with Staatskapelle Dresden on Phillips
Marriner with ASMF, also on Phillips.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Also try The Academy of Ancient Music. They recorded all plus versions of some, plus overtures considered by Mozart to be symphonies, plus uncertain authorship works. Over sixty symphonies.

The Pinnock one is also good, I have listened to some.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

ArtMusic said:


> Also try The Academy of Ancient Music. They recorded all plus versions of some, plus overtures considered by Mozart to be symphonies, plus uncertain authorship works. Over sixty symphonies.
> 
> The Pinnock one is also good, I have listened to some.


And a few a second version of the same symphony.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I'm way out in the minority, but Harnoncourt made Mozart work for me. Has he recorded a set I wonder? I only have a few CDs or mp3s.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

Weston said:


> I'm way out in the minority, but Harnoncourt made Mozart work for me. Has he recorded a set I wonder? I only have a few CDs or mp3s.


I do not think he did the whole cycle. I only see from 31-41.

I write this, then find:Conducts Mozart's Early Symphonies

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZHRDH..._m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=X3JVTM1TN2YEKRXKN026


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

I do have the Mackerras/Prague, which I find very satisfying. You might want to know a few things about it.

- All repeats are taken. ALL of them, even repeating the scherzo first and second parts after the trio.
- There is a faint harpsichord in the background throughout.
- Mackerras uses modern instruments, but he employs a smaller orchestra size and period instrument techniques.

He also includes a number of spurious works, which are generally early and not particularly interesting, and I can't imagine any need for purchasing a set because of them. Focus on the mature symphonies alone.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Mahlerian said:


> I do have the Mackerras/Prague, which I find very satisfying. You might want to know a few things about it.
> 
> - All repeats are taken. ALL of them, even repeating the scherzo first and second parts after the trio.
> - *There is a faint harpsichord in the background throughout.*
> ...


I find that annoying even in Baroque music where it is pretty common. is there background harpsichord even in the last few symphonies? I'm sure Mozart did not include a harpsichord in his 41st or many others.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I find that annoying even in Baroque music where it is pretty common. is there background harpsichord even in the last few symphonies? I'm sure Mozart did not include a harpsichord in his 41st or many others.


The harpsichord is commonly part of the continuo. Often the conductor would lead the orchestra from the harpsichord, not depending on any written continuo part from the composer. I'd guess that whether a harpsichord was used in early performances of Mozart's later symphonies depended entirely on the performing practices of the orchestras, not on any vision Mozart may have had.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

For me the Mackerras set, it's never boring and excellent recorded .


----------



## Steve Wright (Mar 13, 2015)

Splendid, thanks all! Excellent advice... so I'm leaning towards some Mackerras.


Mahlerian said:


> He [Mackerras] also includes a number of spurious works, which are generally early and not particularly interesting, and I can't imagine any need for purchasing a set because of them. Focus on the mature symphonies alone.


In which case perhaps I should zone in on the (apparently even better) two discs of Mackerras, SCO and the late symphonies...?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Weston said:


> I'm way out in the minority, but Harnoncourt made Mozart work for me. Has he recorded a set I wonder? I only have a few CDs or mp3s.


He did record them all.

There´s the least the early, very magnificent & Beethovenian Harnoncourt/Concertgebouw series comprising the symphonies from no.25 and upwards, which I have, possibly more with that orchestra.

The Harnoncourt/Concentus set of the early symphonies mentioned above, which I also own, is really great too, very varied & festive playing. Includes nos. 1-27 and further, unnumbered ones.
Samples & 18 € here https://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/de...madeus-Mozart-Fr%FChe-Symphonien/hnum/3793158

I´m less inclined to what I´ve heard of his Chamber Orchestra of Europe series, but some like it a lot.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Steve Wright said:


> Thanks! That'll be the Scottish Chamber Orchestra recordings, yes?


Yep. That's the one!


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I find that annoying even in Baroque music where it is pretty common. is there background harpsichord even in the last few symphonies? I'm sure Mozart did not include a harpsichord in his 41st or many others.


Yes, even in the last few, although a slightly larger orchestra is used for them that makes it all but inaudible most of the time. It's quite easy to ignore.


----------



## realdealblues (Mar 3, 2010)

My personal favorites for complete cycles are Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic & Sir Neville Marriner/Academy Of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. Bohm isn't always as slow as people make him out to be in Mozart. Many of them move along pretty good but there are a few symphonies that are a little slower than the current norm. The benefits of Bohm are recordings with personality and style and gorgeous playing and tone. Marriner I think you have to buy on the 2nd hand market in two box sets from the old Philips Complete Mozart Edition (which is what I have) but for a more chamber orchestra feel with lively tempos that feel just right I don't feel it can be beat.

I own Mackerras and it's perfectly enjoyable but some symphonies just feel too rushed and honestly I don't need all the repeats. I also own the Pinnock set and it's ok as well but the tone is thin and starts to grate on me after long periods. If you listen in a car it usually sounds like you're listening to an old AM radio to me. I also own the Hogwood set and again it's ok but suffers from the same issue as Pinnock but unlike Pinnock the intonation on the instruments often goes awry. I do have the Levine, Tate and Linden cycles as well. Tate is enjoyable. I'm not real big on the Levine one. It's been a while since I heard the Linden and honestly can't remember much about it so I guess I didn't find it really memorable.

If you don't feel you need all of them and only the later symphonies from like 21 on than Colin Davis is a good one. George Szell is about as good as it gets if you just want the last few. I like Bruno Walter as well in the late ones. Karajan is not everyones cup of tea but I don't think they are as horrible as everyone makes them out to be. You can also get the last few in a smaller set from Karl Bohm which has his magnificent recording of Symphony 39. Bernstein recorded the late symphonies as well and I find them very enjoyable but it's mixed emotions by most with half being great and half being a little too...well Bernstein for some. Most people could probably survive with Symphonies 25-41. I happen to love the early ones but it's kind of like Haydn. Most people really love the London and Paris symphonies and to some the early stuff is pleasant but not necessarily memorable, and I know a lot of people that say the same about Mozart. Just depends on the individual.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

realdealblues said:


> My personal favorites for complete cycles are Karl Bohm/Berlin Philharmonic & Sir Neville Marriner/Academy Of St. Martin-in-the-Fields. Bohm isn't always as slow as people make him out to be in Mozart. Many of them move along pretty good but there are a few symphonies that are a little slower than the current norm. The benefits of Bohm are recordings with personality and style and gorgeous playing and tone. Marriner I think you have to buy on the 2nd hand market in two box sets from the old Philips Complete Mozart Edition (which is what I have) but for a more chamber orchestra feel with lively tempos that feel just right I don't feel it can be beat.
> 
> I own Mackerras and it's perfectly enjoyable but some symphonies just feel too rushed and honestly I don't need all the repeats. I also own the Pinnock set and it's ok as well but the tone is thin and starts to grate on me after long periods. If you listen in a car it usually sounds like you're listening to an old AM radio to me. I also own the Hogwood set and again it's ok but suffers from the same issue as Pinnock but unlike Pinnock the intonation on the instruments often goes awry. I do have the Levine, Tate and Linden cycles as well. Tate is enjoyable. I'm not real big on the Levine one. It's been a while since I heard the Linden and honestly can't remember much about it so I guess I didn't find it really memorable.
> 
> If you don't feel you need all of them and only the later symphonies from like 21 on than Colin Davis is a good one. George Szell is about as good as it gets if you just want the last few. I like Bruno Walter as well in the late ones. Karajan is not everyones cup of tea but I don't think they are as horrible as everyone makes them out to be. You can also get the last few in a smaller set from Karl Bohm which has his magnificent recording of Symphony 39. Bernstein recorded the late symphonies as well and I find them very enjoyable but it's mixed emotions by most with half being great and half being a little too...well Bernstein for some. Most people could probably survive with Symphonies 25-41. I happen to love the early ones but it's kind of like Haydn. Most people really love the London and Paris symphonies and to some the early stuff is pleasant but not necessarily memorable, and I know a lot of people that say the same about Mozart. Just depends on the individual.


The latter symphonies of Mozart and Haydn are better than their earlier ones. The early ones show how they developed over time.


----------



## Poodle (Aug 7, 2016)

Both are good, as long you have one


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Johnnie Burgess said:


> The latter symphonies of Mozart and Haydn are better than their earlier ones. The early ones show how they developed over time.


Even a Mozart die hard like me would have to admit the early haydn symphonies are more interesting than mozart's first 23.

Back to the question - I have the prague/mackerras set which has stood me in good stead over the years. The performances are fresh and bright, crisp and just the right pace - superb orchestral texture - fine rythms and good sonic balance of strings/winds etc. The tinkling chatter of a harpsichord in the background is no problem.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> I do have the Mackerras/Prague, which I find very satisfying. You might want to know a few things about it.
> 
> - All repeats are taken. ALL of them, even repeating the scherzo first and second parts after the trio.
> - There is a faint harpsichord in the background throughout.
> ...


Precisely! And I do enjoy all those middle ones (say 20-32) especially.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

I enjoy the Pinnock set. I also have the Hogwood set. I like them both but there are differences between them and that is ok.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Johnnie Burgess said:


> I enjoy the Pinnock set. I also have the Hogwood set. I like them both but there are differences between them and that is ok.


But very different to the Mackerras recording.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

I would hope there were some differences other wise why would people buy it.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

Pugg said:


> But very different to the Mackerras recording.


True, but Mackerras - always an intelligent musician - took on board aspects of "historically informed" scholarship (tempos, observation of repeats, etc), even if his orchestras weren't of the catgut and valveless-brass variety. This is apparent in his splendid Prague set, and his sadly unfinished Scottish Chamber Orchestra survey of the Mozart symphonies. I wouldn't be without any of them.

PS: I'm a big fan of the Pinnock and Schröder/Hogwood sets also.


----------



## bonducca (Apr 10, 2020)

For my ears the best are Hogwood and Pinnock. I prefer period instruments regardless of period. And the period groups use the 18-th century seating plan. Mozart always wrote his strings 'divisi" and would have used a harpsichord as part of the orchestra. The large 20th century orchestra just buries the interplay of string motifs, which are important or he wouldn't have written them that way. And the repeats are important or he wouldn't have written them. Mozart was not a Romantic composer. He was a classicist. The conductor in the Hogwood/AAM is the wonderful Jaap Schroeder who played and conducted wonderfully.


----------



## bonducca (Apr 10, 2020)

I love those as well. They have some quirky harmonies and rhythms which remind me o CPE Bach. I prefer Shroeder/Hogwood and Pinnock.


----------



## Guest002 (Feb 19, 2020)

I have the Adam Fischer set, plus the Hogwood cycle.

I have supplemented the later symphonies (Linz, Prague, Paris etc) with a little Mackerras here and there (with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra, not the Prague ones) and Britten's recordings (inevitably!) of #25, #29, #38 and #40.

I love the Fischer. I believe practically all my samples of the symphonies for the catalogue were from Fischer's cycle.


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

For complete cycles I have the Pinnock, Bohm and Levine sets. All are very good in their own style and gives me different listening experiences, but Levine (w/WPO) is the one I return the most, it’s consistenly good.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Pinnock's set is a fine achievement - he's as good as anyone and better than most in the Mozart symphonies. I like Mackerras sometimes but I wish he could smile a bit when the music needs it.


----------



## Guest (Apr 11, 2020)

I have the Pinnock set and the Mackerras recordings with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra of Nos. 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41.

I prefer the Mackerras by far. And as far as the early symphonies. I like to listen to No. 1 because it's so precocious - Mozart was so young. But then the next one worth listening to is No. 25.


----------

