# Mozart Requiem recordings



## Hermastersvoice (Oct 15, 2018)

“Not again”, will no doubt be the reaction of most fellow contributors. However, the deeply satisfying recording of this work is one of my obsessions. Bernstein? Yes, great singing and beautifully played by the Bavarian RSO - still a favorite. Solti, Abbado? Absolutely nothing wrong with them, save for an ill-suited Hollywood-type polish. Giulini 1-2 seem to be dragging. My current favorites are Schuricht and Kempe - by no means perfect but they seem to have this big heart, uniyielding pulse that for me is just so important in this work. Kempe is in not very great mono though. To my regret I could never get my hand on Britten on BBC legends - it was gone almost before it was published. Where will I go next?


----------



## Heliogabo (Dec 29, 2014)

Hogwood is remarcable in terms of drama and profondeur.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

My personal favorite: Bohm, great soloist good recording, perhaps not everybody's taste, but my desert island disc.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I've always found the Colin Davis/philips very satisfying (whereas Davis' recording of the c-minor Mass unfortunately suffers from some obvious flaws in the singing).


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Not a desert island composition for me, but Harnoncourt II is my favored recording:


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

My first one and still attractive imo.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

The only one I've heard is Karajan with Vienna. How does that one with Berlin compare?

I might like to check out either a chamber orchestra version with a smaller choir (Marriner to be specific, he can hardly miss with Mozart in my experience) or a full blown HIP version. What's the best of these? I've heard Gardiner doesn't do such a great job with this one. Maybe Hogwood, as mentioned above? I am not big on most of what I've heard of his recordings (mostly Bach, kind of dry for my tastes, though impeccably historically informed, I'm sure).


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

flamencosketches said:


> The only one I've heard is Karajan with Vienna. How does that one with Berlin compare?
> 
> I might like to check out either a chamber orchestra version with a smaller choir (Marriner to be specific, he can hardly miss with Mozart in my experience) or a full blown HIP version. What's the best of these? I've heard Gardiner doesn't do such a great job with this one. Maybe Hogwood, as mentioned above? I am not big on most of what I've heard of his recordings (mostly Bach, kind of dry for my tastes, though impeccably historically informed, I'm sure).


Gardiner gets panned by Hereweghe worshippers - but it's my favorite rec - I find the orch dramatic parts have real bite - and the choral singing is superb. Best Kyrie fugue IMO. Great philips sound too.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

My reviews of versions I have sampled. I listened to Schreier decades ago but need to give it another listen. I recall its being a good middle of the road version but not as good as Marriner. Also need to hear Harnoncourt and Herreweghe.

1) Victor de Sabata (1941) – Tempos and dynamics are sometimes eccentric, the singing style is overly operatic, and the recording dates from 1939. So why is this my first choice? One word: gravitas. No other recording reaches the depth of emotion – both the dramatic and the solemn - like this one. De Sabata was one of the greatest conductors of the century – his Tosca with Callas and Verdi Requiem are unmatched – and he brings that skill here to make an emotional impact befitting this great work.

2) Eugen Jochum (1956) – Almost De Sabata’s match and in tempos and style that are more conventional. My only quibble is a somewhat fast Lacrymosa, but the beauty still comes through. Otherwise it is an interpretation that sounds just right with dedicated singing throughout. Unfortunately the recording quality is below par even for 1950s standards. There are even some extraneous noises, which leads me to believe this is a radio aircheck.

3) Bruno Walter (1937) – The first ever recording is also one of the best, with sound quality that is quite passable for the period. Walter does not quite plum the dark depths like De Sabata, but his tempos and dynamics are better judged. Beautiful when it needs to be and dramatic as well, this is a gift of a recorded document from a great conductor in his prime.

4) Bruno Walter (1956, Orfeo) – Dramatic, committed and spirited, many will prefer this later better-recorded live performance from Walter. The soloists are top notch, and Walter provides all the command, dedication and energy for which he is known. I do still find the earlier Walter account slightly more enjoyable for its beauty and nuance, and this may have something to do with the more variable tone of the choir in the later recording.

5) Neville Marriner (1992) – At last we come to a modern recording which for me qualifies as the best candidate for your one and only Requiem if you take sound quality and conventionality of interpretation into account. Marriner strikes just the right balance in his choice of tempos even if you don’t get the gravitas of the above historic choices or even of a Bernstein (who milks things too much). And yet there is an inspired quality setting it apart from other modern versions. A superbly satisfying reading.

6) John Eliot Gardiner (1986) – A uniquely exciting and well sung and performed account, as one would expect from these talented forces. Indeed the drama of the Requiem comes across in some ways like never before. As often the case with Gardiner, however, the fast tempos rob the slow movements of their natural solemnity.

7) Sir Colin Davis (1967) – This recording has always been something of an old standard for this work and deservedly so. The recording has a bit of hiss but is otherwise full, warm and clear. Davis chooses perfect tempi, and the soloists and chorus perform with beauty, incisiveness and dedication. Perhaps there is a slight bit of stateliness compared to Marriner or Gardiner, but Davis compensates with greater power and warmth.

8) Karl Böhm (1956) – This Philips recording finds Böhm at his most inspired, with a Kyrie that is especially thrilling in its extra power and weight. My only issue with Böhm is a certain inflexibility and lack of nuance that makes his performances sound plodding, even when the tempos are not that especially slow. However this is balanced with great sensitivity and beauty of tone.

9) Carlo Maria Giulini (1989) – Less firepower in the fast movements than his earlier recording, but this one is special for its dedicated, exquisite beauty and sensitivity. You are pretty much only getting one side of the work here, but that view is sublime enough to be worth the time.

10) Carlo Maria Giulini (1979) – Though not as inspired as his later recording, this one is more conventional in terms of tempos and has the requisite energy in the faster movements. In fact as an introduction to the work this recording is just about ideal, with excellent singing from both soloists and chorus.

11) Karl Böhm (1971) – The DG recording is more slow and monumental compared to 15 years earlier on Philips, but there is undeniable beauty, power, and profundity enhanced by the clear, full recording. It only misses the greater liveliness you find in the earlier version.

12) Leonard Bernstein (1989) – Oh Lenny, if only we could harness your emotion into something more disciplined. This recording is worth hearing for the obvious depth of emotion and intense concentration throughout. Unfortunately the tempos are not just slow, but they meander in such a mannered way that it ultimately robs the music of its communicative power.

13) Daniel Barenboim (1971) – Well-judged tempos and inspired performers make this a top central recommendation. The Dies Irae is especially fiery.

14) Sir Colin Davis (2008) – Liveliness and energy are the hallmarks of this performance. The choir lacks body and richness but makes up for it with their vigorous spirit.

15) Claudio Abbado (1999) – Good modern version if largely unremarkable except the quality of the singers.

16) Bruno Kittel (1941) – An eccentric old recording, though with some powerful moments and surprisingly well-recorded. Kittel conducted his own eponymous choir here with the Berlin Philharmonic. Incidentally, that same year these forces performed the Requiem in concert under the baton of Furtwängler. If only there were a recording!


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2019)

I am a particular fan of the Bruno Weill/Tafelmusik recording. I wouldn't give up some of the great older recordings (of those, I think I gravitate most to the Böhm/DG recording), but this HIP recording has been my favorite for a while.


----------



## Clouds Weep Snowflakes (Feb 24, 2019)

I have this one on CD:
https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-6206/
No complains here, and the composition itself is brilliant.


----------



## Orfeo (Nov 14, 2013)

This one (yes, the Bernstein's DG one) remains very special to me. Dedicated to the memory of his late wife Felicia Cohn Montealegre, this performance happens to be personal yet moving (and often gripping). I have no regrets keeping and praising this in-your-face honest work of performing art. And besides, Bohm's 1971 recording is slower yet?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Clouds Weep Snowflakes said:


> I have this one on CD:
> https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-6206/
> No complains here, and the composition itself is brilliant.


Oh yes. I'd forgotten about that one. A good recording one, I think.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Have probably 10 recordings. My fave recording is the one by Hickox. Really don't like the Bernstein version. Also like the Marriner Decca version for the different edition.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

There are quite a number that I like and also many that I don't. I tend to go for HIP recordings in the hope of finding new insights (perhaps the work is too familiar). I do have a problem with the work in any of the completions that I know ... it doesn't maintain the level of inspiration of the earlier parts and I remain unconvinced that any completion brings us close to what Mozart would have done with us.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

This is best recording of Mozart's Requiem-period.


----------



## skim1124 (Mar 6, 2019)

Orfeo said:


> This one (yes, the Bernstein's DG one) remains very special to me. Dedicated to the memory of his late wife Felicia Cohn Montealegre, this performance happens to be personal yet moving (and often gripping). I have no regrets keeping and praising this in-your-face honest work of performing art. And besides, Bohm's 1971 recording is slower yet?
> 
> My first one and only one for a long time, so I got to know it intimately and didn't know it could/should be played in any other way. Still probably my favorite because I'm so familiar with it and know what it's going to sound like before it's played. Doesn't feel too slow to me. I love the emotionality of it; everyone seems totally committed to the performance, which drew me in immediately the first time I heard it.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Red Terror said:


> This is best recording of Mozart's Requiem-period.


I quite like that one and am a huge fan of Currentzis in Mozart ... but I really would say it is the best. It isn't just that I don't like the idea of there being a best among such a much-recorded work. But as I write I am listening to Beecham's recording ... which I really like!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

And then there is this ... one of the best I know (for those who are allergic be warned: it is quite HIP).


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

William Christie is awesome, may have to look into this one. I heard a bit of Gardiner's the other day. Not too bad.

I've never heard of Currentzis, but that is some high praise, of course. Perhaps that one is worth a listen too.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Christie's is special. Currentzis is a wonderful if inconclastic mozartian (his recordings of the da Ponte divide opinion - I really love them). His requiem is a bit unrefined (deliberately, I'm sure) and definitely worth hearing. It can now be had in a cheaper form than the cover posted above. There are lots of other HIP Requiems - Hogwood and Harnoncourt are both very good in their different ways. And Suzuki has his merits. I am not really a Gardiner fan.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Gardiner seems divisive in general, these days -- of course for decades it seems he was bombarded with ridiculous praise for being a major early pioneer of HIP in Baroque and Classical and beyond; now it seems people are more and more turning their favor to other practitioners. (These are my observations as someone who is very new to classical music in general and especially HIP; I guess I am well read on criticism :lol: please correct me if I'm wrong). But it seems especially so with his take on the Requiem. Personally, I like everything I've heard of his, though I haven't heard too many other HIP conductors of note to compare: some others I like are Christie, Jordi Savall, and Masaaki Suzuki. Not too big on what I've heard of Hogwood; haven't heard enough of Pinnock to decide. That's about as familiar as I am with that world. So far it seems he has the most range among these conductors. 

Point being, I like Gardiner's Requiem so far. I'm listening to it now, in fact. What do you think Christie, Hogwood, Harnoncourt, etc. have executed with their Requiems that Gardiner might have missed? (As you can see, I can be very particular about different interpretations, I guess :lol: )

Outside of HIP, being a fan of Böhm in Mozart in general I am interested to hear his Requiem too. I am sure it's in no short supply of solemnity.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^^ I have heard but can't remember much about Gardiner's Mozart Requiem but, generally, think Gardiner is mostly reliable or reliably interesting (well, I hate his Berlioz but other than that ...) but seems to mass-produce his performances which often dehumanises them. Christie is almost the opposite - his account has so many touches of beauty and drama and also to have an overall character that is distinctive. So his is not the whole story but it _is _a story, a beautiful, convincing and memorable one. Harnoncourt shocked me when I first heard it. It doesn't any more but it is beautifully done and powerful. And, again, it does have character. Hogwood's has long been a leader in the field. It is certainly a pleasure to listen to (and I have done so many many times) but I would need to listen to it again to confirm the particular characteristics that I like.

I don't know Bohm's Requiem (there are a few, I think). In general find his Mozart stylish but a little short on a feeling of really enjoying the music, the sense you get with Mozart of an irrepressible joy in invention. Still, I respect Bohm in Mozart (which is more than I can say for Karajan's Mozart). If you want an old Mozart Requiem, do try Beecham's.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Noted! Thanks for that. 

I've heard others say that about Gardiner ("mass produced" or words to similar effect) but not quite sure what it means. Guess I will have to keep listening to find out. 

I've heard nothing of Beecham's recordings, so I will have to look into that for sure. I am definitely not quite sold on Karajan's Mozart either, but like you said, Böhm has a totally different handle on his works.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

So here is my updated recommendations list after listening to Harnoncourt, Herreweghe, Schreier, two Karajans, Norrington, Beecham, Christie, and Currentzis.

1)	Victor de Sabata (1941) – Tempos and dynamics are sometimes eccentric, the singing style is overly operatic, and the recording dates from 1941. So why is this my first choice? One word: gravitas. No other recording reaches the depth of emotion – both the dramatic and the solemn - like this one. De Sabata was one of the greatest conductors of the century – his Tosca with Callas and Verdi Requiem are unmatched – and he brings that skill here to make an emotional impact befitting this great work.

2)	Eugen Jochum (1956) – Almost De Sabata’s match and in tempos and style that are more conventional. My only quibble is a somewhat fast Lacrymosa, but the beauty still comes through. Otherwise it is an interpretation that sounds just right with dedicated singing throughout. Unfortunately the recording quality is below par even for 1950s standards. There are even some extraneous noises, which leads me to believe this is a radio aircheck.

3)	Bruno Walter (1937) – The first ever recording is also one of the best, with sound quality that is quite passable for the period. Walter does not quite plum the dark depths like De Sabata, but his tempos and dynamics are better judged. Beautiful when it needs to be and dramatic as well, this is a gift of a recorded document from a great conductor in his prime.

4)	Bruno Walter (1956, Orfeo) – Dramatic, committed and spirited, many will prefer this later better-recorded live performance from Walter. The soloists are top notch, and Walter provides all the command, dedication and energy for which he is known. I do still find the earlier Walter account slightly more enjoyable for its beauty and nuance, and this may have something to do with the more variable tone of the choir in the later recording.

5)	Neville Marriner (1992) – At last we come to a modern recording which for me qualifies as the best candidate for your one and only Requiem if you take sound quality and conventionality of interpretation into account. Marriner strikes just the right balance in his choice of tempos even if you don’t get the gravitas of the above historic choices or even of a Bernstein (who milks things too much). And yet there is an inspired quality setting it apart from other modern versions. A superbly satisfying reading.

6)	John Eliot Gardiner (1986) – A uniquely exciting and well sung and performed account, as one would expect from these talented forces. Indeed the drama of the Requiem comes across in some ways like never before. As often the case with Gardiner, however, the fast tempos rob the slow movements of their natural solemnity.

7)	Sir Colin Davis (1967) – This recording has always been something of an old standard for this work and deservedly so. The recording has a bit of hiss but is otherwise full, warm and clear. Davis chooses perfect tempi, and the soloists and chorus perform with beauty, incisiveness and dedication. Perhaps there is a slight bit of stateliness compared to Marriner or Gardiner, but Davis compensates with greater power and warmth.

8)	Karl Böhm (1956) – This Philips recording finds Böhm at his most inspired, with a Kyrie that is especially thrilling in its extra power and weight. My only issue with Böhm is a certain inflexibility and lack of nuance that makes his performances sound plodding, even when the tempos are not that especially slow. However this is balanced with great sensitivity and beauty of tone.

9)	Carlo Maria Giulini (1989) – Less firepower in the fast movements than his earlier recording, but this one is special for its dedicated, exquisite beauty and sensitivity. You are pretty much only getting one side of the work here, but that view is sublime enough to be worth the time.

10)	Carlo Maria Giulini (1979) – Though not as inspired as his later recording, this one is more conventional in terms of tempos and has the requisite energy in the faster movements. In fact as an introduction to the work this recording is just about ideal, with excellent singing from both soloists and chorus.

11)	Karl Böhm (1971) – The DG recording is more slow and monumental compared to 15 years earlier on Philips, but there is undeniable beauty, power, and profundity enhanced by the clear, full recording. It only misses the greater liveliness you find in the earlier version.

12)	Leonard Bernstein (1989) – Oh Lenny, if only we could harness your emotion into something more disciplined. This recording is worth hearing for the obvious depth of emotion and intense concentration throughout. Unfortunately the tempos are not just slow, but they meander in such a mannered way that it ultimately robs the music of its communicative power.

13)	Daniel Barenboim (1971) – Well-judged tempos and inspired performers make this a top central recommendation. The Dies Irae is especially fiery.

14)	Peter Schreier (1983) – In terms of technical quality you would be hard pressed to find a better version than this one, with exquisite singing and playing from everyone involved. This makes an excellent conventional choice though the interpretation is not quite as inspired as the greatest versions.

15)	William Christie (1995) – A central recommendation for lovers of period performances. Nothing is too extreme. There is the right amount of drama and beauty throughout, even if the overall impact is not quite as striking as with others.

16)	Herbert von Karajan (1975) – If you value power and grandeur, Karajan provides it in probably his best all-around version. Still, a bit on the heavy side.

17)	Philippe Herreweghe (1996) – This is a very careful, inoffensive performance that prioritizes above all beauty and sensitivity. The dexterity of the performers is quite impressive, though you do not get the same dramatic impact as fellow period practioner Gardiner.

18)	Sir Colin Davis (2008) – Liveliness and energy are the hallmarks of this performance. The choir lacks body and richness but makes up for it with their vigorous spirit.

19)	Sir Thomas Beecham (1954) – This is a somewhat eccentric performance, but the dedication and character are undeniable. Worthy of a listen.

20)	Claudio Abbado (1999) – Good modern version if largely unremarkable except the quality of the singers.

21)	Roger Norrington (1991) – This is a very aggressive period performance that will please those who like that approach. Be forewarned that this is an alternate completion of the familiar Sussmayr and not altogether convincing.

22)	Herbert von Karajan (1961) – Despite some moments of beauty, particularly in the Lacrymosa, this is overall too heavy-handed in approach.

23)	Nikolaus Harnoncourt (2003) – Though there are certainly moments of passion and beauty, this version is marred by willfully eccentric interpretive choices that destroy the natural flow of the composition.

24)	Bruno Kittel (1941) – An eccentric old recording, though with some powerful moments and surprisingly well-recorded. Kittel conducted his own eponymous choir here with the Berlin Philharmonic. Incidentally, that same year these forces performed the Requiem in concert under the baton of Furtwängler. If only there were a recording!

25)	Teodor Currentzis (2010) – A perverse jaunt through the Requiem to apparently show off how “modern” (i.e. rapidly and emotionless) one can perform this work.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Bruggen's concert version does it for me
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71yRVOnGZkL._SX522_.jpg


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> So here is my updated recommendations list after listening to Harnoncourt, Herreweghe, Schreier, two Karajans, Norrington, Beecham, Christie, and Currentzis.
> ...... Etc.


A heroic effort but of the many I know I am not sure I hear things the same way as you at all! I mean Marriner before Beecham! And Gardiner before Christie!

What you hear and I do are so different that I wonder if you would have come to similar conclusions if you had spent time (months or years) with each of them or had listened them for enjoyment rather than judgment. For example, in my experience you need to go beyond any initial surprise in those that seem "different" to you and to move into hearing these performances and their insights "from the inside" and living with them. And - I'm sorry but this gets me - your "middle of the road HIP" critique of the Christie is just so wide of the mark and suggests to me that your approach was more "listen to one with a notebook to hand and then move on to the next" rather than trying to get inside it. It has a large number of very positive characteristics and a very distinctive feel but you seem to have rushed past it.

Obviously tastes differ widely and attempts to be definitive in our judgments are doomed but, when you think of the artistry, effort and insight that went into any of these performances, it seems that spending time trying to get inside what they are trying to do is the least that should be done before seeking to influence others. I hope you don't mind my saying this but it seems to me that a lot of what we do here concerns being amateur critics (expressing views and making recommendations, if not actually trying to be definitive) and our approaches to this task should be up for debate?

BTW, you use the concept of "inspired" several times (sometimes as a negative as in "not as inspired as..") and I wondered what you mean by that term? Is it about "oomph" or is it more a matter of some special insight? Is it possible to be more precise?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

In honour of this thread (or inspired by it, anyway) I listened to a new (to me) Requiem. It is superb!


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

René Jacobs is awesome in Mozart's operas. I bet that requiem is worth a listen.


----------



## juss100 (Apr 10, 2019)

I can't see any mention of John Butt's recent recording which I've just purchased. It strikes me as the perfect balance between a more romantic and a period approach, it's got a lot more bite to it than other HIP recordings I've heard. I really love this.


View attachment 115982


Also, I'd quite like to take a listen to some non-Sussmayer completed recordings. No-one has really talked about that either in this thread and it seems pretty relevant to what recording one might prefer - Does anyone have any thoughts on what the best place to go would be?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Its strange. I can't find it now but I'm sure I can remember a thread on the Requiem (there have been so many!) where one poster went into the different completions and who used which one. I think on the whole that there is not a huge difference and that the differences between different performers' approaches are more significant.


----------



## Rmathuln (Mar 21, 2018)

I have been enjoying Suzuki's new recording a lot lately.
It is a different performing version, and some will not take well to it for that reason.
A few undistracted listening sessions with close attention to the recording and version documentation that accompanies the disc are recommended to get acquainted with the new version and to be unchained from the traditional renderings.
This recording adds a significant notch to the already impressive evidence support Suzuki as a very penetrating and insightful conductor of choral music.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

I feel the tempo is overall satisfactory, except in the Domine Jesu (not the Hostias), which feels a bit fast.




The Levin completion. I find the Amen (the true ending of the Sequenza)'s inversion of the Requiem theme, D-C#-D-E-F, (also stated in the Dies Irae, the start of the Sequenza) an integral part of the work, btw.


----------

