# Mozart´s Piano Concertos -- general discussion



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

This is a thread dedicated to anything related to Mozart´s wonderful Piano Concertos. So what do you think?

I just listened to Alfred Brendel playing the late No. 24 C minor and 26 D major concertos. What an absolutely lovely finale the C minor concerto has! 

In my humble opinion Mozart´s musical brilliance shines in the concertos brighter than anywhere. And like I have said elsewhere, his piano works perfectly with the orchestra. These concertos are (sonically?) even more beautiful than the symphonies and the string quintets, which I adore!

Just realised I have recordings only of concertos 19-27, but multiple versions of those... Which concertos outside the late ones would you recommend above everything else? I am going to have Brendel versions of those.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

Among the better known ones are Nos. 5, 6, 8 and 14 through 17. They get better as they go along but 17 should be in every collection.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

One of the most popular of the earlier ones is No. 9 in E flat major, K. 271 "Jeunehomme." It has appealed to me for decades whether live or on record, and the finale is delightful.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

20 and 24 are the best. I also like 9, 17, 19, 21 (except for the second movement which I cannot stand for some reason) and 23.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

They don't get better than 17 (except maybe 24). I think 9 (K 271) and all from 14 (K 449, the first piece Mozart entered into his "catalogue") are essential and I don't really think there is any "cut; 11-25 were composed within about 4 years (late 1782-1786), so even 11-13 are pretty good. The two piano concerto (10) is also very popular and certainly worth checking out but I don't like it that much.

favorite slow movements: 9,17,18,22,23,27
favorite finales 9,14,17,19,22,24


----------



## johnlewisgrant (Mar 11, 2013)

I grew up with the Brendel recordings, and I can't shake them, even though by modern standards the sound is not perfect. The last movement of #14 has to be one of the most gloriously optimistic pieces of music ever written. At 15:55 in this YT with Brendel and the St. Martins...


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I don't think anyone would be deterred by the 1970s through early 1980s sound of the Brendel/Marriner recordings. There's an older one of 9+14 on Vanguard that is also very good and in good sound. Casadesus/Szell needs quite a bit more tolerance, same for the early Rudolf Serkin recordings. A "dark horse" that is very good (in decent sound) is Peter Serkin with Sasha Schneider, unfortunately only 14-19 but really among the best of these 6. And only in a 6 disc box (one of that "white series" on RCA/Sony with sleeves only and no booklet).


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund (Jan 4, 2016)

I have listened mainly to Murray Perahia, but lately also Ronald Brautigam. I usually like Maria Joao Pires too  Mozart is the best 💚


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I have listened mainly to Murray Perahia, but lately also Ronald Brautigam. I usually like Maria Joao Pires too  Mozart is the best 💚


This video concept surprized me.

*Maria João Pires plays Mozart Piano Concerto no. 21, K.467 - video 1985*
https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=NMQXIH0FH-E


----------



## RobertJTh (Sep 19, 2021)

My personal favorites are 24, KV 491 (obviously) and 25 KV 503 (less obviously). These two are like the two sides of the same coin: C minor and C major, passionate and tragic vs. majestic and uplifting. Dionysian and Apollonian. Their relationship reminds one of the G minor and C major string quintets. Or the two last symphonies.
And in these couples, it's always the "happy" half that gets the short end of the stick, popularity-wise. But I seriously think KV 503 may be Mozart's best concerto. Everything is inspired, the themes, the harmonic and contrapuntal surprises and the wonderful orchestration with the rich woodwinds pre-echoing Beethoven.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet (Aug 31, 2011)

Kreisler jr said:


> They don't get better than 17 (except maybe 24). I think 9 (K 271) and all from 14 (K 449, the first piece Mozart entered into his "catalogue") are essential and I don't really think there is any "cut; 11-25 were composed within about 4 years (late 1782-1786), so even 11-13 are pretty good. The two piano concerto (10) is also very popular and certainly worth checking out but I don't like it that much.
> 
> favorite slow movements: 9,17,18,22,23,27
> favorite finales 9,14,17,19,22,24


17 is great but 20 is better as is 24.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

The slow movements of the minor concerti are not so great, I think, not up with the best ones (like in #17).


----------



## johnlewisgrant (Mar 11, 2013)

Let’s not forget the sunny #23 A major, a perennial favourite!


----------



## johnlewisgrant (Mar 11, 2013)

But was Mozart really that good? Warning: some viewers may find this content offensive. (But some of it sure is funny!)


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

My favorites are 17, 20, and 24, but all of them from no. 9 up are excellent.


----------



## sqorda (Aug 9, 2013)

Outside 19-27? 9 and 17 are essential listening, I would say.

9 (K271) is one of the best things he had composed thus far (January 1777). If not _the_ best. It's quite bold and direct, very little galanterie.

17 (K453) is indeed very good. In my opinion the best of the 1784 concertos along with 19 (K459).


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I am inordinately fond of K 271 I think it is by a large margin his best piece of that time, on of the most original and distinctive of all of his concerti, and the next concerto on a similar level only K 450 7 years later. I prefer it to the (almost as good) Sinfonia concertante of 1779, mostly because the finale is so good and the whole thing feels more "fresh", with the preposterous piano entering so early etc.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

johnlewisgrant said:


> But was Mozart really that good? Warning: some viewers may find this content offensive. (But some of it sure is funny!)


The original recording I have has the announcer saying that Gould was having a little fun. 

But YT uploaders want controversy. Spice it up.


----------



## johnlewisgrant (Mar 11, 2013)

Luchesi said:


> The original recording I have has the announcer saying that Gould was having a little fun.
> 
> But YT uploaders want controversy. Spice it up.


The announcer was anticipating a lynch mob, possibly. Gould didn't record much Mozart anyway, and what little he did suggests to me that he may not really have liked WAM very much. (Or perhaps Gould didn't understand him.) Funny how his Brahms Intermezzi are actually quite emotional. So he wasn't a computer.

Still, hilarious stuff.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

Thanks everyone so far! It is wonderful to read your thoughts on this unbelievably enchanting and enriching music. It is like opening the lid of a treasure chest, the gold reflecting from the chest to the adventurer´s pale face.

I continued my journey by getting myself the 9th and the 17th performed by Alfred Brendel!


----------



## Anooj (Dec 5, 2021)

My favorites are 9, 10, 15, 17, 19-25, & 27 (#10 is very underrated)

In a tier below that, 6, 13, 14, 16, 18, & 26, and then 7, 11 & 12 after those.

1-5 & 8 are entirely fine, but I don’t find myself listening to them often.

I have the following recordings:

- Geza Anda’s classic cycle (which omits concertos 7 & 10)

- The Colin Davis / Alicia de Larrocha recordings (9 & 19-27) that come packaged together with the Larrocha/Previn recordings of concerto 10 and the double piano sonata.

- The Perahia/Lupu disc of 7 & 10

- Andor Foldes’s recordings of 10, 15, 17, 21, 25 under multiple conductors (a must-hear recording of 25)

- A partial Brendel/Marriner cycle on the two Philips/Decca duo sets (9, 15, 19-25, 7)


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Mozart's Pinao Concertos were among my first classical loves. I'd definitely found/heard pieces I liked before then, including Mozart's symphonies, but it was really his concertos that hooked me and made me realized I discovered a whole new universe of music that I could spend a lifetime exploring with enthusiasm. If I had to pick a favorite it would probably be 24, though the entire 19-25 and 27 run is so consistently superb that picking a favorite is nearly impossible and would probably depend on my mood on any given day. Certainly one some days I'd prefer the intensely moody and emotional slow movement of 23, or the pearlescent beauty of 21, or the intense almost operatic/theatrical drama of 20. Like many I also love 9 and 17 from among the early works. For favorite cycles it's hard to say because I listened to them over such long periods of time in different stages of my life, but I'd probably go with the first set that hooked me, which was Uchida/Tate. I've also heard Perahia, Anda, and Brendel, and while they were all good I don't think any of them would inspire me to go back to them over Uchida.


----------



## Waehnen (Oct 31, 2021)

I listened to the 4th Beethoven concerto by Brendel/Rattle today, just for comparison. It sure is a gorgeous work, but I feel like describing it as a symphony for piano and orchestra, just like the two Brahms concertos. And many other piano concertos for that matter.

If I had to compare the Mozart concertos, I would compare them to the brilliance of Beethoven Piano Sonatas more than to Beethoven´s later concertos.

Then again, the wonderful 3rd Piano Concerto by Beethoven is the same genre as Mozart (although the orchestra sounds bigger, and maybe is). The way a piano concerto should be, in my opinion.


----------



## ansfelden (Jan 11, 2022)

When it comes to Mozart, it´s all the concertos for me. 

When it comes to the piano concertos, i always liked the Clifford Curzon stuff, which i have not listened to closely for a long time (but will add to the re-listening pile, thanks for the idea).


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

johnlewisgrant said:


> But was Mozart really that good? Warning: some viewers may find this content offensive. (But some of it sure is funny!)


Which proves that Gould misjudged Mozart so as to play him badly too. There are times when he should have just kept his mouth shut and not made a fool of himself.


----------



## Roger Knox (Jul 19, 2017)

Noticing the Concerto No. 24 in C Minor, K. 491 come up so frequently reminds me of how fortuitous it was that I came to perform its first movement at a summer orchestra camp. It was the first time I had been to such a program, the first time they had offered piano instruction, and my first concerto. My teacher suggested some Mozart concertos and I liked the opening of the C Minor first movement. To me, the brooding mood of the minor key was less remarkable than the chromaticism of the opening orchestral theme, stated in bare octaves. (It is not serial but does include 11 of the 12 pitch classes, all but the flat 2nd scale degree Db [root of the Neapolitan 6th chord] that Mozart saves for later.) Some faculty members were surprised at my choice of this profound work; the woodwind teachers told me to attend to the wind writing; the piano instructor who'd studied with a distinguished European pedagogue pulled apart the piano theme for masculine and feminine motifs; and I became nervous as hell! But it came off reasonably well and the whole experience of meeting professionals and other students around this wonderful work had a lasting influence.


----------



## marlow (11 mo ago)

Wilhelm Kempff did not record all the Mozart concertos but those he did record should be listened to be all Mozartians. They span quite a period of time but worth collecting. Serkin’s incomplete set of recordings will give you a very different but also electrifying experience


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

johnlewisgrant said:


> The announcer was anticipating a lynch mob, possibly. Gould didn't record much Mozart anyway, and what little he did suggests to me that he may not really have liked WAM very much. (Or perhaps Gould didn't understand him.) Funny how his Brahms Intermezzi are actually quite emotional. So he wasn't a computer.
> 
> Still, hilarious stuff.


Yes, it would have been startling to a listener of CM if they didn't already know Gould's humor and his over-the-top imitations/impressions of stodgy critics (back then, everyone's image of a stodgy critic). 

I think he explains himself very well. It's an unrewarding subject. And anyway to me, he was an explorer. Other pianists can do the documenting for future orthodoxies.

He makes good points about Mozart's devices in the Cm, but I disagree with him that they're too low of interest and originality for a grand concerto. I think the over all accomplishment and effect are far greater than the parts (as is the goal of a work, - a goal of art projecting greater than the sum of its parts etc.) and this is what we should listen for and appreciate in Mozart (not his limited toolbox).


----------

