Late Classical Symphonies

[eschiss1]

What I've heard of Carlos Baguer's (1768-1808) symphonies (there are recordings on Chandos and another label or two) are rather good also. (While not all late Classical, Bamert's series- I agree with one reviewer that it would have been more accurately named contemporaries of Haydn, as his influence is generally felt more than Mozart's, which doesn't surprise me - has been good so far as I've heard it.  A real standout has been a symphony in F by Mozart's alleged rival Leopold Kozeluch, in parts very Haydnesque but also a very strong work, especially in the first movement. It would, I think, be good to have some more of Cannabich's very many symphonies- but I think I veer much too much off-topic. Sorry! )
Eric

[Empfindsamer]

I vote for Wilms.
Symphonies 6 (op. 58, d minor) and 7 (c minor).
Stunning music, with no doubt.
IMHO is worth of some Beethoven's exploits.

[Peter1953]

The 3 symphonies from Friedrich Ernst Fesca (1789-1826), opp. 6, 10 & 13, performed by the NDR Radiophilharmonie under Beermann (2 cpo CD's) are definitely late classical works. Pleasant music, but I'm not getting excited. I think those by Eberl show more individuality (Concerto Köln under Ehrhardt).

[eschiss1]

The 3 symphonies from Friedrich Ernst Fesca (1789-1826), opp. 6, 10 & 13, performed by the NDR Radiophilharmonie under Beermann (2 cpo CD's) are definitely late classical works. Pleasant music, but I'm not getting excited. I think those by Eberl show more individuality (Concerto Köln under Ehrhardt).

The scherzo of the 2nd Fesca symphony is sometimes played separately on a Belgian station (Klara.be) whose classical program (Continuo) contains more movements than completed works (but, I will say in its favor, interestingly chosen movements.) It does seem a fine and vital piece (the station webcasts). I haven't heard the rest of the three symphonies yet, though... maybe that's the best of!

[John H White]

It all depends on what we mean by "late Classical". I would say that the Krauss symphonies I have recordings of, including the celebrated Funeral Symphony, sound to me more like Haydn in his Sturm und Drang middle period. One English composer who could write symphonies both in the "Old" style and "Modern" style characteristic of Haydn's "London" symphonies was John Marsh (1752-!828). Haydn's pupil Pleyel and Josef Elsner(1769-1854),both appear to have copied Haydn's late style, but why bother with imitations when you can get the real thing from FJH himself?!
By the way, some of his kid brother Michael's later symphonies are also well worth a listen. In fact his good friend and colleague, Mozart wrote a slow introduction for one of them and for many years it was counted as Mozart's 37th symphony!

[tonton]

try the three piano concertos by Woelfl on the label cpo - lots of echoes of Mozart; Eberl's symphonies op.33 and op.34 are a must on Teldec

[JimL]

It all depends on what we mean by "late Classical". I would say that the Krauss symphonies I have recordings of, including the celebrated Funeral Symphony, sound to me more like Haydn in his Sturm und Drang middle period. One English composer who could write symphonies both in the "Old" style and "Modern" style characteristic of Haydn's "London" symphonies was John Marsh (1752-!828). Haydn's pupil Pleyel and Josef Elsner(1769-1854),both appear to have copied Haydn's late style, but why bother with imitations when you can get the real thing from FJH himself?!
By the way, some of his kid brother Michael's later symphonies are also well worth a listen. In fact his good friend and colleague, Mozart wrote a slow introduction for one of them and for many years it was counted as Mozart's 37th symphony!

I've often wondered, since they found that it isn't Mozart's 37th Symphony but Michael Haydn's 26th, why they don't renumber Mozart's Symphony #22a, (the one in A minor) as his 37th.

[TerraEpon]

I've often wondered, since they found that it isn't Mozart's 37th Symphony but Michael Haydn's 26th, why they don't renumber Mozart's Symphony #22a, (the one in A minor) as his 37th.
[/quote]

Eh, well it's not the only one of the 'main' 41 that's not by Mozart -- 2 and 3 aren't either, and one or two others as well IIRC.

[eschiss1]

I've often wondered, since they found that it isn't Mozart's 37th Symphony but Michael Haydn's 26th, why they don't renumber Mozart's Symphony #22a, (the one in A minor) as his 37th.

Eh, well it's not the only one of the 'main' 41 that's not by Mozart -- 2 and 3 aren't either, and one or two others as well IIRC.

And the A minor one ("Odense") - is there very recent news? I thought that was considered of doubtful authenticity now.
Eric

[JimL]

We may be talking about the same symphony.  I always thought that that was one that Mozart had entered into his thematic catalogue, but the MS had never been found.  When it was found the symphony was considered to be unquestionably authentic, since it matched one that Mozart had already catalogued.

P.S. Upon further research I find that the 'Odense' Symphony may be the same work, but the authenticity of the catalogue entry is in doubt, since Mozart's original catalogue was lost.  Also, the symphony now appears to be numbered 16a.  This doesn't make any sense to me.  I recall reading the article when the symphony was discovered, and I've heard a broadcast of the symphony on the radio and it was referred to as "No. 22a".

[eschiss1]

We may be talking about the same symphony.  I always thought that that was one that Mozart had entered into his thematic catalogue, but the MS had never been found.  When it was found the symphony was considered to be unquestionably authentic, since it matched one that Mozart had already catalogued.

P.S. Upon further research I find that the 'Odense' Symphony may be the same work, but the authenticity of the catalogue entry is in doubt, since Mozart's original catalogue was lost.  Also, the symphony now appears to be numbered 16a.  This doesn't make any sense to me.  I recall reading the article when the symphony was discovered, and I've heard a broadcast of the symphony on the radio and it was referred to as "No. 22a".

It's usually described as Köchel 16a. It might be described as _symphony_ 22a for some odd reason.
I'd be surprised if it was in Mozart's personal thematic catalog, which begins with K.449 I believe (and includes the only evidence of some works that do not survive otherwise, I think- just marches and thelike, but still). Did Mozart also keep a catalog of his earlier works? (Also, I think the manuscript copy of that later catalog does survive- the British Library? Museum? had it viewable online in digitized microform during the Mozart year a few years ago )
Eric

[TerraEpon]

16a doesn't have a number on my list (which isn't perfect, granted). It's also noted "Lost; Doubtful copy found" so at the moment it's though to not be by Mozart.

And I was wrong, it's only 2, 3, and 37. There are a bunch of other spurious ones in the catalog, though the only ones in the original K1 catalog are Symphony in F, K 98 and a symphonic Finale in D, K 291 (that one's also by M Haydn)

[JimL]

The most informative article on the subject can be found here.

[John H White]

I wondered why Mozart's 2nd and 3rd symphonies seemed inferior to his No1 in E flat until I read somewhere that, in that case, the 8 year old child prodigy had copied out one of C F Abel's symphonies as an exercise prior to producing similar works of his own.

[chill319]

I haven't been keeping up, John. Does this mean the story is unfounded about Wolfgang attempting to boost his father's spirits during Leopold's London illness by producing a composition of the type Leopold was rather good at writing?