Haydn vs Mozart
Nov 20, 2009 at 10:40 PM Post #16 of 35

Mink

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Posts
1,396
Likes
882
Location
Netherlands
Mozart.
I don't care much for Haydn's and Mozart's instrumental music, it's their vocal music I adore.
And although I like Haydn's "Die Schöpfung" very much, it cannot beat Mozart's vocal works.
 
Nov 20, 2009 at 10:48 PM Post #17 of 35

userlander

Banned - aka walrus1 - aka vidranger1 - aka iggy-starnuts
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Posts
1,745
Likes
11
I have the Harnoncourt Mozart Symphonies -- they're also really great. I guess I'm in the minority, b/c I think Mozart's symphonies are superior. So many classics, no pun intended!
 
Dec 16, 2009 at 9:07 PM Post #19 of 35

nealric

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Posts
435
Likes
11
Shostakovich
tongue.gif


Can't really choose between them. Mozart's requiem is probably the greatest work produced between the two. Haydin's cello concerto is a close runner up though (speaking as a cellist).
 
Dec 16, 2009 at 9:39 PM Post #21 of 35

radiohlite

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Posts
364
Likes
11
I voted Mozart on account of the late operas and symphonies, though he's not a composer I really enjoy outside of those. Haydn is great musically, but I find him emotionally skimpy.
 
Dec 16, 2009 at 10:24 PM Post #22 of 35

robm321

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
7,947
Likes
194
I pick Mozart without a doubt. Haydn is fun, but Mozart is next level. Which of Haydn's symphonies tops Mozart's 41st? And he had over 100 tries at it.

What work did Haydn write that comes close to Mozart's requiem?

And if Mozart had the same amount of time, this poll would be probably be laughable. Haydn had a nice long maturity to write, unfortunately, Mozart didn't.
 
Dec 17, 2009 at 10:20 AM Post #23 of 35

zumaro

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Posts
861
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by radiohlite /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I voted Mozart on account of the late operas and symphonies, though he's not a composer I really enjoy outside of those. Haydn is great musically, but I find him emotionally skimpy.


If emotionally skimpy means he is not a sad composer, then you should try symphonies like 44 or 49, in fact any of them through that period. The emotions are more straightforward than Mozart would express, but they are no less deeply felt.

Usually however I welcome the later Haydn's wit, his joy, his muscular energy and proto-Beethovian power, and his sheer sanity, all qualities which his profoundly satisfying music can convey. I am not sure why this would be less valid or enjoyable than the more melancholy Mozart.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I pick Mozart without a doubt. Haydn is fun, but Mozart is next level. Which of Haydn's symphonies tops Mozart's 41st? And he had over 100 tries at it.

What work did Haydn write that comes close to Mozart's requiem?

And if Mozart had the same amount of time, this poll would be probably be laughable. Haydn had a nice long maturity to write, unfortunately, Mozart didn't.



Probably none of them top the 41st, but few symphonies in the canon do. But Haydn's symphonic output is as humane, witty, profound and inventive as any composer's. While its a cliche to say he is the father of the symphony and the string quartet, in both media he excelled, and the works remain as relevant and enjoyable today as they ever were. Mozarts great symphonies are really only the last handful - compare this with Haydn's amazing output, and you begin to see why he was so revered in his day.

The Requiem is a poor choice of work to represent Mozart as it is not a first rate example of his craft - here any of Haydn's late masses are better (and stand alongside Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, so high is the quality). Give me the Nelson Mass or Pauken Mass anyday over the Mozart Requiem -profounder and better written, albeit without the romantic death bed story overlay.

Haydn is far beyond "fun", and certainly Mozart's equal in musical greatness.
 
Dec 17, 2009 at 11:01 AM Post #24 of 35

DavidMahler

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Posts
4,124
Likes
336
Quote:

Originally Posted by zumaro /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If emotionally skimpy means he is not a sad composer, then you should try symphonies like 44 or 49, in fact any of them through that period. The emotions are more straightforward than Mozart would express, but they are no less deeply felt.

Usually however I welcome the later Haydn's wit, his joy, his muscular energy and proto-Beethovian power, and his sheer sanity, all qualities which his profoundly satisfying music can convey. I am not sure why this would be less valid or enjoyable than the more melancholy Mozart.



Probably none of them top the 41st, but few symphonies in the canon do. But Haydn's symphonic output is as humane, witty, profound and inventive as any composer's. While its a cliche to say he is the father of the symphony and the string quartet, in both media he excelled, and the works remain as relevant and enjoyable today as they ever were. Mozarts great symphonies are really only the last handful - compare this with Haydn's amazing output, and you begin to see why he was so revered in his day.

The Requiem is a poor choice of work to represent Mozart as it is not a first rate example of his craft - here any of Haydn's late masses are better (and stand alongside Beethoven's Missa Solemnis, so high is the quality). Give me the Nelson Mass or Pauken Mass anyday over the Mozart Requiem -profounder and better written, albeit without the romantic death bed story overlay.

Haydn is far beyond "fun", and certainly Mozart's equal in musical greatness.



I agree, Haydn was very much an innovator who preceded Mozart in quite a few genres. I would say The Creation is Haydn's greatest work and is probably equal to Mozart's Requiem. As far as the Jupiter, there's at least 4 Haydn symphonies I prefer to the Jupiter, but I would never call them better, just different. I would say the 104 London Symphony and the 102nd Symphony don't carry the prestige of the Jupiter, but are as well respected without the burden/luck of being overplayed.
 
Dec 17, 2009 at 11:24 AM Post #25 of 35

zumaro

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Posts
861
Likes
10
I would put all of the last 3 symphonies at the level of Mozart at his greatest. Personally I think 102 is the best (and maybe Haydn's best although 88 and 44 would also be candidates), I enjoy 103 the most, and 104 is like a summary of all that is best in Haydn. The Creation in musical quality is better than the Mozart Requiem - and it stands with the late masses as a supreme example of western classical music at its life affirming best.
 
Dec 17, 2009 at 5:47 PM Post #26 of 35

radiohlite

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Posts
364
Likes
11
hmmm...should delve deeper into Haydn with the recommendations. I've only really heard the late symphonies, one or two of the '40s' (yes, they are quite expressive. forgot about them in my earlier post), some later piano sonatas, and a couple of quartets.

If The Creation is on par with the Missa Solemnis I can't wait!
 
Dec 17, 2009 at 5:47 PM Post #27 of 35

calaf

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Posts
1,261
Likes
57
Location
Latitude 38
Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What work did Haydn write that comes close to Mozart's requiem?


how about the Nelson Mass, or the Missa in tempore belli, or the Creation?

Choral music is one of the two genres (chamber music being the other) where I would argue Haydn bested Mozart. If you had quoted Don Giovanni or the Flute I could only have agreed with you :)
 
Dec 17, 2009 at 10:14 PM Post #28 of 35

zumaro

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Posts
861
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by calaf /img/forum/go_quote.gif
how about the Nelson Mass, or the Missa in tempore belli, or the Creation?

Choral music is one of the two genres (chamber music being the other) where I would argue Haydn bested Mozart. If you had quoted Don Giovanni or the Flute I could only have agreed with you :)



I would agree here - Haydn is better at choral music than Mozart - nothing Mozart wrote approaches the level of any of the late masses or the Creation. The string quartet and piano music in particular are other genres where Haydn wins easily (if this is some kind of contest, and we aren't allowed to appreciate each genius for their individual qualities), but Mozart definitely wins in operas and concertos. If it wasn't for Mozart's last 3 symphonies I would say that Haydn was the easy symphonic winner as well, but those 3 are a spectacular addition to the repertoire.
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 4:20 PM Post #29 of 35

robm321

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
7,947
Likes
194
Quote:

Originally Posted by calaf /img/forum/go_quote.gif
how about the Nelson Mass, or the Missa in tempore belli, or the Creation?

Choral music is one of the two genres (chamber music being the other) where I would argue Haydn bested Mozart.



I agree with that. What I liked about Haydn was that he always put a smile on my face, so I am not motivated to make a big case against him
smile.gif
 
Dec 20, 2009 at 5:50 PM Post #30 of 35

davidhunternyc

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Posts
1,993
Likes
27
For me, these are two very different periods in music, that I can not vote on this poll. I had the great pleasure of listening to this very same debate on NPR, with no resolution to the question...of course. The program highlighted what makes a "Classical" composition (Haydn) and how Mozart chromatic variations presaged the Romantic period. It was interesting because the theoreticians on the program were accompanied by musician's who demonstrated their points. When I reflect on this topic, even though Mozart's Requiem is my most favorite piece of music of all time, I would never say that Haydn's Last Words is inferior. Music from the God's is all I can say.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top