(++++) BACK TO THE 1780s

Mozart: Horn Concertos Nos. 1-4; Rondo, KV 371. Martin Owen, horn; Manchester Camerata conducted by Gábor Takács-Nagy. Chandos. $21.99. 

Haydn: Symphonies Nos. 84-86. Danish Chamber Orchestra conducted by Adam Fischer. Naxos. $19.99. 

     In the decade when Haydn was in his 50s and Mozart in his late 20s and early 30s, the sheer creativity of both composers was in full flower and to this day is something of a wonder to behold – and to hear. The music that flowed from Mozart and Haydn in those years continues to elicit new interpretations and rethinkings to this day, with contemporary performers finding that the works still have a great deal to say to modern audiences and are worth presenting with some new approaches designed to elicit changing listener responses. 

     There is also new scholarship underlying the music. The four Mozart horn concertos are now thought to have been composed in the order of 2, 4, 3 and 1, with No. 1 not finished until after Mozart’s death and being completed by Franz Xaver Süßmayr, who is best known for another completion, of Mozart’s Requiem. In accordance with the new information, Martin Owen gives the two-movement No. 1 a warmer and more expansive reading than it customarily receives, and is backed up aptly in the approach by the Manchester Camerata under Gábor Takács-Nagy. Nor is this the only concerto in which Owen and Takács-Nagy place Mozart closer to the forefront of the Romantic era than is usually the case: all the concertos’ slow movements are delivered with considerable warmth, their emotive qualities emphasized; and at various places – not just in the slow movements – there are tempo variations, unmentioned in the score, that are intended to make the music more expansive or communicative in various ways. It is only in the comparatively straightforward performance of the Rondo, KV 371, which dates to 1781 and thus predates all the concertos, that Owen and Takács-Nagy follow the precedent of other performers pretty much throughout, although here too there is considerable lyrical flow that is accentuated by the round, full tone of Owen’s instrument. Everything here is carefully thought through and presented with considerable elegance and very fine ensemble playing – but the Chandos release does take some getting used to for listeners long familiar with the repertoire. Soloist and conductor do succeed in shining some new light on the material, and without conveying a sense that they are somehow trying too hard to find a new line of communication between the 18^th century and the 21^st. In some ways, though, this thoughtful and well-conceived approach is a bit of a throwback to recordings such as those of Dennis Brain and Barry Tuckwell, which were exceptionally well-played and made no attempt to display the historicity of the music, the scholarship for which was on a totally different level at the time – when the notion of historically informed performance practice was essentially nonexistent. In the collaboration of Owen and Takács-Nagy, matters of history are fully understood based on current scholarship, and when the interpretations seem to deviate a bit from what is now the generally accepted approach to the music, that is entirely by design. Even if this is not a listener’s first choice for a recording of Mozart’s horn concertos, it could surely stand as a second – because it does showcase the music in some genuinely new ways while presenting it always with exceptionally fine playing and some genuine verve, especially in the exuberant hunting-horn finales. 

     Unlike Owen and Takács-Nagy, Adam Fischer may be trying a bit too hard for a new approach in his ongoing reimagining of Haydn symphonic performance. Fischer is supposed to be recording the last 25 of the symphonies for Naxos, although how that will work with three to a disc is by no means clear, since 25 is not divisible by three. The final 12 “London” symphonies did fit neatly onto four CDs, and the six “Paris” symphonies would fit on two, but the expected sequence would be Nos. 82-84 on one disc and Nos. 85-87 on another – which is not what Fischer has recorded in the fifth volume of this series. Instead he delivers first-rate performances of Nos. 84-86, with an accompanying note that sounds almost apologetic for Haydn tending to be less popular nowadays than Mozart and Beethoven despite being No. 1 among audiences of his own time. But this is where Fischer may try too hard to “redeem” Haydn, who needs nothing of the sort: Haydn wrote music not to challenge but to delight, and no apologia for that, no attempt somehow to “equalize” Haydn with his contemporaries, is required. 

     Haydn was endlessly inventive, his symphonies – including Nos. 84-86 – being totally unlike each other even when their formal plans are superficially similar. To modern ears, the differences among the symphonies, and between those by Haydn and those by his contemporaries, are subtle. But in context they were substantial, and that is why Haydn had such an outsized reputation. Today’s audiences would need to be steeped in symphonic works of Haydn’s time to hear just how distinctive Haydn’s were, and that is simply not possible after the intervening centuries. In any case, Fischer and the Danish Chamber Orchestra make a wonderful case for Haydn in general and these three “Paris” symphonies in particular. No. 84 features great clarity of the solos – a distinctive Haydn symphonic feature – despite occasional unneeded slowdowns that are intended to mark points of emphasis. This is inappropriate, as are some brief pauses before some downbeats – a performance oddity that does nothing to burnish the otherwise very clean orchestral sound. “Rescuing” Haydn is entirely unnecessary, but we would have to be steeped in the way symphonic works were commonly conceived in Haydn’s time to understand just how revolutionary Haydn was. There is simply no way to recapture the milieu in which he operated, so it is something of a fool’s errand to try to “revive” the response his music received. Fischer’s approach is attractive in its use of a variety of subtle alterations of typical performance techniques, especially in the strings, to try to bring freshness to the symphonies. They really do stand on their own, though, no matter how effective the bouncing bows in the finale of No. 84 turn out to be. 

     In No. 85, the string speed in the first movement’s runs, and the contrast when the movement dips into the minor, are handled with great panache: it is difficult to sustain the movement at this pace, but this orchestra does so exceptionally well. Fischer is also, here and elsewhere, willing to do slow movements not very slowly at all. In the third movement, piano and forte contrast to particularly good effect, and Fischer never loses sight of the humorous touches that, like the contrast between loud and soft, are characteristic elements of Haydn’s symphonic thinking. The performance climaxes with a very bouncy finale that features a perkily percolating bassoon line – the bassoon having also featured to good effect in No. 84. As for No. 86, timpani are prominent and used to especially good effect in the first movement, in which the transition from the slow opening to the main tempo is both subtle and surprising – again, a combination typical of Haydn but not to be found elsewhere (not even in Mozart). Fischer takes the first movement Allegro spirituoso quite quickly, with the repeated forte exclamations handled with aplomb. This is one of Haydn’s most perfectly proportioned symphonies, and Fischer manages it to fine effect. The second movement forte/piano contrasts are again handled particularly well – this is an unusual movement in its alteration of very slow, emotional material with brighter, quicker elements. The third movement again features especially effective timpani, and its rustic Trio with woodwind emphases is a standout. The finale is very quick, with excellent strings – this movement is a showcase for them – and yet again there are delightful little bassoon touches that are well-handled. The unexpected silences near the very end really come as a surprise here and underline the quality both of the music and of the performers. Nevertheless, nothing that Fischer delivers in his reexamination of a few dozen Haydn symphonies will be as impressive as his remarkable survey of the entire set of 104, recorded over a 14-year period (1987-2001) with the Austro-Hungarian Haydn Orchestra. But even during that monumental undertaking, Fischer was expressing misgivings about the untoward permanence being given to interpretations that he said he was reconsidering and looking at in new ways even as the cycle was being assembled. That sort of self-criticism is understandable: great music invites constant reassessment. So Fischer’s recent thoughts about Haydn’s later symphonies, like the thoughts of Owen and Takács-Nagy about Mozart’s horn concertos, have considerable validity and deserve to generate considerable interest. But nothing in these Haydn and Mozart performances can be or should be thought of as definitive: the characteristics that have kept this music appealing, engaging and meaningful from the 1780s to the 2020s will surely continue to provoke new ideas and new approaches in the future.