[Szabó Zsolt] Mozart: Fantasie (Allegro and Andante) for Organ in f, K608

[@F-Man]

This is a glimpse into what Mozart might have given us had he lived past 1791 and gotten that Kappelmeister position.

[@michaelwu7678]

Ferrariman601 too sad to think about

[@y.martel842]

What a loss for humanity

[@olly8453]

A lot more sacred music would have resulted too--Ave Verum Corpus was another foreshadower of what was to come. Had Mozart lived another 10years, "the greatest composer" argument would have become unanimously uncontested.

[@voxveritatis3815]

@@olly8453 He is exactly because of that 😉

[@abiescanadensis]

couldn't be more true and accurate

[@vigokovacic3488]

The Andante part... Just... Just beautiful...

[@mrknesiah]

Sublime, isn't it. Just effortless beauty.

[@ente866]

Adagio and andante always hit different

[@vigokovacic3488]

@@ente866 Brought me back to this comment and fabulous piece for my birthday! Thanks! 😀

[@armine6766]

reminds me of late beethoven idk why no one talks about it (lol im 6 years late)

[@vigokovacic3488]

@@armine6766 And I'm brought back six years back! Thanks for bringing me back to this!

[@elemusic19]

8:54 Everybody gangsta til the pedal part looks like this.

[@jcl9792]

🤣

[@Mezzotenor]

Superb performance. It helped me realize that my lukewarm appreciation of the piece can be blamed on some rather sub-par performances I've had to sit through.

[@bondo5696]

Now this was a wonderful way to start the day. Thanks for having it here. I have listened many times to a Nonesuch recording I can't find now, but I have never seen the score before.

[@mariasusanavalloud3684]

Qué magnífica ejecución. Fuerza y delicadeza se responden

[@ronwalker4849]

A DAZZLING AND BRILLIANT PERFORMANCE OF EXTROARDINARY DIFFICULTY. WHAT A PITY THAT MOZART DIDN´T WRITE MORE MUSIC FOR ORGAN CONSIDERING HIS GREAT GIFT EQUAL TO THE LEVEL OF BACH´S BEST ORGAN WORKS THANKYOU FOR THE POST. JUST WONDERFUL

[@voxveritatis3815]

Amen

[@kneza96BG]

"equal" is a stretch but i agree that the work is great

[@therealrealludwigvanbeethoven]

No, Bach's organ works are definitely of a higher caliber, although Mozart's music is undoubtedly splendid.

[@DJENTRAX]

caps

[@user-cs4ls1xi5u]

Бессмертный шедевр на века

[@schulze_duda3502]

Agora já posso começar o meu dia.

[@omegads3862]

played in proper spirit. maybe the best recorder.

[@mrknesiah]

Wow ... 8:14 Mozart's ode to Bach's famous G Minor (578) and D minor (565) fugues? I just have to say this music is ridiculously amazing. From astonishing fugal intensity to sublime lyricism, each time I hear this I wonder...how is this even possible?

[@jocelynreinhardt4093]

Mozart did not know the fugue in G minor (BWV 578) !

[@mrknesiah]

@@jocelynreinhardt4093 Are we sure about that? It certainly seems influenced by it.

[@jocelynreinhardt4093]

@@mrknesiah, we must stop always comparing with J.-S. Bach each time we listen to a fugue by another great master of music. As if Bach's music radiated throughout 18th century Europe, systematically inspiring all his contemporaries or successors, or that he had invented the genre of the fugue (Dietrich Buxtehude had already sketched a triple fugue around 1690: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWSygIKYbrWoiKM ). Mozart had almost no knowledge of Bach's organ literature (which was reserved for the church repertoire). He only had access to the Well-Tempered Clavier, the Art of Fugue and some Trio Sonatas. Mozart was very lucky to know Bach's music. This is due to one of its patrons, Baron van Swieten, who had a library with a collection of Baroque scores. This Mozart fugue is not very similar to Bach's G minor fugue (BWV 578). The two are not in the same key (F minor for one, G minor for the other). I would say that Mozart's is even better (despite being shorter). Bach's Fugue in G minor exploits two-part imitation in sixteenth notes, first up a fourth and then back to the original level, which is a technique borrowed from Arcangelo Corelli. Mozart's fugue takes up the subject of the first fugue, enriched with a second subject, with inversion afterwards, and boosted with chromaticism until the end. It's not the same style at all.

[@therealrealludwigvanbeethoven]

@@jocelynreinhardt4093 Excellent comment!

[@randiey95]

2:31 lovely cicrle of 5th

[@Ivan_1791]

There is a place in hell for those who cough. xD

[@markbane4253]

After coronavirus

[@sean-zt3tk]

@Jani Akujärvi nice joke

[@stefanhempel2354]

Wahnsinn Mozart

[@Basal89]

Fire! I like, great interpretation without "rigid metrics" as is right for Mozart!

[@heathenhammer2344]

The unknown castlevania score

[@_Athanos]

9:34

[@user-il1vr9lu9e]

なかなか見ることが無いオルガンの楽譜です。作曲もさることながら、演奏による再現は難しいだろうなぁ ！！ ライブ録音らしく、メインテーマ部に入ってテンポが速くなり、テーマの切り替え時に少し間が空きました。

[@pearlblues3665]

That chord at 2:16 mmmmmmm :)

[@philosophin9893]

+pearl blues Do you also enjoy the melody? Or are you exclusively fixed on chords? ;-)

[@pearlblues3665]

Philosophin I like the whole thing, melody and everything, but some parts really stick out to me.

[@minemilx2702]

I love how he puts the seventh at the bottom.

[@LachlanTyrrell2003]

@@minemilx2702 The seventh is on the top?

[@francescodonarini2086]

can I have the link where you found the sheet? beautiful performance!

[@DJKLProductions]

IMSLP

[@benoitcolindeville2876]

Hello, Nice music. Can you tell me where I can find that version of music score ? Thanks !

[@alvarodavid9566]

Don't think you can play it.

[@alvarodavid9566]

Don't think you can play it.

[@therealrealludwigvanbeethoven]

@@alvarodavid9566 You must be fun at parties!

[@stefan2904]

7:16. 6:38

[@stefanhempel2354]

Super brauche Noten davon

[@ensifer329]

2:31 = paradis

[@organistNam]

welche Verlag ist die Note?

[@tnsnamesoralong]

+kyangsuk Nam Edition Peters, you can find it on imslp.org

[@organistNam]

+tnsnamesoralong thanks a lot,so beutiful performance,i like Mozart f-moll so many!

[@MarekWodawski]

Slower please...

[@somehow3707]

Allegro...

[@regine5285]

@@somehow3707 allegro jest grane za szybko

[@jcl9792]

8:14

[@10mimu]

Very Beethovenian

[@gerdprengel7616]

This is such a great work and I feel that it even needs an orchestral expression - so I tried to do that: kzbin.info/www/bejne/h4apiqejZdh2r9U

[@organbuilder272]

Too fast, not clear, Slow down, this is not a race to the finish. Give the piece breathing space. It is powerful, magnificent, dignified. You performance is technically perfect but the phrasing is not clear in many places. Still, you have a like.

[@CarlBowlby]

robert shaw I totally agree with you. Too fast. At least from the Kalmus edition I have (and I have not been able to get a more reliable score) there are parts in the piece that call for Andante/Allegretto where the 8th note is 84-88 beats. This is played much too fast at this part of the piece. And exactly, the piece needs breathing space because the harmonies are gorgeous. And of course yes the performance is near flawless and absolutely played brilliantly, but the musicality of the piece is lacking in emotion, feeling. And lastly, as an organist, I do not agree with his registration choices, but that’s a subjective, personal affair. Thanks for “sticking out” with your much needed critique.

[@Kris9kris]

@@CarlBowlby If you base your judgment of Mozart’s music on 19th century “instructive” editions (like the Kalmus or the Lebert/Bülow debacle), then you’ve already critically damaged the credibility of your appraisal. To add insult to injury, Mr. Szabó (the performer) already plays from a heavily edited 1885 transcription by Alfred Glaus. Do you know a single person who walks at a quarter = 88 pace? I would assume hardly.

[@CarlBowlby]

Kris9kris ok, my “credibility” is damaged because the only versions that exist are the ones like Kalmus. Illogical preening on your part. Ok, 9 months later, I have my hands on Barenreiter’s version of Mozart’s “organ” pieces-which really aren’t organ pieces because he composed them for a clock-and they are exactly the same. Again, there is no credibility to be damaged if the only sources out there are the same ones. But please, illuminate me. What score are you basing your “superior” judgments on? I truly want to be enlightened. And yes, in the realm of all possibility, I’m sure there is at least one human being on planet earth who walks at 88 bpm. And for future reference, try illuminating a discussion and not turning civil discourse into a piss test.

[@Kris9kris]

​@@CarlBowlby “and they are exactly the same” No, they are not the same - not by a long shot. The score is readily available online, at the NMA website. Granted, it’s not perfect, but better than any of the heavily edited versions originating from the 19th century. What score are you basing your “superior” judgments on? Not superior, just in coherence with the era when this piece was composed. A statement like this makes me see red in several ways for one I didn’t claim there is no room for any viable artistic liberties (nor did I claim that my judgment was the only correct one), but they always have to stay within the realm of a given piece’s compositional genesis which is inherently intertwined with the environment the composition was conceived in, and two: don’t substitute poor research with saying - oh, it’s just a choice, because it’s not. If Mozart writes Andante, you don’t play a romantic, Wagnerian andante as a metronomization from ca. 1850 would tell you, you play a classical one. Many, many interpreters are guilty of this, even today. Classical masters’ piano (and organ for that matter) works were subject to heavy scrutiny throughout the 19th century. Individual phrasings were replaced by long slurs, dynamics got flattened out, note values were changed, excessive pedal markings and crescendos were added, and tempos got slower (unlike Wim Winters would have you believe) gradually to the point of being unrecognisable - to reflect romantic tempo sensibilities. Sigmund Lebert even had the balls to proclaim outright that Mozart’s compositional expertise was tarnished by the limitations of his own instrument… Read Quantz, read Türk, read Sandra Rosenblum’s book, read Czerny, Moscheles, Hummel’s metronomizations regarding Mozart and Haydn’s works and you will get it, I promise. “at least one human being on planet earth who walks at 88 bpm” I meant to write 8th note = 88 in my original comment as you did. 8th = 88 in a 3/4 pulse? A very elderly man with a walking frame I suppose. “try illuminating a discussion” I don’t know why you have to be pissy about it. I only said that a metronome reference from the mid-1800s is a *very* misjudged way to approach classical tempi to the point where you said that a somewhat correct Andante affects the “musicality” of Mozart’s piece - which echoes Sigmund Lebert… No serious musician today should use those instructive editions - I know, because I was one of those individuals, then I got some information in my hands.

[@CarlBowlby]

Kris9kris point taken. However, I think the fundamental issue with Mozart’s so-called organ pieces (KV 594, 608 & 616) were all written for a mechanical organ and clock (or in the German, Orgelwalze) So as far as Mozart’s own credibility in composing “realistic” organ repertoire is sadly misconceived. Is there really any way one can execute 32nd grace notes in the pedal while accompanying/mirroring those 32nd notes in the left hand bass? And to even hear oneself playing that one would have to accentuate the registration in the pedal with at least a 4’ stop, if not using the Kromhorne or Cornet/Trumpet stops. And further in the unrealistic compositional technique, Mozart writes 2 trills in the same right hand. Maybe there is one person who can do this, or maybe even yourself, but for the rest of us, this is completely impractical. And of course, circling back to my original argument, these pieces were written the way they are precisely because it was for a mechanical apparatus, and not a human one. Anyway, I’d like to hear your interpretation of the Classical era dynamics, tempi, etc. as I much prefer the “stability” of the Baroque era repertoire, including ornamentation, which I have studied and played quite extensively. I’ve always found classical pianists play practically everything Allegro assai, unless of course it’s Adagio or Andante, and then, to my ears, it’s played too slowly. And yes, sorry for being pissy. You sound very intelligent. I’d love to hear more of what you think about musical interpretation.

[@d.haroldangel241]

This organ player seems to be in a BIG hurry...

[@Sshooter444]

Ill never understand why people go to a concert and cough!

[@LeFerryVillois]

Poison

[@DanielFahimi]

Just like your existence. Your existence is poison to whomever you're around with.

[@chipensemble]

@@DanielFahimi ROASTED

[@dalladi]

Why did this give me anxiety :/

[@MozartshouldhavediedearlierGou]

This piece starts well and then falls into a black hole of boreness that only a mediocre composer such as Mozart could provide, shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Bach and Beethoven, if I'm being honest I don't even know if he is a better composer than Lady Gaga.

[@therealrealludwigvanbeethoven]

I have a question, Korean troll: are you the same person as 'Beethoven was a bad melodist. Bernstein said.' or is the owner of that channel your friend?

[@orb3796]

I honestly agree. Mozart was a composer who relied on clichés to such a degree that listening to his music becomes painful. If I hear another whimsical melody end in a V-I melodic drop I will punch a hole in a wall. Though I can only partially blame him as living in the classical period is a death sentence when it comes to making exciting compositions. You have to appeal to the musical taste of snobby 18th century aristocrats after all. Not the most exciting people.

[@jocelynreinhardt4093]

​@@orb3796, yet this piece is of baroque inspiration. The contrast between the different movements is reminiscent of the organ works of Buxtehude which alternates and enchains in a characteristic close to improvisation. The Fantasia opens with an introduction (Allegro) that exposes a theme owed to the French or Handelian baroque overture (cf. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qaS8iJuLZpafqtE ), with dotted rhythms and embellishments (gruppetti), the latter, however, take on a dramatic color setting themselves in a motif with dissonant and obsessive chords. A fugue for four voices leads to the re-proposition of the theme in the distant key of F minor (second Neapolitan): a harmonic succession rather rare in Mozart, which however the author abandons shortly after to make room for the relative of the starting key (A-flat major) in the middle Andante. Top of the composition, the Andante has a circular structure with a motif replicated three times and always varied in an elementary and archaic way (baroque), on one side consistent with the spirit of the piece, on the other necessitated by the “ mechanical nature ” of the instrument (because it is a piece for a mechanical organ [musical clock]). Carl de Nys, religious and musicologist, sees in it « one of the most compelling [pages] that Mozart imagined, a surprising fusion of the forms of the Lied, of the variation, of the rondo ». The movement ends with a cadence of trills that leads to the return of the initial Introduction at 7:25, with the fugue enriched by a second subject and bumpy with chromatisms to the end (8:07). This is great art !

[@DanielFahimi]

@@therealrealludwigvanbeethoven No, I can tell, the anti-Beethoven guy, is either a teenager or a grown man. This guy is a stupid kid.

[@DanielFahimi]

@@orb3796 Can't tell if you're just trolling to get some reaction from Mozart fans or you're just mocking Gould.