J. Haydn - Hob I:102 - Symphony No. 102 in B flat major (Brüggen) 

Really, Mr. Dodds! : how can you say such a thing?!?

Edge of seat exciting. And the trio is beautifully played.

Without the ‘London’ symphonies - and Mozart’s last six - there would still have been a Beethoven. What I think is true to say however, is that Mozart and Haydn had left the Classical symphony at such a high point, that there was nothing left for Beethoven but to move the symphony in a different direction - that he found a way to do so is part of his greatness. Even from the first notes of Beethoven’s first symphony - even though the idea originated from Haydn’s string quartet Opus 74 No 1 written seven years earlier - we are clearly at the start of a new age.

@@elaineblackhurst1509 mm. I don't know. As you know Haydn was his teacher and so Beethoven was heavily influenced by him and also Beethoven studied deeply Mozart, expecially the most drammatic compositions by Mozart in my opinion: symphony n. 25, piano concerto n. 20 and n. 24, fantasia in D minor, Don Giovanni too, he also studied the last symphonies and requiem of course. I think we would have a very different Beethoven if he hadn't that base to start with.

@@nickn2794 Some interesting points, but one or two things to consider. 1. Haydn as Beethoven’s teacher. This frequently made point is not helpful, and is in fact more misleading than enlightening. Haydn taught Beethoven counterpoint alone - a form of musical grammar - for about 14 months between his two London visits.* The lessons consisted of Beethoven completing hundreds of dry, formal exercises from Fux’s manual Gradus ad Parnassum; he was not teaching composition generally - it was specifically this drudgery that provoked Beethoven’s well-known comment about learning nothing from Haydn. That said, outside the lessons through talk, working together, and study, Beethoven learned more from Haydn in terms of compositional technique than any other composer. 2. Mozart. Beethoven modelled a small number of works on Mozart originals, his 3rd piano concerto on Mozart’s 24th for example, some of the other influences you mention - such as Mozart’s Symphony 25 for example, cannot I believe, be substantiated. Again with the studies of the Requiem, that was directly related to Beethoven thinking about the choral section of his 9th symphony, and his studies for this also included works by JS Bach, Handel, and Haydn, as well as Mozart. However, you are right to say that Beethoven clearly knew a number of Mozart’s works and generally speaking, probably admired him above all others. Similarly, Beethoven clearly modelled some of his works directly on Haydn originals - the tonal journey of his 5th symphony from c minor to C major in 3rd-related keys is almost identical to Haydn 95, or his concert scena ‘Ah perfido!’ is clearly based on Haydn’s magnificent late Scena ‘Berenice, che fai ?’. In terms of general composition technique, I think there is far more of Haydn in Beethoven’s DNA than there is of Mozart where the ‘influence’ is more related to specific works, but in general, you’re quite right that Beethoven learnt a huge amount from his two greatest predecessors. As in my original comment, the great achievement of Beethoven was to move music forward into the new 19th century from where Mozart and Haydn had left it in the late 18th. In that respect, you’re again correct, it was the Mozart/Haydn base that left music with nowhere to go except in a new direction. In short, I think we are both correct. * Beethoven arrived in Vienna in November 1792, about three months after Haydn’s return from his first visit to England; Haydn set off for his second trip to England in January 1794.

Mozart was also particularly interested in this B-flat number. (CORRECTION---wrong Symphony i had in mind here. But it seems that Elaine Blackheart caught my mistake. I must say I was actually quite offended that someone would actually assume that i pulled a Symphony of out my ass.).

Frank Montoya Is this a candidate for ‘Most Ridiculous Comment on RU-vid’? 1. This symphony was written in 1794 whilst Mozart had died in 1791; so Mozart’s being ‘particularly interested’ in it is a highly original idea. 2. Barely a single note of this symphony sounds anything like Mozart; it is quintessentially Haydnesque. 3. Lots of other reasons.

@@elaineblackhurst1509 Indeed, Mrs. Blackheart. I was in error. At the time reading up on certain Haydn pieces that Mozart was inspired by and i had come here to check out what the the Haydn B-flat symphony sounded like. It was just a mistake.

Frank Mont-error That’s cool; the problem was not so much your mistake but the fact that on RU-vid people read it, believe it, repeat it, and then we end up with a load of nonsense being widely propagated. You are quite right: Mozart was interested in a wide range of Haydn’s work and regarding the symphonies, noted down* the incipit - first few notes - of Symphonies 47, 62 and 75 with a view to performing the works at his concerts; Mozart performed Haydn’s Symphony 80 (and one other) at the first performances of his sacred cantata Davide penitente (K469) in Vienna in March 1785. * The little slip of paper is now in Philadelphia I believe.

Same

and?

Well, they're all great works in their own right. But structurally they share a classical shape and other characteristics Prokofiev pastiched in his 1st symphony. GH is still a strong advocate of the Haydn 102nd.

It’s no secret that Beethoven was influenced by Haydn, and he admitted it himself.

You are dead

Isn't it VON Beethoven?

@@mate_on_f7916 I think it's Van

Классная была первая часть с вами,во второй уже какая-то глупость,там дети щенки, если мне не изменяет память.

Great article on the Grauniad this morning

This article is from 2013 but here it says your comment was written only one year ago.

good thing you changed your seat, or else that chandelier might've killed you

He didn't finally achieve it. Mozart learned from him lol

Interesting that you say that, because Mozart was particularly interested in Haydn's B-flat Symphony,

Frank Montoya Complete nonsense. He was not interested in it; Mozart died in 1791, Haydn wrote this in 1794.

​@@elaineblackhurst1509 Ah, not "nonsense", Elaine, i had just mistaken the Hayden's B-flat Symphony with another work that Mozart was interested in. I had done some reading on Mozart and Hayden so had come here to see what the Symphony sounded like.

Frank Montoya You cannot speak about ‘Haydn’s B flat symphony’ because there are ten (twelve*) of them: Symphonies 16 35 51 66 68 71 77 85 and 98 plus the one to which I think you refer here - Symphony 102 - are all in B flat. Of these ten, 98 and 102 were written after Mozart’s death which makes your specific point difficult to understand. Generally speaking however, you are correct; Mozart was interested in a wide range of Haydn’s works. * The early Symphonies ‘A’ (Hob. I:107), and ‘B’ (Hob. I:108) are also in B flat major.

Je dirais plutôt le plus romantique.

Heureusement que Haydn était un classique x)

@@peterbently1533 La musica del secondo movimento è completamente classica; non una singola nota della musica è romantica.

واحد هنا

Mahmoud Ehab انست وشرفت اغالي

Shiko Nora hi

Looking up the conductor, Frans Brüggen, he lived from 1934-2014. So I'm guessing the orchestra is merely called " The Orchestra of the 18th Century" and it was likely recorded in the 20th century.

That is the name of the orchestra

Hmm. I like brisk paces in Haydn.I 've always felt he was stretching the orchestras of his day and the pieces should stretch today's player's too.But you are right the minuet sounds like a presto. Love the finale though!

@@edwardhoward5525 indeed, there's a boost in 4th mov