Deryk Barker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Now the [Mozart] violin concertos, those I really find tedious for the
>most part.

As with many things, it may be the recording.  I found the violin concerti
also less compelling than the rest of Mozart's oeuvre, but my acquaintance
with them is largely rooted in a recording featuring David Oistrakh as
both violinist and conductor.

(A rule of thumb: I try to avoid performances where the soloist also
conducts.  The orchestral portion may be competent, but rarely insightful,
and there is little interplay or contrast between the orchestra and the
soloist.)

But my eyes were opened when I heard a bit of what David Zinman and
Pamela Frank have done with the same works on Arte Nova.  I'd exchange
the Oistrakh CD (which is actually my daughter's, and even she doesn't
care for it) for that one in a heartbeat.  I have not seen Arte Nova
recordings recently in stores, but I found a link on amazon.com:

   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00003W7YB/classicalnetA/

In general, though, it seems to me that for most composers, the violin
concerti constitute their weakest body of work.  The form seems to lend
itself to superficiality (either of the romantic kind or the flashy kind)
rather than depth.  There are notable exceptions, of course (the third
movement of Shostakovich's first VC is among his most profoundly moving
anywhere in his repertoire).

 - wseb