Jos Janssen wrote:

>I totally agree with Donald Satz's review of Hickox's recording of the
>Paukenmesse.  Great pieces, great recording, great sound, great view of
>the works.  Period.

This and other posts has caused me to revisit this recording of the work.
I have just spent the last couple of hours drinking fine organic wine and
comparing Hickox's against Guest's performances.

Firstly, note that the mass is in C and hence more complex than is usual
with Haydn as I mentioned regarding his symphonies a couple of days ago.
This usually means also that the work is more serious in nature, I think.

I have only been moderately impressed to date with the 4 Cds I have of
Hickox's so far.  So it goes with this work.

I find his view somewhat mono-emotional.  Whereas, Guest provides a sense
of anticipation as the Benidictus commences this seems to be somewhat muted
to me with Hickox.  This, is in spite of the fact that Hickox has the
advantage of clearer sound.  The sound on the Guest version is ok.  It's
just that the positions of the singers in space are much better with the
Hickox version.

But Guest has another huge advantage, boy singers.  These provide a
contrast which is not present on the Hickox version.  Consider the
Benedictus when the solists sing 'osanna' and the boys reply; just
wonderful with Guest but it falls flat with Hickox.

So it's a swings and roundabouts situation re these two recordings.  My
view is that neither is perfect and there is more in there that they get
out.  Maybe I should listen to that Harnocourt version.

I was very impressed with Bruno Weil's versions of the Theresa and Nelson
masses.  But am not sure if he's done the Paukenmass yet.  I'll have to
check this out.

What I have realised today is just how great these late masses are.
Proto-romantic in my view.  It is remarkable the way Haydn marched so
late in life dispite seeing friends (including Mozart) die.

Bob Draper
[log in to unmask]