Talk:Symphony No. 40 (Mozart)

Music Files

The music files on this page will not stop playing once I press "stop". In fact the only way for the music to stop is to let it play all the way or turn off the computer. I find this slightly irritating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.239.135.140 (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits

• The first music download Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart_-_Symphony_40_g-moll_-_1._Molto_allegro is 0 bytes when downloaded!
• I, uhh deleted the following "Mozart loved children and liked to have a gentle touch on their little parts. Just Enjoyable." from the "other" section.
• I reverted unexplained deletion of whole section.
• I removed the theory that the symphony was written by Andrea Luchesi; this is apparently the work of a crank and has never appeared in a peer-reviewed publication. For discussion please see Talk:Andrea Luchesi.
• Add musical quotation for the amazing chromatic passage. Piano reduction will be added when the piano that I use gets tuned.
• Added a suitably conspicuous billing for the Fulda Symphonic Orchestra. I think it's appropriate to acknowledge these artists right here on the page, and not as a kind of footnote attached to the sound files.

Opus33 16:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Antony or Anthony?

One of the sources is attributed to a Anthony Hopkins. It seems more likely that Antony Hopkins, the composer and musical analyst, is meant. Somebody more qualified than myself could correct this, please.

i don't get it.

I'm pretty sure that it's "Anthony."

Quoted Passage

Are we sure it is at the beginning of the development section? It seems to occur in the middle of it; as it is 2/3 of the way through the movement and well past the first statement of the themes.

It does not matter that one of Mozarts significant pieces had a sudden change from a major to a minor!

Yup, we're sure. Look at the score, linked from the article, and also (if necessary) at Sonata form.

I think the reason you're unsure on this point is this: the fourth movement has a relatively short development and recapitulation section (exposition 125 bars, development 81 bars, recapitulation 102 bars), so once the prescribed exposition repeat has been played, we're already 58% through the piece . That's probably late enough to be mistaken for "2/3". Opus33 23:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Minor to major

Unlike many minor-key finales of the Classical era, this movement remains resolutely in the minor mode to the very end.

I think this sentence should be removed. Many, if not most, movements which start in the minor remain in the minor (and plenty of symphonies in the minor do as well).--Zeisseng 18:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

This is true- see Alfred Einstein's discussion of Mozart's stylistic fingerprints in Mozart: His Character, His Work, for instance- of... 9 of 10 movements Mozart wrote in minor, especially those in sonata form. (So much so that when a Mozart work such as the first movement of the K442 trio switches to D major in the recapitulation, it sounds more like something Haydn would do than Mozart, in his opinion, and suggests that the movement was left incomplete and finished by another hand, as the K397 fantasia was by the Abbe Stadler.)

Those finales in variation form- eg the finales of the (second) D minor string quartet and C minor serenade- some of those are exceptions to the end-where-one-began rule, and not all of those, either (the finale of the C minor concerto, imhonesto one of the greatest works of this late period of Mozart's life, does no such thing); another exception of course is the rondo-finale to the D minor piano concerto. And some works in minor end with movements in major (the piano quartet and string quintet in G minor, for instance) but that's another matter altogether.

Most individual movements in minor by this composer not only end where they began, but contrasting material (major-mode second groups, say) often gets converted to not only the main key but the main mode in the recapitulation, also, as in the outer movements of this symphony. Haydn's practice was indeed usually opposite on this point in his later years (not always), and it is worth contrasting them (not in a single work article, maybe, but somewhere more general- the sonata form article?)- to quote several authors who've described the effect of these different approaches. Schissel | Sound the Note! 16:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Main theme similar to one in PC21

This has been removed from the article pending a reference. The similarity is fairly well known, its a theme from the concerto not long after the piano enters. Right after G major is first reached, there's this brief G minor interlude that sounds just like this symphony and then when G major returns the main "second theme" (5-3-2-1--5-3-2-1--6-4-3-2-2) takes over. I'll find a reference. DavidRF (talk) 23:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Its in bar 110 of the first movement (love these free NMA scores). The piano is solo here and the key is G minor so its hard to miss when listening. No argument about being prudent about waiting until there is a citation, though. Its commonly mentioned in program notes. I can probably find it in either or both of the two Steinberg books when I get home. DavidRF (talk)

OK. Its not in either of the Steinberg's. Hutchings mentions it on pp.136-137. Girdlestone on pp. 335-336. Its a "non-recurring theme" in the concerto. Rosen actually cites the concerto section with a score example on p. 236 for its harmonic implications (shift to dominant minor immediately after shift to dominant) but he oddly doesn't note that the first nine notes of the section are the same as the 40th symphony in both key, notes and rhythm. I'll add the section back later with footnotes a bit later. Just archiving the page numbers here so I don't forget. Its a bit odd having it be the only notable thing about the first movement, though. We should look into seeing if there is any way to expand that section. DavidRF (talk) 00:22, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, I noticed the resemblance, and even see it as potentially interesting to our readers. My only worry is the precedent established: "Passage X reminds me of Passage Y" could be said a zillion times in classical music, and (as you just said) we should limit ourselves to the cases where it was said by an established commentator on music. Cheers, Opus33 (talk) 00:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

1st part: Molto Allegro

I was wondering... The "C" sign on a music sheet, does mean 4/4 normally, doesn't it? I think it's not exactly the same as 2/2. Also the German version of this page says it's written in 4/4. If it would be 2/2, there should be a vertical line through the C (₵). I don't want to edit the page by my self, because I'm not a specialist in music, or Mozart. But I really think it's 4/4... Shakamikado (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

2/2 is correct. The score image is incorrect. It should have a crossed 'c', (₵). See the "Neue Mozart-Ausgabe" score links in the external links section. Someone should fix File:Mozart 40.png. The author of that file did not provide lilypond code for easy editing of the image. DavidRF (talk) 22:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I've visited author NH's talk page on the Swedish Wikipedia and asked him/her to fix. Opus33 (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there should be an alla breve sign instead. Thank you for pointing this out. I will provide a correct version shortly. (I did in fact provide the Lilypond code -- it's on commons:file talk:Mozart 40.png -- so if anyone would like to experiment with that, please do go ahead.) /NH (talk) 14:14, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't see the lilypond code there (I've seen in in the 'source' entry but I don't know which is right).DavidRF (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

...and now it's shown in 2/2. Double sharp (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Only two minor key symphonies by Mozart?

Does the Sinfonia for La Betulia liberata (K. 118/74c) in D minor count? Zaslaw counts it in his book. Double sharp (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

First theme in the first movement

"The first theme is well known, and it also appears in the first movement of his Piano Concerto No. 21, which he had written 3 years before this symphony, in 1785."

Where? It has nothing to do with either the main theme, the side themes or the epilogue theme in the first movement of that concerto (No. 21 with the famous 2nd "Elvira Madigan" movement).Aejsing (talk) 22:03, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I think I know what the contributor meant. From our Piano Concerto No. 21 article, click on the link to the NMA score and look at the piano part starting at the upbeat to bar 111.

My feeling about this is that's it's likely to be a total coincidence, and moreover there's no reference source to support the allusion. Unless people object, I propose to take it out. Thanks for bringing this up. Opus33 (talk) 22:38, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I have never thought about that. But the only similarity lies in the first bar (including the upbeat). That is a bit too thin, I think. Aejsing (talk) 22:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I've removed it. Opus33 (talk) 04:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Symphony No. 40 (Mozart). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120804031656/http://classicsplayer.com:80/Classics/MozartSymphonyNo40/play.php to http://classicsplayer.com/Classics/MozartSymphonyNo40/play.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

music examples

The second movement is displayed with the wrong key signature (two flats; should be three, being in E♭ major). Double sharp (talk) 15:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Indeed it is incorrect. It was uploaded to Commons in 2011 by A1. The source cited (http://wolfgang-mozart.ru/10.php) seems to be correct, so I guess that A1 created the sample themselves, and got the key signature wrong. Hopefully they will see this and correct it - but they live in Kyiv, so they may have other things on their mind.

If they don't reply in a few days, I'll have a go at creating it myself (I use Mozart!) and upload a new image. ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I have prepared and uploaded a new transcription from the same source, with the correct key signature.Lsaul52, you raised this at the Teahouse recently, so I'm pinging you. ColinFine (talk) 17:52, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Minuet

The sentence under “the music” that talks about the minuet section claims that ‘various commentators have asserted the minuet would not be suitable for dancing’.

This implies that most minuets would. This misleading and I think it should be removed.

Minuets were originally dances but composers used the dance FORM “minuet” for concert music (not intended for dancing) for centuries. (Along with many other dance forms like the Sarabande, Gavotte etc). There’s no reason to suppose (or imply) that Mozart’s Symphony would be for dancing.

I’ve never edited so I’m hesitant to do it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.202.9.78 (talk) 12:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

"Symphony No. 40 (Mozart" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Symphony No. 40 (Mozart has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21 § Symphony No. 40 (Mozart until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)