Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart - Late Symphonies (disk 1)  (75:03)
	01	Symphony No 32 in G major - Allegro spirituoso						02:59
	02	Symphony No 32 in G major - Andante						03:02
	03	Symphony No 32 in G major - Tempo primo						01:58
	04	Symphony No 33 in B flat major - Allegro assai						06:53
	05	Symphony No 33 in B flat major - Andante moderato						04:23
	06	Symphony No 33 in B flat major - Menuetto & Trio						03:33
	07	Symphony No 33 in B flat major - Allegro assai						08:36
	08	Symphony No 34 in C major - Allegro vivace						07:02
	09	Symphony No 34 in C major - Andante di molto piu tosto allegretto						06:30
	10	Symphony No 34 in C major - Allegro vivace						07:44
	11	Symphony in G major 'Neue Lambach' - Allegro						07:59
	12	Symphony in G major 'Neue Lambach' - Andante in poco allegretto						04:27
	13	Symphony in G major 'Neue Lambach' - Menuetto & trio						03:15
	14	Symphony in G major 'Neue Lambach' - Allegro						06:42
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart - Late Symphonies (disk 2)  (79:25)
	01	Symphony No 35 in G major 'Haffner' - Allegro con spirito						05:29
	02	Symphony No 35 in G major 'Haffner' - [Andante]						08:41
	03	Symphony No 35 in G major 'Haffner' - Menuetto & trio						03:33
	04	Symphony No 35 in G major 'Haffner' - Finale [Presto]						04:03
	05	Symphony No 36 in C major 'Linz' - Adagio - Allegro spirituoso						10:32
	06	Symphony No 36 in C major 'Linz' - Andante						12:34
	07	Symphony No 36 in C major 'Linz' - Menuetto & trio						04:08
	08	Symphony No 36 in C major 'Linz' - Presto						10:54
	09	Symphony No 37 in G major - Adagio maestroso - Allegro con spirito						05:21
	10	Symphony No 37 in G major - Andante sostenuto						04:38
	11	Symphony No 37 in G major - Finale [Allegro molto]						03:36
	12	Symphony in D major - Allegro						02:13
	13	Symphony in D major - Andante grazioso						02:07
	14	Symphony in D major - Presto						01:36
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart - Late Symphonies (disk 3)  (76:09)
	01	Symphony No 38 in D major 'Prague' - Adagio - Presto						13:07
	02	Symphony No 38 in D major 'Prague' - Andante						10:46
	03	Symphony No 38 in D major 'Prague' - Presto						07:53
	04	Symphony No 39 in E flat major - Adagio - Allegro						10:24
	05	Symphony No 39 in E flat major - Andante con moro						07:21
	06	Symphony No 39 in E flat major - Menuetto & trio [Allegretto]						04:59
	07	Symphony No 39 in E flat major - Finale [Allegro]						08:04
	08	Symphony in A minor 'Odense' - Allegro moderato						03:56
	09	Symphony in A minor 'Odense' - Andantino						05:49
	10	Symphony in A minor 'Odense' - Rondo: Allegro moderato						03:50
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart - Late Symphonies (disk 4)  (79:42)
	01	Symphony No 40 in G minor - Molto allegro						06:58
	02	Symphony No 40 in G minor - Andante						14:14
	03	Symphony No 40 in G minor - Menuetto & trio [Allegretto]						05:17
	04	Symphony No 40 in G minor - Allegro assai						09:02
	05	Symphony No 41 in C major 'Jupiter' - Allegro vivace						11:01
	06	Symphony No 41 in C major 'Jupiter' - Andante cantabile						09:10
	07	Symphony No 41 in C major 'Jupiter' - Menuetto & trio [Allegretto]						05:50
	08	Symphony No 41 in C major 'Jupiter' - Molto allegro						11:48
	09	Symphony in D major - Allegro assai						03:34
	10	Symphony in D major - Andante grazioso						01:33
	11	Symphony in D major - Presto						01:15

Symphony No. 32 in G major, K. 318
Composer - Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Composition Date - 1779

Composition Description by Joseph Stevenson
This short symphony was the first Mozart wrote after his return to Salzburg after his disastrous trip to Paris, during which his mother died and his only major output was the Symphony No. 31 "Paris". Because the Symphony No. 32 is in the form of an opera or operetta overture, some commentators have concluded that it was written as the "sinfonia," or overture for one of the stage pieces that Mozart was working on during 1779, such as Thamos, King of Egypt, K. 345/336a or Zaide, K. 334/336b. Ludwig Ritter von Kochel, editor of the Thematic Catalogue of Mozart's Work (1862) appended the subtitle ("Ouverture"). But Kochel was probably reflecting nineteenth century views, which considered overtures a separate type of composition from a symphony, whereas in Mozart's time there was little distinction between the two. Some commentators conclude that of Zaide and Thamos, one was too early and the other too late for this composition to be connected to it. The symphony is for strings, pairs of flutes, oboes, and bassoons, four horns, two trumpets, and kettledrums. It is Mozart's only symphony in G that calls for trumpets. It does not have a continuo part: the bassoons, cellos, and at times the double basses have independent parts. The first movement is in sonata-allegro form, but it stops short with a full-orchestra pause just where the main material should come in for a recapitulation. At that point the Andante starts, in a rondo form of ABA'CA"B'. (The apostrophes indicate that the recurring sections are varied.) This, too, does not come to a conclusion; note that a final repeat of the "A" material is missing. Now Mozart returns to the opening tempo and finally opens the recapitulation, but actually begins six measures before the return of the second subject. Having gotten through the foreshortened recapitulation, the symphony would naturally end with a coda; the surprise here is that the coda is the opening subject that was "missing" from the recapitulation. The symphony is quite brief, being in a compact, continuous style, but it is very inventive in form and highly attractive in its ideas.


Symphony No. 33 in B flat major, K. 319
Composition Date - 1779

Composition Description by John Palmer
According to the date inscribed on Mozart's manuscript of the Symphony No. 33 in B flat major, K. 319, the works was completed on July 9, 1779, in Salzburg. It was the second symphony Mozart composed after returning to Salzburg from his lengthy, fateful trip to Mannheim and Paris.

Scored for paired oboes, bassoons, horns, and strings featuring a divided viola part, the symphony was originally in three movements; the Minuet and Trio was added for performances in Vienna. Artaria published the four-movement version in Vienna in 1785, as Op. 7, No. 2, along with the Symphony in D major, K. 385 ("Haffner"). Throughout the Symphony in B flat major, the writing is of a "chamber-music" nature in its detail and procedures. This is probably why Mozart chose this particular work when Sebastian Winter, the Mozart family's former servant, requested in 1786 a work from the composer that would be suitable for Prince Furstenberg's small orchestra in Donaueschingen.

Each of the original three movements of K. 319 has a development section that begins with new material that, in each case, is thematically related to the material at the equivalent spot in the other movements. Overall, Mozart's handling of the woodwinds and orchestration in general is as advanced as we find in his later symphonies.

The opening Allegro assai, in sonata form, is set in an unusual triple meter. Its quiet, hesitant opening, with sudden, forte outbursts, suggests a youthful playfulness. Strikingly jolly in mood, the movement does not have a repeated exposition and the development section is relatively brief. A rising and falling four-note motive, not a part of the exposition, figures prominently in the development and looks forward to the finale of the "Jupiter" symphony of 1788.

The E flat major Andante moderato closes with a "mirror image" recapitulation, in which the secondary theme appears first and is resolved to the tonic before the appearance of the primary theme. This device, used often by the very Mannheim composers Mozart had recently visited, is not so much an innovation as it is a nod to earlier binary movements in which the principle theme does not appear at all. The delayed return of the primary theme sounds very much like a coda and the "rounding" effect is pure, high-Classical rhetoric.

In 1782, Mozart added a Minuet and Trio to the symphony, placing it in third position. The generally dark mood is an unusual trait of this B flat major movement. The Trio tune slightly resembles the second theme of the first movement and does nothing to lighten the atmosphere.

Cheerful energy supplants the ominous Minuet at the opening of the Finale, marked Allegro assai. Passages that remind us of Mozart's later operas appear at numerous places in this sonata-form movement, filled with abundant energy and endless musicality.



Symphony No. 34 in C major, K. 338
Composition Date - 1780

Composition Description by John Palmer
Mozart's Symphony No. 34 in C major, K. 338, is one of the composer's more assured and consistent works from his last years in Salzburg. Arguably the most original of Mozart's symphonies to that point, it looks forward to his later, more mature efforts in the genre.

One unusual characteristic of the Allegro vivace first movement is that there is no real melody for nearly 40 measures. Instead, Mozart bombards the listener with rising arpeggios and repeated notes in a march-like rhythm. As in K. 319 and the earlier Symphony No. 31 in D major, K. 297, the movement lacks the customary repeat of the exposition, instead moving directly into the development. The development does not concern itself with themes from the exposition, but presents new material in the striking key of A flat major, creating a powerful, intense harmonic relationship with the dominant just before the recapitulation. The recapitulation is presented as a "mirror image" of the exposition, beginning with the resolution of the secondary material and closing with the main theme.

Mozart added the bassoon part of the second movement, Andante di molto, in 1786; it had originally been written for strings only. This movement is characterized throughout by a sense of repose, initiated by the key of F major and its relaxed relationship to the C major of the Allegro. Mozart's quest for symmetry is clear in the contrast between the melodic shapes of the first theme, a rising, turning idea with minute pauses, and the second, a continuous, generally descending melody. A brief development passage, really just a transition, connects the exposition to the recapitulation.

The third movement, a Minuet and Trio in C major, presents something of a problem. Mozart had previously added a minuet to the Symphony No. 33 in B flat major, K. 319 (1779) for a performance at the Vienna Auergarten in 1782. Noted Mozart scholar Alfred Einstein believes that the composer did the same for K. 338, and that a stray Minuet in C major, K. 409 dating from May 1782 was meant to be inserted between the symphony's slow movement and finale. Einstein points to the fact that the autograph of the symphony contains the first few measures of a minuet in C major, later crossed out. However, this minuet was to be in second position and is nothing like K. 409; furthermore, K. 409 includes flutes, which are not present in the other movements of the symphony. Einstein suggests, without concrete evidence, that Mozart added flutes to the remaining movements, but neither flutes nor a minuet appear in the revised orchestral parts Mozart sent to Prince Furstenberg in Donaueschingen in the summer of 1786. The controversial Minuet has a sturdy, assertive character that seems a little out of place in this work. After the first section closes on the dominant, the second half follows a traditional path and is rounded by a full return of the earlier material. A solo oboe takes the lead in the first part of the Trio, while the flutes are prominent in the second.

The finale is permeated by the language of Italian opera buffa in the context of a symphonic argument. As in the first movement, the main thematic material is unmelodic, unfolding as a series of ideas rather than real tunes, in the tonic and dominant. The movement's energy, fueled by its propulsive 6/8 meter, continues unabated from the downbeat to the end.



Symphony No. 35 in D major ("Haffner"), K. 385
Composition Date - 1782

Composition Description by Roger Dettmer
By mid-1782 Mozart had been a Vienna resident for more than a year, beginning to prosper from the success of his new singspiel, The Abduction from the Seraglio. Yet Leopold Mozart refused to bless his marriage proposal to Constanze Weber, and thought nothing of disrupting his son's professional life. In the midst of preparations for the first all-Mozart concert in Joseph II's imperial capital, Papa insisted that Wolfgang compose a new work for the ennoblement of Salzburg's mayor, Sigmund Haffner. In other words, a gratis job, unrelated to Wolfgang's new career and income. The wonder is that Mozart obliged posthaste, despite being harried. Between July 20 and August 5 he wrote the new D major serenade-symphony in six movements (not to be confused, however, with an earlier Haffner Serenade, K. 250). During the same fortnight he also made a wind-band arrangement of music from The Abduction ("if I don't do this, someone else will beat me to it and take my profit"), composed the noble C minor Serenade for winds (K. 388/384a), and married Constanze without Leopold's permission.

Six months later, needing a new symphony for further concerts in the Burgtheater, Mozart remembered that Leopold had pestered him for a piece and asked for its return. Papa of course took his mean-spirited time, but finally did send it. Upon receipt Wolfgang wrote that "the music has positively amazed me, for I had forgotten every single note it!" He dropped one of the Serenade's two minuets (subsequently lost) and a concluding march, then added a pair each of flutes and clarinets in movements 1 and 4, and offered K. 385 as a new piece. He conducted the first performance in Vienna's Royal Burgtheater on March 23, 1783. To Papa he wrote that "the theater could not have been more crowded...every box was full. But what pleased me most of all was that His Majesty the Emperor was present and, goodness! - how delighted he was and how he applauded me!"

Celebratory pomp suffuses the concisely argued, monothematic sonata-form, Allegro con spirito movement without exposition-repeat. Everything relates to the main theme with its two-octave leaps, dum-dum-da-dum-dum rhythm, skirling trills and racing scales.

A sinuous song and trio with translucent textures and operatic ornamentation for the violins makes the G major Andante the longest movement if all repeats are played. The trio silences flutes, clarinets, and trumpets, yet begins with marvelously sonorous wind chords. Low strings carry the melody until violins take over with more trills, birdcalls, and galant-period embellishments, after which the song repeats.

The Menuetto movement - not four minutes long even with repeats - is emphatically rhythmic, and countrified rather than courtly in the song sections. Contrastingly, the trio is played legato throughout.

The final Presto is sonata form again, even more concise than in the first movement. Although Mozart wanted it played "as fast as possible," he still meant slower than the capability of most twentieth century instruments.


Symphony No. 36 in C major ("Linz"), K. 425
Composition Date - 1783

Composition Description by Brian Robins
Mozart's marriage to Constanze Weber in Vienna on August 4, 1782, left relations with his father strained. After stalling for nearly a year, Mozart and his new wife made the journey to Salzburg in order to effect introductions in July 1783, remaining until October 27. Their journey back to Vienna was broken in Linz, where they stayed three weeks during which Mozart gave a concert in the Ballhaus. The genesis of the symphony he composed for the occasion, and which has since born the name of the city for which it was composed, is explained in a letter written by Mozart to his father on October 31. After giving details of the journey and the hospitable reception accorded to him and his wife by their hosts, the Thun family, Mozart continues: "On Tuesday, November 4th, I an giving a concert in the theatre here and, as I have not a single symphony with me, I am writing a new one at breakneck speed, which must be finished by that time." No details of the remaining program are extant, but it probably followed the format of the Mozart's concerts in Vienna - one or two piano concertos, arias, and the solo keyboard improvisations for which he was famed. After the Mozarts returned to Vienna, the "Linz" Symphony was again performed at Mozart's concert at the Burgtheater on April 1, 1784.

The symphony is scored for strings, timpani, and pairs of oboes, bassoons, horns, and trumpets. Cast in the usual four movements, K. 425 is the first of a trio of symphonies (the others are the "Prague" Symphony No. 38 in D, K. 504, and the Symphony No. 39 in E flat, K. 543) in which the main allegro (here marked Allegro spiritoso) is prefaced by a slow Adagio introduction, to which may be added the Adagio maestoso Mozart added to a Symphony in G by Michael Haydn (P16) when he was in need of new works during the height of his Viennese concert promotion activities. (The work was long accepted within the canon of Mozart's works as his Symphony No. 37 in G, K. 444). Also unusual is the introduction of trumpets and drums in the Andante, a rare incursion in slow movements in symphonies of this period. The brilliant Presto finale is a close relative of that of the "Haffner" Symphony of the previous year, with the additional interest of contrapuntal passages to contrast with the prevailing homophonic texture. The symphony as a whole is Mozart's most successful essay in the form so far, showing little sign of the haste with which it was written.



Symphony No. 38 in D major ("Prague"), K. 504
Composition Date - 1786

Composition Description by Brian Robins
On May 1, 1786, Mozart's new opera Le nozze di Figaro received its first performance at the Burgtheater in Vienna. Enthusiastically received by connoisseurs, the long and complex opera puzzled many of the general public and it received only eight performances. Early in December, Figaro was staged at the National Theater (today known as the Tyl Theater) in Prague, where it became such a triumphant success that Mozart was induced to visit the Bohemian capital to see the production for himself. When he and his wife Constanze arrived on January 11, 1787, he had with him a new symphony which had been completed early in December (it was entered in Mozart's thematic catalog on December 6). The symphony was included in the concert Mozart gave eight days later, resulting in the first performance of a work which would subsequently become irrevocably associated with the city in which the composer witnessed his greatest triumph in later years. A decade after the concert, the Prague schoolmaster Franz Niemetschek (who educated Mozart's son Carl after the composer's death in 1791) testified to the symphony's enduring popularity: "The symphonies he composed for this occasion are real masterpieces of instrumental composition....This applied particularly to the grand Symphony in D, which is always a favorite in Prague, although it has no doubt been heard a hundred times."

Such connections have led to the general assumption by Mozart's biographers that the "Prague" symphony was composed for his visit there, but this cannot be the case - Mozart composed the work before he received the invitation to visit the city. Indeed, a letter of his father's (November 17, 1786) clearly shows that at the time of composition Mozart was planning a visit to England, a visit which never took place becase Leopold refused to look after the composer's two young children. It therefore seems perfectly reasonable to suggest that the work was composed with Mozart's projected London visit in mind - what we know as the "Prague" symphony might have become Mozart's "London" symphony had his plans come to fruition. An unusual feature of the symphony is that it is in only three movements; it is the only major symphonic work from the Classical period to lack the usual minuet and trio or scherzo movement. But there is nothing small-scale about the work; it amply justifies Niemetschek's epithet "grand." The opening movement, a broad, imposing Adagio introduction followed by a hugely powerful Allegro, is one of the most impressive of all Classical symphonic movements, with dramatic qualities that foreshadow Don Giovanni and a mastery of counterpoint hitherto restricted to Mozart's chamber works. The central Andante utterly transcends the easygoing implication of such a heading; it is a movement of profound, songful depth and contrapuntal skill. The final Presto also shares some of the demonic power of Don Giovanni, the opera Mozart would shortly compose for Prague, while at the same time inhabiting a world in which, for all the bright major-mode music, tragedy never seems too far away.



Symphony No. 39 in E flat major, K. 543
Composition Date - 1788

Composition Description by Brian Robins
No group of Mozart's works has been the subject of more discussion than his final three symphonies, Nos. 39 in E flat, No. 40 in G minor, and the "Jupiter," No. 41, in C. They were apparently composed within the remarkably short space of about two months during the summer of 1788, and the composer's motivation for writing them has since been vigorously debated. In common with his contemporaries, Mozart composed nearly exclusively for practical purposes, yet none has been positively identified in this instance. Still, the least plausible explanation advanced is that Mozart composed his great final symphonic trilogy as a result of some personal "inner need," the attractive romanticism of the theory being compounded by the assertion that he did not live to hear these three pinnacles of the symphonic repertoire performed. Such a theory runs counter to all we know about Mozart's working practices. In particular, he would not have had the time for such indulgence during the period concerned, a summer during which his surviving correspondence is predominantly concerned with increasingly desperate begging letters to his benefactor and fellow Freemason Michael Puchberg. More practically, it has been suggested that Mozart intended to mount a series of subscription concerts for the fall or Advent season. It was thought that these concerts never took place, but recently the scholar H.C. Robbins Landon has persuasively argued that these concerts were in fact held, with the three last symphonies as the principal new works performed at them. It also appears highly likely that Mozart took the new works on the tour of Germany he undertook the following year.

In the three symphonies of 1788 (to which must be added in this regard the "Prague" Symphony of 1786) we find the culmination of Mozart's assimilation of the contrapuntal style of Bach and Handel he had first begun to study during the early 1780s. It was this synthesis of "learned" style with the clean clarity of classicism that caused so much trouble for Mozart's contemporaries, to whom his late style became increasingly "difficult." Each of the symphonies occupies a very specific world of its own. The E flat Symphony, entered by Mozart into his thematic catalog on June 26, 1786, is often characterized as being "warm and autumnal" (Robbins Landon), a description that (as so often with Mozart) tells only part of the story; it fails to bring to attention the symphony's tensile strength and a dramatic quality that does not preclude moments of pathos more readily associated with the G minor symphony. There are four movements. The opening Allegro is prefaced (as it had been in both the "Prague" and "Linz" symphonies, its immediate numerical predecessors) by a powerful slow Adagio introduction. The following Andante has a secondary theme which is much stormier (and also subjected to considerable development) than might be expected in a "slow" movement, while the succeeding Minuet has an elegant gait set off by a rustic central trio. The final Allegro is a dazzling display of good humor and contrapuntal wizardry, its complexity skillfully masked in one of those movements in which the composer conceals his art. The symphony is scored for flute, pairs of clarinets, bassoons, horns, trumpets, timpani, and strings.




Symphony No. 40 in G minor, K. 550
Composition Date - 1788

Composition Description by Brian Robins
Mozart composed his final three symphonies during the summer of 1788. His entries in the thematic catalog he maintained suggest that all were written during the space of about two months. Much critical discussion has been devoted to the reasons for their composition, for it appeared that Mozart had no specific occasion in mind for their performance. The romantic notion that he composed them without practical purpose is now widely disregarded as being out of character with Mozart's known compositional procedures, and the scholar H. C. Robbins Landon has recently advanced convincing arguments to suggest that they were in fact written for a series of concerts he gave in the fall or Advent season of 1788. Robbins Landon's argument is largely based on an undated letter written by Mozart to his principal benefactor, his fellow Freemason Michael Puchberg. In this letter he refers to his concerts which will begin "next week," concerts which scholars formerly believed never to have taken place. Evidence also supports the idea (advanced by Neal Zaslaw) that Mozart took the three symphonies on the tour he made to Germany the following year, which would further undermine the long-held notion that the composer never heard three of the greatest works in the symphonic literature performed.

One aspect of the symphonies upon which commentators reach universal agreement is their extraordinary diversity of character; each has unique qualities which together utterly explode the myth that the extreme agitation and pathos of the G minor Symphony reflected the abject circumstances in which Mozart found himself at this period. The begging letters addressed to Puchberg during these months are indeed pitiful documents that might be cited as evidence of Mozart's state of mind at the time he was composing the G minor symphony. But they will hardly do for the mellow warmth, strength and humor of E flat symphony or the elevated grandeur of the "Jupiter" Symphony. Neither should it be forgotten that the tragic qualities so often associated with the symphony today have not always been apparent to all. To Robert Schumann the symphony was a work of "Grecian lightness and grace," while for a later writer, Alfred Einstein, there are passages that "plunge to the abyss of the soul."

Such ambiguity is perhaps apt for one of the greatest works of a composer whose music so frequently defies adequate description. The symphony is cast in the usual four movements; the opening Molto allegro immediately announces something unusual by starting not with characteristic loud "call to attention," but with quietly spoken agitation. The uneasy passion of the main theme leads to conclusions that seem to protest rather than find any consolation. The movement's dominant feeling is urgency: upbeat after upbeat after upbeat occurs. Amid great instability and a questioning aura, we experience a peek into Don Giovanni's abyss. In the finale, the horns intrude with wild swatches of color. There is even an eerie twelve-note insertion after the double bar in the Allegro assai section.

There are two versions of the G minor symphony. The first is modestly scored for flute and pairs of oboes, horns, and strings, but at some point shortly after composition Mozart added parts for two clarinets, slightly altering the oboe parts to accommodate them. Such second thoughts surely also add credibility to the idea that Mozart led performances of the work - he would hardly have bothered with such refinements if the symphony was not being used for practical purposes.



Symphony No. 41 in C major ("Jupiter"), K. 551
Composition Date - 1788

Composition Description by Michael Rodman
The near-quarter century that separates Mozart's first symphony and his last - the Symphony No. 41 in C major (1788) - was marked by the composer's recurrent, if not ongoing, interest in the possibilities inherent in this form. Upon examination of the chronology of Mozart's works, one finds that the composition of his symphonies tends to occur in irregularly spaced groups, of as many as nine or ten examples in a row, rather than regularly or singly. What this might suggest, aside from any financially based motivation, is that he employed these various periods specifically for the working out of the problems and challenges of the symphonic form. In surveying these works, one finds that the prominent benchmarks increase almost geometrically as time progresses, so that by the production of the "Jupiter" Symphony two years before his death - as part of a group of three composed within the space of less than three months - the full extent of the evolution which has taken place is striking indeed.

The Symphony No. 41 aptly embodies what is now identified as a paradigm of Classical symphonic form: four movements, the first and last in a quick tempo, the second slower, the third a minuet with trio. Unencumbered by norms suggested by any model, however, Mozart's deft imagination distinguishes this work from others in a similar cast. The first movement is characterized in part by the dramatic and effective employment of unexpected pauses in the rhythmic flow through the use of rests, a trait shared with and perhaps influenced by the symphonies of Haydn. After an initial regularity, irregular and changing phrase lengths contribute as well to the dramatic impetus. The serene F major quietude of the second movement's opening is soon disrupted, posed against more restless, rhythmically insistent minor-key episodes. This calm/dark conflict continues throughout, the initial spirit eventually prevailing. The falling chromatic theme and flowing, even accompaniment of the Minuet set a graceful tone for the third movement. The companion Trio provides an earthier, more overtly dancelike mood, which is, however, interrupted by a suddenly more serious tutti outburst. The final movement is exceptional for the richness of its contrapuntal language, a somewhat unexpected - and, some of Mozart's contemporaries would venture, unfashionable - attribute in a symphonic work of the time. The four-note motive that begins the movement is put through its paces in a number of guises, most prominently as the beginning of a recurrent canon and fugue subject which occurs both as originally presented and in inversion. The effect is one not of academicism but of great tension and dramatic impulse which, borne bristling and in search of resolution, finds its resting place only in the final bars.