Mozart's last four quartets arouse much less admiration than the six he had written a little earlier for Haydn, but hearing them several times one after the other was a fascinating experience and made me enjoy them more than ever before. Repetition makes them seem more varied in quality than I had expected. K499, unlike Mozart's other quartets and unlike almost all of Haydn's, is on its own and not part of a set and there have been several guesses as to the reason for this, none very convincing. Is it significant that in spite of its extreme cleverness it is in places a little lacking in heart? Di Mozart's enthusiasm for a projected set wane for some reason?
The other three are a little spoilt for some people by the emphasis on the cello which in the best quartet writing, they think, is not quite the thing. I can't myself imagine why Mozart shouldn't emphasize the cello if he felt like so doing, and in fact he does so with radiant success in K575 (a work I used to underrate). In K589 the cello solos are not integrated quite so successfully; they don't all seem to 'belong'. But I wish one or two other quartet composers had realized that the first violin need not be of paramount importance.
On these discs the cello solos are played with lyrical beauty by Philip de Groote, and his very quick staccato notes in the finale of K499 are a delight. The Melos version (DG) includes the repeat in this movement and here too the playing is often superb. But these two CDs bring all these late quartets to life rather then just two, with very real advantages. There is little in it as regards overall sound, but the lines do sometimes seem a shade clearer on the Compact Discs.'