These two symphonies were composed for Haydn's second 
          visit to London, during the winter months of 1794-95. He knew the musicians 
          for whom he was writing, and they were a virtuoso ensemble. Therefore 
          these are among the largest scaled, most technically demanding among 
          all his symphonies. 
        
 
        
Kuijken's performances are very direct and fresh. His 
          ensemble sounds on the small side for the music, which means that there 
          are fewer strings than there might be. How this would affect a live 
          performance would of course depend upon the size of the chosen venue. 
          In a recording, one can only judge on the end result, and while the 
          sound has good perspective and balance, the strings in both symphonies 
          do sound somewhat 'under nourished'. This may be the recording, may 
          be the playing, may be the lack of sufficient numbers to make an ample 
          sound in tuttis. On the other hand, it may well be intended. 
        
 
        
Kuijken's band is full of splendid musicians, and they 
          play on original instruments. The strings use gut rather than wire, 
          and there is little bloom and less vibrato in their sound. Too little 
          of each for my taste, in fact, and in these symphonies this seems less 
          appropriate than it did in the companion performances of the earlier 
          Paris symphonies, composed during the previous decade. 
        
 
        
Kuijken's tempi and phrasing are eminently sane and 
          deliver some exciting rhythmic purpose to proceedings. The fast sections 
          develop tellingly out of the slow introductions, and the overall balancing 
          of the movements is highly effective. In fact the music sounds best 
          in the two finales, which reveal the composer's uniquely bubbling wit. 
        
 
        
Although the slow movements are expertly paced, in 
          No. 102 especially the lack of bloom in the string sound denies the 
          music some of its intensity and line. For this Adagio movement can stand 
          a slower, more eloquent expression than this. At face value what Kuijken 
          chooses is perfectly fine, but try alternatives such as Sir Colin Davis 
          and the Concertgebouw (Philips) or Eugen Jochum and the London Philharmonic, 
          and the extra richness pays dividends. 
        
 
        
These performances have undoubted merits, and are recommended 
          particularly to enthusiasts devoted to the 'original instrument' sound. 
          For the more indulgent listener, it is probably best to try elsewhere. 
          In an ideal world, these do make excellent alternatives to the larger 
          collection, opening up fresh vistas on two great symphonies. 
        
 
        
Terry Barfoot