The Handel and Haydn Society offered a stunning season closer Friday night at Symphony Hall that garnered not one but two standing ovations, the first occurring most unusually right before intermission. Featuring renowned soloist Kristian Bezuidenhout on a fortepiano and the H+H Youth Choruses, the premier period instrument orchestra—directed by Jonathan Cohen—presented an eclectic selection from Viennese composers of the late 18^th and early 19^th centuries, inviting a fresh ear on lesser-known works of canonical composers.

The evening began with a featured performance by the H+H Youth Choruses, accompanied on fortepiano by Bezuidenhout. The young singers offered a solid if at times tentative rendition of “An die Sonne,” a Schubert part-song. Despite some nerves, the Youth Choruses showed great sensitivity in their singing and responded keenly to Cohen’s direction. The only drawback was that the size of the choir (about 50 in total) frequently drowned out the fortepiano entirely. Indeed throughout the evening, the acoustics of Symphony Hall which are well suited to a large modern symphony orchestra did not serve the fortepiano as well. A part-song such as “An die Sonne” might be more suited to a chamber performance with just four singers, one on a part.

A selection from Mozart’s incidental music to Tobias Philipp von Gebler’s (1722-86) play Thamos, König in Ägypten followed. The work consists of choruses and instrumental entr’actes in several versions. However, it is not known whether Mozart’s music was ever performed with the play in his lifetime. In any case, the piece never gained much traction, something Mozart lamented to his father in a 1783 letter:

I regret deeply that the music for Thamos will not be able to be used! Because it did not please, the piece is now among the rejected pieces which will not be performed again. It should be performed again purely for the sake of the music, – and that is unlikely to happen;– it is certainly a pity!

Fortunately for us, H+H agreed with Mozart’s assessment and offered three of the instrumental numbers arranged as a set, creating a kind of three movement symphony. These selections display the operatic drama that Mozart so often instilled in his instrumental works beginning with a stormy C minor Maestoso, continuing with a luxurious and lyrical E flat major Andante, and closing with a D minor Allegro that transformed into a triumphant D major conclusion. H+H truly brought Mozart’s take on the drama of Gebler’s play to life. In particular, Debra Nagy’s oboe solo in the Andante deserves special mention for balancing a clear and warm timbre with the frequent melodic leaps in a tricky key.

The first half ended with Haydn’s Symphony No. 82, “The Bear,” one of the “Paris” Symphonies (1785-86) which represent a shift in style for Haydn, partly because of the larger size of the Paris orchestra for which he composed them. “The Bear” is so-called because of a motive in the finale which resembles bagpipes in its repeated sustained tones inflected by grace notes, a feature which evoked for some 19^th-century listeners images of trained dancing bears. H+H brought an appropriate levity the Haydn work. Cohen seemed to use his whole body to conduct, sometimes barely moving his arms and at others swinging his whole torso. His gestures were not consistent as he had complete confidence in his orchestra’s ability to execute their parts and stay together. This allowed him to take a step back and shape the work in a higher, more expressive level. Here, concertmaster Aisslinn Nosky appeared to have the most fun, as she moved and gestured dramatically with her instrument, almost dancing along with the music.

But the most effective feature of the finale is Haydn’s characteristic playing with form. Cast as a rondo, the movement continually returns to the “Bear” motive, but toward the end of the movement, the symphony reaches a climactic moment with full orchestral chords and timpani rolls only to revert suddenly back to the quiet section that preceded it and repeat the same build up to the end. H+H executed the orchestral effect cheekily and in fact elicited wry chuckles from the audience. When the climactic moment returned once again, we were that much more excited for it. As the last chord continued to reverberate through the hall, some in the audience leapt instantly to their feet while others shouted “Bravo!” Thus, the first standing ovation, although only partial, occurred. The two leaders’ sense of ease and glee communicated through flowing gestures may very well have prompted the audience to engage so deeply with this work.

During intermission, I ventured out of the hall to see the art display. H+H partners with Massachusetts College of Art and Design (MassArt) each season, sending H+H musicians and Historically Informed Performance Fellow Teresa Neff to meet with students and give them historical context on a piece and background on the period instruments. Then students respond by creating original artworks inspired by the pieces which were displayed and available for sale at Friday’s concert. This season, the MassArt students responded to Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 4, the final work Friday evening. I was struck in particular by one piece that depicted a “Symphony of Mice” traversing the keys of a piano, which was inspired by the unique timbre of the early 19^th-century fortepiano. Wondering if I would hear the same in Bezuidenhout’s performance, I returned to my seat for the second half.

Bezuidenhout chose an R.J. Regier of Freeport, Maine instrument modeled after pianos by Conrad Graf (active 1811-1844) and Ignaz Bösendorfer who set up shop in 1828, making it a bit late for a concerto that premiered in 1808. Many instruments, but especially the piano, underwent significant changes in construction and sound between 1808 and the 1830s. So, Bezuidenhout’s performance evoked less how the piece might have sounded in its premiere with the composer as soloist in 1808 than in Mendelssohn’s revival of the concerto in 1836. Despite being larger and a bit heavier in sound than the instrument for which Beethoven wrote this piece, the delicacy of the Regier’s tone compared to the modern piano still transported us back at least to Mendelssohn. However, once again, the fortepiano was swallowed up by the large concert hall and there were times when I could barely hear it, even sitting in the orchestra section.

Despite this, Bezuidenhout did in fact evoke a “Symphony of Mice.” In contrast to Beethoven’s other piano concertos such as No. 3 in C Minor or the “Emperor” (No. 5), his Piano Concerto No. 4 is much lighter and breezier in mood. Backed by a warm and rich tone from the orchestra, Bezuidenhout’s fingers flew over the keyboard in the virtuosic passages while the lyrical melodies sang through in the upper register. Across three cadenzas, the keyboardist elegantly wove themes from the concerto together while applying his own stamp on them instead of merely replicating Beethoven’s style. A renowned HIP interpreter of Beethoven, Bezuidenhout showed his chops in this concerto both technically and expressively.

When the third movement ended, the appreciative audience gave its second standing ovation of the evening, this time everyone leapt to their feet. The ovation was so enthusiastic that Bezuidenhout came back onstage a third time to announce an encore. He played for us the second movement of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata No. 4, Op. 7. The slow movement provided a more contemplative ending to a dramatic evening and allowed a satisfying exposure to the sounds of the Regier which came through clearly in this final solo offering.

This program repeats Sunday at 3:00pm.

Michael Goetjen, a musicologist, harpsichordist, and organist whose research focuses on 18^th-century opera and the music of Mozart, teaches at MIT and BU.