Canon Count Wolfegg, both to the Master of the Hunt, Bar. v. Pölnitz, and to Jomelli. L. Mozart was inclined to ascribe this to the influence of Jomelli, who figured as Kapellmeister from 1754 to 1768,[20012] with a salary of 4,000 fl. (more correctly 3,000 fl.), the keep of four horses, fuel and lights, a house in Stuttgart and another at Ludwigsburg, and 2,000 fl. pension for his widow. Leopold Mozart announces all this to Hagenauer, with the question: "What do you think of that for a Kapellmeister's pay?" He maintained that all native artists had to suffer from Jomelli's influence, who spared no trouble to drive Germans from the court and to admit none but Italians; this was the more possible, as he was in high favour with the Duke. He and his countrymen, of whom his house was always full, were reported to have said that it was incredible that a child of German birth could have such musical genius, and so much spirit and fire. _Ridete Amici!_ he adds. Granted, however, that musical taste in Ludwigsburg had been thoroughly Italianised by Jomelli's influence and position,[20013] there is no doubt that this account of him is prejudiced and exaggerated. Metastasio pictures him as courteous and affable,[20014] and in Stuttgart he had the reputation of giving all due credit to German artists,[20015] so that L. Mozart's accusation is probably without much foundation. He himself acknowledges that Jomelli's unlimited power had been principally the cause of the excellence of musical performances in Ludwigsburg; though here again, Schubart complains that the orchestra was spoilt by the numerous amateur members who could not agree, and who were fond of introducing ornamentations in their separate parts, quite out of character with the whole.[20016] Of the really superior amateurs who were then at {EARLY JOURNEYS.} (32) Ludwigsburg L. Mozart mentions only Tartini's pupil, P. Nardini (died 1793) who "was unsurpassed in taste, purity, and delicacy of tone, but not by any means a powerful player."