Tuesday night was a good night for the “Pathétique” Symphony in New York. At 6:50, Ludovic Morlot launched into this symphony — Tchaikovsky’s Sixth — with the New York Philharmonic. That was at Avery Fisher Hall. And, about 9:10, in Carnegie Hall, Franz Welser-Möst launched into the “Pathétique” with the Cleveland Orchestra.

Mr. Welser-Möst is music director of the Cleveland, and, starting in 2010, he will be general music director of the Vienna State Opera. Therefore, he will hold two of the most important positions in all of music. That’s a lot of weight on those slim Austrian shoulders.

The maestro and the Clevelanders are in town for three concerts at Carnegie, ending tonight. Interestingly, they have no soloists, starry or otherwise (unless you count the singers for Mahler’s Symphony No. 2, which is tonight’s program). It’s just the band and its leader.

On Tuesday night, they started with a Mozart symphony: No. 28 in C major, K. 200. This is a marvelous piece, with a great concluding Presto. And these forces were good in it — the whole symphony. Extremely good.

The first movement was both refined and energetic — filled with little jolts. And the orchestra was amazingly precise. The music was the right “size,” if you’ll accept that word. It was slender yet substantial and spirited.

You know how the Boston Symphony used to be called “the Aristocrat of Orchestras”? Well, in this symphony, the Cleveland sounded like the aristocrat of orchestras.

The second movement, Andante, had clockwork grace. And the little trills in the violins aren’t easy to manage — the Cleveland’s did. The third movement, the minuet, featured a smooth, smooth horn.

And the Presto? It’s not easy to pull off, but Mr. Welser-Möst and the Cleveland did so with almost impudent ease. The music was tight, racing — even a little jazzy.

You can go for a long while without hearing an earlyish Mozart symphony so well conducted and played. Was there anything at all wrong with this performance? Sort of: The minuet did not quite start together. And the Presto can be even jazzier — giddier, merrier. But Mr. Welser-Möst is a pretty contained, cool guy.

The program continued with a work by John Adams, written in 2001. It’s called “Guide to Strange Places,” and it is busy, frenetic, repetitive. It relies heavily on the percussion. In other words, it’s a modern American piece.

In addition, Mr. Adams plays skillfully with orchestral sonorities, and orchestral layers. I thought of the word “soundscapes.” Toward the end, the piece turns snarling, primitive, savage.

As with much of this music, if you give in to it — groove to it — you’ll be okay. But the work takes almost a half-hour, and that is a lot of Carnegie Hall time. Is it worth it? The piece is clever, if not inspired or deep. But would it be less clever at half the length? Would it be worse? How about at a third of the length? I, for one, felt like saying, “All right already.”

In any case, the Clevelanders sounded royal.

And now to Mr. Welser-Möst’s “Pathétique.” The opening movement was warm, lovely — not all that Russian. Not all that “pathétique.” Bows seemed to stay on the tops of strings, rather than digging in — or even moving in. The ending of this movement is one of the noblest things in all of Tchaikovsky. Mr. Welser-Möst did not quite bring out that quality. In fact, he was disposed to bring nothing out — he was just conducting. Which has its merit.

The second movement, the waltz, was fine. It can be headier, more urgent. Mr. Welser-Möst was laidback — and completely unobjectionable. The next movement, the march? Again, fine. A little tame. A little lacking in dynamic variation. Not throttling, barely stirring. But fine.

And the Finale? Fine, fine — lovely, careful, and easy. I heard someone say, about the entire symphony, “That was beautiful.” And so it was. That was both the virtue of this performance and its problem.

You can take one of two main views of this performance. The first, I’ll put in insulting terms: It was clean, pretty, and heartless. It was benign, safe, harmless. Mr. Welser-Möst presented Tchaikovsky’s music on a doily. Surprised he wasn’t wearing a tutu.

And the second view? Mr. Welser-Möst was mature and responsible. He let the music speak for itself. In his hands, the symphony was truly “pathétique,” rather than “bathétique.” This was music-making of rare refinement. Let him be a model and rebuke to the emoters.

I’m afraid I lean toward the first view. But I respect and understand the second. And isn’t concert-going rewarding?