# Baroque saraband : Tempo and interpretation framework ?



## Camiz

Dear all,

There are huge differences among the interpretation frameworks of baroque sarabands. For instance, JS Bach BWV 996 saraband (original for lute), you may find on YT a lot of different renditions, which tempo goes from slow adagio to ... saraband as a dance.











Indication of the tempo of baroque Sarabands can be found in different books. In a (French) book, Veihlan quotes the old "l'Afillard" book that specifies 72 per half-note (minim) for a Saraband at 3/2, which is rather close to the first rendition.

Do you think that the interpretation of baroque sarabands (including Bach's ones) should meet the requirements of baroque dancers, such as in the next two videos ?


----------



## Enthalpy

Is the saraband the cause?

JSBach's music was meant to be played much more freely than we're used to since the classical or romantic eras. JSB gave _very_ few indications: the ornament was essentially the musician's responsibility, dynamics too, and the dance's name the only tempo indication. Editors added indications later, but these are arbitrary and shouldn't impose themselves to the musician.

An extreme case is the continuo line, for which composers wrote conventionally just a line of single slow notes, on which the musicians were expected to improvise. That's why it sounds so boring presently: it's not played as it should.

Then the guitar. It is tradition and present among guitarists to add ornament as they feel it, much like baroque musicians did. Harpsichord players do it too.

So the greater diversity you hear when guitarists play this saraband reflects better the customs of the baroque era, I say. Eventually, violinists too dare to retake the freedom they had at that time:
JSB's Ciaconna by Nemanja radulovic - Julia Fischer​That piece is physically impossible to play on a violin as written, as JSB knew exactly. It implies that the musician is expected to adapt the music.

Whether music bearing the name of a dance should be danceable?

I like to compare JSB's dances with Piazzola's ones. The dance inspires a style and some rhythms to a music not primarily meant to be danced.
Piazzola's Tango etude Nr3 - Oblivion​Or that piece, it's far too refined to be played with constant tempo and emphasis
JSB's Gavotte en rondeau​Anyway, good dancers don't need a regular rhythm
Oblivion​


----------



## mikeh375

^^ I'm curious Enthalpy. Why do you say that the chaccone is impossible? It isn't, it is written in an idiomatic way so it is in fact ideal for the instrument. Admittedly some sustained written notes cannot be sustained with the bow as written - perhaps that's what you are reffering to. Showing their perceived duration is an important aspect of the counterpoint and also gives the performer a 
clear sense of the lines. 
Am I missing something else?


----------



## Enthalpy

I append the first line of the Ciaccona. From the manuscript, so it' not altered by an editor. Click to magnify







The manuscript is on the Web, readers could check how little detailed it is.

For instance in the first three bars, notes on two or three lower strings shall last for a half note while the higher string plays more notes. Not only on empty strings, which would resonate for an appreciable time. Such examples abound everywhere in the sonatas and partitas.

This is impossible to play literally on a modern violin with the modern bow. Two strings are normal, three can be played simultaneously if pressing strongly and accepting the horrible sound, four are impossible. Or else, the violinist plays a chord with two strings at a time, low to high usually. But then, all notes in the chord are written with the same duration, here a dotted quarter.

Possible explanations?

The bridge and the fingerboard were less curved before the romantic era. Some people allege that the bow's tension was adjusted by the thumb then, and such a bow has been built recently with success. Less tension lets reach all strings indeed. But drawings from JSB's time don't support that hypothesis, texts neither.

Or the sonatas and partitas (not just the Ciaccona) were meant for a different instrument, say the lute or the organ, and JSB didn't care to alter the manuscripts when he changed to "violin" instead. But this music extends exactly to the violin's low G, suggesting the violin was the primary target.

Or playing a part on a different instrument was much more common and accepted than now. Then, JSB would have written an ideal version of his pieces, with the cited excerpts playable literally on the lute and the organ, and he expected the violinist to adapt the notes to his instrument with common sense. This would have kept the part as good as possible for all instruments. I like this hypothesis.

Or the musicians were expected to read the parts very freely, so JSB didn't bother to write dotted quarters instead of half notes. Quite possible. Check for instance the arpeggi: JSB just writes chords and puts "Arpeggio" or "Arp." without a rhythm indication, which is vague and gets indeed played in varied ways. It would nearly mean "do it as you want and can".


----------



## Monsalvat

mikeh375 said:


> Admittedly some sustained written notes cannot be sustained with the bow as written - perhaps that's what you are reffering to. *Showing their perceived duration is an important aspect of the counterpoint* and also gives the performer a
> clear sense of the lines.
> Am I missing something else?


This is it, as far as I'm concerned. Bach's way of writing it clearly shows the ostinato bass and the intended polyphony. It is up to the performer to make this make sense to a listener. Unless I'm completely mistaken, it's never been a common practice to use a looser bow or less curved fingerboard to be able to sustain triple and quadruple stops.

I have more experience with keyboards than with string instruments, so here's how I think of it. The ending of the A minor fugue of the Well-Tempered Clavier, Book I is also impossible as written, due to the pedal point at the very end resulting in physically impossible intervals. Admittedly it would be possible on an instrument with pedals such as a pedal harpsichord or an organ. However, a harpsichordist, clavichordist, or pianist must figure out how to realize something which is not possible in a literalist sense. (This is, I believe, the only unplayable instance in the entire Well-Tempered Clavier.) Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than myself would be able to confirm or deny this more confidently, but I don't believe this was ever intended to be a literal representation of what the violinist must do; rather, it is a polyphonic representation of what Bach wanted the violinist to _imply_ using the best possible technique and voice-leading skills.

Again, I'm not an expert and not a string player! And perhaps my experience with modern recordings has colored my perspective as well.


----------



## mikeh375

The technical writing suggests that the music was written for the violin, there's no escaping this. Multiple stop writing needs a knowledge of the instrument's capabilities regarding finger stretch, fingering and hand position in order to estimate any potential vertical interval placement within a chord. This in turn obviously dictates the composer's approach to spacing within a chord. The fact that the Partitas are purposely 'violinistic' should tell one that this music is written for the instrument, i.e. idiomatic, irrespective of the sustained notes.

The sustained notes are of course impossible but that is not the point and I'd be wary of drawing conclusions other than self evidently musical ones for the notation, which clarifies the counterpoint's rhythmic nature and the harmonic rhythm, along with the occassional use of individual stems for each note in a chord to further distinguish lines.


----------



## Enthalpy

Monsalvat said:


> [...] use a looser bow or less curved fingerboard to be able to sustain triple and quadruple stops. [...]


The fingerboard was less curved at Bach's time. The curvature was increased in the romantic era to allow more bow pressure without touching the neighbour strings.

This implied to raise the bridge too, or the bow would have touched the soundbox, but the presently taller bridge responds differently to the side movements of the strings. The taller bridge also presses more strongly on the table, which received a taller bass bar, changing completely the resonances of the table. Consequently, all Amati-Stradivari-Guarneri-Gadagnini differ much now from their original behaviour.

Whether the bow allowed to play 3 or 4 strings at Bach's time is debated. It would explain Bach writing parts presently impossible to play. But evidence is rather against.


----------

