# Bach on Piano - Pedal



## Ravel

I’ve been playing Bach’s 5th keyboard concerto in F minor on piano, a beautiful tormented piece written in such an elegant fashion. I especially love the 1st movement. I’ve worked on it with several different teachers and some prefer the use of some pedal and some consider it sacrilegious. So I wanted to know - what are everyone’s thoughts about the use of pedal when playing Bach keyboard music on a modern piano?


----------



## Taggart

Much of Bach's work was designed for harpsichord (and harmony) training. We do know that the written text is fluid see BWV 791 where there is a plain version and a very twiddly one. That to me means that we can adapt the music to suit our performance style and if that includes pedal - so be it.

However, many people like a HIP style and many exam boards insist on "harpsichord imitation" so it has to be what is appropriate for the context. I certainly prefer a HIP style but would be happy to use pedal if necessary e.g. to carry a pedal note.


----------



## Judith

Heard an awful piece on u tube of Lang Lang playing Air on a G String. Thought, leave it for the violins.


----------



## Ras

Ravel said:


> I've been playing Bach's 5th keyboard concerto in F minor on piano, a beautiful tormented piece written in such an elegant fashion. I especially love the 1st movement. I've worked on it with several different teachers and some prefer the use of some pedal and some consider it sacrilegious. So I wanted to know - what are everyone's thoughts about the use of pedal when playing Bach keyboard music on a modern piano?


Ravel

I'm not a musician and what I say here is "hear-say"= something I've heard them say and now repeat:
Andras Schiff recorded Bach's music for solo harpsichord on a modern piano with the use of pedals for Decca.
Later he re-recorded the same repertoire for ECM (on cds) and EuroArts (The French Suites on DVD/blu-ray) still on a modern piano, but (almost?) without using the pedal. I think maybe comparing those two recordings by Andras Schiff could teach you something...


----------



## Mandryka

Ravel said:


> I've been playing Bach's 5th keyboard concerto in F minor on piano, a beautiful tormented piece written in such an elegant fashion. I especially love the 1st movement. I've worked on it with several different teachers and some prefer the use of some pedal and some consider it sacrilegious. So I wanted to know - what are everyone's thoughts about the use of pedal when playing Bach keyboard music on a modern piano?


Why do you want to use pedal?

If it's because you like it, then jolly good, it's more about you than anything else, there isn't anything further to be said, de gustibus . . .

If it's because you want to sustain a sound, then if it's possible that Bach meant a sustaining instrument like an organ, then I understand. So, clearly no pedal for sustain in The Goldbergs or the Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue. But possibly pedal for sustain in some of the WTC pieces.

But there's a catch, when an organist plays a long note, he can do so without obscuring any of the music in a resonance haze. A modern piano's pedal tool may not be so good at this. When you think that a lot of Bach's musical ideas were contrapuntal, you can see that all the voices are equally important - it's not like something by Schubert!

Mozart owned a pedal piano which was designed to avoid this problem, and old pianos like this are, I think, a better avenue to explore than pedalling Bach on a Steinway.

I'm not able to comment with any confidence about the F minor concerto, except to say that it's often heard as a violin concerto . . .


----------



## premont

There is no reason to use the sustaining pedal, when you play Bach on the piano. If you want any "sustain" , you can do it with the fingers in the same way as on a harpsichord. The exeptions are a few - relatively youthful Bach-works - , which seem to be written for an instrument with pedalboard (organ or pedal-clavichord).It is about works like WTC book I a-minor fugue or the Sonata BWV 963, which contain low organ points, which can't be reached with the fingers.


----------



## Josquin13

Most of the notable Bach pianists use the pedal, some more sparingly than others. I've noticed that some of the more recent 'Bach specialists' use the pedal most sparingly, while Andras Schiff doesn't use it at all (on his ECM recordings, but not the Decca ones). Though I'd say that Schiff is rare (if not singular?). In contrast, the Russian pianists tend to use the pedal more liberally--Feinberg, Richter, Gavrilov, Nikolayeva, Afannasiev, etc., and as a result, I can find their Bach playing takes on an 'organ-like' size & quality at times, such as in the Well-Tempered Clavier, for instance.

Historically, is the pedal justified? Yes and no. No, Bach didn't specifically tailor his keyboard music to a modern grand piano. He composed it for a harpsichord or clavichord, a double manual harpsichord (as with the Goldberg Variations & French Suites), and in some cases probably an organ. And yes, most interestingly, recent research has shown that at Cafe Zimmermann Bach used a double manual harpsichord mounted on a pedal harpsichord, made by Zacharias Hildebrandt. Which is most interesting, as it suggests that pianists shouldn't rule out the pedal completely, on a historical basis. But it is left to the pianist to translate this music to a piano. As Glenn Gould said, when you play Bach's keyboard music on a piano, you're making "a transcription". The music wasn't written for a piano, and therefore you have to transcribe it. It would be folly to try to make a piano sound like a harpsichord.

Nevertheless, I strongly believe pianists should try to listen to as many harpsichordists play Bach's keyboard music as they can, since the phrasing and shades of meaning of the music can change--and sometimes radically so--when Bach's music is played on an instrument that he knew. In the end, however, I expect that how much a pianist decides to use the pedal--as a modification--will be more or less a discretionary or aesthetic choice (as with vibrato). Certainly, there are many notable pianists today that use the pedal more or less uniformly throughout, and there are those that use it very little, if at all.

What you don't want to do, in my opinion, is muddy up the waters, i.e., Bach's contrapuntal textures. Each of the voices or musical lines in Bach must be distinctly heard within the contrapuntal dialogue. It's a conversation, and in Bach, there is often a sense of equality between the different voices or lines. Think of yourself as at a round table, with no consistent head of table or speaker, as the 2nd and 3rd voices aren't necessarily secondary (or inferior). This isn't Chopin. Although how much you want to bring out that equanimity will likely vary, depending on the passage, piece, and specific movement. So, it's up to your taste & temperament.

You should also bear in mind that a modern grand is already more unwieldy & overly resonant (and louder) than anything Bach would have imagined (except for maybe an organ), before you have even pressed the pedal. (Have you heard Bach's music played on a plucky, smaller clavichord?) Therefore, when you decide to add the pedal, it should most often be done judiciously (as a singer does with vibrato), since sustaining or extending the notes on a grand piano will inevitably link them together in ways that Bach didn't intend or imagine. Again, you can't ignore the pinpoint complexity of this music, with its different voices intricately woven together, and by extending the notes longer than Bach imagined, you run the risk of reducing the complexity of notes to 'mood' music, or worse, a muddle of indistinct, unseparated notes. The music won't be lithe or nimble enough, as it is written. For example, would you play Spanish Flamenco music on a Moog synthesizer? No, you wouldn't, right? Certainly, the dancers wouldn't be happy about that, as it would slow them down, and change the whole style & character of Flamenco dancing. Therefore, you probably shouldn't do the equivalent to Bach on a piano, because on a harpsichord or clavichord, the music is closer to the quick, bold rhythms of Flamenco dance than it is to the slower, more drawn out notes heard of an electronic Moog. (Some critics have written that pianist Till Fellner tends to turn parts of the Bach WTC Book 1 into "mood" music, for instance--do you agree or disagree?)

Which means that you probably don't want to use the pedal much in Bach's complex fugues, for instance, if at all.

On the other hand, in Bach's beautiful melodies, you might use a bit more pedal. Here Murray Perahia's views are perhaps relevant, as Perahia sees Bach's keyboard music as a series of "chorales". To Perahia, Bach's music is first and foremost about conveying emotion, as he finds a singing quality to Bach, & cautions pianists from turning it into mere "dry mathematics", or "dry analytic stuff". I have myself heard a number of pianists today play Bach (& Handel) as if they were sitting at a typewriter, rather than at a piano. Their playing can sound almost completely devoid of emotion--which can't be right. (Presumably they're trying to conform their sound and approach to a harpsichord, or some other misguided idea about HIP):






So, how emotional do you want your Bach to sound? How much like chorales?

On the flip side, I also dislike it when a pianist turns Bach into Chopin. I have problems with Simone Dinnerstein's approach to Bach, for instance--though others love it. I have a similar problem with some of Andras Schiff's early Decca recordings too. For me, early on, Schiff wasn't especially interested in the contrapuntal conversation. However, in recent years he has changed his view, & now eschews the pedal (see links for examples below). Yet, many piano lovers continue to highly regard Schiff's earlier Decca recordings. What do you think of Schiff's Decca recordings versus his ECM ones? How do they compare? Which do you prefer, and why? I think Ras has made an excellent suggestion to you to compare Schiff's early and late interpretations of the WTC.

I also have a problem with some of Angela Hewitt's Bach too. In my view, she tends to use the pedal too uniformly, and at the same time, she doesn't vary her piano touch enough. So, for me, while her Bach is certainly very accomplished, it can develop a certain sameness throughout, which in larger doses, can become a little boring, at least to me (though I like her Toccatas). (Curiously, I don't find the same is true of her Beethoven).

So, you should definitely try to hear to a wide range of pianists performing Bach. For example, you might listen to how different pianists (& harpsichordists) play the Prelude and Fugue No. 1 in C major, BWV 846, of Book 1 of Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier. How much pedal is advisable in the Prelude? & how much pedal is okay in the Fugue? Most pianists use a lot of pedal in the Prelude, but less so in the fugue. According to your tastes, where is there too much pedal? Where is there too little? And do you think Gould's highly unusual (to me weird) staccato effects work here?, especially in contrast to the heavier pedaling Russian pianists? Is there any evidence in the score that justifies what Gould chooses to do?

You should also listen to various transcriptions of Bach's keyboard music for the piano (& other instruments too):

For example, do you enjoy Siloti's transcriptions of Bach? as played by Emil Gilels, for instance?






And, what do you think of pianist Wilhelm Kempff's transcriptions of Bach? Do you find Kempff uses too much pedal? & does it cause him to overly slow down, even drag the music?






How successful are these transcriptions of Bach to the piano?

Over time, it might be a good idea to try to listen to an ever widening circle of pianists in Bach--either on You Tube or Spotify (or somewhere else for free). With that in mind, most of the pianists that I've linked to below are either known for their Bach, or have received favorable reviews for the specific recordings that I've linked to. You might try to compare and contrast their various approaches in the same music--such as in certain movements of the English or French Suites, or the 6 Partitas, or parts of the Well-Tempered Clavier (if that doesn't drive you crazy):

Virginia Black--Black is a former harpsichordist, and I find her 6 Partitas played on a piano unique & special. She transcribes the music differently from any other pianist I've heard. It will be immediately apparent that her conception of contrapuntal writing is more precisely pinpointed, & her phrasing more harpsichord-like, than most pianists. Do you like what she does? Can you learn anything from her approach to the pedal? (By the way, harpsichordist Luc Beauséjour has also recorded some Bach on piano, and you should listen to him too.)






Ivo Janssen--to date, Janssen has recorded the most complete set of Bach's keyboard works, so he's a very experienced Bach player, and has presumably thought a great deal about how to translate Bach's music on a piano. Therefore, it's well worth getting to know how he approaches Bach. (Of course, he's more pianistic than Black.)










Samuel Feinberg--Feinberg's old Russian recordings of the Well-Tempered Clavier have an almost 'cult' status among pianophiles. Do you think that Feinberg overdoes the pedal in the opening Prelude? The notes are certainly extended to the point of lingering long after struck, and merge together or overlap. Or, is he bringing out the musical content in a more profound way, by doing so?






Sviatoslav Richter--Do you think that Richter likewise uses the pedal too much in the opening Prelude? which he plays more briskly than Feinberg (& probably with just as much pedal)? Also, do you think Richter's piano touch is too heavy (or at times too clangorous) for Bach, or just about right, in your opinion?










Rosalyn Tureck--Do you find Tureck's Bach too romantic? What's good about it? What don't you like?






Glenn Gould--Most interestingly, Gould came to dislike his earlier Bach recordings, towards the end of his life. He said he couldn't listen to them. So what changed in Gould's approach to Bach in his late recordings versus the early ones? How are they different? (You could compare his early 1955 Goldberg Variations to his 1981 recording, etc..) Do you agree with Gould's view on his early Bach?

Gould's 1955 Goldbergs (on a Zenph):





Gould's 1981 Goldbergs"





Here is Gould in conversation with Tim Page, late in his life (discussing his final Goldbergs recording):






IMO, Gould's late Toccata recordings are among his best Bach:






Harpsichordist Scott Ross once said that Gould was so far off the mark in Bach that you'd need a 747 jet to bring him back. Do you agree or disagree with Ross? And why?

Edward Aldwell--Aldwell strikes me as a pianist that has deeply considered how this music sounds on a harpsichord, yet is unapologetic about playing it on a piano. I get the sense that Aldwell has listened to Gustav Leonhardt a lot (especially in the French Suites)--in deciding how to best translate Bach to the piano. Like Wilhelm Furtwangler, & pianists Elizabeth Rich and Samuel Feinberg, Aldwell was a student of Schenkerian musical analysis, so that enters into his music making, as well. You should definitely read Aldwell's textbook, if you haven't already.





https://www.amazon.com/Harmony-Voice-Leading-Edward-Aldwell/dp/0495189758

David Fray (IMO, one of the better Bach pianists today):










Maria Tipo (and her student Pietro de Maria)--Is Tipo's approach too romantic? do you think she overdoes the pedal? Is her student De Maria more judicious with the pedal, & do you prefer that?










Igor Levit--Levit has a lighter, more Baroque-like touch in Bach (& Beethoven). What do you think of his approach?






Rafal Blechacz:





Murray Perahia:





Andras Schiff:

WTC, Book 1--1984 (with pedal)





WTC, Book 1--2017 Proms (without pedal)





Dubravka Tomsic (another favorite pianist of mine in Bach):










Carl Seeman:





Tatiana Nikolayeva:










Andrea Bacchetti--You should try to hear Bacchetti's French Suites on Sony. I think highly of those recordings. Bacchetti appears to use the pedal very sparingly.









https://www.amazon.com/J-S-Bach-French-Suites/dp/B00OX447B2

Dinu Lipatti:





Maria-Joao Pires:





Alfred Brendel:
https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Italian...pID=61idXmFCsUL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Francesco Tristano--Tristano (or sometimes Tristano Schlimé) was a student of Roslyn Tureck's at Juilliard. How do you think Tristano's approach to Bach is similar to his teacher's? and how does it differ? By the way, you should try to hear Tristano's Bach concertos, recorded with his fellow Juilliard students, as it doesn't sound like he's using a pedal at all--do you think what he does works in the concertos?


















Valery Afanassiev--Well-Tempered Clavier Books 1 & 2--Afanassiev was a student of Emil Gilels, and he won the Leipzig Bach competition early in his career, so he's formidable Bach player. I tend to enjoy his WTC more than Richter's, for instance. His approach makes me wonder whether Afanassiev has ever played Bach on the organ?










Ivo Pogorelich--while Pogorelich isn't especially known for his Bach playing, he's worth hearing in the English Suites 2 & 3, and you might find it illuminating to compare him to harpsichordist Christophe Rousset in the same (or to Bob van Asperen or Blandine Rannou). How are they similar? How are they different? Which do you prefer? and why?










Angela Hewitt (the first clip is a lecture/recital on playing Bach on the piano):














Andre Gavrilov--You might compare Gavrilov's two recordings of the French Suites--as one is sometimes said to be excessively romantic? (EMI), and the other much less so (DG). Gavrilov has spoken about the huge influence of both Richter and Gould's Bach on him (& other Russian pianists), in his formative years growing up in Russia. Do you think he overdoes the sustaining pedal, or not?






Gavrilov's DG set:














Vladimir Feltsman--You might compare Feltsman's 6 Partitas to Virginia Black's. Which do you prefer?





Craig Sheppard:













Till Fellner (as mentioned, some people think that Fellner turns the WTC into 'mood' music, what do you think?):










Martin Stadtfeld:









Miecyslaw Horszowski:









Amadine Savary:





In addition, you should try to hear some of Alexandre Tharaud's Bach, and perhaps Caspar Frantz in the French Suites too (I've really enjoyed Frantz's playing, but maybe not quite as much as Aldwell in the French Suites).

Among these pianists, who do you think best 'transcribes' Bach to the piano, and who uses (or doesn't use) the pedal most effectively, and why?

Also, are you drawn more to a romantic style of playing Bach, or to the Bach played in a less romantic approach? Your tastes in this regard will effect how much pedal you choose to use. Which pianists over pedal in your opinion, and where? Who is too parsimonious with the pedal? And why? What don't you like?

Of course, you should also try to listen to and compare these pianists to a wide variety of approaches to the same music as played on a harpsichord (and possibly a clavichord too)--perhaps some subset of the following harpsichordists (if not all of them): Pierre Hantai, Bob van Asperen, Leon Berben, Ton Koopman, Blandine Rannou, Christophe Rousset, Fabio Bonizzoni, Christian Rieger, Colin Tilney, Richard Egarr, Wanda Landowska, Zuzanna Ruzickova, Ottavio Dantone, Kenneth Gilbert, Helmut Walcha, Ralph Kirkpatrick, Christine Schornsheim, Pascal Dubreuil, and Trevor Pinnock.

Let all of these pianists and harpsichordists teach and instruct you--assimilate, embrace and/or reject their ideas, decide what they do well, what they don't do well, etc.. Then, of course, go back to the score, as you should now have a clearer idea about how you want your Bach to sound on a piano.

Hope that helps.


----------



## MelodicMi88

Hello Ravel and other members of this post I’m a new member but very familar with playing Bach on piano. My husband and I met at University and he is a harpsichordist organist, and plays clavichord. His personal regard for box music is exponential . I was completely captivated by Bach’s music when I first began playing piano. I devoured as much of the WTC as one devours a box of chocolates ! Fortunately there was no one to tell me how I “ should “ Play Bach. 
Bach,s riding of keyboard music goes beyond being instrument specific To consider how to express on piano goes beyond whether to use pedal or not As a harpsichordist my husband greatly dislikes what he calls pecking imitation when pianist try to imitate harpsichord 
First order of business in playing the music Bach is to understand what bark wants to convey through his music. If you sit down to play at a harpsichord you must use the particular sound expressive capabilities of that instrument . If you sit down to play Bach on in modern grand piano you must use all of the tunnel capabilities of that instrument to express the content of Bach’s Music Understand the content of the music and consider your personal thoughts (AKA “ interpretation “) , be guided by the total sonority Characteristics of which instrument you’re playing , and aim for expressing the core of Bach’s musical expression .
MelodicMi88


----------



## BiscuityBoyle

For me the greatest Soviet Bach performer was one Anatoly Vedernikov, a Neuhaus student (like Gilels and Richter), Prokofiev's musical assistant and Richter's frequent two piano partner. I find that his approach is something like the golden mean between the more pedal-heavy Russian style and the crispness of Gould (who many Russians were also obsessed with btw), and in terms of technical mastery and clarity of polyphony he's as good as it gets.


----------



## premont

MelodicMi88 said:


> First order of business in playing the music Bach is to understand what bark wants to convey through his music. If you sit down to play at a harpsichord you must use the particular sound expressive capabilities of that instrument . If you sit down to play Bach on in modern grand piano you must use all of the tunnel capabilities of that instrument to express the content of Bach's Music Understand the content of the music and consider your personal thoughts (AKA " interpretation ") , be guided by the total sonority Characteristics of which instrument you're playing , and aim for expressing the core of Bach's musical expression .


Is this to be understood in that way, that you think the content of Bach's music differs with the instrument used? If so, I doubt Bach anticipated any specific content for the modern piano grand, an instrument he - for obvious reasons - didn't know.


----------



## Capeditiea

Josquin13 said:


> Most of the notable Bach pianists use the pedal, some more sparingly than others. I've noticed that some of the more recent 'Bach specialists' use the pedal most sparingly, while Andras Schiff doesn't use it at all (on his ECM recordings, but not the Decca ones). Though I'd say that Schiff is rare (if not singular?). In contrast, the Russian pianists tend to use the pedal more liberally--Feinberg, Richter, Gavrilov, Nikolayeva, Afannasiev, etc., and as a result, I can find their Bach playing takes on an 'organ-like' size & quality at times, such as in the Well-Tempered Clavier, for instance.
> 
> Historically, is the pedal justified? Yes and no. No, Bach didn't specifically tailor his keyboard music to a modern grand piano. He composed it for a harpsichord or clavichord, a double manual harpsichord (as with the Goldberg Variations & French Suites), and in some cases probably an organ. And yes, most interestingly, recent research has shown that at Cafe Zimmermann Bach used a double manual harpsichord mounted on a pedal harpsichord, made by Zacharias Hildebrandt. Which is most interesting, as it suggests that pianists shouldn't rule out the pedal completely, on a historical basis. But it is left to the pianist to translate this music to a piano. As Glenn Gould said, when you play Bach's keyboard music on a piano, you're making "a transcription". The music wasn't written for a piano, and therefore you have to transcribe it. It would be folly to try to make a piano sound like a harpsichord.
> 
> Nevertheless, I strongly believe pianists should try to listen to as many harpsichordists play Bach's keyboard music as they can, since the phrasing and shades of meaning of the music can change--and sometimes radically so--when Bach's music is played on an instrument that he knew. In the end, however, I expect that how much a pianist decides to use the pedal--as a modification--will be more or less a discretionary or aesthetic choice (as with vibrato). Certainly, there are many notable pianists today that use the pedal more or less uniformly throughout, and there are those that use it very little, if at all.
> 
> What you don't want to do, in my opinion, is muddy up the waters, i.e., Bach's contrapuntal textures. Each of the voices or musical lines in Bach must be distinctly heard within the contrapuntal dialogue. It's a conversation, and in Bach, there is often a sense of equality between the different voices or lines. Think of yourself as at a round table, with no consistent head of table or speaker, as the 2nd and 3rd voices aren't necessarily secondary (or inferior). This isn't Chopin. Although how much you want to bring out that equanimity will likely vary, depending on the passage, piece, and specific movement. So, it's up to your taste & temperament.
> 
> You should also bear in mind that a modern grand is already more unwieldy & overly resonant (and louder) than anything Bach would have imagined (except for maybe an organ), before you have even pressed the pedal. (Have you heard Bach's music played on a plucky, smaller clavichord?) Therefore, when you decide to add the pedal, it should most often be done judiciously (as a singer does with vibrato), since sustaining or extending the notes on a grand piano will inevitably link them together in ways that Bach didn't intend or imagine. Again, you can't ignore the pinpoint complexity of this music, with its different voices intricately woven together, and by extending the notes longer than Bach imagined, you run the risk of reducing the complexity of notes to 'mood' music, or worse, a muddle of indistinct, unseparated notes. The music won't be lithe or nimble enough, as it is written. For example, would you play Spanish Flamenco music on a Moog synthesizer? No, you wouldn't, right? Certainly, the dancers wouldn't be happy about that, as it would slow them down, and change the whole style & character of Flamenco dancing. Therefore, you probably shouldn't do the equivalent to Bach on a piano, because on a harpsichord or clavichord, the music is closer to the quick, bold rhythms of Flamenco dance than it is to the slower, more drawn out notes heard of an electronic Moog. (Some critics have written that pianist Till Fellner tends to turn parts of the Bach WTC Book 1 into "mood" music, for instance--do you agree or disagree?)
> 
> Which means that you probably don't want to use the pedal much in Bach's complex fugues, for instance, if at all.
> 
> On the other hand, in Bach's beautiful melodies, you might use a bit more pedal. Here Murray Perahia's views are perhaps relevant, as Perahia sees Bach's keyboard music as a series of "chorales". To Perahia, Bach's music is first and foremost about conveying emotion, as he finds a singing quality to Bach, & cautions pianists from turning it into mere "dry mathematics", or "dry analytic stuff". I have myself heard a number of pianists today play Bach (& Handel) as if they were sitting at a typewriter, rather than at a piano. Their playing can sound almost completely devoid of emotion--which can't be right. (Presumably they're trying to conform their sound and approach to a harpsichord, or some other misguided idea about HIP):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, how emotional do you want your Bach to sound? How much like chorales?
> 
> On the flip side, I also dislike it when a pianist turns Bach into Chopin. I have problems with Simone Dinnerstein's approach to Bach, for instance--though others love it. I have a similar problem with some of Andras Schiff's early Decca recordings too. For me, early on, Schiff wasn't especially interested in the contrapuntal conversation. However, in recent years he has changed his view, & now eschews the pedal (see links for examples below). Yet, many piano lovers continue to highly regard Schiff's earlier Decca recordings. What do you think of Schiff's Decca recordings versus his ECM ones? How do they compare? Which do you prefer, and why? I think Ras has made an excellent suggestion to you to compare Schiff's early and late interpretations of the WTC.
> 
> I also have a problem with some of Angela Hewitt's Bach too. In my view, she tends to use the pedal too uniformly, and at the same time, she doesn't vary her piano touch enough. So, for me, while her Bach is certainly very accomplished, it can develop a certain sameness throughout, which in larger doses, can become a little boring, at least to me (though I like her Toccatas). (Curiously, I don't find the same is true of her Beethoven).
> 
> So, you should definitely try to hear to a wide range of pianists performing Bach. For example, you might listen to how different pianists (& harpsichordists) play the Prelude and Fugue No. 1 in C major, BWV 846, of Book 1 of Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier. How much pedal is advisable in the Prelude? & how much pedal is okay in the Fugue? Most pianists use a lot of pedal in the Prelude, but less so in the fugue. According to your tastes, where is there too much pedal? Where is there too little? And do you think Gould's highly unusual (to me weird) staccato effects work here?, especially in contrast to the heavier pedaling Russian pianists? Is there any evidence in the score that justifies what Gould chooses to do?
> 
> You should also listen to various transcriptions of Bach's keyboard music for the piano (& other instruments too):
> 
> For example, do you enjoy Siloti's transcriptions of Bach? as played by Emil Gilels, for instance?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And, what do you think of pianist Wilhelm Kempff's transcriptions of Bach? Do you find Kempff uses too much pedal? & does it cause him to overly slow down, even drag the music?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How successful are these transcriptions of Bach to the piano?
> 
> Over time, it might be a good idea to try to listen to an ever widening circle of pianists in Bach--either on You Tube or Spotify (or somewhere else for free). With that in mind, most of the pianists that I've linked to below are either known for their Bach, or have received favorable reviews for the specific recordings that I've linked to. You might try to compare and contrast their various approaches in the same music--such as in certain movements of the English or French Suites, or the 6 Partitas, or parts of the Well-Tempered Clavier (if that doesn't drive you crazy):
> 
> Virginia Black--Black is a former harpsichordist, and I find her 6 Partitas played on a piano unique & special. She transcribes the music differently from any other pianist I've heard. It will be immediately apparent that her conception of contrapuntal writing is more precisely pinpointed, & her phrasing more harpsichord-like, than most pianists. Do you like what she does? Can you learn anything from her approach to the pedal? (By the way, harpsichordist Luc Beauséjour has also recorded some Bach on piano, and you should listen to him too.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ivo Janssen--to date, Janssen has recorded the most complete set of Bach's keyboard works, so he's a very experienced Bach player, and has presumably thought a great deal about how to translate Bach's music on a piano. Therefore, it's well worth getting to know how he approaches Bach. (Of course, he's more pianistic than Black.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samuel Feinberg--Feinberg's old Russian recordings of the Well-Tempered Clavier have an almost 'cult' status among pianophiles. Do you think that Feinberg overdoes the pedal in the opening Prelude? The notes are certainly extended to the point of lingering long after struck, and merge together or overlap. Or, is he bringing out the musical content in a more profound way, by doing so?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sviatoslav Richter--Do you think that Richter likewise uses the pedal too much in the opening Prelude? which he plays more briskly than Feinberg (& probably with just as much pedal)? Also, do you think Richter's piano touch is too heavy (or at times too clangorous) for Bach, or just about right, in your opinion?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rosalyn Tureck--Do you find Tureck's Bach too romantic? What's good about it? What don't you like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Glenn Gould--Most interestingly, Gould came to dislike his earlier Bach recordings, towards the end of his life. He said he couldn't listen to them. So what changed in Gould's approach to Bach in his late recordings versus the early ones? How are they different? (You could compare his early 1955 Goldberg Variations to his 1981 recording, etc..) Do you agree with Gould's view on his early Bach?
> 
> Gould's 1955 Goldbergs (on a Zenph):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gould's 1981 Goldbergs"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is Gould in conversation with Tim Page, late in his life (discussing his final Goldbergs recording):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMO, Gould's late Toccata recordings are among his best Bach:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harpsichordist Scott Ross once said that Gould was so far off the mark in Bach that you'd need a 747 jet to bring him back. Do you agree or disagree with Ross? And why?
> 
> Edward Aldwell--Aldwell strikes me as a pianist that has deeply considered how this music sounds on a harpsichord, yet is unapologetic about playing it on a piano. I get the sense that Aldwell has listened to Gustav Leonhardt a lot (especially in the French Suites)--in deciding how to best translate Bach to the piano. Like Wilhelm Furtwangler, & pianists Elizabeth Rich and Samuel Feinberg, Aldwell was a student of Schenkerian musical analysis, so that enters into his music making, as well. You should definitely read Aldwell's textbook, if you haven't already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Harmony-Voice-Leading-Edward-Aldwell/dp/0495189758
> 
> David Fray (IMO, one of the better Bach pianists today):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maria Tipo (and her student Pietro de Maria)--Is Tipo's approach too romantic? do you think she overdoes the pedal? Is her student De Maria more judicious with the pedal, & do you prefer that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Igor Levit--Levit has a lighter, more Baroque-like touch in Bach (& Beethoven). What do you think of his approach?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rafal Blechacz:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Murray Perahia:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andras Schiff:
> 
> WTC, Book 1--1984 (with pedal)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTC, Book 1--2017 Proms (without pedal)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dubravka Tomsic (another favorite pianist of mine in Bach):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carl Seeman:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tatiana Nikolayeva:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andrea Bacchetti--You should try to hear Bacchetti's French Suites on Sony. I think highly of those recordings. Bacchetti appears to use the pedal very sparingly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/J-S-Bach-French-Suites/dp/B00OX447B2
> 
> Dinu Lipatti:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maria-Joao Pires:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alfred Brendel:
> https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Italian...pID=61idXmFCsUL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch
> 
> Francesco Tristano--Tristano (or sometimes Tristano Schlimé) was a student of Roslyn Tureck's at Juilliard. How do you think Tristano's approach to Bach is similar to his teacher's? and how does it differ? By the way, you should try to hear Tristano's Bach concertos, recorded with his fellow Juilliard students, as it doesn't sound like he's using a pedal at all--do you think what he does works in the concertos?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Valery Afanassiev--Well-Tempered Clavier Books 1 & 2--Afanassiev was a student of Emil Gilels, and he won the Leipzig Bach competition early in his career, so he's formidable Bach player. I tend to enjoy his WTC more than Richter's, for instance. His approach makes me wonder whether Afanassiev has ever played Bach on the organ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ivo Pogorelich--while Pogorelich isn't especially known for his Bach playing, he's worth hearing in the English Suites 2 & 3, and you might find it illuminating to compare him to harpsichordist Christophe Rousset in the same (or to Bob van Asperen or Blandine Rannou). How are they similar? How are they different? Which do you prefer? and why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Angela Hewitt (the first clip is a lecture/recital on playing Bach on the piano):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andre Gavrilov--You might compare Gavrilov's two recordings of the French Suites--as one is sometimes said to be excessively romantic? (EMI), and the other much less so (DG). Gavrilov has spoken about the huge influence of both Richter and Gould's Bach on him (& other Russian pianists), in his formative years growing up in Russia. Do you think he overdoes the sustaining pedal, or not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gavrilov's DG set:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vladimir Feltsman--You might compare Feltsman's 6 Partitas to Virginia Black's. Which do you prefer?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Craig Sheppard:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Till Fellner (as mentioned, some people think that Fellner turns the WTC into 'mood' music, what do you think?):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Stadtfeld:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Miecyslaw Horszowski:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amadine Savary:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, you should try to hear some of Alexandre Tharaud's Bach, and perhaps Caspar Frantz in the French Suites too (I've really enjoyed Frantz's playing, but maybe not quite as much as Aldwell in the French Suites).
> 
> Among these pianists, who do you think best 'transcribes' Bach to the piano, and who uses (or doesn't use) the pedal most effectively, and why?
> 
> Also, are you drawn more to a romantic style of playing Bach, or to the Bach played in a less romantic approach? Your tastes in this regard will effect how much pedal you choose to use. Which pianists over pedal in your opinion, and where? Who is too parsimonious with the pedal? And why? What don't you like?
> 
> Of course, you should also try to listen to and compare these pianists to a wide variety of approaches to the same music as played on a harpsichord (and possibly a clavichord too)--perhaps some subset of the following harpsichordists (if not all of them): Pierre Hantai, Bob van Asperen, Leon Berben, Ton Koopman, Blandine Rannou, Christophe Rousset, Fabio Bonizzoni, Christian Rieger, Colin Tilney, Richard Egarr, Wanda Landowska, Zuzanna Ruzickova, Ottavio Dantone, Kenneth Gilbert, Helmut Walcha, Ralph Kirkpatrick, Christine Schornsheim, Pascal Dubreuil, and Trevor Pinnock.
> 
> Let all of these pianists and harpsichordists teach and instruct you--assimilate, embrace and/or reject their ideas, decide what they do well, what they don't do well, etc.. Then, of course, go back to the score, as you should now have a clearer idea about how you want your Bach to sound on a piano.
> 
> Hope that helps.


I am blogging this post for future references when i have a more reliable internet connection. :3


----------



## Capeditiea

turns out that post was too long by about 19000 characters... i guess copying and pasting to a document will have to do...


----------



## MelodicMi88

Bach's intention in his musical expression is to convey MUSIC first. My intention in my (mis-spelled) post was to point that out. Then consider which instrument you are sitting down to play, and use whatever resources that instrument and your sensitivity offers to express the CORE of Bach's musical expression. Bach's musical expression was not restricted to the instruments he personallay played. The eternal quality of Bach's musical writing has such scope & breadth to almost effect his keyboard compositions to transcend any particular style of keyboard.
BTW, doesn't the writing of the Well-tempered Klavier with its comprehensive use of all keys go a bit beyond the instruments he was playing?
Know the musical CORE of Bach's writing, the essence, then thoughtfully interpret for the instrument that you are sitting down to play.


----------



## Mandryka

MelodicMi88 said:


> Know the musical CORE of Bach's writing, the essence, then thoughtfully interpret for the instrument that you are sitting down to play.


This is, I think, what Busoni thought.


----------



## premont

MelodicMi88 said:


> Bach's intention in his musical expression is to convey MUSIC first. My intention in my (mis-spelled) post was to point that out. Then consider which instrument you are sitting down to play, and use whatever resources that instrument and your sensitivity offers to express the CORE of Bach's musical expression. Bach's musical expression was not restricted to the instruments he personallay played. The eternal quality of Bach's musical writing has such scope & breadth to almost effect his keyboard compositions to transcend any particular style of keyboard.


Where do you know all this from? Isn't it the most probable, that Bach shaped his music in accordance with the instruments he had to his disposal, and that he meant the music to be performed on these?



MelodicMi88 said:


> BTW, doesn't the writing of the Well-tempered Klavier with its comprehensive use of all keys go a bit beyond the instruments he was playing?


No I don't think so. On the contrary I find the WTC perfectly composed for the keyboard instruments he played and the tuning he probably used.


----------



## premont

Mandryka said:


> This is, I think, what Busoni thought.


Agree. And for that reason he exerted kind of romantic thinking, since his instrument was the modern piano grand - an instrument constructed to possess definitive romantic characteristics. Well, we live in a free world - fortunately - and people are free to distort Bach's keyboard music at will.


----------



## KenOC

Just for the record, Bach in his later years became a sales agent for Silberman pianos. Sales documents survive. A far cry from a "modern grand piano" perhaps, but still…

It is possible that most of his _Musical Offering_ was written for the piano, since it was intended for Frederick the Great, who was an enthusiast and had quite a few in his palace (Bach improvised on several during his famous Potsdam visit). Alex Ross puts this forth as a fact, not speculation.


----------



## Larkenfield

There are few if any interpretive markings on Bach’s keyboard works. It’s possible that what he was encouraging was not license but spontaneous freedom of expression in the moment. One can interpret the composer one’s own way only. One can interpret it how others have and be a slave to that. Or one can make it a collaboration between the composer and the interpreter where there’s perhaps the greatest freedom of all and the performance still works for the audience. Whether one uses a finger sustain or a pedal sustain, it’s still about creating a certain atmosphere where the music somewhat hangs and floats in the air, and one can try it both ways. But whether it’s a matter of ignoring everybody or being a slave to everybody in opinion, the music won’t live unless the performer plays it from within and feels the music and the expression comes from out of that. So perhaps it’s the feeling that comes first and then it’s a matter of shaping it to best convey that feeling, otherwise the performance will be rote and mechanical and lifeless and fake and false. So it’s really a question of how to best feel the music and then develop the technical means of doing that, no matter what instrument it’s being played on. Up to now, it’s hard to imagine any composer being interpreted so dramatically different by the greatest of pianists than Bach. Perhaps that’s what makes Bach the greatest in the eyes and ears of so many listeners.


----------



## Mandryka

KenOC said:


> , but still…
> 
> .


But still what exactly?



KenOC said:


> most .


No


----------



## premont

KenOC said:


> Just for the record, Bach in his later years became a sales agent for Silberman pianos. Sales documents survive.


This does not substantiate anything at all.



KenOC said:


> A far cry from a "modern grand piano" perhaps, but still…


A fortepiano sounds more like a harpsichord than like a modern piano, the sound being richer in partials and more short-lived.



KenOC said:


> It is possible that most of his _Musical Offering_ was written for the piano, since it was intended for Frederick the Great, who was an enthusiast and had quite a few in his palace (Bach improvised on several during his famous Potsdam visit). Alex Ross puts this forth as a fact, not speculation.


Almost a half of the Opfer (when we consider the playing time) is scored for traverso, violin and continuo. Tha canon a 2 violini is as the title says scored for two violins.The ricercare a 6 can be played with two hands, but its style is most related to Bach's great organ works. So rather little remains, which possibly was meant for the participation of a fortepiano.


----------



## Mandryka

Maybe a more reasonable way to see it, Ken, is that the relative absence of music appropriate for piano in opfer is evidence that he had reservations about the instrument. You know, his host had a piano and he had improvised a ricercar on one, which may have gone down well, so he put a single short piece in opfer which could be played on piano, out of politeness maybe. Furthermore, the three part ricercar need not be played on piano as far as I know - there are no piano specific effects in the score.


----------

