# Bach: Goldberg Variations, BWV 988



## science

This is of course one of the most famous and popular works in the entire canon, and as usual Wikipedia has a nice article about it, including a little analysis.

How do you feel about this work? If you love it, what is it that pleases you so much?

And of course, what are your favorite recordings?


----------



## Varick

Oh, where do I begin with the Goldberg. I absolutely LOVE the piece. The entire construct, form, architecture of the piece is just pure brilliance. The skill and technique to play it well is also demanding. But, mostly, it moves me to my depths. It is one of my favorite pieces in the entire canon. 

I prefer it on the piano over the harpsichord. I have over 17 recordings of the piece. I do believe that Glenn Gould did the greatest performance of it ever (1955 Recording). However, that is not to say there aren't other outstanding performances of this piece.

I think Andrei Gavrilov does an outstanding job on it (perhaps my second favorite). Other excellent recordings:
- Maria Yudina
- Andras Schiff
- Vladimir Feltsman
- Murray Perahia (I get why some people don't like this one, I happen to think he did a great job, if not slightly reserved. But his technique is flawless).

V


----------



## Bulldog

Bach's Goldbergs is one of my favorite keyboard works. I have about 150 versions, mostly a mix of piano and harpsichord.

Favorites off the top of my head - 

Piano:
Gould (all of them)
Tureck (all of them)
Schiff (ECM)

Harpsichord:
Hantai (both)
Leonhardt (all of them)
Rousset
Gilbert
Richter
Ross

Fortepiano:
Riemer (NF-Audio)


----------



## wkasimer

Varick said:


> Oh, where do I begin with the Goldberg. I absolutely LOVE the piece. The entire construct, form, architecture of the piece is just pure brilliance. The skill and technique to play it well is also demanding. But, mostly, it moves me to my depths. It is one of my favorite pieces in the entire canon.


I couldn't have said it better. Bach's ability to create such expression and variety within the constraints of such a tightly constructed work is miraculous.

Hard to name favorites, but I'll try. On piano, Sergei Schepkin, Ekaterina Dershavina, Lori Sims, Giovanni Mazzocchin, Maria Yudina, Alexis Weissenberg. On harpsichord Ottavio Dantone, Bob van Asperen, Blandine Rannou, Pierre Hantai, Robert Hill. And probably a few I'm forgetting....


----------



## fliege

I love the aria but I've so far found the variations impenetrable. From time to time I give it another shot, but it's not yielding so far.


----------



## Mandryka

fliege said:


> I love the aria but I've so far found the variations impenetrable. From time to time I give it another shot, but it's not yielding so far.


My advice to you is not to try to listen to all of them at once. Dip in, take it in small doses, like you might do for Art of Fugue. Some people think that the set of variations were never intended for concert performance, performed from nose to tail, and that the music is so complex and subtle that, as a listener, it's hard to appreciate more than a few at a time. This is especially the case if the performer likes to play fast.


----------



## Mandryka

One question I have, something that's been on my mind today while listening to Rubsam play it, is why he repeats the aria. Do you people think that the aria should be performed with different expressive nuances each time? Is there any other set of variations where the "theme" as it were, is repeated like this?


----------



## Bluecrab

It's easily one of my favorite works. I only have the two Gould recordings, but for me they suffice, especially the 1981 recording. We had the good fortune to see American pianist Simone Dinnerstein perform the work about a year ago. Her tempo was almost identical to Gould's 1981 recording. She played the work flawlessly and with great feeling.

Here's a link to an interesting website about the nine canons in the work.

http://www2.nau.edu/tas3/goldbergcanons.html


----------



## DavidA

This is truly one of the great works for keyboard. I don't like the harpsichord so piano versions only for me.

Gould of course is tremendously exciting and provocative. Think I have four versions by him.
Another great version is by Perahia. As someone has commented why people don't like this peerlessly played version is beyond me.


----------



## Bluecrab

DavidA said:


> Gould of course is tremendously exciting and provocative. Think I have four versions by him.


??? Gould only recorded the work twice, in 1955 and 1981. Are you referring to live performances (excerpts) from youtube, by chance?


----------



## KenOC

Jeremy Denk did a nice set of Goldbergs on the piano not long ago. It came with an extra DVD with quite a long video of Denk talking about the variations, one by one, while playing excerpts at the keyboard.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

I like to say that it is my favorite piece by Bach. It can be touching for any state of mind. I grew up with Glenn Gould on cassette, but now like it in many versions on different instruments.


----------



## Varick

wkasimer said:


> I couldn't have said it better. Bach's ability to create such expression and variety within the constraints of such a tightly constructed work is miraculous.
> 
> Hard to name favorites, but I'll try. On piano, Sergei Schepkin, Ekaterina Dershavina, Lori Sims, Giovanni Mazzocchin, Maria Yudina, Alexis Weissenberg. On harpsichord Ottavio Dantone, Bob van Asperen, Blandine Rannou, Pierre Hantai, Robert Hill. And probably a few I'm forgetting....


Huh, you have now given me some more to explore. I am interested, since you feel the same way about the piece as I do, I take it you are not a Gould fan? I know there are those who dislike his Goldberg's and some who actually hate it. What's your take on his recordings? Thanks,

V


----------



## wkasimer

fliege said:


> I love the aria but I've so far found the variations impenetrable. From time to time I give it another shot, but it's not yielding so far.


I don't know if you have access to "The Great Courses" (https://www.thegreatcourses.com), but if you do, Robert Greenberg includes an excellent and detailed analysis of the Goldberg Variations as part of his "Bach and the High Baroque" course - about three hours of analysis for a work about one third of that length. I found the work hard to appreciate before I listened to Greenberg.


----------



## wkasimer

Varick said:


> I take it you are not a Gould fan?


It's not that I'm averse to Gould - I'm actually one of the few people who likes his Mozart - but I don't think that the Goldberg Variations, famous though those recordings are, show him at his best. First, I like performances with repeats - all of them - and Gould took none in the first recording. That recording may have plenty of energy, but I don't hear sufficient variety of color. The second recording includes a few repeats, but lacks the energy of the first recording.

I neglected to include Schiff, whom I heard play the work live in Boston a few years back, with every repeat; his ECM recording is a pretty good reflection of that performance. That was the first half of the concert; the second half was Beethoven's Diabelli Variations. Quite a marathon, particularly since his encore was the entire second movement of LvB Op. 111, which he stopped about five minutes in to berate a coughing audience member, after which he started the movement over.


----------



## Josquin13

The Goldberg Variations recordings that I've found myself returning to most over the decades are (& an asterisk *=a great favorite): on piano, *Ivo Janssen, *Edward Aldwell, Glenn Gould *1981 (& *1955--Zenph re-performance), and Tatiana Nikolayeva (*1979 Melodyia, 1986--BBC Legends & 1992 Hyperion). Murray Perahia and Konstantin Lifschitz are good too. (& I'd like to hear Beatrice Rana's recent award winning recording, and Lars Vogt's, and am looking forward to Andrea Bacchetti recording the Goldbergs one day too, as I thought his French Suites for Sony were brilliant.) On harpsichord, I'm partial to *Pascal Dubreuil, *Gustav Leonhardt, *Fabio Bonizzoni, Jory Vinikour, Ignacio Prego, and Blandine Rannou. Ketil Haugsand and Bob van Asperen are good too.


----------



## JayBee

I was listening to the Greenberg lectures at around the same time that one of my cats was in decline due to a heart illness. On what would prove to be his last morning, I listened to the full piece (Trevor Pinnock's recording, I think). The next morning and for two more weeks following that, I listened to it to start my day, almost like a ceremony. I found that the aria at the end almost inevitably brought tears and a profound sense of a bittersweet cyclical nature of life. I find the work powerfully sacred. My favourite piano recording is by Zhu Xiao-Mei. Harpsichord is probably Pinnock, but I also love Bob van Asperen's. I have listened to many others and look forward to listening to many more, but I suspect Xiao-Mei will remain unsurpassed for me.


----------



## Malx

Bluecrab said:


> ??? Gould only recorded the work twice, in 1955 and 1981. Are you referring to live performances (excerpts) from youtube, by chance?


Bluecrab, I am aware of three on disc -the 1955 and 1981 recordings you mention plus the live recording from the Salzberg Festival in 1959.

View attachment 106663


----------



## Bluecrab

Malx said:


> Bluecrab, I am aware of three on disc -the 1955 and 1981 recordings you mention plus the live recording from the Salzberg Festival in 1959.


You're right... thanks for that. The Salzburg recording seems to be on youtube; I'll definitely listen to it.


----------



## Mandryka

Malx said:


> Bluecrab, I am aware of three on disc -the 1955 and 1981 recordings you mention plus the live recording from the Salzberg Festival in 1959.
> 
> View attachment 106663


There's at least one more, from the Vancouver Festival 1958









https://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/classical/products/7996997--glenn-gould-in-concert-1951-1960

This says it's from 1959, but I haven't heard it


----------



## Bluecrab

JayBee said:


> ...I found that the aria at the end almost inevitably brought tears and a profound sense of a bittersweet cyclical nature of life. I find the work powerfully sacred.


That's a great description of the closing aria and the feeling of the completion of a cycle that it evokes; I can certainly empathize with that. And as a cat lover, I've been down that road more times than I care to recall. It's always awful. Sorry for your loss. I'm not familiar with the recording you mention, but I'll listen to it soon.


----------



## wkasimer

JayBee said:


> My favourite piano recording is by Zhu Xiao-Mei.


An excellent recording, which I appreciated much more after reading her autobiography "The Secret Piano: From Mao's Labor Camps to Bach's Goldberg Variations".


----------



## JayBee

wkasimer said:


> An excellent recording, which I appreciated much more after reading her autobiography "The Secret Piano: From Mao's Labor Camps to Bach's Goldberg Variations".


I read her autobiography after having heard her Goldbergs, and it increased my appreciation as well. Her recording of the Well-Tempered Clavier is also very good.


----------



## JayBee

Bluecrab said:


> That's a great description of the closing aria and the feeling of the completion of a cycle that it evokes; I can certainly empathize with that. And as a cat lover, I've been down that road more times than I care to recall. It's always awful. Sorry for your loss. I'm not familiar with the recording you mention, but I'll listen to it soon.


Thank you, Bluecrab. I have been down that road many times as well, but this time was different. My bond with this particular cat was more profound than I realized. I am grateful to have a piece of music that captures and celebrates the essence of that bond for me. I will be interested to hear what you think of Xiao-Mei's interpretation.


----------



## Bluecrab

JayBee said:


> I will be interested to hear what you think of Xiao-Mei's interpretation.


I was able to find a few fragments of her interpretation of the work on youtube. She plays the aria beautifully. I suppose I'll have to break down and buy the recording to hear it in its entirety.


----------



## Guest

Bluecrab said:


> I was able to find a few fragments of her interpretation of the work on youtube. She plays the aria beautifully. I suppose I'll have to break down and buy the recording to hear it in its entirety.


You'll find the usual 30 second samples from each track on amazon.com


----------



## Mandryka

Bulldog said:


> Bach's Goldbergs is one of my favorite keyboard works. I have about 150 versions, mostly a mix of piano and harpsichord.
> 
> Favorites off the top of my head -
> 
> Piano:
> Gould (all of them)
> Tureck (all of them)
> Schiff (ECM)
> 
> Harpsichord:
> Hantai (both)
> Leonhardt (all of them)
> Rousset
> Gilbert
> Richter
> Ross
> 
> Fortepiano:
> Riemer (NF-Audio)


One problem I'm having, Don, is that now that I've heard Rubsam all the others are starting to sound the same. It's like there's Rübsam and the rest. So today I listened to Mortensen play it. It is excellent. Even _you_ couldn't rubbish it too much I don't think. I mean, I know you could, but that's because you're looking for darkness . . .

But there's something lacking even for me in the Mortensen, and I'm quite happy to listen to basically celebratory performances. It's too « vertical » As if he's not really seen that the music is contrapuntal.

What Rubsam's taught me is that where music's got two voices it's a duet, and a good performance will make it a duet of two independent, imaginative, responsive musicians. I think this is just as much the essence of Bach as moments of darkness relieved by light.


----------



## Bulldog

Mandryka said:


> One problem I've having, Don, is that now that I've heard Rubsam all the others are starting to sound the same. It's like there's Rübsam and the rest.


I haven't listened to it yet; will try to do so today.


----------



## Guest

Mandryka said:


> One problem I'm having, Don, is that now that I've heard Rubsam all the others are starting to sound the same. It's like there's Rübsam and the rest. So today I listened to Mortensen play it. It is excellent. Even _you_ couldn't rubbish it too much I don't think. I mean, I know you could, but that's because you're looking for darkness . . .


I agree entirely. Rubsam has invented a free way of playing that is utterly different than any other Bach performance I have heard. Piano and harpsichord performance 'sound the same' to me when put against Rubsam. He has not invalidated the performance tradition, but it has provided a very distinct alternative.

I regard Rubsam as a rare visionary in Bach performance. It started a fairly conventional organ cycle on Philips, continued with his Naxos recordings in which his interpretation of the suites is quite free compared with what you normally hear. His new recordings with lute-harpsichord are pure genius, I think.


----------



## Bulldog

Well, I listened to Rubsam's new version but do not share the high regard voiced by others. I must admit that I did not listen straight through to every variation as my irritation kept increasing. 

My thoughts:

1. Must be about the slowest version I've heard - almost 80 minutes with plenty of repeats not observed (could be a blessing).

2. Minimal forward momentum - sometimes none.

3. Trills all over the place that greatly reduced my enjoyment.

Overall, what I heard was: start/chop/trills/stop - start/chop/trills/stop etc.

It was just one listen, but I don't know if I'll ever want to hear it a second time. Generally, I love Rubsam's Bach, be it organ, harpsichord or piano interpretation. With the Goldbergs, he hits all the elements I don't like in Bach keyboard playing except for one - at least he doesn't go to the highest register in the repeats, a stunt that Felstsman routinely pulled in his recording.

Now I'm going to listen to Rousset's outstanding version and get back the good feelings I had before playing Rubsam's.


----------



## Guest

It's crazy, I admit, but the lack of forward momentum is the point. There is an unhitching of the voices from each other. It forces me to hear it anew.


----------



## MarkW

For years and years and years, the Goldbergs performed for me their original function: they put me to sleep. 

The when I was in my early 50s, they suddenly clicked. The occasion was listening to a CD by a pianist whom I had known when I was younger, Andrew Rangell -- an iconoclast whose specialties included things like late Beethoven and Stepan Wolpe's Passacaglia. I have heard a few, but not a lot of other recordings for comparison (for instance, both of Gould's), but I am happy with Rangell's. It says what I need without a lot of wondering what else they have to offer.


----------



## Mandryka

Bulldog said:


> Well, I listened to Rubsam's new version but do not share the high regard voiced by others. I must admit that I did not listen straight through to every variation as my irritation kept increasing.
> 
> My thoughts:
> 
> 1. Must be about the slowest version I've heard - almost 80 minutes with plenty of repeats not observed (could be a blessing).
> 
> 2. Minimal forward momentum - sometimes none.
> 
> 3. Trills all over the place that greatly reduced my enjoyment.
> 
> Overall, what I heard was: start/chop/trills/stop - start/chop/trills/stop etc.
> 
> It was just one listen, but I don't know if I'll ever want to hear it a second time. Generally, I love Rubsam's Bach, be it organ, harpsichord or piano interpretation. With the Goldbergs, he hits all the elements I don't like in Bach keyboard playing except for one - at least he doesn't go to the highest register in the repeats, a stunt that Felstsman routinely pulled in his recording.
> 
> Now I'm going to listen to Rousset's outstanding version and get back the good feelings I had before playing Rubsam's.


The Rubsam approach seems to me to make the music sound ancient, a keyboard analogue of a Gombert or de Rore motet, but more rhythmically free. Each variation is a motet for keyboard ...

Annother thing Rubsam's style makes me think of is Grete Sultan, playing Cage Etudes. So paradoxically he makes the music sound more modern too.


----------



## wkasimer

Baron Scarpia said:


> It's crazy, I admit, but the lack of forward momentum is the point. There is an unhitching of the voices from each other. It forces me to hear it anew.


Well, I agree that it's unique, and I'm glad I heard it...once. I don't think that I'll ever go back to it. I'm pretty much in agreement with Bulldog's assessment. I do enjoy the sound of the instrument, though.


----------



## Mandryka

wkasimer said:


> Well, I agree that it's unique, and I'm glad I heard it...once. I don't think that I'll ever go back to it. I'm pretty much in agreement with Bulldog's assessment. I do enjoy the sound of the instrument, though.


Do you think it is likely without any comparison? Or that it will contribute to a new understanding of the music, and beyond? (Those are Rubsam's words about his Goldbergs)

There's a certain shock of the new.


----------



## Guest

wkasimer said:


> Well, I agree that it's unique, and I'm glad I heard it...once. I don't think that I'll ever go back to it. I'm pretty much in agreement with Bulldog's assessment. I do enjoy the sound of the instrument, though.


If I could play this music, I could sit at the keyboard and stretch and pull at the music, take it apart and put it back together again. That's what Rubsam does for me. I certainly got some pleasure and insight out of it (so far, haven't listen to all yet). For that it's worth it. I don't expect it to become my "go to version."


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

DavidA said:


> Gould of course is tremendously exciting and provocative. Think I have four versions by him.
> Another great version is by Perahia. As someone has commented why people don't like this peerlessly played version is beyond me.


Agreed. I've enjoyed many recordings of this wonderful work, but my favourites by far are by Gould, Schiff and Perahia - great Bach pianists, all three of them.


----------



## Guest

DavidA said:


> This is truly one of the great works for keyboard. I don't like the harpsichord so piano versions only for me.
> 
> Gould of course is tremendously exciting and provocative. Think I have four versions by him.
> *Another great version is by Perahia. As someone has commented why people don't like this peerlessly played version is beyond me.*


Very fine, yes. Peerless, no. He doesn't surpass every other version available.


----------



## Mandryka

Baron Scarpia said:


> If I could play this music, I could sit at the keyboard and stretch and pull at the music, take it apart and put it back together again. That's what Rubsam does for me. I certainly got some pleasure and insight out of it (so far, haven't listen to all yet). For that it's worth it. I don't expect it to become my "go to version."


One problem about Rubsam now is that he's the only one playing like that. I mean, some people have a taint, a whiff, of his style, but really, he's the only one. Contrast other phenomenal musicians of their time -- Leonhardt for example, or Walcha. They all had pupils who followed their ideas. There's no Rubsam "school".

And I expect (though I'm not sure) that the conservatories are very conservative -- you know, a kid playing the Goldbergs like Rubsam for a degree would probably be marked heavily down.

The other "problem" is just how HIP is it? I honestly have no idea about that, though I do know that you can't read a 17th century score like it was a score by Beethoven -- the signs mean different things. If someone said he was self indulgent to play like that, I don't know whether he would have a satisfying response (he'd talk about how the voices are staggered in the Bach manuscripts possibly)

Rubsam thinks that mostly everyone else is just playing Bach wrong, that they're just not even making music out of the score. He wants a revolution in baroque keyboard performance -- with him at the vanguard, the avant garde.


----------



## Guest

Regarding Rubsam, he made a recording, that is enough. He doesn't need a "school." He's the polar opposite of Gould and maybe Rubsam and Gould will become the bookends between which Bach performance lives.

I don't know if it is HIP, and I'm not too concerned. I think the bit about taking account of how the notes are staggered in the manuscript is complete nonsense (why didn't Bach tell the printers to duplicate the note staggering) but it gave Rubsam the idea of playing freely with the time base. I like it as an alternative to the people who do it "properly," be that on piano or harpsichord.

I wish his WTC was on Naxos. I can't bring myself to buy the diced up, overprices downloads from his site.


----------



## Bulldog

DavidA said:


> Another great version is by Perahia. As someone has commented why people don't like this peerlessly played version is beyond me.


I haven't been impressed with any of Perahia's Bach recordings. For me, it's too much of Perahia playing Perahia. When I'm in a Perahia mood, I reach for his Mozart.


----------



## Guest

^^Which Mozart?


----------



## Mandryka

Baron Scarpia said:


> I wish his WTC was on Naxos. I can't bring myself to buy the diced up, overprices downloads from his site.


You should it's very good. And they come as a zipped file so they're not diced up. As is the Pachelbel and Bohm and AoF and transcriptions. I'd say the Goldbergs is by far and away the most challenging.


----------



## Mandryka

Bulldog said:


> Perahia playing Perahia.


They're mostly all like this, the modern pianists on the big labels.

I heard a really unusual one the other week -- if you're in the mood I'd love to hear your impressions. Tzimon Barto.


----------



## Guest

Mandryka said:


> You should it's very good. And they come as a zipped file so they're not diced up. As is the Pachelbel and Bohm and AoF and transcriptions. I'd say the Goldbergs is by far and away the most challenging.


What I'm annoyed at is having the WTC split into 5 "volumes" for $10 each. They've priced themselves beyond what I'm willing to pay.


----------



## Mandryka

Baron Scarpia said:


> What I'm annoyed at is having the WTC split into 5 "volumes" for $10 each. They've priced themselves beyond what I'm willing to pay.


Oh for fks sake, we're talking great poetry and high art here. You can't take it with you you know


----------



## Bulldog

Mandryka said:


> They're mostly all like this, the modern pianists on the big labels.
> 
> I heard a really unusual one the other week -- if you're in the mood I'd love to hear your impressions. Tzimon Barto.


Are you referring to the version on the Capriccio label that's arranged by Busoni?


----------



## Guest

Mandryka said:


> Oh for fks sake, we're talking great poetry and high art here. You can't take it with you you know


No, but I can buy some other high art with my money. Or food.


----------



## Bulldog

Concerning Barto's recording on Capriccio, I'm familiar with it and have not thought well of the interpretation. However, I did listen to some of it today to see if my previous opinion was still valid - it is. Barto is rather infuriating with his mannerisms and approach. He loves to play ever so softly and slow down the proceedings; I find it kills the musical flow. At the other end, there are times when his ridiculously powerful bass chords take over a variation. Overall, I find it a mess. Take the 30th variation where he ruins the joy of the music and turns it into a call for arms.

I'm all for a different take on the Goldbergs if it offers some insight and sounds natural. Barto's take just sounds like being different is what matters. 

What do you think of Beatrice Rana's version on Warner Classics?

P.S. - Every time I type Barto, it changes into Bartok.


----------



## Mandryka

Bulldog said:


> Concerning Barto's recording on Capriccio, I'm familiar with it and have not thought well of the interpretation. However, I did listen to some of it today to see if my previous opinion was still valid - it is. Barto is rather infuriating with his mannerisms and approach. He loves to play ever so softly and slow down the proceedings; I find it kills the musical flow. At the other end, there are times when his ridiculously powerful bass chords take over a variation. Overall, I find it a mess. Take the 30th variation where he ruins the joy of the music and turns it into a call for arms.
> 
> I'm all for a different take on the Goldbergs if it offers some insight and sounds natural. Barto's take just sounds like being different is what matters.
> 
> What do you think of Beatrice Rana's version on Warner Classics?
> 
> P.S. - Every time I type Barto, it changes into Bartok.


I didn't know Barto was playing the Busoni, but I do know the transcription from Tanski's recording. Haven't heard Rana, will do tomorrow if I can!


----------



## endelbendel

After attending a recital by Dinnerstein doing all of it straight thru, it'll be OK if sometime before i listen again. This season she is coming back with the Goldbergs in two different group settings.


----------



## Mandryka

Re Rana, I thought it was charming, radiant, refreshing music making, easy to like.


----------



## Bluecrab

endelbendel said:


> After attending a recital by Dinnerstein doing all of it straight thru...


I'm curious-did she have the modern dance troupe with her when you saw her? She did when we saw her. We found them to be basically a distraction. But her playing was top-notch. 75 minutes... she played all of the repeats.


----------



## tortkis

This thread aroused my interest, so I listened to Rübsam's recording. The right hand and the left hand play as if they are two independent players who are improvising, listening to each other carefully, hesitating or rushing at times. Sometimes, it almost sounds like aleatory music. I was reminded of the rhythmically complex pieces of Michael Byron. Amazing.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Which are there more of, Bach cello suite or Bach Goldberg recordings? And so many good ones!

I have the obligatory Gould recording that I can only listen to through speakers because I can't abide the extraneous noises. I have Perahia, which I like. Also from cheap box downloads I have P. Serkin which is surprisingly good and J. Friskin which is a solid B-.
I think those will do OK.


----------



## jegreenwood

Bluecrab said:


> I'm curious-did she have the modern dance troupe with her when you saw her? She did when we saw her. We found them to be basically a distraction. But her playing was top-notch. 75 minutes... she played all of the repeats.


Jerome Robbins choreographed the Goldberg Variations for New York City Ballet back around 1970. It's still in their active repertoire, although not performed too often; I've seen it once. I recall feeling rather sorry for the ballet company's pianist who was playing one of the great masterpieces for the keyboard while no one was paying attention to him.

Robbins seems to favor Bach and Chopin over other composers.


----------



## classfolkphile

On harpsichord, I like Koopman, Ross and Van Asperen. I don't like the sound of Hantai's and Rousset's harpsichords, nor the latter's ridiculously fast (to me) speeds. I love the sound of Verlet's instrument but not, unfortunately, her interpretation. I've started listening to Rubsam's recording and have enjoyed it streaming on earbuds. (For some reason I suspect it won't work as well on my speakers - perhaps the extreme left/right image separation - and might even be annoying on them. I will try it though.)

On piano, I enjoy Gould ('55 & '81), Tureck (the live VAI recording at W.F. Buckley's - not the DG studio version), Rosen, Dershavina, and, perhaps most of all, Bruno Canino. There is a freedom and joy in his playing that I have not heard to the same extent elsewhere.

Good but below the above, for me, are Aldwell and Rana. Perahia's playing is excellent but what I (and I suspect many others) don't like is his tinkly tone. I've never been able to warm up to Schiff's Bach as much as I recognize his skill: there is something just a little bit willful about his playing. I found Gavrilov and Dinnerstein mannered. And Weissenberg would be excellent save for the glacier pace of the Arias and DG's (correction: EMI's, not DG's) hard bright sound.

I have not heard many of the other versions discussed here and am looking forward to doing so.


----------



## wkasimer

> And Weissenberg would be excellent save for the glacier pace of the Arias and DG's hard bright sound.


Weissenberg's Goldberg recordings are on EMI, not DG.


----------



## classfolkphile

wkasimer said:


> Weissenberg's Goldberg recordings are on EMI, not DG.


Correct, my mistake. It doesn't change the character of the sound, however, on the one I heard. Did he make more than one recording?


----------



## Mandryka

One modern piano one which I think is worth hearing is by Risto Lauriola. There’s also Koriolov.

Re Tureck, the one I like is on her Great Pianists edition, I heard her play it in fact, but I can’t remember anything about the concert except that she wore a tent made out of curtains, she came on late, left for five minutes in the middle, and wiped down the piano with a kleenex before strarting.


----------



## wkasimer

classfolkphile said:


> Correct, my mistake. It doesn't change the character of the sound, however, on the one I heard. Did he make more than one recording?


He recorded it twice, in 1971 and 1981. The former is only available, AFAIK, on a 3 CD set with the Partitas. The 1981 has been issued multiple times. Not much of a difference between the two, actually.


----------



## wkasimer

BTW, if you're looking for a comprehensive Goldberg discography...

http://www.a30a.com/


----------



## premont

wkasimer said:


> BTW, if you're looking for a comprehensive Goldberg discography...
> 
> http://www.a30a.com/


Quite a lot, and it is not even complete.


----------



## Josquin13

"The Rubsam approach seems to me to make the music sound ancient, a keyboard analogue of a Gombert or de Rore motet, but more rhythmically free. Each variation is a motet for keyboard ... "

I've only listened to sound clips so far, but had the same thought. The tranquility of Rubsam's playing and mellow sound of the lute harpsichord reminded me of a Renaissance motet that has been arranged for lute duet (as was popular during the middle to late Renaissance). I even started to forget that he's playing a keyboard. Which is intriguing, since I've long thought that Bach's music had strong roots in the Renaissance. Not only do I suspect that Bach maintained an intense interest in Renaissance polyphony throughout his life (as you may recall, I think there's a possible connection between Bach's Art of the Fugue and Josquin's innovative late Missa Sine nomine: 



), but also in Renaissance practices as well, such as the common use of one singer (or two) to a part--a tradition that Bach's idol Buxtehude later adopted, along with his friend Telemann (as did Bach himself).

What gives me further pause here is that the lute harpsichord is a very rare instrument. I understand that there are only a few in existence today (Rubsam's being a new instrument built by Keith Hill). Therefore, lute harpsichords couldn't have been widely used during the Bach's era, and yet Bach owned not one, but two lute harpsichords at his death.

After listening to the instrument, I can't imagine that Bach wouldn't have preferred it to a clavichord, as the lute harpsichord doesn't have any of the drawbacks or limitations of the clavichord (i.e., difficult to control and play in tune, etc.). Yet it offers the same intimate, mellow sound. It also has a fuller, more resonant sound than a clavichord and appears to be capable of a greater subtleties. So, how could Bach not have preferred it?

As to whether Bach considered it a suitable instrument to play his Goldberg Variations on, if we trust Johann Nikolaus Forkel's 1802 story that the variations were composed to be played on a harpsichord by the teenaged Count Goldberg for the late night listening of the former ambassador to the court of Saxony, Count Kaiserling (who was ill and had insomnia), the idea that Bach privately played the variations on a lute harpsichord seems unlikely. Although the mellowness of the instrument is arguably more suitable for the intimacy of late night listening than a harpsichord. It would be interesting to know whether the Counts Goldberg or Kaiserling actually owned a lute harpsichord. Of course, Bach does specify on the title page of the Goldbergs that they are intended for a two-manual harpsichord. Therefore, we know that the Goldbergs weren't composed for a single harpsichord, or clavichord, or lute harpsichord (unless there was such thing as a two manual lute harpsichord?). In addition, I have doubts about whether Rubsam's approach would have worked as effectively if he'd taken all the repeats, & Bach does ask the performer to take all the repeats.

What's refreshing about Rubsam's approach is that it's the total opposite of the dogmatic, tightly controlled 'academic' approach to Bach's counterpoint that you find with a lot of the older harpsichordists. Indeed, the rhythms are so free that he seems to almost displace musical lines--in a fugue-like manner--then bring them back together again. The effect is dream-like. However, I don't think this approach would work as well on a piano, as it seems more suited to the inherent qualities of the lute harpsichord. Rubsam's ornamentation also works quite well on the instrument. I felt drawn in. It added interest, & made me listen more keenly.

I was also struck by how, even though Rubsam tends to pull the music apart, his playing isn't at all romantic. Which brings to mind pianist Elizabeth Rich's rhythmically free and varied approach to Mozart's piano sonatas. I look at her approach as very classical, though others may not. Like Rubsam, Rich puts the content of the music ahead of other concerns, and her understanding of the style of the period is so strong that her playing doesn't come off as 'romantic' either, even though she brings a greater rhythmic freedom and contrast to this music than other pianists. Considering the illuminating results, I suspect that Rich's approach is closer to the way Mozart played his own music than any other pianist. As with Rubsam, she draws the listener more intensely into the beauty and meaning of each phrase. There is a sense of time slowing down, which allows the listener to linger and reflect more deeply on the character and meaning of each phrase.

"They all had pupils who followed their ideas. There's no Rubsam "school"."

That's surprising, since Rubsam is a teacher. I recall that he teaches or has taught at Northwestern University. On the other hand, it's not surprising, since in order to most effectively adopt Rubsam's approach, his students would have to play a lute harpsichord, in my view. Personally, I find it hard to separate what Rubsam is doing interpretively from the instrument he's using. With so few lute harpsichords in existence, in order for there to be a genuine "Rubsam school", Keith Hill would have to get busy with many new commissions, & that's not likely going to happen. Although it would be interesting to hear some alternative interpretations of Bach's keyboard music on a lute harpsichord, considering that Bach owned and played the instrument.

I see the Brazilian organist Julia Brown studied with Rubsam at Northwestern. She has recorded the complete organ music of Buxtehude for Naxos (& now lives in Oregon). Have you heard her playing? If so, do you find that her Buxtehude has anything in common with her teacher's Bach?


----------



## Bulldog

Josquin13 said:


> That's surprising, since Rubsam is a teacher. I recall that he teaches or has taught at Northwestern University. On the other hand, it's not surprising, since in order to most effectively adopt Rubsam's approach, his students would have to play a lute harpsichord, in my view. Personally, I find it hard to separate what Rubsam is doing interpretively from the instrument he's using. With so few lute harpsichords in existence, in order for there to be a genuine "Rubsam school", Keith Hill would have to get busy with many new commissions, & that's not likely going to happen. Although it would be interesting to hear some alternative interpretations of Bach's keyboard music on a lute harpsichord, considering that Bach owned and played the instrument.


I believe that Robert Hill made at least one recording for Hanssler of Bach keyboard music on a lute-harpsichord.


----------



## classfolkphile

A superb post, Josquin. Thank you.


----------



## classfolkphile

Bulldog said:


> I believe that Robert Hill made at least one recording for Hanssler of Bach keyboard music on a lute-harpsichord.


Yes, and he also made a recording with Ekkehard Weber of the 3 Sonatas for Viola da Gamba and Harpsichord (transcribed for Lute-Harpsichord) on Ars Musici. (Btw, I'm listening to Hill's Goldberg Variations (on harpsichord) now and quite liking it).

Also there is, of course, the Kim Heindel "Aufs Lautenwerck" (lute-harpsichord) recording of Bach music on Dorian that's been out for a long time. All of these recordings are available.


----------



## Mandryka

Elizabeth Farr, who studied with Wolfgang Rubsam, has recorded a Bach lautenwerk CD for Naxos. I haven’t heard it. I believe that you can hear a slight pre-echo of the horizontal style in some of her recordings - in the Jacquet de la Guerre and the Byrd Pavans for example. But she’s not as imaginative or improvisatory as Rubsam himself. Julia Brown, another Rubsam student, is an organist who I like very much, and her tempos tend to be on the slow side like his. But not even Rubsam plays organ like Rubsam plays harpsichord! That would be very strange! 

John Paul is a harpsichordist who has recorded all the Bach suites and WTC on lautenwerk. I thought it was horrible. And see my next post.


----------



## Mandryka

Bulldog said:


> I believe that Robert Hill made at least one recording for Hanssler of Bach keyboard music on a lute-harpsichord.


Are you forgetting Gwendolyn Toth's Goldbergs?

http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NonVocal/Klavier-Goldberg-Toth.htm


----------



## Mandryka

classfolkphile said:


> Yes, and he also made a recording with Ekkehard Weber of the 3 Sonatas for Viola da Gamba and Harpsichord (transcribed for Lute-Harpsichord) on Ars Musici.


This is very good I think.

I'm not a great fan of Hill's Goldbergs by the way. He plays too fast as if he's trying to dazzle us with his virtuosity rather than let us hear the poetry of Bach's music.


----------



## Mandryka

Josquin13 said:


> "The Rubsam approach seems to me to make the music sound ancient, a keyboard analogue of a Gombert or de Rore motet, but more rhythmically free. Each variation is a motet for keyboard ... "
> 
> I've only listened to sound clips so far, but had the same thought. The tranquility of Rubsam's playing and mellow sound of the lute harpsichord reminded me of a Renaissance motet that has been arranged for lute duet (as was popular during the middle to late Renaissance). I even started to forget that he's playing a keyboard. Which is intriguing, since I've long thought that Bach's music had strong roots in the Renaissance. Not only do I suspect that Bach maintained an intense interest in Renaissance polyphony throughout his life (as you may recall, I think there's a possible connection between Bach's Art of the Fugue and Josquin's innovative late Missa Sine nomine:
> 
> 
> 
> ), but also in Renaissance practices as well, such as the common use of one singer (or two) to a part--a tradition that Bach's idol Buxtehude later adopted, along with his friend Telemann (as did Bach himself).
> 
> What gives me further pause here is that the lute harpsichord is a very rare instrument. I understand that there are only a few in existence today (Rubsam's being a new instrument built by Keith Hill). Therefore, lute harpsichords couldn't have been widely used during the Bach's era, and yet Bach owned not one, but two lute harpsichords at his death.
> 
> After listening to the instrument, I can't imagine that Bach wouldn't have preferred it to a clavichord, as the lute harpsichord doesn't have any of the drawbacks or limitations of the clavichord (i.e., difficult to control and play in tune, etc.). Yet it offers the same intimate, mellow sound. It also has a fuller, more resonant sound than a clavichord and appears to be capable of a greater subtleties. So, how could Bach not have preferred it?
> 
> As to whether Bach considered it a suitable instrument to play his Goldberg Variations on, if we trust Johann Nikolaus Forkel's 1802 story that the variations were composed to be played on a harpsichord by the teenaged Count Goldberg for the late night listening of the former ambassador to the court of Saxony, Count Kaiserling (who was ill and had insomnia), the idea that Bach privately played the variations on a lute harpsichord seems unlikely. Although the mellowness of the instrument is arguably more suitable for the intimacy of late night listening than a harpsichord. It would be interesting to know whether the Counts Goldberg or Kaiserling actually owned a lute harpsichord. Of course, Bach does specify on the title page of the Goldbergs that they are intended for a two-manual harpsichord. Therefore, we know that the Goldbergs weren't composed for a single harpsichord, or clavichord, or lute harpsichord (unless there was such thing as a two manual lute harpsichord?). In addition, I have doubts about whether Rubsam's approach would have worked as effectively if he'd taken all the repeats, & Bach does ask the performer to take all the repeats.
> 
> What's refreshing about Rubsam's approach is that it's the total opposite of the dogmatic, tightly controlled 'academic' approach to Bach's counterpoint that you find with a lot of the older harpsichordists. Indeed, the rhythms are so free that he seems to almost displace musical lines--in a fugue-like manner--then bring them back together again. The effect is dream-like. However, I don't think this approach would work as well on a piano, as it seems more suited to the inherent qualities of the lute harpsichord. Rubsam's ornamentation also works quite well on the instrument. I felt drawn in. It added interest, & made me listen more keenly.
> 
> I was also struck by how, even though Rubsam tends to pull the music apart, his playing isn't at all romantic. Which brings to mind pianist Elizabeth Rich's rhythmically free and varied approach to Mozart's piano sonatas. I look at her approach as very classical, though others may not. Like Rubsam, Rich puts the content of the music ahead of other concerns, and her understanding of the style of the period is so strong that her playing doesn't come off as 'romantic' either, even though she brings a greater rhythmic freedom and contrast to this music than other pianists. Considering the illuminating results, I suspect that Rich's approach is closer to the way Mozart played his own music than any other pianist. As with Rubsam, she draws the listener more intensely into the beauty and meaning of each phrase. There is a sense of time slowing down, which allows the listener to linger and reflect more deeply on the character and meaning of each phrase.
> 
> "They all had pupils who followed their ideas. There's no Rubsam "school"."
> 
> That's surprising, since Rubsam is a teacher. I recall that he teaches or has taught at Northwestern University. On the other hand, it's not surprising, since in order to most effectively adopt Rubsam's approach, his students would have to play a lute harpsichord, in my view. Personally, I find it hard to separate what Rubsam is doing interpretively from the instrument he's using. With so few lute harpsichords in existence, in order for there to be a genuine "Rubsam school", Keith Hill would have to get busy with many new commissions, & that's not likely going to happen. Although it would be interesting to hear some alternative interpretations of Bach's keyboard music on a lute harpsichord, considering that Bach owned and played the instrument.
> 
> I see the Brazilian organist Julia Brown studied with Rubsam at Northwestern. She has recorded the complete organ music of Buxtehude for Naxos (& now lives in Oregon). Have you heard her playing? If so, do you find that her Buxtehude has anything in common with her teacher's Bach?


Do you think that Rubsam plays The Goldberg Variations in a way which sounds like style brisé? I'm not sure.



> The quickly fading sound of the lute did not lend itself to polyphonic voice leading and called for specific techniques that compensated for the limitations of the instrument. The "broken style" of lute music, a most ingenious and consistent application of such a technique, may be called a glorification of the simplest lute figure: the arpeggio, That broken style is characterised by rapidly alternating notes in different registers that supply, in turn, melody and harmony. Seemingly distributed in arbitrary fashion in different registers, the notes produced, in their composite rhythm, a continuous strand of sound. The lute composer was able to articulate the even flow by means of double and triple stops which suggested the rhythmic patterns, essential to the dance. The texture of lute music was necessarily free voiced since no voice could be carried through and since notes that hinted at one voice at the beginning of the measure dropped out as soon as they had appeared.


The above is taken from an outstanding book, Manfred F Bukofzer, _Music in the Baroque Era_

Here's an example of the style






For an interpretation of the Goldbergs which makes it sound ancient, there's also Egarr.


----------



## classfolkphile

Mandryka said:


> This is very good I think.
> 
> I'm not a great fan of Hill's Goldbergs by the way. He plays too fast as if he's trying to dazzle us with his virtuosity rather than let us hear the poetry of Bach's music.


I admit to being a bit dazzled by his virtuosity but felt like he also slowed down enough when appropriate to let the poetry through. As I've only heard it the one time late last night, I'll have to see if it wears repeated listening well. In any event his speeds did not immediately repel me as Rousset's metronomic rushing did.


----------



## Bulldog

Mandryka said:


> Are you forgetting Gwendolyn Toth's Goldbergs?


Yes I did forget. That review was about 15 years ago when I was buying cd's at an alarming rate and writing up a storm. Both addictions are now under control.


----------



## Josquin13

"Do you think that Rubsam plays The Goldberg Variations in a way which sounds like style brisé? I'm not sure."

Yes, to a degree. But he has his own way. It doesn't strike me as exactly the same approach (as Rubsam seems a bit freer), although I'd need to listen more. It's an interesting question.

A good example of a lutenist playing Renaissance motets in a "broken style" is Jacob Heringman's CD of Renaissance lute arrangements of works by Josquin. I don't have a problem with Heringman's approach, since I don't think it likely that Couperin's harpsichord style originated in France, but rather came out of the late Renaissance (like everything else). But I'd be interested to know why Heringman chose to play Josquin's music in a style brisé, & his justification for doing so. Or do all lute players perform Renaissance music in the later French style?

Anyway, I don't think what Heringman is doing is exactly the same as Rubsam's approach to Bach, but they're not that far apart either. For example, I find the following Heringman/Mudarra clip to be fairly similar to Rubsam's playing, in places, but elsewhere maybe a bit more tightly structured? What do you think?:


----------



## classfolkphile

Mandryka said:


> Are you forgetting Gwendolyn Toth's Goldbergs?
> 
> http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NonVocal/Klavier-Goldberg-Toth.htm


And what do you think of it?


----------



## Mandryka

Josquin13 said:


> "Do you think that Rubsam plays The Goldberg Variations in a way which sounds like style brisé? I'm not sure."
> 
> Yes, to a degree. But he has his own way. It doesn't strike me as exactly the same approach (as Rubsam seems a bit freer), although I'd need to listen more. It's an interesting question.
> 
> A good example of a lutenist playing Renaissance motets in a "broken style" is Jacob Heringman's CD of Renaissance lute arrangements of works by Josquin. I don't have a problem with Heringman's approach, since I don't think it likely that Couperin's harpsichord style originated in France, but rather came out of the late Renaissance (like everything else). But I'd be interested to know why Heringman chose to play Josquin's music in a style brisé, & his justification for doing so. Or do all lute players perform Renaissance music in the later French style?
> 
> Anyway, I don't think what Heringman is doing is exactly the same as Rubsam's approach to Bach, but they're not that far apart either. For example, I find the following Heringman/Mudarra clip to be fairly similar to Rubsam's playing, in places, but elsewhere maybe a bit more tightly structured? What do you think?:


I'm not sure what to make of this.


----------



## Mandryka

classfolkphile said:


> And what do you think of it?


I haven't heard it.


----------



## JSBach85

Goldberg Variations is one of the most ambitious composition ever written for harpsichord, a gem that should be listened as many times as possible.

My recordings at this moment are:

- Bob Van Asperen / Erato. Harpsichord.
- Gustav Leonhardt / Warner Classics. Harpsichord.
- Pierre Hantai / Naive. Harpsichord.
- Andreas Staier / Harmonia Mundi. Harpsichord.
- Trevor Pinnock / Archiv Produktion. Harpsichord.

I would be interested in Koopman recording as well.


----------



## endelbendel

i heard Dinnerstein play the whole set in recital. After that i do not crave listening to recordings of it for a long time.


----------



## premont

Mandryka said:


> Do you think that Rubsam plays The Goldberg Variations in a way which sounds like style brisé? I'm not sure.


If you recall, I did not write. that Rübsam's Bach style was identical with Style brisé, but rather that I think it represents some kind of extension of Style brisé, meaning obviously inspired by Style brisé.


----------



## Rubsam

Prof. Farr was never my student. She does not adopt at all what is found in my interpretations. 
Dr. Julia Brown was a former student and I produced all of her recordings, as well as those by Prof. Farr for Naxos records.


----------



## Rubsam

It has nothing to do with Style brise but rather with the Portamento and Vacillare of the baroque Italian Art of singing; the horizontal independence of polyphony, here as a hint ....


----------



## Guest

Are we to understand that you are _the_ Wolfgang Rübsam?


----------



## premont

Rubsam said:


> It has nothing to do with Style brise but rather with the Portamento and Vacillare of the baroque Italian Art of singing; the horizontal independence of polyphony, here as a hint ....


Is there any evidence in musical treatises that this horizontal style has been practiced in keyboard music in the Baroque age, or is it completely unprecedented?


----------



## Rubsam

Baron Scarpia said:


> Are we to understand that you are _the_ Wolfgang Rübsam?


That is indeed the fact. WR


----------



## Rubsam

premont said:


> Is there any evidence in musical treatises that this horizontal style has been practiced in keyboard music in the Baroque age, or is it completely unprecedented?


In short, vertical harmony is created by the voices of polyphony flowing cleverly constructed horizontally. When played vertically everything "together", nobody can comfortably follow the architecture of each individual voice. 
Refined Music making is not learned via treatises that mostly explain what NOT do do. It is the vast experience of polyphonic works studied and performed over many years, plus learning from other colleagues and even students of some new discoveries.


----------



## Guest

Rubsam said:


> In short, vertical harmony is created by the voices of polyphony flowing cleverly constructed horizontally. When played vertically everything "together", nobody can comfortably follow the architecture of each individual voice.


That matches my experience in listening to your recording of the Goldberg Variations, the individual voices jump out at me. In a conventional performance of baroque polyphony great effort is needed, and I only really feel comfortable that I know what is going on if I follow a score.


----------



## Guest

Prof. Rübsam,

Do you think your new performance style is suitable for performance of Bach's works for organ?


----------



## Rubsam

Baron Scarpia said:


> Prof. Rübsam,
> 
> Do you think your new performance style is suitable for performance of Bach's works for organ?


It is not really a new style of mine but further nurtured by the Lautenwerk TALKING to me constantly, meaning, the instrument barks at me literally when something did not sound as elegant as it requires, quite like a historic organ surely does as well; provided one is interested in learning more from the instrument in touch and tempo choice. 
Gould did not receive such guidance in that direction from the modern piano and the results are just the notes cleanly played, often way too fast, missing out on the real "heart of JSBach' jewels of music" seriously. The damage is done unfortunately starting with the ever so perfect metronome ticking performance plus painfully mathematically calculated trills, called "ornamentation" for those who do not know better. 
The global public applaudes because satisfaction is achieved when one can clearly guess how the upcoming measures will sound; they are predictable, but never in my interpretations, even on repeated listening!!
Try it out and be surprised, as the interplay of voices is way too complex to ever be memorized. 
Yes, this horizontal polyphonic style could be carefully applied in organ playing, as it is doubtful that home practice on clavichord and harpsichord would suddenly make students of Bach play the organ with an entirely different touch/approach. Think pumping the organ bellows and time to practice in cold churches as a side remark. Food for thought......


----------



## Guest

Rubsam said:


> It is not really a new style of mine but further nurtured by the Lautenwerk TALKING to me constantly, meaning, the instrument barks at me literally when something did not sound as elegant as it requires, quite like a historic organ surely does as well; provided one is interested in learning more from the instrument in touch and tempo choice.


Your description of a new instrument encouraging or even compelling you to adopt a different style of performance is very compelling. I would be very interested in hearing the result if you chose to record the Partitas, English Suites, French Suites on the Lautenwerk.


----------



## classfolkphile

Baron Scarpia said:


> Your description of a new instrument encouraging or even compelling you to adopt a different style of performance is very compelling. I would be very interested in hearing the result if you chose to record the Partitas, English Suites, French Suites on the Lautenwerk.


As would I. Very much so.


----------



## Mandryka

And I would like to hear some Frescobaldi, I've always thought that Vartolo' s way with the capricci makes them into instrumental madrigals, but he didn't have this amazing lute harpsichord.

When I first heard the Goldbergs I thought of renaissance motets. One of the things that Wolfgang's recording has done is help me appreciate Gombert better!


----------



## Mandryka

I just want to say something about vocal polyphony and the lautenwerk recordings, especially the Goldbergs. 

I think that what Wolfgang is exploring reveals MORE subtle, refined, complex, dramatic, responsive, expressive relationships among the voices than you hear on most every performance of Monteverdi, Gesualdo, Marenzio etc.


----------



## premont

Mandryka said:


> And I would like to hear some Frescobaldi,


I too. But even more I would like to hear some suites and tombeaux by Froberger and Louis Couperin - not the least the latter's fis-minor pavane and unmeasured preludes. The relation of these suites to lute music is most suggestive,


----------



## Guest

Usually on this site one can make negative remarks about compositions or performers without worrying about offending anyone but their acolytes. Now I'm worried about any remark I might have made here about Prof. Rübsam. 

In any case, I don't think we want to turn this thread into a list of assignments for future recordings. I will be pleased with anything that comes, and I hope I the little outlays will not attract the attention of my wife. 

I've a lot on my shelves to appreciate, ranging from the organ cycle on Philips, to the recordings from Naxos on piano (which seems to have said different things to Rübsam than it did to Gould) and the wonderful new recordings on Lautewerk!


----------



## wkasimer

Baron Scarpia said:


> Usually on this site one can make negative remarks about compositions or performers without worrying about offending anyone but their acolytes. Now I'm worried about any remark I might have made here about Prof. Rübsam.


One never knows who's reading what. That's why I never write anything that I wouldn't say directly to the subject of my comment, or to my mother.


----------



## Rubsam

Baron Scarpia said:


> Usually on this site one can make negative remarks about compositions or performers without worrying about offending anyone but their acolytes. Now I'm worried about any remark I might have made here about Prof. Rübsam.
> 
> In any case, I don't think we want to turn this thread into a list of assignments for future recordings. I will be pleased with anything that comes, and I hope I the little outlays will not attract the attention of my wife.
> 
> I've a lot on my shelves to appreciate, ranging from the organ cycle on Philips, to the recordings from Naxos on piano (which seems to have said different things to Rübsam than it did to Gould) and the wonderful new recordings on Lautewerk!


Musical performance Art should never stand still. Tastes change over time as well. Wisdom of historically correct performance practices will never end with new discoveries and awarenesses. And, with time moving on, our past observations become often questionable. Nothing wrong with such since we all move on in musical awarenesses.


----------



## wkasimer

I just listened, via Spotify, to an excellent and imaginative recording by Cedric Pescia. It's a pity, though, that he observes none of the repeats.

I see that he's recently recorded the WTC, which I've preordered.


----------



## Ras

My current favorites are some pretty wacky arrangements:

*for 5 recorders. (Seldom Sene Recorder Quintet on Brilliant Classics).:*








*for Saxophone Quartet. (The Danish Saxophone Quartet on Kontrapunkt):*


----------



## Ras

Not sure these are going to be favorite - but here are some more/new chamber arrangements of the Goldbergs:

*For septet on Sony:*









*For chamber orchestra on the Norwegian label Simax:*


----------



## science

Here is a thread about Gould's 1955 recording.


----------



## wolfgang1782

For more advanced listeners... variation 24 is perhaps one of the greatest achievements in that an octave canon is incredibly difficult to manage in a modulating framework. My particular suggestion is to dubb the movement “The Bell”. At bar 13 my senses have picked up a DRONE D (pitched just above MC) continuing until the cadence at bar 16. Similarly at bar 29, a drone G until the close. It is just another example of that science whereupon Bach’s stature reaches beyond remarkable. Try singing softly to yourself that note at the appointed bars and perhaps you may understand something of what I’m saying. A musical phenomenon unwritten yet present.


----------



## Mandryka

wolfgang1782 said:


> For more advanced listeners... variation 24 is perhaps one of the greatest achievements in that an octave canon is incredibly difficult to manage in a modulating framework. My particular suggestion is to dubb the movement "The Bell". At bar 13 my senses have picked up a DRONE D (pitched just above MC) continuing until the cadence at bar 16. Similarly at bar 29, a drone G until the close. It is just another example of that science whereupon Bach's stature reaches beyond remarkable. Try singing softly to yourself that note at the appointed bars and perhaps you may understand something of what I'm saying. A musical phenomenon unwritten yet present.


All these canons are fabulous really!


----------



## RockyIII

I haven't heard many other recordings for comparison, but on piano I really like Beatrice Rana's 2017 recording. On harpsichord, I like the 2006 remastered version of Trevor Pinnock's 1980 recording.


----------



## flamencosketches

This piece and in particular Glenn Gould's 1955 recording of it is what really got me hooked on classical music. (A very common story I'm sure.) There's so much depth to it. The aria is one of the most beautiful pieces of keyboard music I've ever heard and it proceeds to be warped in as many ways as possible (without hardly even leaving the key it starts in) each unique and characteristic of something different than the previous. I still love Gould's because he plays it no nonsense on the piano. He gives you the variations one after another without staying too long on any particular one, and in my opinion you really see the movement of the piece. This is surely not the only way to do it and one could (indeed even I would) argue that there's a lot of depth that is being missed by not going for the repeats and his ridiculous tempi throughout. But for me, a millennial with a screwed up attention span, hearing it played like that was a great introduction, and like I said I'm now hooked on not just Bach and baroque music but classical music in general which previously was always very tangential to my tastes and interests in life.

Lately I really like Wolfgang Rübsam's recent recording of the variations on the lautenwerk. My girlfriend thinks I'm crazy and that his interpretation is complete garbage, and who does he think he is to play Bach like that. It's definitely unorthodox but it's unlike any other harpsichord version I've heard (most of which fail to captivate me like a lot of the piano renditions I have heard do) and he really draws me in with his cantabile approach to playing which really brings out each voice, even if he does it in kind of an exaggerated way. It just goes to show how much depth there is in a piece like this, how many different ways there are to play it.

Some other piano versions I like are András Schiff's version on ECM (tho I am a fiend for the ECM sound and have been for years ever since becoming obsessed with Keith Jarrett years ago; many I'm sure would not be so fond of the reverb), and Maria Yudina's old recording of all of the variations, tho the audio here is rough. Her playing is very cantabile too and full of feeling that you don't really get in Gould's earlier version. I'd like to seek out and find a harpsichord version that is played in a somewhat traditional way that I enjoy.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

For anyone wanting a freebie Goldberg, naxos.com has one this month. You have to sign up for the newsletter. It is far from a bad version. Middle of the road I would say.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

At the present I have several recordings of this work. Of course the obligatory Gould 1955 recording which I enjoy despite the deranged goat noises sometimes in the background. The above post is my newest acquisition, which was a freebie. I am awaiting a CD I picked up for a few $$ of Dinnerstein's account from a few years ago, I have heard it already and it impressed me enough to pick up a copy. I have Perahia's wonderful account, and probably my favorite.

But two I don't see mentioned often I acquired as part of those mega download boxes. I knew nothing about either and quite like them enough to look up some information on them.

Peter Serkin has recorded Goldberg several times and his 1987 performance is available here for $.99. It's a good one.








James Friskin recorded this one in 1956 available for $.99. Poor Friskin had the bad timing to record around the same time as Gould. This is quite a worthy recording.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Since the above post I have acquired Peter Serkin's 96 recording which is quite good.

And there is this free recording on internet archives.

Another DG recording made available on Internet Archives. I have no idea why DG chooses to allow these posted as public domain when they are also available for sale. But we have been here before. Internet Archives does not allow pirated items so I accept this as free and legal to download.

Bach Goldberg Variations a 1969 recording by Kempff. An absolutely simple and beautiful rendition. Read up on it if you like. Kempff leaves out most of the orientation and flair and plays it simple and how he interprets Bach to have intended.
https://archive.org/details/wilhelmkempff-j.s.bach_goldbergvariations201824-96


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Since the above post I have acquired Peter Serkin's 96 recording which is quite good.
> 
> And there is this free recording on internet archives.
> 
> Another DG recording made available on Internet Archives. I have no idea why DG chooses to allow these posted as public domain when they are also available for sale. But we have been here before. Internet Archives does not allow pirated items so I accept this as free and legal to download.
> 
> Bach Goldberg Variations a 1969 recording by Kempff. An absolutely simple and beautiful rendition. Read up on it if you like. Kempff leaves out most of the orientation and flair and plays it simple and how he interprets Bach to have intended.
> https://archive.org/details/wilhelmkempff-j.s.bach_goldbergvariations201824-96
> View attachment 128921


Kempff would be quite interesting to hear in the Goldbergs. Shall have to check that out soon!

This is a wonderful thread to read through that, I think, deserves some further discussion about the endless intepretive possibilities of this great composition. Currently Tureck's stereo version ('77 I think?) and Gould '81 share equal adoration from me. They are as close to the dictionary definition of "polar opposites" as can be, but I find them both to be deeply spiritual traversals that illuminate various sublime nooks and crannies of the music, showing us different but equally rewarding hidden gems along the way. My only quibble with both has to do with repeats- Tureck takes them all but her very patient tempi can sometimes make them tough to bear (she does vary some ornamentation and voicing on the repeats, though). And Gould seems to arbitrarily choose which ones to take. At least it's not like his hot-rod '55 version which skips through them all. Also, his very consistent style through each fast variation can sometimes be tiresome. Here are four more favorites:

- Schiff: I love the clear, bell-like sonority of his instrument and his cleanly-shaped playing. I find it a beautiful balance between formal Baroque articulation and the possibilities of the modern piano in Bach.
- Perahia: Perahia is not very idiomatic- he plays every variation in a legato fashion. But this makes Bach sing beautifully and provides a more strictly "pianistic" take on the work.
- Rana: I agree with the praise this has received. Virtuosic but tasteful, imaginative but restraned when need be. The structure of the work comes across as wonderfully organic and inexorable.
- Levit: Quite a unique reading with some particularly lovely playing in the slow variations. He chooses some tempi that might be seen as more "romantic" leaning than some, but I really enjoy it.

And just a general question: what does everyone think of Wanda Landowska's Bach? I've seen her lambasted in some circles for her stubborn idiosyncrasies, and praised in others for the depth of her readings. Personally I find the rich sound of her Pleyel harpsichord very palatable compared to period instruments, and her performances to be highly straightforward (not that this is a bad thing). Do you think her recordings serve as more of a historical interest, or do you think they rank among the finest of Bach keyboard recordings?


----------



## Mandryka

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Kempff would be quite interesting to hear in the Goldbergs. Shall have to check that out soon!
> 
> This is a wonderful thread to read through that, I think, deserves some further discussion about the endless intepretive possibilities of this great composition. Currently Tureck's stereo version ('77 I think?) and Gould '81 share equal adoration from me. They are as close to the dictionary definition of "polar opposites" as can be, but I find them both to be deeply spiritual traversals that illuminate various sublime nooks and crannies of the music, showing us different but equally rewarding hidden gems along the way. My only quibble with both has to do with repeats- Tureck takes them all but her very patient tempi can sometimes make them tough to bear (she does vary some ornamentation and voicing on the repeats, though). And Gould seems to arbitrarily choose which ones to take. At least it's not like his hot-rod '55 version which skips through them all. Also, his very consistent style through each fast variation can sometimes be tiresome. Here are four more favorites:
> 
> - Schiff: I love the clear, bell-like sonority of his instrument and his cleanly-shaped playing. I find it a beautiful balance between formal Baroque articulation and the possibilities of the modern piano in Bach.
> - Perahia: Perahia is not very idiomatic- he plays every variation in a legato fashion. But this makes Bach sing beautifully and provides a more strictly "pianistic" take on the work.
> - Rana: I agree with the praise this has received. Virtuosic but tasteful, imaginative but restraned when need be. The structure of the work comes across as wonderfully organic and inexorable.
> - Levit: Quite a unique reading with some particularly lovely playing in the slow variations. He chooses some tempi that might be seen as more "romantic" leaning than some, but I really enjoy it.
> 
> And just a general question: what does everyone think of Wanda Landowska's Bach? I've seen her lambasted in some circles for her stubborn idiosyncrasies, and praised in others for the depth of her readings. Personally I find the rich sound of her Pleyel harpsichord very palatable compared to period instruments, and her performances to be highly straightforward (not that this is a bad thing). Do you think her recordings serve as more of a historical interest, or do you think they rank among the finest of Bach keyboard recordings?


I think Landowska was a more interesting musician before the war than after.


----------



## premont

Mandryka said:


> I think Landowska was a more interesting musician before the war than after.


I find her Pleyel monster self forbidding.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Kempff would be quite interesting to hear in the Goldbergs. Shall have to check that out soon!
> 
> This is a wonderful thread to read through that, I think, deserves some further discussion about the endless intepretive possibilities of this great composition. Currently Tureck's stereo version ('77 I think?) and Gould '81 share equal adoration from me. They are as close to the dictionary definition of "polar opposites" as can be, but I find them both to be deeply spiritual traversals that illuminate various sublime nooks and crannies of the music, showing us different but equally rewarding hidden gems along the way. My only quibble with both has to do with repeats- Tureck takes them all but her very patient tempi can sometimes make them tough to bear (she does vary some ornamentation and voicing on the repeats, though). And Gould seems to arbitrarily choose which ones to take. At least it's not like his hot-rod '55 version which skips through them all. Also, his very consistent style through each fast variation can sometimes be tiresome. Here are four more favorites:
> 
> - Schiff: I love the clear, bell-like sonority of his instrument and his cleanly-shaped playing. I find it a beautiful balance between formal Baroque articulation and the possibilities of the modern piano in Bach.
> - Perahia: Perahia is not very idiomatic- he plays every variation in a legato fashion. But this makes Bach sing beautifully and provides a more strictly "pianistic" take on the work.
> - Rana: I agree with the praise this has received. Virtuosic but tasteful, imaginative but restraned when need be. The structure of the work comes across as wonderfully organic and inexorable.
> - Levit: Quite a unique reading with some particularly lovely playing in the slow variations. He chooses some tempi that might be seen as more "romantic" leaning than some, but I really enjoy it.
> 
> And just a general question: what does everyone think of Wanda Landowska's Bach? I've seen her lambasted in some circles for her stubborn idiosyncrasies, and praised in others for the depth of her readings. Personally I find the rich sound of her Pleyel harpsichord very palatable compared to period instruments, and her performances to be highly straightforward (not that this is a bad thing). Do you think her recordings serve as more of a historical interest, or do you think they rank among the finest of Bach keyboard recordings?


You might like Kempff then. He's total opposite of Gould. He's Bizarro Gould. At first I checked to see what I was listening to. Thought I keyed up the wrong work. I read up a bit on why Kempff played it the way he did and there is good reason. It comes across simple uncomplicated and beautiful.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I can't believe I have not mentioned this one.

https://opengoldbergvariations.org/

This is totally free and legal to download and use in any way you like. The artist released this to the public domain. Where you see donation amount you are free to enter zero. I find this an exceptionally well recorded Goldberg Variations from 2012 and recommend it. The artists site explains the instrument and recording techniques used.
Try it, you won't regret it.

It isn't obsure, hard to find, really old, or insanely expensive and it isn't by the Canadian G Man, so it may not appeal to everyone.

I like her playing. Critical reviews seem almost non existent. Possibly it was reviewed in 2012 when first released. I have had it since that time and listen to it once in a while.


----------



## Mandryka

I saw Ishizaka play Art of Fugue in London, I’m afraid I didn’t enjoy it at all, I could hear very little finesse, very few subtle or interesting ideas. Maybe tough plain speaking and simplification is part of her poetic approach. At the time she was seeking crowd funding for a CD release, I don’t know if it has happened, but I can see that she has three Bach recordings on Qobuz - Goldbergs, AoF and WTC1.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Mandryka said:


> I saw Ishizaka play Art of Fugue in London, I'm afraid I didn't enjoy it at all, I could hear very little finesse, very few subtle or interesting ideas. Maybe tough plain speaking and simplification is part of her poetic approach. At the time she was seeking crowd funding for a CD release, I don't know if it has happened, but I can see that she has three Bach recordings on Qobuz - Goldbergs, AoF and WTC1.


Her AOF is the only piano version I have. I have heard recordings by others also. It's one of the few Bach works that I don't much care about so hers is as good as any.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Since the above post I have acquired Peter Serkin's 96 recording which is quite good.
> 
> And there is this free recording on internet archives.
> 
> Another DG recording made available on Internet Archives. I have no idea why DG chooses to allow these posted as public domain when they are also available for sale. But we have been here before. Internet Archives does not allow pirated items so I accept this as free and legal to download.
> 
> Bach Goldberg Variations a 1969 recording by Kempff. An absolutely simple and beautiful rendition. Read up on it if you like. Kempff leaves out most of the orientation and flair and plays it simple and how he interprets Bach to have intended.
> https://archive.org/details/wilhelmkempff-j.s.bach_goldbergvariations201824-96
> View attachment 128921


I listened to Kempff's Goldbergs today. Wow, what a performance! At first, I had some major reservations considering he takes the aria so unsentimentally and with no ornamentation at all (making it sound like a totally different piece). But his traversal of the variations is unmatched IMO except by Gould '81 and Tureck '79. Yes, he's very straightforward. Yes, he arbitrarily chooses which ornaments to play (I would be interested in learning how he came to these decisions). Yes, he only takes the first repeat in each variation if you're a stickler for that. But he masters the art of beautiful, unadorned playing. His legato is light and creamy, his characterization of the variations is fascinating, his phrasing idiomatic. And he brings out lots of voices I had never heard before. All this to say, Kempff plays the Goldbergs like the masterpiece of Western music that they are. He lets everything speak for itself, but is as far from bland as can be. I owe a big tip 'o the cap to Oldhoosierdude!:tiphat:


----------



## flamencosketches

Oldhoosierdude said:


> For anyone wanting a freebie Goldberg, naxos.com has one this month. You have to sign up for the newsletter. It is far from a bad version. Middle of the road I would say.
> View attachment 112885


I just bought this for $2 at a record store but haven't listened to it yet. My interest was piqued when I saw that Joyce Hatto had plagiarized this and garnered some acclaim for "her" recording.


----------



## starthrower

I have a copy of that Naxos CD. If only I could find it I'd give it a spin. Let me know if you think it's worth listening to.


----------



## Bulldog

Oldhoosierdude said:


> For anyone wanting a freebie Goldberg, naxos.com has one this month. You have to sign up for the newsletter. It is far from a bad version. Middle of the road I would say.
> View attachment 112885


I'd say the same. I've had this disc for what seems like forever - rarely think of it but always find it enjoyable when I give it a spin.


----------



## Bigbang

I have Jendo Jando on Naxos...listened to it and found it to be what some described as playing without embellishments. I have Glenn Gould (55/82), Barenboim, Schiff (not the so called ecm version), Feltsman, Perahia, and some I cannot recall and I like this Jendo Jando version...just found it a few weeks ago and dug it up after reading this.


----------



## Helgi

Re: the Wilhelm Kempff Goldberg Variations; I'm so used to the '81 Gould recordings that this is a real eye-opener. Wonderful stuff! 

Sounds almost robotic in contrast, but then of course it is anything but.

Oh, and the sound quality is excellent as well. Solo piano music really benefits from hi-res files.


----------



## fluteman

Oldhoosierdude said:


> I can't believe I have not mentioned this one.
> 
> https://opengoldbergvariations.org/
> 
> This is totally free and legal to download and use in any way you like. The artist released this to the public domain. Where you see donation amount you are free to enter zero. I find this an exceptionally well recorded Goldberg Variations from 2012 and recommend it. The artists site explains the instrument and recording techniques used.
> Try it, you won't regret it.
> 
> It isn't obsure, hard to find, really old, or insanely expensive and it isn't by the Canadian G Man, so it may not appeal to everyone.
> 
> I like her playing. Critical reviews seem almost non existent. Possibly it was reviewed in 2012 when first released. I have had it since that time and listen to it once in a while.
> 
> View attachment 129416


I seldom contribute to threads like this since so many good suggestions are made with no help from me, including most or all of my favorites, of which this is one. But here I can add that Ms. Ishizaka's download is not only free, but available in better than CD sound quality "high rez" 20-bit format, or at least was when I downloaded it. I'd love to hear her perform the Goldbergs in person.


----------



## Sad Al

Why don't you get Scott Ross's studio recording, I think it was in 1988. Goldberg variations sounds best on double manual harpsichord, according to J.S.Bach. I think Mr Bach understood a lot about his late masterpiece. The live 1985 Goldberg by Ross is also excellent. Ross was wonderful. That said, Gould's live Goldberg variations weren't bad at all. I can also recommend Huguette Dreyfus (1988, on excellent old Hemsch harpsichord)


----------



## Mandryka

Sad Al said:


> Why don't you get Scott Ross's studio recording,


You prefer the studio to the live recording?


----------



## Sad Al

OK. I got it, I must listen to both recordings again. And again. And I have them both. Once more in to the bleach, as Blondie put it. I remember that the studio is more introspective and the live is more spectacular. The studio is better recorded but the live is more spontaneous. You need both! Even an autistic moron like I could play Goldberg variations from memory, it's not that difficult for dumb people. Goldberg variations unfortunately proceed as dictated by God who doesn't exist.

What do you think about Keith Jarrett's version?


----------



## premont

Sad Al said:


> …..by God who doesn't exist.


Elsewhere you wrote that neither coronavirus nor Australia exists.

Tell me: Do you exist?

BTW I agree with your words about Ross' two Goldbergs.


----------



## Mandryka

Sad Al said:


> What do you think about Keith Jarrett's version?


I think it's cute, charming.


----------



## DavidA

Sad Al said:


> OK. I got it, I must listen to both recordings again. And again. And I have them both. Once more in to the bleach, as Blondie put it. I remember that the studio is more introspective and the live is more spectacular. The studio is better recorded but the live is more spontaneous. You need both! Even an autistic moron like I could play Goldberg variations from memory, it's not that difficult for dumb people. *Goldberg variations unfortunately proceed as dictated by God who doesn't exist.
> *
> What do you think about Keith Jarrett's version?


Correction Mr Dumb Al, to dispel any myth you are blinded by: Goldberg Variations not dictated by God - written by a genius called J S Bach who considered writing music a service to the God he believed in.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

DavidA said:


> Correction Mr Dumb Al, to dispel any myth you are blinded by: Goldberg Variations not dictated by God - written by a genius called J S Bach who considered writing music a service to the God he believed in.


You Can Call Me Al will be gone soon. Most of those kind are.


----------



## Sad Al

Oldhoosierdude said:


> You Can Call Me Al will be gone soon. Most of those kind are.


Yes. Sad Al is an anagram of Salad. I write word salad. But I'll be back! I'm the old Arn


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Sad Al said:


> Yes. Sad Al is an anagram of Salad. I write word salad. But I'll be back! I'm the old Arn


You seem to have a need for attention. How sad for you. Carry on, friend.


----------



## Sad Al

Oldhoosierdude said:


> You seem to have a need for attention. How sad for you. Carry on, friend.


If I have a need for attention, I am doing a lousy job in my pursuit.

Premont asks me do I exist. This is a difficult philosophical question. "I" obviously refers to something called ego-consciousness which, like unicorns, is a concept that is difficult to define and prove scientifically. "To exist" is as difficult. It could refer "to be capable of being observed". Unicorns cannot be observed but they could still exist.

Do Goldberg variations exist?


----------



## Bigbang

Oldhoosierdude said:


> You seem to have a need for attention. How sad for you. Carry on, friend.


Well, in defense of "need for attention" I would say it can be interpreted in various ways. I have noticed posters past years no longer around so it happens the forum moves on. Too much time devoted to any activity daily where it can get in the way of doing other things to bring more balance perhaps but burnout can apply here.


----------



## Bigbang

Sad Al said:


> If I have a need for attention, I am doing a lousy job in my pursuit.
> 
> Premont asks me do I exist. This is a difficult philosophical question. "I" obviously refers to something called ego-consciousness which, like unicorns, is a concept that is difficult to define and prove scientifically. "To exist" is as difficult. It could refer "to be capable of being observed". Unicorns cannot be observed but they could still exist.
> 
> Do Goldberg variations exist?


I have cds that say Goldberg Variations--but it is printed. I listen to all the music with the name, sound very similar, but does the sound and name go together?

Seriously, as in religion thread, to think we are making sense or getting anywhere when we are spinning ourselves in circles, we must try to rise above the "philosophy" and focus on making points that members can use in replying to. Not everyone can or will as some are interested in projecting their interests but overall the best way is too use the forum to discuss what the forum is here for.


----------



## ZeR0

The Goldberg Variations are my favorite composition for keyboard by Bach, and one of my favorites by anyone. I enjoy both of Gould's interpretations, Schiff's (ECM), and both of Hantai's recordings on harpsichord best.


----------



## Caryatid

Just a point of interest: Claudio Arrau recorded the Goldbergs in 1942. It seems to be the first time the whole set was recorded on piano (there are earlier recordings on harpsichord and on piano roll). The recording had notoriously poor sound quality, but I found out recently that it has been remastered. It's on the set called "Claudio Arrau - The Complete RCA Victor and Columbia Album Collection" - and perhaps elsewhere. I have been listening to it on Spotify.

Here's a playlist, if anyone's interested: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/5RqqtUKYNnxHPARAx4VN7Q?si=IQfdWv27TrKoJX5Ps8hRJA


----------



## Guest

It's one of my favorite works by Bach. I have at least a dozen recordings, but a few favorites include Andrew Rangell, Stefan Vladar, Cedric Pescia, and Beatrice Rana.


----------



## Simplicissimus

I can enjoy the Goldberg Variations played on piano, but I really love them played on the instrument for which the were written, two-keyboard harpsichord. My favorite recording is by Jory Vinikour from 2000 on Delos.


----------



## Barbebleu

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Since the above post I have acquired Peter Serkin's 96 recording which is quite good.
> 
> And there is this free recording on internet archives.
> 
> Another DG recording made available on Internet Archives. I have no idea why DG chooses to allow these posted as public domain when they are also available for sale. But we have been here before. Internet Archives does not allow pirated items so I accept this as free and legal to download.
> 
> Bach Goldberg Variations a 1969 recording by Kempff. An absolutely simple and beautiful rendition. Read up on it if you like. Kempff leaves out most of the orientation and flair and plays it simple and how he interprets Bach to have intended.
> https://archive.org/details/wilhelmkempff-j.s.bach_goldbergvariations201824-96
> View attachment 128921


I just heard the Kempff for the first time today and had to listen to the aria twice to convince myself about what I was hearing. I thought, what is he doing? Then I realised he was playing without the ornaments. Very different and not at all unpleasant. Does any know of any other unadorned Goldbergs out there?


----------



## flamencosketches

Barbebleu said:


> I just heard the Kempff for the first time today and had to listen to the aria twice to convince myself about what I was hearing. I thought, what is he doing? Then I realised he was playing without the ornaments. Very different and not at all unpleasant. Does any know of any other unadorned Goldbergs out there?


Why does he do this, I wonder. I remember being rather shocked when I first heard his Goldbergs.


----------



## Barbebleu

flamencosketches said:


> Why does he do this, I wonder. I remember being rather shocked when I first heard his Goldbergs.


Maybe his technique wasn't up to it?. Only kidding,I have a few Kempff recordings and like them all.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Largely the same here. I used to have a Chopin LP of his which struck me as a trifle stiff in style, so as an impecunious student I part-exed it for something else. Otherwise I've always enjoyed his playing across a wide repertoire.


----------



## Guest

There are none better than this:










SAID NO ONE EVER!


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

KlavierKing said:


> There are none better than this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SAID NO ONE EVER!


It's getting good reviews. I don't have a big problem with what I have heard. My opinion is that others have used the same approach in a way I like better.


----------



## DarkAngel

All I will say about Lang Lang (not for me) is listen before you buy, large tempo variations slow & fast, opening aria perhaps slowest I have heard at 5:21........

Compare to more conventional performances:
Schiff: 3:50
Hewitt 4:21
Perahia 3:58


----------



## Helgi

I enjoyed listening to the new Lang Lang recording, all the while knowing that I have no interest in hearing it again.

Another fun one I recently discovered is Glenn Gould's live Salzburg recording. I've been avoiding his Goldberg Variations because I listened to the '81 recording a lot, years ago, and the Salzburg one is a pleasant surprise.


----------



## perdido34

Kolesnikov's newly released recording was praised by a couple of British critics. I find it dull and indifferently recorded.


----------



## wkasimer

perdido34 said:


> Kolesnikov's newly released recording was praised by a couple of British critics. I find it dull and indifferently recorded.


My copy should arrive from Berkshire Record Outlet today or tomorrow.

Just so I know your frame of reference - which are you preferred recordings?


----------



## Mandryka

wkasimer said:


> My copy should arrive from Berkshire Record Outlet today or tomorrow.
> 
> Just so I know your frame of reference - which are you preferred recordings?


Do you know what the involvement with the choreographer was? I've come across this sort of idea before - Hans Davidsson said it about his work preparing for recordings of organ music by Georg Bohm.



> Intense, emotional and pure' is how Pavel Kolesnikov describes the experience of making this recording, the fruits of a collaboration between the pianist and choreographer Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker.


----------



## jegreenwood

Jerome Robbins choreographed "The Goldberg Variations" for New York City Ballet back in 1971. It's still in the repertoire but it's not done that often. I've seen it once.

Here's a video about the relationship between pianist and dancer.


----------



## mparta

Caryatid said:


> Just a point of interest: Claudio Arrau recorded the Goldbergs in 1942. It seems to be the first time the whole set was recorded on piano (there are earlier recordings on harpsichord and on piano roll). The recording had notoriously poor sound quality, but I found out recently that it has been remastered. It's on the set called "Claudio Arrau - The Complete RCA Victor and Columbia Album Collection" - and perhaps elsewhere. I have been listening to it on Spotify.
> 
> Here's a playlist, if anyone's interested: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/5RqqtUKYNnxHPARAx4VN7Q?si=IQfdWv27TrKoJX5Ps8hRJA


I read that Arrau recorded a Goldberg in some proximity to the appearance of the first Gould and had it withheld. I have the Arrau with some other Bach on a two-disc set, cheap. He's fine, not very interesting.









As per some of the posts above, I think the Kempff is some of the loveliest playing on disc, and Schiff remains my go-to pianist for Bach. But the Kempff is real ear candy.


----------



## Agamenon

A miracle of miracles. 

I love Gould and Perahia in this masterpiece.


----------



## SanAntone

Rondeau on *Bach* _Goldberg Variations_ BWV 988 | Netherlands Bach Society






"In a sense, the Goldberg Variations are an ode to silence." Harpsichordist Jean Rondeau talks about the 'Goldberg Variations', which he performed for All of Bach, and about the harpsichord, to which he has a close relationship.

Recorded for the project All of Bach on June 6th 2017 at the Concertgebouw, Bruges. If you want to help us complete All of Bach, please subscribe to our channel http://bit.ly/2vhCeFB or consider donating http://bit.ly/2uZuMj5.

For the complete performance of the 'Goldberg Variations' go to 



...
For more information on BWV 988 and this production go to http://allofbach.com/en/bwv/bwv-988/


----------



## EvaBaron

I’m sorry but I don’t know much about variations. Are all the variations based on the first ‘movement’ (I’ll call it that) Aria?
I have never listened to the Goldberg variations and I would like to. If the variations are based on the aria, should I listen only to the area for a few times first so that I can probably get it in my head, so I will enjoy the variations more?


----------



## wkasimer

EvaBaron said:


> I'm sorry but I don't know much about variations. Are all the variations based on the first 'movement' (I'll call it that) Aria?
> I have never listened to the Goldberg variations and I would like to. If the variations
> 
> If the variations are based on the aria, should I listen only to the area for a few times first so that I can probably get it in my head, so I will enjoy the variations more?


It's not quite that simple, I'm afraid. The variations are based on the bass line of the aria, so if you listen to the aria, concentrate on that. If you have access to Robert Greenberg's Teaching Company Course "Bach and the High Baroque" (often available at public libraries), he spends four lectures dissection the Goldbergs. If you want something shorter, try this:

https://stickynotespodcast.libsyn.com/bach-the-goldberg-variations


----------



## Kreisler jr

I think for a first approach it is better to almost forget that these are variations and not strain too hard to identify the bass line etc. in the variations but just listen to them as pieces "on their own". Every third variation is also in canon form but again I would not focus too much on that. The aria can be a bit long and slow depending on interpretation. Not sure if it's a good idea to put it on repeat before listening to the rest. If you find someone playing only the bass on youtube this might be an easier way.


----------



## Aderichleau

I've been listening to the Goldberg Variations for 32 years and still haven't picked out a single variation in the music. It simply doesn't affect my appreciation of the piece. Grew up with Gould's second studio recording from 1981 and that remains my favourite (despite the singing). Also enjoy Beatrice Rana's recent recording.


----------



## Mandryka

Does anyone know if there were any variation sets prior to this one which use the ground of the theme throughout? Is the structure of the set unique? Canons, symmetries.

There’s also the BWV 1087 to think about.


----------



## ClassicalMaestro

There can only be one GLENN GOULD!!!


----------

