# General Bach Discussion (Recordings, Performers, Performance Styles)



## Allegro Con Brio

Rather than “derailing” threads in which a poster asks a specific question about a Bach recording, I’ve decided to start this thread as a gathering place for fellow Bach enthusiasts who share a deep passion for the master’s music and the infinite ways in which it may be interpreted. Let’s discuss whatever we want about recordings, concerts, and performers of Bach’s music; scholarship into performance style, newly released recordings, etc. Well, if the thread veers into discussion of Bach’s life, intentions, and historical context I won’t complain either. Basically, we can just geek out about the composer we love The idea was inspired by the Bach Cantatas Mailing List (not an open forum, so not a direct competitor to TC, but mods, feel free to take down the reference if in violation of the TOC) which used to have wonderful in-depth scholarly and lay conversations on such matters, but hasn’t seen much meaningful activity in several years. The archived discussions on each cantata and several other works are a treasure trove to read through, though.


----------



## SearsPoncho

Hey ACB! I'm not a Bach scholar or an expert in period or "authentic" performance practices of the Baroque era, so I'll just list a few of my favorite Bach recordings. However, I would first like to state my awe and admiration for Bach's genius. Did he ever write a bar of music that wasn't musical brilliance at the highest level? Anyhow, here are a few of my favorite recordings:

1) Arthur Grumiaux - Complete Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin. If I could only have one Bach disc, this would be it.

2) Andras Schiff (piano)- Goldberg Variations (on Decca from the early '80's)

3) Martha Argerich (piano) - Bach album with the Partita #2, the English Suite #2, and the Toccata in C minor. I wish she recorded more Bach.

4) Brandenburg Concertos - Benjamin Britten/English Chamber Orchestra.

5) The Art of Fugue - Evgeni Koroliov (piano) on the Tacet label.

6) Mass in B minor - Klemperer/New Philharmonia Orchestra- Epic performance of an epic work.

7) Mstislav Rostropovich (cello) - 6 Suites for Unaccompanied Cello - These were recorded live in 1955. They came in a 10 cd Rostropovich box full of other stuff, and like many of those ultra-cheap 10 cd box sets, there's almost no other information given other than the name of the work and, occasionally, the year of recording. These were probably recorded in Moscow.

*Edit*: I have to include Stokowski's Orchestral Transcriptions with "His Orchestra" as an Honorable Mention selection. As I might have said in a previous post, if loving this is wrong, I don't want to be right. I'm all in.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

We have similar tastes. The Grumiaux, Argerich and Britten recordings would be on my list too.


----------



## Bulldog

I'm period-instrument Bach all the way except that I have no problem with Bach solo keyboard on piano or fortepiano. 

For Bach choral works, I favor Herreweghe, Suzuki, Leonhardt, and Gardiner. For Bach orchestral, I tend to favor Goebel. 

Bach ovpp is fine with me, but not necessary. The organ works are fantastic and I've found that Gerhard Weinberger is most satisfying.

A lot of favorites for Bach's solo keyboard. Some of them are Gould, Tureck, Koroliov, Woodward, Leonhardt, Curtis, Cates, etc.
Although I don't care much for Schiff's Decca Goldberg Variations (too mannered and distant), I love his more recent version that I think is on ECM.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

Happy to see Koroliov and Woodward mentioned  Igor Levit has some nice Bach recordings too.
I heard Ricardo Gallén play all lute suites live and he has recorded them. He is superhuman! 
I used to think Grumiaux was great, but now I actually find him too intense  I discovered Ingrid Matthews in the sonatas & partitas, whom is not known at all it seems. Wonder what others think of her playing? 
One of my favorite Bach recordings is Kuijken/Leonhardt viola da gamba sonatas I used to have on cassette.
Norwegian Kåre Nordstoga has some nice organ albums.
Almost forgot the Goldberg variations!!! I love that different instruments play it...harp, string trio and other ensembles, even solo guitar


----------



## Bulldog

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I discovered Ingrid Matthews in the sonatas & partitas, whom is not known at all it seems. Wonder what others think of her playing?


Her set is one of my favorites. The reviews I've read of it over the years have been uniformly positive. The set is on the Centaur label which isn't going to deliver much exposure. So, Matthews isn't well-known and will never be; the same applies to at least dozens of other exceptional Bach performers.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

In the thread about Suzuki vs. Koopman's cantata sets, I raised the question of "historical authenticity" of one-voice-per-part choirs. I mentioned that I like hearing them for some smaller-scale cantatas because they provide quite a different perspective on the music than is typical, but that I doubt whether Bach really had them or specified them for each week. For me the biggest advantages are intimacy and involvement, like the listener is really immersed in the message of the day, and clarity of counterpoint; while the biggest drawback is a lack of proper heft in the great praise or lament cantatas like 34 and 101 off the top of my head. Josquin13 mentioned that the selected recordings by Eric Milnes and Montreal Baroque are perhaps his favorites, and since I haven't spent much time with these recordings; last night I listened to their "eternity" volume with BWV 4, 9, 106, and 181 (the latter which I skipped for now).










These performances made an extremely unique artistic impression on me, with some of the most imaginative conducting and singing I have ever heard on a Bach recording. For those used to Koopman and Suzuki's rather "straight, cool" styles they can sound a bit jarring. Milnes's conducting is unabashedly bold, adopting extreme tempi and extraneous ornamentation at times and inserting lots of random accents that might be taken as "distortions" like Harnoncourt is infamous for. But nothing seemed excessively mannered; I had the impression that Milnes takes the theology of the music seriously and is finding new and exciting ways to communicate it. The great, austere early work BWV 4 sounds like a continuous splash of cold water in this performance - it is incredibly spare, ascetic, archaic and serious, just like it should be. Milnes's vocal ensemble changes for some volumes, but his lineup here features a female alto, making him a rarity among period performers, and the voices blend splendidly in ensemble with enough individuality to stand out. OVPP really allows the singers to listen to each other and adjust their performances on the spot like a string quartet; it's true chamber style. Their intonation is straight on and the choruses and chorales make a very strong spritual and aesthetic impression. In the solo spotlight, I loved the sonorous bass Drew Santini and the celestial, sensitive soprano Odei Bilodeau; but the alto Elaine Lachica sounded rather pale and uninvolved in an attempt to emulate a countertenor timbre, and the tenor Philippe Gagne has a peculiar timbre that I didn't think fit the music really well - but I'm not normally a huge fan of the tenor voice in general anyway so maybe I'm being harsh

BWV 106 is a work that is guaranteed to draw teardrops from me regardless of how it's performed; I indelibly associate it with the grief and loss I have gone through as well as my desire to have it played at my funeral some day alongside selections from Brahms's _Deutsches Requiem_. I'll just express my opinion on Milnes's version right away - this is possibly the most moving recording of this cantata I have heard. Never have I heard the performers so emotionally invested in this music, portraying the ideas in a perfectly spontaneous fashion as we are led inexorably from the clutches of utmost melancholy to the indelible promises of heavenly hope. The opening Sonatina is normally played in a grave, processional fashion; but Milnes gets his gambas and recorders to phrase it uniquely and play with a buoyancy of rhythm while maintaining a solemn tempo. The result is that it sounds like a gentle sarabande dance rather than a funeral march - superb. I get chills just thinking of it. If there's ever a cantata that lends itself to OVPP, with its dialogue format and very spare instrumentation, it's this; and the singers capture every shift of mood on the way to Paradise in remarkable fashion. By the time the bass enters in the second movement to sing, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" over the ethereal alto chorale, I just broke down. What a pleasure it is to hear Bach performance like this.

Finally, BWV 9. This is a cantata close to my heart, certainly one of my top 10, with its soothing prospects of salvation tinged with chilly darkness. The opening chorus is punctuated with Milnes's strange rubati and accents, but all the lines shine through crystal-clear and there is a relentless, boundless optimism in the power of grace, just as there should be. The three authoritative recitatives for the "pastor" are delivered with superb gravitas by Santini and the lamenting tenor aria, though not sung as purely as I'd like by Gagne, is taken at a proper slow tempo with a perfectly detached violin obbligato, matching the hopelessness of the soul before grace and it's difficult to fault Gagne's delivery of the text. The great duet for high voices is one of my very favorite Bach arias - I find it almost painfully beautiful - and Bilodeau and Lachica rise to the challenge, blending their voices ideally and singing with rapt sublimity over Milnes's leisurely direction and the silky playing of the oboe and flute.

In summary: This is honest-to-goodness Bach, both technically accomplished and deeply thematically involved, tied together with a healthy dose of creative interpretation - just as it should be. I will working my way through the other available volumes on Primephonic and comparing them to the OVPP recordings by Kuijken and Pierlot.


----------



## Mannheim Rocket

Thanks for this great thread idea! I enjoy both performances on modern and period instruments and am looking to get into the cantatas. Does anyone have any tips for the easiest way to do this? I'm not sure whether buying collections of "The Great Cantatas" that labels have put out is the way to go at first or if I should try to acquire a complete set and dive in head first. Any advice would be appreciated!


----------



## SanAntone

Allegro Con Brio said:


> In the thread about Suzuki vs. Koopman's cantata sets, I raised the question of "historical authenticity" of one-voice-per-part choirs. I mentioned that I like hearing them for some smaller-scale cantatas because they provide quite a different perspective on the music than is typical, but that I doubt whether Bach really had them or specified them for each week.


You are mistaken about the choir Bach most likely used.

_The Essential Bach Choir_ by *Andrew Parrott* is a well researched book which covers this issue in depth.



> Parrott shows that this use of a one-per-part choir was mainstream practice in the Lutheran Germany of Bach's time: Bach chose to use single voices not because a larger group was unavailable, but because they were the natural vehicle of elaborate concerted music.
> 
> As one of several valuable appendices, this book includes the text of Joshua Rifkin's explosive 1981 lecture, never before published, which first set out this line of thinking and launched a controversy that is long overduefor resolution.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

^Interesting! Thanks for that. It certainly sheds an important light on the quest for "authenticity." I don't doubt the veracity of the research, but must say that I would prefer hearing it from people other than Rifkin and Parrott who are known as pioneers of OVPP Here is an archived BCW discussion about the issue: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Choir-Form-2.htm


----------



## SanAntone

Allegro Con Brio said:


> ^Interesting! Thanks for that. It certainly sheds an important light on the quest for "authenticity." I don't doubt the veracity of the research, but must say that I would prefer hearing it from people other than Rifkin and Parrott who are known as pioneers of OVPP Here is an archived BCW discussion about the issue: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Choir-Form-2.htm


It is correct that Rifkin and Parrott are advocates for the OVPP approach, and not just concerning Bach. Parrott also addressed issues of pitch and choir size regarding Monteverdi and Machaut. But personally, I am not interested in a question of authenticity since I feel that question will never be answered because of a lack of empirical evidence.

I simply prefer the sound of smaller vocal groups since they display the polyphony with more transparency and allow for a more agile tempo and phrasing.


----------



## jegreenwood

SanAntone said:


> It is correct that Rifkin and Parrott are advocates for the OVPP approach, and not just concerning Bach. Parrott also addressed issues of pitch and choir size regarding Monteverdi and Machaut. But personally, I am not interested in a question of authenticity since I feel that question will never be answered because of a lack of empirical evidence.
> 
> I simply prefer the sound of smaller vocal groups since they display the polyphony with more transparency and allow for a more agile tempo and phrasing.


My attitude as well. As I mentioned in the other thread, I created a playlist including all the Montreal Baroque's Cantatas available on Tidal. While I will start my serious listening tomorrow, I did sample one, and it is certainly more vibrant (extroverted may be a better word) than my Kuijken set.


----------



## SanAntone

jegreenwood said:


> My attitude as well. As I mentioned in the other thread, I created a playlist including all the Montreal Baroque's Cantatas available on Tidal. While I will start my serious listening tomorrow, I did sample one, and it is certainly more vibrant (extroverted may be a better word) than my Kuijken set.


I've been a fan of the Kuijken set since the first installment. I only recently became aware of the Eric Milnes recordings with the Montréal Baroque group. I usually don't compare recordings, and it is enough for me to say I like them both.


----------



## JohnP

I love Bach's keyboard music and sacred cantatas. In the cantatas I gravitate toward recordings featuring Peter Kooij when possible. I also enjoy the exquisite cantata series with the J.S. Bach-Stiftung led by Rudolf Lutz.

I've enjoyed a number of Bach pianists; among them are Craig Sheppard, Angela Hewitt, Till Fellner, Richard Goode, Sergey Schepkin, Zhu Xiao-Mei and others.

I'm not a huge fan of the music for solo violin, but I admire Milstein, Grumiaux, Podger, Ehnes, Fulkerson, Jansen, and Hahn.

There are numerous keyboard and guitar transcriptions I really enjoy. Among the keyboard transcriptions, including the Bach/Busoni Chaconne and others, are players like Grimaud and Larrocha (Bach/Busoni), Edna Stern (Lutz Chaconne), Nadejda Vlaeva (Bach/Saint-Saens), Thomas Labé and Konstantin Scherbakov (Bach/Various incl. Godowsky). For guitarists, I like Georg Gulyas and David Russell. 

If it seems that I like transcriptions more than the originals, that is not the case. It's just that once I got started on transcriptions, I thought they might add something to the thread. If these are out of place, here, I apologize, but I believe that if Bach could hear all that other composers have done with his music, he would approve. He was a great borrower, himself. Maybe Favorite Bach Transcriptions would make a good thread.


----------



## jegreenwood

SanAntone said:


> I've been a fan of the Kuijken set since the first installment. I only recently became aware of the Eric Milnes recordings with the Montréal Baroque group. I usually don't compare recordings, and it is enough for me to say I like them both.


Too early to say which I like better (as I've spent less than 5 minutes with Montreal Baroque  )

Sunday morning edit. Enjoying the Montreal Baroque set.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Deleted…………………..


----------



## starthrower

I am no expert or long time listener other than the Brandenberg Concertos, and some popular organ pieces but I've expanded my Bach listening and recordings quite a bit in the past few years.

For orchestral music and arrangements I like Ensemble Sonnerie, Freiburger Barockorchester, and Cafe Zimmermann. I started out with Marriner's Brandenburg Concertos 35 years ago and they still sound pretty good to me.

Art Of The Fugue: Walcha on organ, Marriner for ensemble, but there's so many recordings and arrangements that I haven't explored. Canadian Brass is interesting too.

For other organ music I listen to E. Power Biggs, and Marie Claire Alain.

I've collected cantatas by Koopman, and Kuijken's Complete Litugical Year box. I enjoy both of these series. 

I've experimented with a number of different recordings for the sacred choral works. Jochum, and Klemperer for old school. I have an Andrew Parrott box, and Gustav Leonhardt's, and Muller-Bruhl's St. Matthew Passion. I'm fairly new to these works and I've read all the threads here and made a note of other recordings but haven't explored much further yet.

WTC: I have Gould, and Richter on CD but I really like Evelyne Crochet whose recordings I've streamed but don't own. I also have a harpsichord recording on Naxos by Beauséjour. I don't know how it rates with the experts? But he plays a good sounding instrument which is important for my enjoyment.


----------



## Josquin13

Allegro Con Brio,

I'm pleased to hear that you (& others) have discovered Eric Milnes & Montreal Baroque and their ongoing, slowly progressing one-voice-to-a-part cycle of Bach Cantatas. As I've written before on TC, I consider Milnes to be one of the finest Bach conductors today. His performances are always carefully considered, deeply insightful, and thoroughly well-rehearsed (unlike some of Kuijken's cycle). & he picks his singers & musicians exceptionally well. For example, the German soprano Monika Mauch, who sings on a number of the earliest releases in this series, has become one of my favorite Bach sopranos (alongside Elly Ameling, Arleen Auger, & Dame Janet Baker). Her intonation is flawless, & there's no wobbly vibrato or scooping into notes (as is sometimes a problem on the older Bach recordings). I also like the German tenor Jan Kobow, along with Charles Daniels, who used to sing with the Orlando Consort! Of course, Milnes has to choose his soloists well, because they sing all the choral movements (one-voice-per-part), so they're a lot more exposed than would be the case with a larger choir.

In addition, I'd strongly recommend Milnes' superb disc of Bach's Cantatas for the Feast of St. Michael and the Archangels! IMO, the so called "Michaelmas" cantatas are some of the glories of Bach's opus, if you don't know them. When John Eliot Gardiner was performing his Bach Pilgrimage concert series, he had the Michaelmas Cantatas marked in RED on his calendar. That's how excited he was to conduct them.

To my ears, the opening movement of Cantata BWV 19 is one of the most mind blowing fugal movements that Bach ever composed. The contrapuntal parts go in every possible direction, and you can hear each of the musical lines with great clarity in the Montreal performance. Although yes, I have to admit that there are times when I also enjoy hearing Gardiner's larger Monteverdi Choir & orchestra in this movement, as well. After all, the music represents the final battle on earth between Michael and his angels and Satan's hordes. So, Gardiner's virtuosic larger forces are able to produce a more massive effect. Yet, with Gardiner, you don't hear Bach's complex writing with the same incredible contrapuntal clarity as in the Montreal performance. Either way, the music is genius on another level... (& I'd suggest that you turn up the volume!). The post victory tenor-trumpet duet aria in the 5th movement, where a human implores Michael & his angels to remain on earth is, for me, one of the most beautiful and profound arias in all of Bach's Cantatas...

--Milnes, Montreal Baroque, BWV 19:





--Gardiner, BWV19: 




As for the question of Bach's choir size in Lutheran Germany, you might read M.R. Simpson's review on Amazon for Milnes' Michaelmas recording, as I don't have the time or space to go into all the points made in this review. & while you're at it, you might also read "Gio's" review (formerly Giordano Bruno), who is a professional in the early music field, and a brilliant guy (his scholarly early music reviews are always very informative & well worth reading!). Here are the links,

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-...ef=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B000CCU8G2
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-...ef=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B000CCU8G2
https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Cantate...000CCU8G2/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

However, you are spot on, when you point out that Bach's weekly 4 part Cantatas are composed like a string quartet, or chamber music. Out of the literally hundreds of Cantatas that Bach wrote, he doesn't ask for a single double choir in any of them--except for a lone, one movement fragment from a now lost Michaelmas Cantata, BWV 50, whose authorship is disputed by some scholars (it's on Gardiner's Michaelmas disc--see the following link). If the rest of Cantata BWV 50 still exists somewhere, it is undoubtedly a unique & special work. I believe it is by Bach, but that the movement simply needs to be heard within the larger context of the now lost work. Plus, being that it was written for a double choir, Gardiner & his Monteverdi choir do well here: 




In other words, Bach was working in a choir tradition that derived largely from the Renaissance (not surprisingly), just like his contemporary Telemann & idol Buxtehude: whose choral music was regularly sung, as scholars have firmly established, by one voice to a part choirs (and was likewise tailored to & composed for such choirs). Granted, the music budgets in Lutheran Germany were, by all accounts, paltry & stingy, but thank goodness they were!, because if they had not been, Bach might not have written such incredibly complex, intricate & lithe contrapuntal music, which in the case of his 4 part Cantatas at least, is so obviously written for a small, nimble, fleet choir, rather than some oversized, plodding, cumbersome, murky & homogenous sounding massive choir. (From my readings of contemporary sources, 1 to 2 singers on a part was generally the norm in Bach's Germany.)

I know you don't buy actual recordings, but it might be helpful to also read a copy of the booklet notes written for Milnes' Michaelmas hybrid SACD by the late, great scholar & musician Bruce Haynes. These notes, as well as any of Haynes' books are well worth reading (as is Andrew Parrott's book, "The Essential Bach Choir", which SanAntone mentions above.) Here's a PDF copy of Haynes' booklet notes, which I found on the Atma website,

https://atmaclassique.com/wp-conten...a-e8f5-4169-91a9-0d1830295ed1_2401_livret.pdf

Of particular interest is Haynes' discussion about how period violins at the opening of Cantata BWV 130 are naturally suited to play authentic Baroque violin slurs, sometimes called "graces", in the manner that Bach wrote these slurs into his scores & would have expected to hear them, that is, as a series of short pick ups or thrusts. While, as Haynes points out, modern violins that play in a modern conservatory style can't play them as written, and are therefore too slow. With the result being that the modern violins bog down & encumber the rest of the ensemble by not being able to play the slurs quickly enough: which altogether produces an effect that isn't what Bach had in mind. Milnes understands this Baroque convention, and the Montreal period violins play true violin graces at the opening of BWV 130, and it clearly galvanizes the rest of the ensemble, which I find very exciting:






Now compare that to the stunted & misshapen opening of Rilling's BWV 130, where the violins don't play anything close to Baroque violin slurs, and notice how the choir & musicians get seriously bogged down, as a result:

--Rilling, Cantata BWV 130: 




--Here too is a link to Karl Richter's recording of BWV 130, where his modern violins at least try to approximate a Baroque grace at the opening, but are having some trouble doing so successfully: 



.

If you listen to these examples, you'll start to hear Bach's music in a different way; because Haynes is right, it is a very different Bach from the one that many people think they know. I should also point out that Haynes' view has nothing to do with 'subjective opinion'. A Baroque violin slur is a Baroque violin slur--they are a part of an irrefutable Baroque convention, one that Bach would have expected to hear in his music. Hence, either you can hear them in action, & see them written into Bach's scores, or like Rilling, you don't.

By the way, I'd also recommend hearing Joshua Rifkin's OVPP "Actus tragicus" Cantata, BWV 106, as well. It's a beautiful early period revival performance, & appropriately solemn at the opening: 




Philippe Pierlot and the Ricercar Consort are very good in Op. 106, too: 



, as is Konrad Junghänel & Cantus Cölln--who likewise offer beautiful one-voice-per-part or OVPP performances:






As you can probably tell, Op. 106 is one of my favorite Bach Cantatas, too.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

^Josquin, you always humble me whenever I think I know something about a subject:lol: I totally agree with you that period instruments and small choirs are best for Bach's cantatas; even the larger-scale ones benefit from a general transparency of sound and chamber-influenced performance (also, I just flat out prefer the clean, sweet tones of period violins and oboes for the obbligati; the bright, silvery trumpets and brash horns; the crisp, hollow timpani rather than the dull thuds of modern drums...). I retain a fondness for Rilling's recordings because his soloists are so good and I think he is able to stay respectful of Bachian style even within his modern conceptions, but I must admit it does become a bit sludgy and overblown sometimes. In the Passions and B Minor Mass I am more fond of the "Romantic" style and larger choirs. Apparently, the main argument against a strict adherence to OVPP is the "Entwurff letter," in which Bach told the Leipzig city council that he wanted at least three singers per part and preferably four. This has been interpreted as only applying to a specific week or that he wanted backups in case the first choices of singers weren't to his liking; but personally I think that number sounds just about right to me. If I'm not mistaken that's about what Suzuki uses in his recordings? His choir size always sounds perfect to my ears. Personally, if I were recording a complete set of cantatas I would alternate between OVPP and a 9-16-person choir depending on the scale and aesthetic of the cantata in question. I hope Milnes eventually completes his full set; it might be just my favorite if he does.

And I totally agree on BWV 19, though in general I don't think the Michaelmas works are as profound as his best cantatas. Last year, one of my major COVID listening projects was listening through all of the cantatas (which took me about eight months). As I did so, I jotted down a little write-up for each one based on my perceptions. Afterward, I did some more research and turned them into miniature essays (some day, I'd like to write a book if time and inclination ever line up in perfect proportion...) Here's what I wrote on BWV 19. I'd be glad to share more of these little write-ups via PM to anyone who is interested.

_Bach's works for St. Michael's Day (19, 50, 130, and 149) are all full of martial, triumphant imagery and unbridled celebration, occasionally at the cost of artistic depth. This was the day devoted to the worship of angels and commemoration of the archangel Michael defeating the forces of Satan, so Bach made sure to charge these works with unassailable grandiose exaltation. However, the charge of superficiality could not be leveled at anything here, not least the huge, grandiose opening movement. The voices enter immediately like a motet, but any concerns about old-fashioned stodginess are quickly swept aside and we are thrust directly into a realm of overwhelming contrapuntal battery that flows recklessly and exuberantly, as if Bach has simply turned on the faucet of his imagination and let it run recklessly without restraint, all over thrilling trumpets and timpani. Those who are skeptical about the authenticity of the BWV 50 fragment need only hear this movement, which shares many obvious features. Two short orchestral portions provide brief interludes for the listener to catch their breath. A doleful recitative for bass ensues, then a soprano aria decorated with a delicate, quasi-vocal duet for oboes. We would think that the strong image of God sending a ring of angels to guard us with fire, horses, and chariots would inspire more extrovert celebratory music, but maybe the omnipresent piping of the oboes signifies the inescapable presence of the celestial beings on all sides of us while the soloist revels euphorically in this security, a blazing ring of fortification to hem us in.
Despite the occasion of high praise, this is, of course, a Lutheran cantata and Lutherans cannot go very far without discussing the depravity of mankind. The well-constructed tenor recitative sets up the focal point of the work, the eloquent, inward, and extensive tenor aria. It is a flowing siciliano that is constantly underpinned by an uncomfortable, limping dotted figure that symbolizes our uncertain paths in the world. Even as we hobble along through our tribulations, we can lean on angels for protection. But Bach refuses to take the easy route, drawing us a realistic portrait of a bleak and colorless world. As the tenor prays for assistance from the Almighty, the remedy shines through as lucidly as the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel - an unexpected and ingenious intrusion of a chorale theme on the trumpet, one that is associated with the restfulness and fulfillment of death, frequently appears, sometimes at the most opportune of times to provide stability to this otherwise very unsteady and faltering music, the distant herald shepherding us to Paradise even if he seems much further away than he has up to this point. When the soloist sings a huge melisma of adoration we feel like the tide has turned, but the mourning desolation of the A section quickly returns to bury it. A quick soprano recitative leads us to the final chorale, which is lightweight and effortless in its exaltation, the shadows not entirely dispelled but certainly undermined by peals of trumpets and drums._


----------



## starthrower

Great posts! Thanks for the links, Josquin! I'll give them a listen later when I get home. I don't know how other members would feel about this but I think this forum should create a special section entitled "Book of Josquin" where all of his scholarly and encyclopedic posts would be complied for the education and edification of all interested music enthusiasts at TC. I've read dozens of them and they are a treasure.


----------



## Josquin13

Starthrower,

That's kind of you to say. I've never blogged any of my posts. Perhaps I should. But I'd love to have a place on TC to put some of my more interesting posts, especially where more people might see them! (As I lose track of them myself.) There are definitely some musical subjects that I've thought more deeply about than others, & certain areas of research that interest me more intensely. Although I'm usually responding to various questions asked by other posters on TC, or to other posts. I seldom initiate a conversation or topic myself. Therefore, all of my posts are usually offered within a specific context of a thread, and it probably wouldn't work to take them out of that context. Besides, I doubt that TC is going to give me my own little cubicle for blogging on this forum!  But it's a nice suggestion. & thanks for your comment, I appreciate it.

ACB writes, "I retain a fondness for Rilling's recordings because his soloists are so good and I think he is able to stay respectful of Bachian style even within his modern conceptions, but I must admit it does become a bit sludgy and overblown sometimes."

To my ears, Rilling's Bach can sound a bit stodgy at times. But over time I've begun to realize that that's primarily due to his misunderstanding of Bach's style, from an HIP standpoint. Did you listen to the comparison that I set up on my previous post, between Milnes & Rilling at the opening of BWV 130? It's a real eye-opener, & education. It surprises me that Rilling doesn't seem to understand what a Baroque violin slur or grace is, or at least, how it should sound. At least not in the way that Bruce Haynes describes a violin slur or grace, and Haynes is very clear about what they are, & why they don't work as written when played on modern violins, in his booklet essay for Atma (which I provided a PDF link to above). Most tellingly, Rilling's Bach cycle is the only cantata cycle out of all the major complete cycles that Gio listened to and said should be avoided. Which is saying something. After all, here's a guy that makes his living playing Baroque music all around the world. Hence, his low assessment of Rilling's cycle makes me wonder what other Baroque conventions Rilling may not fully understand as a conductor?

But I agree with you about Rilling's choice of singers. (Which is why I've hung on to his Bach choral recordings, and superb Vivaldi Gloria.) If you ask me, the smartest thing that Rilling did was to hire soprano Arleen Auger in her prime. She was such a special singer, & what a gorgeous voice! Auger could project to the back of Carnegie Hall (& fill the hall) with the greatest of ease. (As I once heard her sing in Handel's Messiah at Carnegie, with Trevor Pinnock conducting, & it was unforgettable.) & of course Rilling hired her frequently throughout his Bach recordings, & elsewhere.

--From the "highlights" CD "Auger sings Bach": 




ACB writes, "Apparently, the main argument against a strict adherence to OVPP is the "Entwurff letter," in which Bach told the Leipzig city council that he wanted at least three singers per part and preferably four. This has been interpreted as only applying to a specific week or that he wanted backups in case the first choices of singers weren't to his liking; but personally I think that number sounds just about right to me. If I'm not mistaken that's about what Suzuki uses in his recordings? His choir size always sounds perfect to my ears. Personally, if I were recording a complete set of cantatas I would alternate between OVPP and a 9-16-person choir depending on the scale and aesthetic of the cantata in question."

Not all Bach conductors do everything the same way, all of the time. For example, Ton Koopman is firmly planted in the Leonhardt-Herreweghe-Gardiner camp, among those conductors that believe they are historically justified to use a massive choir--largely due to the "Entwurff letter"--yet!, Koopman also performs some of the cantatas in his cycle OVPP. While a conductor like Jos van Veldhoven believes in the OVPP argument, but mixes OVPP with ripienists at times, to add additional heft to certain movements. While Herreweghe sees the historical justification for OVPP performances, but has said that he simply likes larger choirs better, on aesthetic grounds.

As for Suzuki, no, he is not generally in the Leonhardt-Herreweghe-Gardiner camp. Rather, he falls somewhere in between OVPP and an oversized choir. I'd say that he generally uses a medium-sized choir, more or less--at least in comparison to Gardner's gigantic choir, and one that is historically justified, but more towards the maximum limit used in Bach's day (which was about 16 singers).

Speaking of which, did you read M.R. Simpson's review that I linked to? He succinctly & fairly outlines all of the basic points of the argument on both sides (including the "Entwurff letter"), with references to contemporary sources. He also names the main scholars & conductors in the debate, including Telemann & Buxtehude scholars. Both Telemann and Buxtehude are crucial to this argument, as well, considering that they likewise establish what the choir practices were in Lutheran Germany during Bach's lifetime. By the way, John Butt's booklet notes to his OVPP Mass in B minor recording on Linn are invaluable, too, since Butt demonstrates that choral music was performed OVPP in Dresden during Bach's lifetime. & of course, Bach desperately wanted to get out of Leipzig, where he wasn't treated well, and at one point had hoped to attain an appointment at the Dresden Court: https://www.linnrecords.com/recordi...breitkopf-hartel-edition-edited-j-rifkin-2006.

Maybe I'll just copy M.R.S's review onto this page, if people don't mind, to have it on TC, since who knows what Amazon will do with this review in the future, they could simply erase it one day--just like they did the comments page below all of their reviews--when the product page is no longer relevant anymore. But it will probably have to be posted separately, since it's a lengthy review...


----------



## starthrower

I listened to the Konrad Junghanel disc the other night. A superb sounding ensemble both instrumentally and vocally. I truly enjoyed it!


----------



## Josquin13

As mentioned above, here's M.R.S.'s review of Milnes' "Michaelmas" recording, which I think is worth reading! (my old Amazon friends are probably chuckling right now..):

5.0 out of 5 stars: "And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon..."

"The Feast day of St. Michael and all Angels--known as Michaelmas Day in the Lutheran Church calendar, and the celebratory day of the autumn equinox, inspired J.S. Bach to write three of his most ingenious Cantatas--BWV 19, 130, and 149. The texts chosen by Bach derive mostly from the Book of Revelations 12: 7-12, and center around the final battle waged by the Archangel Michael against the malevolent serpent of the garden, represented by an ancient reptilian dragon.

The excellent period ensemble Montreal Baroque, led by Eric Milnes, performs all three cantatas on this release: which makes up volume 2 of a projected cantata cycle. While scholars often consider these cantatas to be among Bach's finest, with their picturesque musical settings, curiously they remain among Bach's lesser known choral masterpieces. At present there is only one other recording in the catalogue where all three cantatas have been assembled on a single disc, and that comes in volume 7 of John Eliot Gardiner's complete survey: https://www.amazon.com/Cantatas-Vol-7/dp/B000ICLTZK/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8. Unlike Milnes, Gardiner includes the one movement BWV 50, a stunning work for double choir, which is thought to be part of a now lost or unfinished 'Michael' cantata.

The other main difference between Milnes and Gardiner is that Milnes has chosen to perform the cantatas one-voice-to-a-part: which means that the choral movements are sung by a quartet of soloists, rather than a large choir--which in Gardiner's case is the twenty person Monteverdi choir. Milnes' decision to use only four soloists is based on the scholarship of Joshua Rifken, who several decades ago proposed the then radical idea that it was normal practice in Bach's Germany for a quartet (or quintet) of highly skilled soloists to sing the choruses, rather than a full sized choir. This premise served as the basis for a number of critically acclaimed recordings by Rifken, as well as a more recent book entitled "Bach's Choral Ideal." While Rifken's ideas have gradually gained a wider acceptance among leading period ensembles, the early music movement remains divided.

The first leading early music figure to embrace Rifken's argument was the British scholar and conductor Andrew Parrott--who, like Rifken, also made acclaimed recordings, and wrote an influential book, "The Essential Bach Choir": https://www.amazon.com/The-Essential-Bach-Choir/dp/0851157866/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8. A list of other notable conductors to have since become persuaded includes: Paul McCreesh, Konrad Junghänel, Sigiswald Kuijken, John Butt, Marc Minkowski, Philippe Pierlot, and Eric Milnes, as well as the conductor less Purcell Quartet. I would also add the Dutch conductor Jos Van Veldhoven, even though, strictly speaking, Veldhoven does use additional vocalists, called ripienists, for 'poetic emphasis' where he sees fit. But otherwise his approach is one-voice-to-a-part. Indeed Veldhoven has stated, "I think of this music not in terms of a chorus, but in terms of five highly expressive soloists."

Rifken's premise has also found a wider acceptance among leading scholars of the period. In his 2001 book, "Music of the Baroque," David Schulenberg writes, "Although the exact make up of Bach's vocal forces has been a matter of debate, it appears increasingly likely that most of Bach's vocal works were composed for a 'chorus' comprising a single singer per part. Orchestral parts, too, were rarely doubled, except for the violin and continuo lines. Thus what many listeners have come to regard as massive choral movements for large choir and orchestra are in fact examples of chamber music for vocal soloists and a small instrumental ensemble." Further support has come from studies into the performance practices of Bach's contemporaries, such as Kerala Snyder's 1987 book, "Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck," where Snyder shows that the composer who so impressed the young Bach, normally intended his four-part choral compositions for four soloists; and from Jeanne Swack, whose books on composer Georg Phillip Telemann present evidence that Telemann also used one per part scoring in his cantatas.

The basis for Rifken's argument begins with the question of whether or not it was normal practice in Bach's time for singers to share part copies. Since the majority of Bach's choral works have come down to us with only one existing copy per part, Rifken concluded that only one singer sang that part. Scholars had previously thought that two or three singers read from each copy, requiring a minimum of eight singers: with the choir consisting of four or five principal singers, who were then doubled or tripled by ripienists. Before Rifken, a typical Bach choir might consist of twelve to sixteen singers, who could then be expanded to eighteen to twenty-four singers for the larger choral works, which can require up to eight vocal parts, or a double choir. Of the two hundred or so Bach Cantatas that have survived, remarkably, there is only one sacred cantata that requires a double choir, and that is the BWV 50 fragment. The rest are four or five-part vocal works, which suggests that Bach regularly wrote his cantatas for a smaller choir.

Like Rifken, Parrott also sees the debate as hinging on the "presence or absence of ripenists," arguing that ripienists were used only where Bach writes it on the title page, which occurs in about 10% of Bach's vocal works. Nor does Bach otherwise provide any performance cues or notations for when ripienists should enter and exit, though he does give plenty of other indications regarding articulation and tempo. For Parrott this was compelling evidence that Bach wanted ripienists only when he specified them.

Rifken further maintains that the decision of whether to use ripienists was considered optional in Bach's day. He writes, "Given the inherent dispensability of most ripieno parts, Baroque composers often left it up to the performer whether or not to use them; not infrequently, they signaled this option through a kind of shorthand. A cantata by Bach's predecessor Sebastian Knüpfer, for example, called for five concerted voices, five vocal ripieni, six stringed instruments, and five brass. On the title page, the summary of forces reads "for 16 or 21" - meaning that you could perform it with just five essential voices and the eleven instruments, or that you could add the five ripieno voice parts according to circumstance or taste." In other words, their use varied, and likely depended on such factors as quality of obtainable singers, available monies, the performance venue, the piece of music being performed, and the composer's notations.

However, in Bach's case, who seldom gave any indications for ripienists, and who also rarely doubled his orchestral parts, except on the violin and continuo lines--or on the top and bottom musical lines--Parrott's argument makes a good deal of sense. Because by rarely doubling the instruments in the middle section of his orchestra, it shows that Bach was keenly intent on preserving the contrapuntal clarity of the more congested middle range of his score. In other words, he wanted all those intricately detailed musical lines in his music to be clearly heard. Which, of course, is fully in keeping with Parrott's claim that Bach should also wish to severely limit the use of ripienists in his choral works as well. The cavernous acoustics of Leipzig churches would play a further role in this, as their echoing interiors would have given Bach an even greater need to consciously limit and balance his musical forces.

Yet there is historical evidence that puts Rifken's 'quartet' theory into question. In the 1737 Der Critische Musikus, Johann Adolph Scheibe writes that a double quartet of eight singers, not four, was the working minimum of Bach's day:

"A complete choir of singers, for use both in theatre and in church and chamber, cannot consist of fewer than eight persons. These I break down in the following way: first a pair of sopranos, [then] a pair of altos, a pair of tenors, and a high bass or so called baritone and finally a low bass. But these eight persons must all be skilled people. However, as the choruses could still be filled out, one would quite easily be able - at courts - to add chapel boys - [or] in towns - some schoolboys."

Thus according to Scheibe--who significantly had been a pupil of Bach's at St. Thomas School--a 'complete' choir in 1737 consisted of eight highly skilled singers; two for each part, plus additonal singers in the form of highly trained 'chapel boys' for special performances at courts, or less skilled 'schoolboys' for muncipal, and possibly outdoor performances.

There has also been some debate surrounding a letter that Bach wrote to the Leipzig City Council on August 23th, 1730, known as the "Entwurff" letter: where Rifken's critics--among them musicians Ton Koopman, Gustav Leonhardt, and scholar George Stauffer--insist that Bach was plainly asking the council for 12-16 singers to fill out his 1st choir at St. Thomas. While Rifken and Parrott argue that Bach wasn't asking for a set number for his choir at all, but instead requesting the number of singers needed to staff his 1st choir for the entire church season. Indeed Rifken compares Bach's request to a baseball team's full seasonal roster, rather than the number of players in the starting line up on game day.

Personally, I don't see why both sides aren't at least partly correct here--since different musical works, venues, and occasions would demand a varying number of singers. By asking for 12-16 singers Bach was most likely requesting the maximum number of singers he would need to fill out his 1st choir on special occasions, when large choral works requiring a double chorus and ripienists might be performed. At the same time, Rifken is surely right to argue that 12-16 singers represented Bach's full seasonal roster: because on most other "game" days, Bach's actual starting line up of singers woud have been less than 12-16, especially in regards to his regularly performed four part cantatas.

Nevertheless, Bach did on occasion conduct full scale ensembles of up to 30-40 musicians and singers. We know this from an eyewitness account passed down to us by one of Bach's former colleagues at St. Thomas School, Johann Heinrich Winckler. In 1765 Winckler quoted another former instructor at the school, Johann Matthias Gesner, as having been particularly impressed by Bach's ability to conduct a large ensemble of musicians all at once, recalling that Gesner had said to him, "...as [Bach] paid attention to all of them simultaneously and from this group of 30 or even 40 musicians [he would] nod to one of them with his head or indicate to another by stamping his foot, or threateningly, by using his finger, keep the third one on beat with the correct rhythm."

It must be remembered, however, that in early 18th century Germany such musical extravaganzas--which here evidently included both instrumentalists and choir--required additional monies. In 1728 even the largest Evangelical churches of Bach's day--that is, the best funded ones, were criticized by Johann Mattheson in Der Musicalische Patriot for routinely using very meager sized choirs compared to their Catholic counterparts in Italy and Spain. Indeed Mattheson called for vocal and instrumental ensembles of up to "30 to 40 musicians" as his ideal--hence, this wasn't standard Lutheran practice. Not to mention that such extravagance usually came directly out of a cantor's own pocket, and it is well known that Bach had continual money problems in Leipzig, and wasn't at all happy at St. Thomas. Therefore it is most unlikely that Bach conducted 30-40 member ensembles on any regular basis. Thus Gesner's account is probably a description of Bach conducting one of his larger choral works on some occasion when his entire 1st choir roster was required.

In strong contrast to Gesner's statement, there is also a 1721 document by Gottfried Ephraim Schneibel entitled, "Random Thoughts about Church Music in Our Day," where on the subject of choir size, Schneibel writes, "if each part is provided with one or at most two people who excel in what they do, then a choir is well appointed." Hence, according to Scheibel a "well appointed" or prudent choir in Bach's day consisted of four to eight excellent principal soloists--that is, one per part, who could be acceptably doubled, if need be: which further confirms that choirs of four soloists were definitely used. It is also most interesting to note that, as with Bach, Schneibel sets the maximum limit for a choir at sixteen singers.

One voice-to-a-part performance can also be found in the other great musical capital of Bach's day, the city of Dresden, where it was common practice, and where the first version of Bach's great Mass in B minor received its only performance during the composer's lifetime in 1733. In the booklet notes to his recent Dunedin Consort recording of this work, musician and scholar John Butt writes, "At the Dresden court, also, to which Bach increasingly looked the longer he stayed in Leipzig, much of the vocal music was performed primarily with soloists." Regarding the 1733 Dresden Bach performance, Butt continues, "As it stood in 1733, Bach indicated that the two sopranos together sing the top line, thus suggesting that this line was sung with doubled voices, the others without. But in 1731 this music (part of the town-council cantata BWV 29) had been furnished with ripienists in all parts. So Bach countenanced the same piece of music being sung with 8 voices in 1731, 5 in 1733, and 8 again in 1750 (in the 'Dona Nobis' at least)." (I should clarify that Bach composed the final "Dona Nobis Pacem" for a double choir: so, with 8 vocalists, it would have been sung by one singer per part.) Once again it would appear that the use of ripienists varied according to the specific occasion and venue, whether it was a church, a town venue, or at court.

Thus by taking Schneibel, Scheibe, Buxtehude, Telemann, Bach, and the common musical practice in Dresden at the time as our guides, we can reasonably conclude that Bach typically used four to eight singers for his weekly cantatas (except BWV 50), and no more than eight to sixteen singers in the larger works that required a double choir. With ripiensts being most likely added in the case of specially funded court or municipal performances, where, as Scheibe writes, extra boys might fill out those performances. It would therefore appear that the 'modern' practice of using large homogeneous choirs of eighteen to twenty-four singers and up, singing over rather sizeable orchestras, has more in common with the ample sized choirs used in Catholic Italy and Spain during Bach's lifetime, and to a much later 19th century ideal of choral grandeur found in the music of Berlioz and Verdi--rather than to the early 18th century Protestant Germany of Bach, Telemann, and Buxtehude.

And I am not solely referring to modern instrument performances either: Such imbalances can occur on period recordings as well, especially when their over-sized choirs (Gardiner, Koopman, etc.) sing with more vibrato than they probably should; or, when those choirs are recorded in overly reverberant acoustics. Granted it doesn't happen uniformly, but when it does, the unevenness of balances created does diminish the contrapuntal clarity of Bach's writing.

As one might expect, such imbalances never occur in the Montreal performances on this disc: where the four soloists and superb baroque ensemble achieve a near perfect sense of equilibrium; indeed the balances seem so consistently natural (and deftly handled), that there is never any sense of competing forces, or drowning out or blurring of the monumental complexities of Bach's score. Nor is there ever the sense of a 'conductor' manipulating those balances or effects in a showy or ostentatious manner. The sharper contrapuntal focus also allows the dramatic contrasts in Bach's score to seem crisper and more incisive. Hence, not only is there a clear historical precedent for Milnes' use of only four soloists, but there are also significant aesthetic advantages as well."

To be continued, as the review is too long to fit onto a single post here, so I'm going to have to break it up...


----------



## Josquin13

To continue M.R.S.'s review from my previous post,

"Another aspect of these scores that argues in favor of a greater overall transparency from choir and musicians is Bach's extensive use of violin 'slurs'--called 'graces' in the 18th century--at the opening of BWV 130. In his booklet notes, musicologist Bruce Haynes discusses how the function of a violin slur in Bach's time was different from the later Romantic Age. He writes,

"To a musician reading these notes in 19th-century mode, a series of slurs mean nothing more than an absence of articulation, they are a mere technical instruction for legato. But in the 18th century a slur of up to three or four notes was thought of as a grace, its function being to indicate an emphasis with a diminuendo. Thus it was an indication of legato playing only incidentally... the series of slurs are thus a code for a chain of separate accents, one at the beginning of each slur; not the modern single impulse with articulation, but three independent thrusts, like short pickups. Playing this way gives this passage a rather different meaning... "

[Milnes, Montreal Baroque, Cantata BWV 130: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nih914KuFPw.]

Hayes concludes that the effect of the violins changes significantly "depending on whether the slur is perceived as an expressive device (as it generally was in the 18th century) or as a technical instruction (as in Modern Conservatory Style.)" Which means that when the slurs are played in "Modern Conservatory style" the violins can limit or bog down the requisite agility and rhythmic articulation of the rest of the ensemble: giving us a very different sounding Bach.

To better illustate this point, have a listen to how the violin slurs are played in the opening bars of Helmuth Rilling's modern instrument recording of BWV 130. It will be a real eye opener. Notice how Rilling's modern violins are more cumbersome than Milnes' period violins, and how their lack of agility--due to the purely legato effect--impedes the swiftness of the chorus and trumpets, making the music drag in comparison: 



. And bear in mind that Rilling is considered to be one of the least pedantic conductors performing Bach's choral music on modern instruments today.

Yet nowhere in these cantatas is Bach's need for a greater agility and transparency from his performers more evident than in the magnificent fugally constructed opening of Cantata BWV 19. Here Bach dazzling depicts the decisive battle in what conductor Craig Smith has described as a 'vaulting high energy fugue." (Hayes likewise writes that the individual parts go "in every imaginable direction.") Famed musicologist Albert Schweitzer writes of this movement that,

"Bach launches a whole army of devils against the divine power... the first chorus paints the struggle of Satan and his host against the archangel Michael. The serpent-forms fling themselves upward in mighty contortions." But "at the words, 'Aber Michael bezwingt, under die schar, die ihn umringt, stüzt des Satans Grausamkeit." [But Michael Conquors, and the cruel host of Satan encircling him is cast down."], the motive is inverted, and the agitated and distorted mass fall precipitantly into the depths."

Here Gardiner's larger, more aggressive forces work to undeniably fuller effect: with the staggering virtuosity of the Monteverdi singers brilliantly capturing Michael and his angels on the upper line fiercely interlocked in a raging battle with Satan's reptilian hordes on the lower line: 



. However, it can also be said that Milnes and his smaller forces bring a mind-blowing clarity to the movement: which, given that it is written in the most complex of musical forms--a fugue--is a significant advantage. In addition, by sounding less fiercely driven, Milnes' chorus also has the effect of making Michael and his angelic forces seem more self-confident of their eventual victory: which may be more in keeping with the confidently assured outlook of 18th century Lutheranism, and therefore Bach's own firm belief in the supremacy of God's dominion over good and evil.

As for the soloists, I much prefer Milnes' singers to Gardiner's, and not because Gardiner's are weak, but simply because Milnes' are even better. Monika Mauch, for example, makes the ideal Bach soprano: with her vocal range falling somewhere between a soprano and mezzo--rendering her singing a suitable approximation to the late pubescent young men of Bach's day, who sang this part, and whose voices broke later than today at around 15 or 16 years old. Moreover, her pitch perfect vibrato less singing and superb artistry bring a wonderful pure toned precision to Bach's score. The tenor Jan Kobow is also an ideal choice. His singing of the post victory aria in BWV 19--a duet for tenor and trumpet written in a siciliano rhythm--is quite memorable. In this moving aria a human implores the angels, with their leader Michael, to remain on earth after the battle has been won. To my mind it is one of the most profound arias that Bach ever composed.

Interestingly, of the four releases issued so far in the Montreal series, each corresponds to one of the 'quarter' days in the annual year, or the four Lutheran feast days associated with the precession. Volume 1, for example, is comprised of cantatas that Bach wrote for the birthday of John the Baptist on June 24, or the summer solstice, also known as Midsummer's Day. While volume 2 consists of cantatas that Bach wrote for the Feast of St. Michael and All Angels on September 29th, or the celebratory day of the autumn equinox. Volume 3 contains cantatas written for "Marie de Nazareth" that mark the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary on "Lady Day," or the vernal equinox on March 25th. Finally, volume 4--entitled "La Nativite"--is grouped together by cantatas that honor the birth of Jesus at Christmas, or the celebratory day of the winter solstice on December 25th.

1-- https://www.amazon.com/Bach-J-S-Can...ntatas+30+7+167&qid=1629162597&s=music&sr=1-1
2-- https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Cantate...atas+130+19+149&qid=1629162650&s=music&sr=1-1
3-- https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Nazaret...ntatas+147+82+1&qid=1629162744&s=music&sr=1-1 
4-- https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/7977744--bach-cantatas-volume-4

At present there is only one other one-voice-per-part Bach cantata cycle in the makings, from Sigiswald Kuijken and Le Petite Band (though it's unclear whether the Purcell Quartet intends a complete cycle). While Kuijken is much further along in his cycle than Milnes, as I write he has yet to record the Michaelmas cantatas. Like the Montreal series, Kuijken's cycle is also being recorded in a hybrid SACD format (playable on conventional players). In terms of the quality of Kuijken's performances, some reviewers have complained about the inconsistency of his soloists on certain issues, which of course is a serious negative in OVPP performance. Neither have Rifken or Parrott recorded these cantatas either; though Parrott has made an OVPP recording of the BWV 50 fragment. Thus the offerings on this disc represent a special opportunity to hear all three Michaelmas cantatas in exceptional one-voice-to-a-part performances, that have been recorded in spectacular state of the art Atma sound--all in all, a rare delight. I eagerly await all future releases in this promising series."


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I thoroughly enjoyed reading that, Josquin; and ultimately I totally agree with your conclusion that choir size might differ depending on the work, but really shouldn't exceed 16 for optimal clarity, and 8 might even be ideal for most cantatas. As for the BWV 130 comparison; it _is_ interesting that Rilling plays the ritornello so stolidly and in such a detached manner; you are certainly right that period conventions produce a more fluid, songful image of the music (this can be heard even apart from Milnes's brisker tempo), which is surely more in keeping with Bach's visions. Rilling's rhythmic stodginess is a big blot on many of his recordings, IMO, though I really like his St. Matthew Passion on Hännsler. But I had never previously connected it with the actual style of phrasing that he chooses; perhaps he could have maintained the same slower tempo for the choruses but been more willing to stick to legato phrasing. The result would be smoother and more natural. The impression I get is that he chose this "choppier" phrasing because he thought it would make him stand out from the pack and distinguish his conceptions from the big, swooning romantic type-sound favored by Richter and Klemperer, but clearly neither extreme is exactly accurate. I actually found Richter pretty successful here with a surprisingly lively tempo by his standards, though as always his choir just sounds too massive.


----------



## Josquin13

In regards to Richter, Klemperer, Jochum, Rilling, and the majority of other older, pre-period revival conductors that have made recordings of Bach's choral music on modern instruments, I have a personal story to relate: You may have heard me talk about it before, but when I first started collecting classical LPs back in the 1980s, I initially relied on the recommendations of a composer friend of mine, who was also a well regarded teacher of composition (as he had himself studied with composers Vagn Holmboe, Wallingford Riegger, & Henry Cowell). At the time, I was advised by a mutual (musician) friend of ours that my friend always gave 'the best' recommendations for recordings, so being new to classical music, I eagerly & gratefully took his advice, especially since he always seemed to have such fascinating & often scholarly reasons for why he'd choose one conductor or musician over another. & to this day, I still treasure many of the recordings that he recommended to me back then (and later on, as well).

I recall that at one stage in my growing fascination with classical music, I heard Bach's St. Matthew Passion for the first time, live in concert, with Erich Leinsdorf conducting the Philadelphia Orchestra, and decided that I wanted to start collecting recordings of Bach's choral works. So, I phoned my friend up & asked him if he could recommend a Bach choral conductor, whose recordings I could buy? To my surprise there was a long, uncharacteristic silence on the other end of the line, before he finally replied, "No, I can't." Now, he'd never refused me before, so I asked again, "Do you mean there isn't a single conductor of Bach's choral music that you can recommend? "No, there isn't", he answered, adding, "There aren't any conductors in the catalogue that understand how to conduct Bach's music in a Baroque style". That was another unexpected comment. "But what about Eugen Jochum?," I asked (whose Brahms he had previously recommended to me). "No, Jochum's style of conducting is all wrong for Bach", he replied. "What about Karl Richter?" I asked. "No, no, Richter's conducting is too inflexible and Teutonic. I don't recommend Richter."

Undeterred, I pressed on, "Isn't there anyone that you can recommend, to get me started?" He thought for a moment, and then said, "No, wait. There is someone that I can recommend... Peter Schreier. Schreier knows how to conduct Bach in a Baroque style. But he's the only one." He then proceeded to recommend Schreier's 1984 LP recording of Bach's Mass in B minor on Eurodisc, which was at that time available in the "cut out" bins, so I could buy it inexpensively, he said.

Of course, I was very surprised to hear that out of all the conductors that came before the period movement, Peter Schreier was the only one that, according to my friend, knew how to conduct Bach's music with an understanding of Baroque style. & that he didn't feel he could recommend anyone else--not Jochum, Richter, Klemperer, et al.. Although I should point out that John Eliot Gardiner's Archiv Bach recordings had not come out yet, and I have little doubt that my friend would've recommended Gardiner if they had, since he later recommended Gardiner's Beethoven Missa Solemnis to me (along with Klemperer's).

On the other hand, Joshua Rifkin's one-voice-per-part or OVPP Mass in B minor had been released by that time, but curiously, my friend didn't mention it. Which isn't surprising, considering that the OVPP argument was in its early infancy in those days, and it may well be that he hadn't yet become convinced that it was an authentic performance practice (or perhaps he wasn't entirely won over by Rifkin's performance).

In any event, I did buy Schreier's recording of the Mass in B minor, with the New Bach Collegium Musicum Leipzig--an ensemble that had been newly formed in 1979 by conductor Max Pommer & some of the finest musicians in Leipzig at the time--including Ludwig Güttler, Karl Süske, Eckart Haupt, and other prominent members of the Gewandhaus Orchestra--in an attempt to resurrect Bach's "Collegium Musicum" concerts in Leipzig. & I enjoyed the music very much. It would be the first of two recordings that Schreier would make of Bach's "Great" mass. I also later collected all of Schreier's excellent Bach (& Mozart) choral recordings with the Staatskapelle Dresden & Kammerorchester C. Ph. E. Bach on Philips, which included Schreier's 2nd recording of the Mass in B minor made in Dresden. Despite that I would eventually become an avid period enthusiast, I continue to treasure many of Schreier's recordings.

I'd also consider it germane to our discussion here--about the pros & cons of Rilling & Richter's Bach--to hear a modern instrument ensemble & pre-period revival conductor perform this music with a greater "understanding of Bach's style". Although of course, today, we have many other worthwhile period recordings of Bach's choral music to choose from. So many, that it may sound like a cliché, but it really has become an embarrassment of riches.

Nevertheless, as noted, I do still listen to Schreier's Bach--even after many years, and don't expect that people will hear anything "stolid", "stodgy", "sludgy", or "romantically overblown" or stylistically naive about these performances. Though the use of vibrato by some of his solo singers may at times sound slightly dated today:

--Peter Schreier 1: Bach Mass in B minor, with the New Bach Collegium Musicum Leipzig: Here are some YT highlights:

--Kyrie: 



--Gloria in excelsis Deo: 



--Et resurrexit (this movement makes a particularly strong impression, IMO):






--Peter Schreier 2: Bach Mass in B minor, with the Staatskapelle Dresden & Rundfunkchor Leipzig:





I will say that my one disappointment with Schreier's interpretation of the Mass is that he takes the final "Dona nobis pacem" movement too quickly, for my tastes, and it loses some of its majesty. Although he does slow down a bit more in this movement on his 2nd recording in Dresden.

(If interested, you might now compare parts of Schreier's Mass in B minor to Helmut Rilling's recording with the Bach-Collegium Stuttgart, on Hänssler: 



. Or, for an even bigger eye opener!, the Mass in B minor recorded by Herbert von Karajan & the Philharmonia Orchestra in the early 1950s: 



, where Karajan seriously drags the music, and shows little to no understanding of Baroque style or that Bach was known to have favored brisk tempi in his music. Otto Klemperer likewise drags the music on his famous recording, despite his usual, engaging musicality. Though I'd say that Klemperer is probably better than Karajan in this respect: 



.

While Eugen Jochum is perhaps a little better than Klemperer & Karajan, in that he doesn't seem to drag the music quite as much. For me, Jochum conducts a beautiful & deeply committed performance: 



. However, at the same time, I agree with my friend that Jochum does have a tendency to conduct Bach's Mass as if it were Brahms' German Requiem or a Bruckner Mass: which is surely off the mark, style-wise, from what Bach would have expected to hear in the 18th century. Especially when you consider that the traditions of the late Romantic age had not yet occurred in the earlier Age of Enlightenment. And therefore, I'd imagine that if Bach were alive today to hear some of these post-Romantic readings, with their excesses & in some cases, woefully imbalanced choirs & orchestras, they'd have struck him as an unexpected distortion of his music.)

I'm also a big fan of Schreier's wonderful recording of Bach's Christmas Oratorio with the Staatskapelle Dresden, & would strongly recommend it:






As well as Schreier's Bach Magnificat (in the first BWV 243 version) with the Kammerorchester C. Ph. E. Bach. Although my top choices for BWV 243 are the period recordings by Philippe Herreweghe (his first one) & Philippe Pierlot's wonderful OVPP performance with the Ricercar Consort. While Schreier's remains my favorite recording on modern instruments:

--Schreier, Bach Magnificat, Kammerorchester Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, 1994, Philips:






--Pierlot, Bach Magnificat (OVPP):






--Herrweghe, Bach Magnificat: For me, this is one of the best Bach recordings that Herreweghe has given us to date (along with his recent St. John Passion on Phi): 



. Although I do occasionally have a problem with Herreweghe's insistence on feminine endings in his phrasing, as well as his occasional lack of incisiveness and dynamism. Granted, this approach does work well in the music of Gabriel Faure, but not so much in Bach--at least, not in my view. But I do like Herreweghe's Magnificat recording very much, and as usual, he has assembled a first rate group of singers, who are probably the best that I've heard in this work (along with Pierlot's singers).

Of interest, I can recall that many years ago now, the period violinist & conductor Andrew Manze wrote an article for one of the British classical rags where he listened to a bunch of different recordings of Bach's Magnificat, and then decided upon which was his first pick or overall favorite. I remember that Manze liked Herreweghe's recording, but in the end he chose Karl Richter's 1962 recording with the Münchener Bach-Orchester & Chor as his first choice: 



. Which I found to be a surprising & strange choice for a musician so thoroughly ensconced within the period field at the time. I wonder if Pierlot's recording had been available to Manze back then, if he'd have chosen it over Richter's?

Here again, I agree with my friend--at least, in regards to Richter's Bach Magnificat--because try as I might, I can't get on board with Richter's rigid, inflexible conducting, & heavily stressed downbeats!: which, at times, can remind me a bit of Nikolaus Harnoncourt at his worst. I find it strange that only certain Germanic conductors seem to conduct in this inflexible, and downbeat-heavy manner. Which I don't care for myself, and especially in Baroque & Classical works (though I admit that I have liked Harnoncourt's conducting at times, but find him erratic). Moreover, it's hardly a style of conducting that I can imagine Bach would have liked, especially since there's no supporting evidence for this kind of inflexible conducting in the more refined musical traditions that I've come to know & love in Leipzig & Dresden. So, I think that my friend was right to say that Richter's overly 'Teutonic' style of conducting isn't well suited to Bach's music, & especially when we view it as inherently and distinctively 18th century music, and Bach, as a child of Enlightenment--rather than a composer working in the post Romantic era, which obviously he wasn't. Nor does Richter's Bach style share much, if anything in common with the Bach conducting of the Dresden born and raised Peter Schreier, either.

By the way, Schreier also recorded an excellent, 'unsung' set of Bach's 6 Brandenburg Concertos with the Kammerorchester C.Ph.E. Bach for Philips--which almost never gets mentioned when people talk about the best 'modern instrument' recordings of the 6 Brandenburgs, but Schreier's musicians are very good:





https://music.amazon.com/albums/B0758FFW9C?do=play&ref=dm_ws_dp_ald_bb_phfa_xx_xx_xx

Although, as fine as the playing is, I'm not sure that I'd recommend Schreirer's set over Sir Neville Marriner's lively 1st Philips recording of the truncated 'first version' of Bach's 6 Brandenburg Concertos--that is, before Bach presented his 6 Concertos to the Margrave of Brandenburg-Schwedt, in 1721. Interestingly, the "reconstructed" edition that Sir Neville used was compiled by the English scholar & musician Thurston Dart back in the 1960s (& btw, Marriner's performance also includes David Munrow playing the recorder!, which was controversial back then, & probably still is...): 



. For me, Marriner's first recording for Philips is preferable to his later all-star cast of musicians on his 2nd Philips recording, which included Szeryng, Rampal, Holliger, Petri, André, etc., all of whom I found surprisingly dull when they played together (though of course I've admired these musicians elsewhere). By the way, Dart's edition was the one that Christopher Hogwood later used & adapted for his Brandenburg Concertos recording on Oiseau-Lyre, and unless I'm mistaken, those are the only two times that Bach's original scores have been recorded. While I still enjoy revisiting Marriner & Schreier's recordings from time to time (along with other modern instrument recordings from the Suk Chamber Orchestra, The English Chamber Orchestra--under Raymond Leppard, & Virtuosi Saxoniae), for me, the 'best' Brandenburg Concerto recordings have come from the period ensembles & conductors, such as Hofkapelle München--led by violinist Rüdiger Lotter, Florilegium, Pinnock 1 & 2, Leonhardt, Linde, Goebel, & the Freiburger Barockorchester:

--Hofkapelle München:









--Florilegium: 




Lastly, here's a link to the 12 CD discount Decca box set that includes all of the Bach choral recordings that Peter Schreier made with the Staatskapelle Dresden & Kammerorchester C.Ph.E Bach for Philips (though not the earlier New Bach Collegium Musicum recording of the 'Great' Mass): I think it's an excellent bargain at about $30-35 presently on Amazon, if you enjoy the performances & prefer to buy big box sets (which I don't always recommend, for the obvious reason that you can almost always do better by purchasing a range of carefully selected individual recordings, even if it takes longer):

https://www.amazon.com/Collectors-J...+bach+decca+box&qid=1629319898&s=music&sr=1-2
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8033377--js-bach-great-choral-masterpieces

In addition, here's a link to Schreier's earlier Eurodisc recording of the Mass in B minor, which has since been reissued by Berlin Classics (though it may be presently out of print...?):

https://www.amazon.com/J-S-Bach-Mass-B-Minor/dp/B000S6EORG
https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Messe-H-Moll-BWV-Minor/dp/B0000063GO

Then, sometime around the mid to late 1980s, John Eliot Gardiner's Bach choral recordings began to appear on DG Archiv, performed by his excellent English Baroque Soloists & highly virtuosic (if oversized) Monteverdi Choir, & other period Bach choral recordings soon followed after. (Although Pinnock, Hogwood, Linde, & Leonhardt--as well as Gardiner in his early Erato days--had already begun to record Bach's orchestral music on period instruments a bit earlier). After that, the performing of Bach's choral music would never be the same again (though, curiously, one of the pioneering conductors of the early period revival, Reinhard Goebel--the founder of Musica Antiqua Köln--has recently returned to making Baroque music recordings on modern instruments, but in a HIP style):

--Gardiner, Mass in B minor, Archiv: 




P.S. After hearing the New Bach Collegium Musicum Leipzig play on Schreier's recording of the "Great" Mass, & liking them, I asked my friend what he thought about the ensemble's other Bach recordings that were part of a series, conducted by Max Pommer. He replied that the Leipzig musicians were very good, but that he hadn't been overly taken with Pommer's conducting. & no, he didn't recommend the series. In preference, he suggested the period recordings by Trevor Pinnock & Christopher Hogwood instead, but that was back in the 1980s, and of course many excellent period recordings have appeared since that time--when Pinnock & Hogwood's recordings led the field. Nevertheless, I did end up buying some of Pommer's Bach Leipzig recordings, despite my friend's lack of enthusiasm, & decided that they were very beautiful and well played performances, but maybe occasionally on slow side and laid back, rhythmically. Anyway, here's a link to Pommer's recording of Bach's The Art of the Fugue (on LP), which I like, if anyone's interested in hearing more fine playing by the New Bach Collegium Musicum Leipzig: 



.


----------



## starthrower

I've been reading Maria Popova's magnificent Brain Pickings blog for a number of years now. This week she has a very interesting piece on Bach, and the transformative power of his music. I figured this would be as a good a place as any to post the link.
https://www.brainpickings.org/


----------



## Kreisler jr

Pommer and others recorded lots of Bach, often already digitally before/around the anniversary 1985. I believe records were a source of revenue for the GDR. (They even produced CDs but the GDR didn't have a manufacturing plant; these were either produced in Czechoslovakia or via some Western partner in Japan or West Germany, I believe.)

It often was a peculiar take with some HIP influences but modern instruments; the trumpet/corno player Güttler was quite a star in Germany and after the Fall of the Wall he toured to raise funds for the reconstruction of the Frauenkirche in Dresden. There were some other excellent soloists, the one still active and best known today (and very young back then), is maybe Christine Schornsheim (harpsichord, organ). 
I am not sure, these recordings hold up so well after almost 40 years in an overcrowded field, but they certainly still have friends and are often available very cheaply. (I think the AoF is among the more interesting ones, though.)

However, some of the Leipzig and Dresden cantata recordings from the 1970s and 80s have aged a bit better, despite having the same features of modern instruments and a mix between local tradition (and of course, they have the best claim to that, Bach did not live in Amsterdam or Ghent...) and what passed for historically informed 40+ years ago. They often have stellar soloists (Schreier, Auger etc.) and are worth trying. The closest in style are probably Rilling's from around the same time.

Overall, the most desirable Bach from the GDR is probably "Bachwerke auf Silbermannorgeln", despite some of the organs not in true historical condition and recorded over about 20 years in variable sound.


----------



## Chatellerault

After that long and scholarly discussion about the Cantatas, I'd like to move to the Harpsichord Concertos if y'all don't mind.

Pierre Hantaï has been a favourite of mine for a few years for both solo harpsichord and chamber/concerto music.

But a recent discovery of mine was the 2008 album with three concertos by harpsichordist Francesco Cera with I Barocchisti/Fasolis. An orchestra that sounds slightly bigger than some HIP groups (5 to 8 violins according to the booklet). And a harpsichord with a rather full sound, rich with harmonics compared to the slim, gentle sound that I associate with Hantaï.








And how about the old guard like Leonhardt, Pinnock, Gilbert, who do you think has stood the test of time in the concertos, both for single and multiple harpsichords?


----------



## Ganz Allein

I'm relatively new to Bach, but got the Bach 333 set for my birthday a few months ago, and have been slowly working my way through it and have been loving every step of it! I'd previously only really heard some keyboard works performed on piano, and Karajan's 50's B Minor Mass, and considered Bach to be old-fashioned and boring. Then earlier this year I came across Gardiner's B Minor Mass and was thunderstruck by the vitality and excitement in that recording. After that I got a handful of other Bach recordings at my local second-hand store and was sufficiently convinced to ask for the massive box set, especially since I didn't already have any of the recordings from the box! What a thrilling process it has been to discover such an amazing treasure trove that I'd ignored and unfairly dismissed for many years!

Anyway, I haven't gotten to the harpsichord concertos yet, but I've recently been working my way through the keyboard music with the recordings performed on harpsichord, and I've fallen in love with Huguette Dreyfus' recordings of the English Suites! These are the only recordings of these pieces I've heard up to this point, so I can't compare the performance itself, but I will say I absolutely love the sound of the harpsichord(s) she uses. There's a friendly almost buzzy quality to the sound that sort of reminds me of Wendy Carlos' Switched-On Bach recordings (which I loved before I even loved Bach!). Every once in a while, she activates some kind of mechanism that completely changes the sound of the harpsichord as well - I've read somewhere that some harpsichords were equipped with a pedal to make the instrument sound more like a lute. I'm guessing that's what she's using here? Anybody more educated than I have any information on how she does this?


----------



## Kreisler jr

I have not heard Dreyfus (Archiv is not always doing a good job keeping/reisssuing older recordings) but it's called a "lute stop" but I am not quite sure how it works. Either a different set of strings is struck than in the standard register and/or struck/damped in a certain way.


----------



## Chatellerault

Ganz Allein said:


> Every once in a while, she activates some kind of mechanism that completely changes the sound of the harpsichord as well - I've read somewhere that some harpsichords were equipped with a pedal to make the instrument sound more like a lute. I'm guessing that's what she's using here? Anybody more educated than I have any information on how she does this?


"While many harpsichords have one string per note, more elaborate harpsichords can have two or more strings for each note. When there are multiple strings for each note, these additional strings are called "choirs" of strings. This provides two advantages: the ability to vary volume and ability to vary tonal quality. Volume is increased when the mechanism of the instrument is set up by the player (see below) so that the press of a single key plucks more than one string. Tonal quality can be varied in two ways. First, different choirs of strings can be designed to have distinct tonal qualities, usually by having one set of strings plucked closer to the nut, which emphasizes the higher harmonics, and produces a "nasal" sound quality. The mechanism of the instrument, called "stops" (following the use of the term in pipe organs) permits the player to select one choir or the other. Second, having one key pluck two strings at once changes not just volume but also tonal quality; for instance, when two strings tuned to the same pitch are plucked simultaneously, the note is not just louder but also richer and more complex."
Source: Wikipedia

As far as I'm aware, Bach didn't explicitly write in any of his harpsichord or organ works which stops should be used.

On the organ it leaves the performer with even more choices to be done, as the possibilities of registration (i.e. different sounds on each manual plus pedals) are much more varied. Each organ manual has about 5 to 20 different manuals, with a range of timbres that sound like flutes, trumpets, etc.

So, for both the harpsichord and organ music of Bach, registration must be chosen by the interpreter based on the tempo, on rethorical aspects, on comparison with other composers' registration, etc.

Compare this interpretative freedom with French Baroque music (and Romantic music in general), where registration is often written - sometimes in details, sometimes only hinted at - by the composer. For example Louis-Nicolas Clérambault (1676-1749) has two organ suites, where the movements' names are such as: Basse et dessus de trompette; Récits de cromorne et de cornet séparé; Dialogue sur les grands jeux; Flutes; etc.

Baroque registration is tipically changed between movements, giving each movement in a suite (or toccata, or prelude and fugue...) its distinctive character.


----------



## jegreenwood

Josquin13 said:


> Allegro Con Brio,
> 
> I'm pleased to hear that you (& others) have discovered Eric Milnes & Montreal Baroque and their ongoing, slowly progressing one-voice-to-a-part cycle of Bach Cantatas. As I've written before on TC, I consider Milnes to be one of the finest Bach conductors today. His performances are always carefully considered, deeply insightful, and thoroughly well-rehearsed (unlike some of Kuijken's cycle).
> 
> . . . .


Just a heads up. Those albums may be disappearing. I had nine of them as a Squeezebox playlist via Tidal. The playlist no longer works. I checked Tidal and Qobuz, finding only seven. I then checked Presto and found eight, which I purchased and downloaded. Physical copies of several seem hard to come by (new at least). Atma seems to have some, but my search there only led to individual tracks.

I'm not sure if Montreal Baroque even exists anymore. When I Google it, all I get are references to a festival by that name.


----------



## SanAntone

If I ever want encyclopedic information about recordings ( I usually don't) I'll read a book. On a forum, short posts, with a simple concise point, are vastly preferable. 

As always, YMMV.

BTW, the Eric Milnes Montreal Baroque Bach Cantata recordings appear to be completely available on Spotify. As are Milnes's recordings of The Beatles. Odd hearing Muzaky arrangements of The Beatles, along with some pretty good Bach cantata recordings by the same guy.


----------



## jegreenwood

SanAntone said:


> If I ever want encyclopedic information about recordings ( I usually don't) I'll read a book. On a forum, short posts, with a simple concise point, are vastly preferable.
> 
> As always, YMMV.
> 
> BTW, the Eric Milnes Montreal Baroque Bach Cantata recordings appear to be completely available on Spotify. As are Milnes's recordings of The Beatles. Odd hearing Muzaky arrangements of The Beatles, along with some pretty good Bach cantata recordings by the same guy.


I don’t use Spotify as it is Lossy.

I repeat - they may be disappearing. I checked the Bach-Cantata website, which lists eight, so that is likely the correct number. Presto and Atma (where I located them through a different search strategy) had eight. Tidal has seven and Qobuz is down to six. Even the Montreal Baroque Festival website only lists seven. As I generally listen to my playlist several times a month, I am fairly certain these deletions are quite recent. 

Now, perhaps this is of no matter to you, but there are others on this website who may treasure these recordings as much as I do, for whI’m this information may be useful.

My mileage DOES vary.


----------



## SanAntone

jegreenwood said:


> I don’t use Spotify as it is Lossy.


So are my 70 year old ears.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

The Milnes recordings are still there on Idagio. A shame that they seem to be dropping off the charts though as they remain probably my favorite OVPP recordings.

One OVPP ensemble I have not seen mentioned on this thread yet is the Purcell Quartet, who may have the starriest lineup of all. They are headed by the unmistakable, oboe-like soprano of Emma Kirkby, who dominates the ensembles to almost an overwhelming point, but that's exactly what her voice is made for and it's quite glorious. Sonorous baritone Peter Harvey, mellifluous tenor Charles Daniels, and the IMO just OK countertenor Michael Chance complete the excellent lineup. The performances truly sound like chamber music, as if the performers are responding to each other on the spot, and the instrumental playing is superb as well. Their BWV 12 and 172 are particular highlights for me. I see three of their Bach recordings on Idagio.


----------



## jegreenwood

Allegro Con Brio said:


> The Milnes recordings are still there on Idagio. A shame that they seem to be dropping off the charts though as they remain probably my favorite OVPP recordings.
> 
> One OVPP ensemble I have not seen mentioned on this thread yet is the Purcell Quartet, who may have the starriest lineup of all. They are headed by the unmistakable, oboe-like soprano of Emma Kirkby, who dominates the ensembles to almost an overwhelming point, but that's exactly what her voice is made for and it's quite glorious. Sonorous baritone Peter Harvey, mellifluous tenor Charles Daniels, and the IMO just OK countertenor Michael Chance complete the excellent lineup. The performances truly sound like chamber music, as if the performers are responding to each other on the spot, and the instrumental playing is superb as well. Their BWV 12 and 172 are particular highlights for me. I see three of their Bach recordings on Idagio.


I see them on Tidal and Qobuz (although on the latter you need to search both Purcell Quartet and Emma Kirkby to find them all). I will check them out.


----------



## Monsalvat

Chatellerault said:


> "While many harpsichords have one string per note, more elaborate harpsichords can have two or more strings for each note. When there are multiple strings for each note, these additional strings are called "choirs" of strings. This provides two advantages: the ability to vary volume and ability to vary tonal quality. Volume is increased when the mechanism of the instrument is set up by the player (see below) so that the press of a single key plucks more than one string. Tonal quality can be varied in two ways. First, different choirs of strings can be designed to have distinct tonal qualities, usually by having one set of strings plucked closer to the nut, which emphasizes the higher harmonics, and produces a "nasal" sound quality. The mechanism of the instrument, called "stops" (following the use of the term in pipe organs) permits the player to select one choir or the other. Second, having one key pluck two strings at once changes not just volume but also tonal quality; for instance, when two strings tuned to the same pitch are plucked simultaneously, the note is not just louder but also richer and more complex."
> Source: Wikipedia
> 
> As far as I'm aware, Bach didn't explicitly write in any of his harpsichord or organ works which stops should be used.
> 
> On the organ it leaves the performer with even more choices to be done, as the possibilities of registration (i.e. different sounds on each manual plus pedals) are much more varied. Each organ manual has about 5 to 20 different manuals *ranks of pipes*, with a range of timbres that sound like flutes, trumpets, etc.
> 
> So, for both the harpsichord and organ music of Bach, registration must be chosen by the interpreter based on the tempo, on rethorical aspects, on comparison with other composers' registration, etc.
> 
> Compare this interpretative freedom with French Baroque music (and Romantic music in general), where registration is often written - sometimes in details, sometimes only hinted at - by the composer. For example Louis-Nicolas Clérambault (1676-1749) has two organ suites, where the movements' names are such as: Basse et dessus de trompette; Récits de cromorne et de cornet séparé; Dialogue sur les grands jeux; Flutes; etc.
> 
> Baroque registration is tipically changed between movements, giving each movement in a suite (or toccata, or prelude and fugue...) its distinctive character.


For harpsichord music, Bach would sometimes leave *f* or *p* markings to indicate which hand should go on which manual. The upper manual can be coupled to the lower manual (so when you press a note on the lower manual, it also physically depresses the key on the upper manual and you get to hear both strings) but _not_ vice versa, meaning that the lower manual is *f* and the upper is *p*. There are some instances of this in the French Overture, for example (especially the last movement, the Echo). No registration indications other than loud/soft, though.

On the organ, there are some rare cases where Bach actually _did_ leave registration instructions. In BWV 645, you see "Sinistra 8 Fuss", "Dextra 8 Fuss", and "Pedal 16 Fuss" at the very start, meaning each hand is on a different manual at 8' pitch and the pedals are at 16' pitch, which is fairly standard. Another example is BWV 720 (here labeled for _three_ manuals and pedal). The "Fagotto" is a 16' bassoon (reed) stop, which Bach had once specifically requested on an organ, I believe, so we have some reason to think he really liked the 16' Fagotto. I've never played on an instrument with a sesquialtera, but Bach also specifies this; it is a combination of a 2 2/3' mutation and a 1 3/5' mutation. You also see Bach jumping back and forth between the manuals (the "Rückpositiv" and "Oberwerk" indications). This is something Bach also indicates in the Dorian toccata, BWV 538 to create an antiphonal effect, though there are no indications about the actual nature of the registration itself. Usually, Bach is content to let us organists figure it out! Each instrument and space is different, and there are no one-size-fits-all solutions with organ registration. He will typically indicate how many manuals are needed (and whether pedal is needed, also) and leave the rest to the performer.


----------



## DTut

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Rather than “derailing” threads in which a poster asks a specific question about a Bach recording, I’ve decided to start this thread as a gathering place for fellow Bach enthusiasts who share a deep passion for the master’s music and the infinite ways in which it may be interpreted. Let’s discuss whatever we want about recordings, concerts, and performers of Bach’s music; scholarship into performance style, newly released recordings, etc. Well, if the thread veers into discussion of Bach’s life, intentions, and historical context I won’t complain either. Basically, we can just geek out about the composer we love The idea was inspired by the Bach Cantatas Mailing List (not an open forum, so not a direct competitor to TC, but mods, feel free to take down the reference if in violation of the TOC) which used to have wonderful in-depth scholarly and lay conversations on such matters, but hasn’t seen much meaningful activity in several years. The archived discussions on each cantata and several other works are a treasure trove to read through, though.


Not that well known outside the classical guitar world, but the Four 'Lute' Suites BWV 995 - 1006a are simply outstanding. Check out the 1975 John Williams recording which is the gold standard for these works.


----------



## SanAntone

DTut said:


> Not that well known outside the classical guitar world, but the Four 'Lute' Suites BWV 995 - 1006a are simply outstanding. Check out the 1975 John Williams recording which is the gold standard for these works.


Except he doesn't play them on a lute.  

Instead I prefer the recording by Hopkinson Smith


----------



## jegreenwood

SanAntone said:


> Except he doesn't play them on a lute.
> 
> Instead I prefer the recording by Hopkinson Smith


I like Smith on lute. In addition to the set you mention, I have a set of him performing lute transcriptions of all of the cello suites and the sonatas and partitas for violin. On guitar, my favorite is Goran Sollscher. I have a number of other recordings as well. Including a recent purchase of the works on lute-harpsichord, for which, some folks argue, the "lute" works were written.


----------



## Wigmar

SearsPoncho said:


> Hey ACB! I'm not a Bach scholar or an expert in period or "authentic" performance practices of the Baroque era, so I'll just list a few of my favorite Bach recordings. However, I would first like to state my awe and admiration for Bach's genius. Did he ever write a bar of music that wasn't musical brilliance at the highest level? Anyhow, here are a few of my favorite recordings:
> 
> 1) Arthur Grumiaux - Complete Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin. If I could only have one Bach disc, this would be it.
> 
> 2) Andras Schiff (piano)- Goldberg Variations (on Decca from the early '80's)
> 
> 3) Martha Argerich (piano) - Bach album with the Partita #2, the English Suite #2, and the Toccata in C minor. I wish she recorded more Bach.
> 
> 4) Brandenburg Concertos - Benjamin Britten/English Chamber Orchestra.
> 
> 5) The Art of Fugue - Evgeni Koroliov (piano) on the Tacet label.
> 
> 6) Mass in B minor - Klemperer/New Philharmonia Orchestra- Epic performance of an epic work.
> 
> 7) Mstislav Rostropovich (cello) - 6 Suites for Unaccompanied Cello - These were recorded live in 1955. They came in a 10 cd Rostropovich box full of other stuff, and like many of those ultra-cheap 10 cd box sets, there's almost no other information given other than the name of the work and, occasionally, the year of recording. These were probably recorded in Moscow.
> 
> *Edit*: I have to include Stokowski's Orchestral Transcriptions with "His Orchestra" as an Honorable Mention selection. As I might have said in a previous post, if loving this is wrong, I don't want to be right. I'm all in.


I may list some recordings in my collection:
BWV 825-30: Pinnock
BWV 846-93: Richter, Riefling (pf), Pinnock
BWV 988: Pinnock, Haugsand



BWV 1001-6: Heifetz, Milstein
BWV 1007-12: Gendron
BWV 1041-3: Oistrakh
BWV 1046-51: Ars Rediviva, Munclinger
BWV 1052-64: Pinnock
BWV 1080: Ars Rediviva, Nikolajeva (pf)


----------



## Wigmar

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Rather than “derailing” threads in which a poster asks a specific question about a Bach recording, I’ve decided to start this thread as a gathering place for fellow Bach enthusiasts who share a deep passion for the master’s music and the infinite ways in which it may be interpreted. Let’s discuss whatever we want about recordings, concerts, and performers of Bach’s music; scholarship into performance style, newly released recordings, etc. Well, if the thread veers into discussion of Bach’s life, intentions, and historical context I won’t complain either. Basically, we can just geek out about the composer we love The idea was inspired by the Bach Cantatas Mailing List (not an open forum, so not a direct competitor to TC, but mods, feel free to take down the reference if in violation of the TOC) which used to have wonderful in-depth scholarly and lay conversations on such matters, but hasn’t seen much meaningful activity in several years. The archived discussions on each cantata and several other works are a treasure trove to read through, though.


BWV 846-893 Pinnock, harpsichord
BWV 988 Haugsand, harpsichord (Simax cd) 
BWV 1001-6 Heifetz (RCA,1952)
BWV 1007-12 Gendron (Philips,1964)
BWV 1041-3 Oistrakh (DG, 1961)
BWV 1046-51 Ars Rediviva (c 1965, Supraphon) 
BWV 1052-58 The English Consort (Archiv) 
BWV 1080 Ars Rediviva (Supraphon)


----------

