# Bach Mass in B Minor BWV 232 - recommendation?



## kg4fxg

Do you have a favorite version of the Bach Mass in B Minor? Each time I look to purchase it and read reviews and can't decided what CD to buy. 

Any recommendations? Please post your thoughts, reviews, links.

Thanks


----------



## BuddhaBandit

This is one of my favorite pieces. I would highly recommend starting with John Eliot Gardiner's version, with Phillipe Herreweghe and Masaaki Suzuki as close seconds. Don't buy Robert Shaw's version, because he tends to make the music prettier and less dramatic.


----------



## the_unexpected

I've been curious about this as well...I bought the EMI Classics reissue of the B Minor Mass with von Karajan/Vienna..and it definitely is a gorgeous recording. (I bought it was available for a decent price at a smaller store that doesn't really have much classical, so I would've bought it automatically) However, I am interested in something like the Gardiner - to give the period recording a representation in my collection. 

I don't have any other recordings with which to compare von Karajan's, but if you're not a serious collector and are easily satisfied with musical beauty, you will not be let down with this reading.


----------



## handlebar

The Gardiner by far and away.

Jim


----------



## jhar26

Gardiner - definitely.


----------



## Ymer

Among the HIP recordings, which one is the HIPest? 

I'm really interested because all of the versions I own and hear - Klemperer, Enescu and Karajan - are nowhere near HIP! 

Thanks


----------



## Celloman

I own the Gardiner, and I can safely say that I have never been disappointed. It's a healthy balance between the puritanism of Rifkin and the giganticism of Celibidache. Not that those interpreters don't have anything to say about it. I tend to prefer my Bach somewhere in the middle.


----------



## DavidA

Gardiner is good and so is Herreweghe in this second recording with a gorgeously slow Agnus Dei from Scholl. I don't go for the one a part castrated singing type, however, nor do I buy the line that it's what Bach did originally so we must do it. Bach no doubt had limited resources and possibly inferior singers. But that doesn't mean we must.


----------



## Il_Penseroso

The best I've ever heard:


----------



## Schumann

My 2 top performers for the Mass in B Minor are definitely both Philippe Herreweghe: Collegium Vocale Gent or Harry Christophers: The Sixteen Choir & Orchestra these two are just right in every way, especially the Agnus Dei part by Philippe Herreweghe & Andreas Scholl is beyond perfection!


----------



## Itullian

Suzuki for me.
In all the Bach choral works.


----------



## SixFootScowl

This is the one I want:








http://www.allmusic.com/album/bach-mass-in-b-minor-mw0002002101]

Listen to clips on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003GT37O8/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A9G4IDK5ZNW30]


----------



## Ymer

I wouldn't be caught dead without my Enescu, Ferrier's singing of the Agnus Dei is the very essence of this music.

Karajan's rendition, not too fond. But Christa Ludwig's extremely slow Agnus Dei... transcendental. I always go back to this.

Klemperer is probably the best balance among the ones I have, certainly the best performance but, in my opinion, tough Janet Baker is ALWAYS perfect, and I mean PERFECT, this music isn't quite as human with her as it is with Ferrier or Ludwig.

The Jochum is also a good recording, somewhere in the middle. Fassbaender, like Janet Baker, perfect and, again, not as human as Ferrier nor as transcendental as Ludwig.

I forgot to mention I also have the Gardiner, most definitely not my favorite, but I want something more HIP! Mostly for comparison/curiosity.

I'm also not fond of men singing the Alto parts but I know there's no way around it with HIP recordings of the mass.

Men singing Vivaldi's Stabat Matter also bother me 

Thanks!


----------



## Guest

Masaaki Suzuki with Bach Collegium Japan. Simply heavenly. If you want the others, by all means buy them as well - it is impossible to have too many recordings of this work. But start with Suzuki.


----------



## Ymer

Thanks, I will! Any idea if it's available as a lossless download somewhere?


----------



## quack

Ymer said:


> I forgot to mention I also have the Gardiner, most definitely not my favorite, but I want something more HIP! Mostly for comparison/curiosity.


The most HIP you can probably get is Rifkin as his one voice per part rendition helped get HIP shaking and was quite controversial for its time (probably still is). Suzuki or either of Kuijken's are probably the closest to the HIP aesthetic of those readily available. Suzuki uses male altos Kuijken uses female. Rifkin is my favourite mass of all i've heard although I do love wallowing in huge romantic Bach as well.


----------



## Guest

Ymer said:


> Thanks, I will! Any idea if it's available as a lossless download somewhere?


Eclassical.com carries much of the BIS catalog, and it does carry Suzuki's recording. Here is the website:
http://www.eclassical.com/conductors/suzuki-masaaki/js-bach-mass-in-b-minor.html
You have the option to purchase it in MP3 format, or 16-bit or 24-bit FLAC. The prices are usually pretty good - the cost is directly proportional to the duration, and unlike many others, you can purchase individual tracks - which is good when you only want a particular work on an album.


----------



## Bas

I prefer the Herreweghe, he has outstanding soloists, that I find to have more expression and are a better match for the orchestra then Suzuki's. I have not heard the one by the Dunedin Consortium - as someone have mentioned - but I have all their other cd's (Mattheus, Messiah, Johannes, Handel's Esther, Handels's Acis & Galathea) and they can not possibly be bad. 

Listen to them all, it is one of Bach's greatest works.

Enjoy!


----------



## Joris

How about Richter?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Bas said:


> I prefer the Herreweghe, he has outstanding soloists, that I find to have more expression and are a better match for the orchestra then Suzuki's. I have not heard the one by the Dunedin Consortium - as someone have mentioned - but I have all their other cd's (Mattheus, Messiah, Johannes, Handel's Esther, Handels's Acis & Galathea) and they can not possibly be bad.
> 
> Listen to them all, it is one of Bach's greatest works.
> 
> Enjoy!


Yes and the Dunedin Consortium's Messiah is the Dublin version. As I recall Messiah initially was not well received in England ("sacred music should not be for entertainment"), but then Handel took it to Ireland and they loved it!


----------



## SixFootScowl

This one looks pretty good:


----------



## Guest

TallPaul said:


> This one looks pretty good:


I have this group's recording of Schubert's Mass in E flat major, D. 950, and they do a very good job with that. I would think this one wouldn't disappoint.


----------



## Xaltotun

As in most things, I also here prefer Klemperer.


----------



## Il_Penseroso

Xaltotun said:


> As in most things, I also here prefer Klemperer.


Yes, slow tempos, romantic phrasing, more acceted basses, choosing great singers and chorus... all sound glorious!


----------



## Llyranor

I'm usually pretty HIP when it comes to Bach, but I'll make an exception for Klemperer and the Mass. I like the Suzuki and Koopman also. Don't have the Gardiner.


----------



## Bulldog

I have all the period instrument sets and still prefer the Leonhardt on DHM. Being out of print, the price is on the high side but definitely worth it.


----------



## Mandryka

The thing that interests me most about performances right now is how the interpretation reflects the meaning of the words. I wouldn't really like to make a recommendation because I'm really still exploring, but I think if you too are interested in the music/meaning relation then you should at least check out Harnoncourt (1986, the second recording he made), Hengelbrock and Herreweghe (all three are well worth hearing.)


----------



## Picander

Joris said:


> How about Richter?


I think the CD you have linked (which I own) is the one that Masaaki Suzuki was referring to when he said:

"I think we should define the word authenticity," says Suzuki. "According to one opinion, Helmuth Rilling and Karl Richter were not authentic. Of course they didn't use period instruments, but they were together with the mind and spirit of Bach. I have played with Rilling's orchestra. The way of playing is very different, but it has insight. And when I was at school I listened to the Richter B Minor Mass a thousand times. I have no contradiction in me in enjoying both types." ( http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/the-delicate-harmonies-and-timbres-of-suzuki-697456.html )

This Richter's version is my favourite Mass in B minor.


----------



## ahammel

I like Celibidache's, but I'm almost hesitant to mention it. If you like Celibidache, you already want a copy of it, and if you don't you'll probably hate it.


----------



## CDs

From what I know Philippe Herreweghe recorded this work more than once (please correct me if I'm wrong). Which one of his recordings of _Mass in B Minor_ is the one to get?


----------



## Pugg

CDs said:


> From what I know Philippe Herreweghe recorded this work more than once (please correct me if I'm wrong). Which one of his recordings of _Mass in B Minor_ is the one to get?


My very humble opinion, this one:

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Erato/6931972


----------



## Titeoteo

CDs said:


> From what I know Philippe Herreweghe recorded this work more than once (please correct me if I'm wrong). Which one of his recordings of _Mass in B Minor_ is the one to get?


Here:

https://www.amazon.com/Mass-B-Minor-BWV-232/dp/B00694VP1O

This version is best selling of Mass in B minor recently on Amazon. Together with version of Sir Gardiner.


----------



## CDs

Titeoteo said:


> Here:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Mass-B-Minor-BWV-232/dp/B00694VP1O
> 
> This version is best selling of Mass in B minor recently on Amazon. Together with version of Sir Gardiner.


Picked that one up a few months ago.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

Titeoteo said:


> Together with version of Sir Gardiner.


Sir John. (The first name is used for Sirs and Dames. The surname is for more senior titles: Lord, Lady, Baron, Baroness, etc.)


----------



## Martin70

It is almost like being asked, "Which of your children are your favourite?" I have far too many recordings, most of which I like in different ways. However in order of most play counts in the last year:

2015 Sir John Elliot Gardiner
2011 Philippe Herreweghe
2009 Frans Bruggen
2006 Veldhoven
1996 Thomas Hengelbrock
2007 Masaaki Suzuki
2009 John Butt
1986 Harnoncourt 
1990 Celibidache
1994 Ton Koopman

That said tastes vary, but the music is so good you can soon find yourself a lot poorer, but with a number of excellent recordings to enjoy. I would not want to be without my Shaw or Klemperer recordings, even if they do not get listened to as often.


----------



## Martin70

It is almost like being asked, "Which of your children are your favourite?" I have far too many recordings, most of which I like in different ways. However in order of most play counts in the last year:

2015 Sir John Elliot Gardiner
2011 Philippe Herreweghe
2009 Frans Bruggen
2006 Veldhoven
1996 Thomas Hengelbrock
2007 Masaaki Suzuki
2009 John Butt
1986 Harnoncourt 
1990 Celibidache
1994 Ton Koopman

That said tastes vary, but the music is so good you can soon find yourself a lot poorer, but with a number of excellent recordings to enjoy. I would not want to be without my Shaw or Klemperer recordings, even if they do not get listened to as often.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I just listened to the 80s Gardiner and 2011 Herreweghe back-to-back. If you want a sample of the difference, listen to the 2-3 minute final movement, Dona Nobis Pacem. With Gardiner it is majestic and conclusive, as it is supposed to be. With Herreweghe it is muted and underwhelming.

I do not understand why Herreweghe insists on always putting such a lid on things in his recordings. To me it is a personal affect that ruins his interpretations. It does not present the works in their full glory as they are intended to be heard. Yes, the sounds he creates are beautiful, the choir lovely and well-blended. But this is Herreweghe, not Bach. I feel like I am getting only a sensitive, precious view of the work.

Although the Gardiner is not quite as beautiful sounding and can sound a bit detached at times, I think he understands the work better and presents a more complete picture. As always, the dramatic sections are well-done and the choral work immaculate.

I also have older recordings I will be revisiting soon - Karajan '50, Enescu, Scherchen '59, Giulini BBC, and Jochum EMI.


----------



## Varick

I am an unapologetic fan of most things Karajan. However, I must say, I find his Mass in B Minor (and most of his Baroque ventures) pretty awful. He is usually great at bringing out the "majesty" of music, especially pieces as grand as the Mass in B Minor. But on this account, I believe he utterly fails.



Joris said:


> How about Richter?


Now this... THIS is IMO the greatest recording of this marvelous piece of music. Talk about Grandiose, majestic, powerful, Sacred, and every other wonderful adjective that should be associated with a performance of this magnificent piece. I truly believe that if Bach could have heard this rendition even he would have thought, "WOW!!!!!"

Obviously I am not a HIPster, I find most HIP recordings to be thin, tinny, uninspired, and weak. I dislike the mentality that one "must" listen to these older pieces in a HIP to get the "genuine" experience. Fooey!!! Imagine if everyone thought that way about food: "No! How dare you add Lobster sauce in Quenelles de Brochet. It's only supposed to have butter and cream. That's the way it was ORIGINALLY made. We should NEVER make improvements on things!!!" Good lord, what an asinine outlook.



Picander said:


> I think the CD you have linked (which I own) is the one that Masaaki Suzuki was referring to when he said:
> 
> "I think we should define the word authenticity," says Suzuki. "According to one opinion, Helmuth Rilling and Karl Richter were not authentic. Of course they didn't use period instruments, *but they were together with the mind and spirit of Bach*. I have played with Rilling's orchestra. The way of playing is very different, but it has insight. And when I was at school I listened to the Richter B Minor Mass a thousand times. I have no contradiction in me in enjoying both types.
> 
> This Richter's version is my favourite Mass in B minor.


I completely concur with the emboldened above. I have not heard Suzuki's version yet. Can someone tell me if that is a HIP version please.

I also find Klemperer's Mass to be very good as well.

V


----------



## Bulldog

Varick said:


> I have not heard Suzuki's version yet. Can someone tell me if that is a HIP version please.


Suzuki's version is definitely HIP and on period instruments - yummy.

FWIW, I totally disagree with your assessment of HIP recordings of Bach's music.


----------



## Varick

Bulldog said:


> Suzuki's version is definitely HIP and on period instruments - yummy..


Thank you. I will still give it a listen. There are some whom I believe do a good job of not going overboard on the HIP stringency such as Trevor Pinnock. Most of what he does in the baroque I find rather good. Often excellent.



Bulldog said:


> FWIW, I totally disagree with your assessment of HIP recordings of Bach's music.


That's fine. That's what makes a ball game. We all like what we like. For me, it's not so much the actual performance of a HIP, it's the "cult-like" mentality that "IT HAS TO BE DONE ON HISTORICAL INSTRUMENTS AND TUNED TO HISTORICAL TONES IN ORDER TO HAVE *ANY VALUE *WHATSOEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" mentality that drives me nuts. I know that there are those who aren't that militant about HIP, but I have met more than my fair share that are that vehement about it.

To each his own.

V


----------



## NLAdriaan

Varick said:


> Thank you. I will still give it a listen. There are some whom I believe do a good job of not going overboard on the HIP stringency such as Trevor Pinnock. Most of what he does in the baroque I find rather good. Often excellent.
> 
> That's fine. That's what makes a ball game. We all like what we like. For me, it's not so much the actual performance of a HIP, it's the "cult-like" mentality that "IT HAS TO BE DONE ON HISTORICAL INSTRUMENTS AND TUNED TO HISTORICAL TONES IN ORDER TO HAVE *ANY VALUE *WHATSOEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" mentality that drives me nuts. I know that there are those who aren't that militant about HIP, but I have met more than my fair share that are that vehement about it.
> 
> To each his own.
> 
> V


Enter Ton Koopman, his (HIP) recordings are not thin, not speeding, not obviously moving out of tune (like the early HIPster recordings) and not conclusive/strict like Gardiner or dull and melodramatic like Herreweghe. Koopman is very inspired and truly festive, he also is the teacher of Suzuki. It is actually wonderful to hear Bach played as it is fun and a celebration of our existence.

Traditional Bach (like Karajan/Klemperer and the old school) sounds obese, like watching a turtle dance. No oxygen, no energy, like swimming in the mud or slowly drowning in quicksand. I truly can't listen to it.

Indeed, to each his own:


----------



## janosgrogan

No doubt in my mind; Concentus Musicus Wien directed by Nikolaus Harnoncourt

Rotraud Hansmann - soprano 1
Emiko Iiyama - soprano 2
Helen Watts - alto
Kurt Equiluz - tenor
Max von Egmond - bass

Wiener Sängerknaben (Vienna Boys' Choir) directed by Hans Gillesberger

Vinyl - TELEFUNKEN - DAS ALTE WERK SKH 20/1-3 Sorry, don't have the CD info.


----------



## Azol

Ton Koopman on Erato is perfect (but countertenors bother me, heh) and I would agree that listening to such complex works as B Mass played on modern instruments is a tiring work (though I enjoy Rilling, Sir John is my preference here). Herreweghe is not my cup of tea, can't listen to his choir on any given day. They used to aim at perfect diction totally overdoing it and it scratches my ear.


----------



## Ras

There are many good recordings but my favorite is Jordi Savall's. On the way from Savall is Bach's Christmas Oratorio.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Some nice observations in this thread.



Azol said:


> Herreweghe is not my cup of tea, can't listen to his choir on any given day. They used to aim at perfect diction totally overdoing it and it scratches my ear.





Brahmsianhorn said:


> I do not understand why Herreweghe insists on always putting such a lid on things in his recordings. To me it is a personal affect that ruins his interpretations. It does not present the works in their full glory as they are intended to be heard. Yes, the sounds he creates are beautiful, the choir lovely and well-blended. But this is Herreweghe, not Bach. I feel like I am getting only a sensitive, precious view of the work.


This is exactly my view on Herreweghe as well. He is probably my least favorite Bach conductor. Everything sounds so pretty, glossy, and homogeneous that it drains the drama out of the music. I never find the music memorable or emotionally affecting whenever I hear one of his recordings.



NLAdriaan said:


> Koopman is very inspired and truly festive, he also is the teacher of Suzuki. It is actually wonderful to hear Bach played as it is fun and a celebration of our existence.


Yes, I agree that Bach should be a celebration of existence! However I always prefer Suzuki to Koopman for his less "interventionist" conducting. Koopman can adopt some surprisingly broad tempi but sometimes rushes a lot as well. Suzuki's choir has a fresh, light sound that matches the quick dance music in the Mass to a T.



NLAdriaan said:


> Traditional Bach (like Karajan/Klemperer and the old school) sounds obese, like watching a turtle dance. No oxygen, no energy, like swimming in the mud or slowly drowning in quicksand. I truly can't listen to it.


Richter's Bach sounds this way to me (and I understand how that can be said about Karajan too), but I find that Klemperer sustains my interest with a hypnotic power, mainly due to the dazzling performance of his choir who sings like every note is their last. The opening Kyrie always strikes me as too slow, but holy smokes, it is riveting! This is the recording that really launched my passion for comparing performances and for that reason it remains among my favorite interpretations of anything.

Gardiner gets recommended a lot. He is brilliant, virtuosic, and engaging but IMO suffers due to a lack of soul.

I highly recommend this unfortunately OOP version for those new to the work:









This is a great underlooked HIP version:









But the most unfortunate oversight of this thread by far, is the ravishing, sensibly-paced Jochum.


----------



## wkasimer

Allegro Con Brio said:


> This is exactly my view on Herreweghe as well. He is probably my least favorite Bach conductor. Everything sounds so pretty, glossy, and homogeneous that it drains the drama out of the music. I never find the music memorable or emotionally affecting whenever I hear one of his recordings.


I largely agree with you - most of Herreweghe's recordings are polished to the nth degree but lack drama. But for me, the two Passions are the exceptions, particularly his first recordings of them.


----------



## ORigel

So far, I know Gardiner, Herreweghe, and Klemperer. 

Love the Gardiner.

Herreweghe's is not dramatic enough, as others have said. He makes the music pretty, instead of assertively "masculine."

Klemperer was hard for me to like at first, but now I love the haunting, slow Kyrie, the mighty Gloria, the rest of the Mass.


----------



## ORigel

Now I've gotten a CD of the Richter recording, and am listening to the Kyrie. And...the voices. It's way better on CD than on audio-compressed Youtube.


----------



## cheregi

I'm rather new to broadly-defined classical music, and the kyrie of Bach's B-minor mass has stood out to me as just one of the absolute most gorgeous pieces of music I've ever heard. That said, I think I strongly prefer performances that are faster and with fewer singers and instrumentalists - on the 'chamber music' end of things. Does anyone have good recommendations along these lines?


----------



## Jacck

cheregi said:


> I'm rather new to broadly-defined classical music, and the kyrie of Bach's B-minor mass has stood out to me as just one of the absolute most gorgeous pieces of music I've ever heard. That said, I think I strongly prefer performances that are faster and with fewer singers and instrumentalists - on the 'chamber music' end of things. Does anyone have good recommendations along these lines?


Václav Luks and Collegium 1704 are certainly on the "chamber music" side of interpretations.


----------



## mparta

wkasimer said:


> I largely agree with you - most of Herreweghe's recordings are polished to the nth degree but lack drama. But for me, the two Passions are the exceptions, particularly his first recordings of them.


Oh, back to gustibus... Herreweghe is by far my favorite Bach conductor. I listen to his Cantata recordings almost daily and heard the B minor Mass just yesterday. I like the Mass a lot, although Gardiner there has a certain kick/frisson that is irresistible. Waiting for my Jordi Savall recording to arrive.

For the passions it's Herreweghe and Harnoncourt.

I have something of Butt, an English critical favorite and didn't like it enough to even remember what it was lol.

Klemperer. Really? Been so long I can't even remember what it might have been like, guess that's the cue to try again.

I find that the B minor Mass and Passions are special occasion music, not daily bread. When I have time for a long sit I can do the St. Matthew Passion or B minor mass. The St. John Passion bothers me, I can make excuses but the content is troubling in retrospect.


----------



## Josquin13

Cheregi writes, "That said, I think I strongly prefer performances that are faster and with fewer singers and instrumentalists - on the 'chamber music' end of things. Does anyone have good recommendations along these lines?"

Me too, generally, & for scholarly as well as aesthetic reasons (although I wouldn't want to be without conductor Peter Schreier's two wonderful Leipzig & Dresden accounts of the Mass played on modern instruments).

For one-voice-per-part or OVPP performances, I'd suggest that you look into the period recording by the Dunedin Consort, conducted by John Butt, which uses an edition of the score created by Joshua Rifkin (who made the very first OVPP recording on LP back in the early 1980s). Note that there are parts of the mass that call for a double choir--here at least 10 singers, 2 x 5, or a double quintet (versus the usual 8 singers in a double choir--2x4, or a double quartet), so the singing shouldn't sound too sparse in those sections. Nor, IMO, should the final Dona Nobis Pacem be taken briskly, as Bach intended the movement to be played with 'majesty' (which may be something to keep in mind when comparing recordings).


















Another favorite of mine is the partly, but not entirely OVPP recording by Jos van Veldhoven and The Netherlands Bach Society on Channel Classics, in DSD hybrid SACD surround sound. Veldhoven mixes an OVPP choir with a fuller (yet not oversized) choir for "aesthetic" reasons, but tends to favor brisk tempi (if you like brisk tempi in Bach, you'll also want to check out his St. Matthew Passion). Here's a live performance to give you some idea about Veldhoven's approach to Bach: 



. (Otherwise, I see the Channel Classics box set may be hard to find these days, as it appears to have gone OOP on Amazon... ??)

In addition, there are a number of other excellent OVPP versions that are worth looking into, which you may prefer, as tastes can vary: from (1) Konrad Junghanel & Cantus Colln (although unfortunately, Junghanel takes the final Dona Nobis Pacem too briskly--in my view, in an otherwise terrific reading), (2) Marc Minkowski & Les Musiciens du Louvre (in their very first Bach recording--imagine starting with the Mass in B minor!), and (3) the pioneering OVPP performance from Andrew Parrott & the Taverner Consort & Choir (which I expect you'll probably like, since it's a very reduced performance, like Butt, Parrott uses no more than 10 singers, with an authentic sized instrumental ensemble. Btw, you may also enjoy reading Parrott's book on the subject of Bach's choir: https://www.amazon.com/Essential-Bach-Choir-Andrew-Parrott/dp/0851157866). While others have liked Sigiswald Kuijken and La Petite Bande's recording, released in 2009 (& reissued in 2015) a bit more than me I'd say ... So you might want to check out and compare these recordings via listening samples (on You Tube, Spotify, etc.) & read reviews.

Konrad Junghanel, Cantus Colln: 





















Andrew Parrott, Taverner Consort & hoir:









With that said, I've not heard the recent OVPP version from Lars Ulrik Mortensen and Concerto Copenhagen, but it has received good, if maybe slightly mixed reviews in some quarters, and it also comes on two hybrid SACDs.

The conductor that I'd consider to be the finest OVPP Bach conductor in the world today is Eric Milnes, who records with Montreal Baroque on the Atma label. Milnes initiated, at the time, the first OVPP cycle of Bach Cantatas, and has been progressing slowly but surely through this cycle over the past decade or so, taking his time to produce thoroughly well rehearsed performances, where he has consistently chosen exceptional solo singers: One essential & quite necessary attribute in a OVPP performance, considering that the singers are more exposed in these performances. Milnes' tempi are also consistently apt & well chosen, in my view. However, unfortunately, Milnes has yet to give us a Bach Mass in B minor. Hopefully, he will one day, and if so, I'll definitely be purchasing it. So, I'd suggest keeping an eye out for a possible Mass in B minor from him--which will be worth the wait, I expect, but in the meantime, I'd also recommend exploring his wonderful 'in progress' Bach Cantata series on Atma: For starters, you might check out their superb disc of Bach's very underrated St. Michaelmas Cantatas (which I liked so much that I bought an extra copy as back up, which is something I very rarely do):





https://www.amazon.com/Bach-Cantate...s+bach+cantatas&qid=1610128450&s=music&sr=1-6.

Another excellent OVPP Bach conductor & ensemble to watch out for in the future--for a possible Mass in B minor--is Philippe Pierlot and the Ricercar Consort. Pierlot & co. have made a very fine OVPP recording of Bach's Magnificat, for example, and will undoubtedly get to the 'great' Mass at some point:






You might also enjoy the Purcell Quartet's OVPP chamber recordings of Bach Cantatas (but again, they've not done the Mass in B minor): 



.

(Btw, while I'm on the subject of the cantatas, there's another excellent OVPP Bach Cantata disc from Konrad Junghanel & Cantus Colln, performing the "Actus Tragicus" Cantata BWV 106, etc.: 



. Plus, there's also Joshua Rifkin's pioneering OVPP Bach Cantata recordings on L'Oiseau-Lyre, which are well worth hearing.)

While in the 'other camp', you'll probably want to stay away from conductors Gardiner, Herreweghe, Leonhardt, Hengelbrock, and Koopman, who all use oversized choirs (usually well over 16 singers, which was the limit during Bach's lifetime, in Lutheran Germany) & larger instrumental forces than Bach asks for, whatever the merits of their performances may be otherwise. Of these five, Gardiner tends to get away with a huge choir, more so than the others, due to the incredible virtuosity of his Monteverdi Choir. So too does Hengelbrock, with his fine Balthasar-Neumann-Choir (& excellent Freiburger Barockorchester). In contrast, Suzuki tends to use smaller, more medium sized forces than these conductors (16 singers or less), but his performances aren't one-voice-to-a-part, either.

As for Vaclav Luks and Collegium 1704, Luks uses a choir of 21 singers, which is a gigantic choir for Bach's time, and therefore, far from an authentic 'chamber' version. Although it is a beautiful and thoughtful performance.

Hope that helps.


----------



## cheregi

Josquin13 said:


> Me too, generally, & for scholarly as well as aesthetic reasons (although I wouldn't want to be without conductor Peter Schreier's two wonderful Leipzig & Dresden accounts of the Mass played on modern instruments).


Wow!! Thank you for this amazingly, wonderfully thorough response! I am making my way through all of these recommendations. I haven't even begun listening with any seriousness to recordings of the cantatas, because Bach's oeuvre is just too intimidatingly large, so it's great to also have places to start with those.


----------



## Handelian

wkasimer said:


> I largely agree with you - most of Herreweghe's recordings are polished to the nth degree but lack drama. But for me, the two Passions are the exceptions, particularly his first recordings of them.


Herreweghe's second recording of the mass is beautifully played and sung - fabulous Angus Dei from Scholl - but certainly not lacking in drama to my ears.


----------



## Vienne

Klemperer’s interpretation was my introduction to this greatest of Bach masses. Recently I’ve discovered Veldhoven, who has not been mentioned too many times in this thread. Whereas Klemperer is suffused with the power and force of sound, I think Veldhoven’s version features a pleasing balance and clarity maintained among the performers throughout the movements. I do recommend trying both.


----------



## Martin70

The comments above are worthy opinions, so please forgive my duplication of some already recommended.

I collect the B-Minor-Mass and have far too many recordings. All Herreweghe's recordings are safe when I need a relaxed but polished listen. Veldhoven, Dijkstra, Lutz, Henglebrock and Jordi Savall are more dramatic and regular listens. Yesterday I enjoyed Harnoncourt's first and he, Gardiner, Bruggen, Butt, Konrad Junghanel, Masaaki Suzuki & Luks are also highly recommended. Richter needs to be included on any list as it is a worthy classic. I do also admit to listening to Peter Schreier, Shaw, Klemperer and Enescu when I want a larger assembly or something different, although they are occasional listens only. Those I have and avoid are William Christie, Stephen Layton and Karajan. Many others are good, some mentioned above.

I find my mood dictates which I listen to and I would be hard pressed to go without any of the recordings, even those I don't really enjoy, they help me appreciate my favourites even more.

However no recording can replace a live performance and I cannot wait for the current restrictions to be lifted as I can think of no more appropriate music to celebrate when we can return to listening live. The last time I saw it live I sat next to Lenny Henry, that was when Butt last performed the Mass at the Barbican and we had a lively discussion about Albert Coates first recording, while I would not recommend buying it, it is out of copyright and worth a listen for historical reasons only.

Eric Milnes is on the wish list, but does anyone know of any about to be released?


----------



## Josquin13

Martin70 writes, "Eric Milnes is on the wish list, but does anyone know of any about to be released?

In regards to the Mass in B minor, there are no plans as far as I know currently. However!!, the following Covid-19 related recording of the Kyrie on 33 'socially distant' cellphones (& therefore I suppose some allowances must be made)--with the Ensemble L'Harmonie des saisons--shows that he's recently had the Mass on his mind. I don't know this Quebec based ensemble, as they are new to me, so I can't vouch for them. Although Milnes' other ensemble, Montreal Baroque, is, IMO, one of the best period bands on the planet, & I can certainly recommend them. In the past, Milnes has also worked with the superb Boston-based choir, Blue Heron, led by Scott Metcalfe, so I suppose he could potentially record a Mass in B minor out of Boston, as well, or possibly Portland, Oregon, where he has also worked, or maybe New York City, where he's from...






In the meantime, here is Milnes' discography for the Canadian Atma label, and again, I'd strongly recommend his current 'in progress' OVPP Bach Cantata series for that label (& especially the "St. Michaelmas" Cantatas disc, which has become a great favorite of mine, and makes a valuable contrast to Gardiner's recordings of the same using larger forces): https://atmaclassique.com/en/artiste/eric-milnes/


----------



## BachIsBest

Josquin13 said:


> While in the 'other camp', you'll probably want to stay away from conductors Gardiner, Herreweghe, Leonhardt, Hengelbrock, and Koopman, who all use oversized choirs (usually well over 16 singers, which was the limit during Bach's lifetime, in Lutheran Germany) & larger instrumental forces than Bach asks for, whatever the merits of their performances may be otherwise. Of these five, Gardiner tends to get away with a huge choir, more so than the others, due to the incredible virtuosity of his Monteverdi Choir. So too does Hengelbrock, with his fine Balthasar-Neumann-Choir (& excellent Freiburger Barockorchester). In contrast, Suzuki tends to use smaller, more medium sized forces than these conductors (16 singers or less), but his performances aren't one-voice-to-a-part, either.
> 
> As for Vaclav Luks and Collegium 1704, Luks uses a choir of 21 singers, which is a gigantic choir for Bach's time, and therefore, far from an authentic 'chamber' version. Although it is a beautiful and thoughtful performance.
> 
> Hope that helps.


As an important historical note, we know Bach consistently requested more singers than what he had available. Ideally, according to his letters, he would have liked to have around 32 singers; this is what Gardiner generally bases his forces on. It is unlikely Bach ever heard his music sung with many more than 16ish singers (if even that) but he generally wanted it sung with more. As 32 was already close to fantastical for his day, it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable he might have preferred even more if he could choose, and hear, any number of high-quality singers.

All this is to say I don't think OVPP have such an exclusive claim to being the "authentic" Bach voice.


----------



## Handelian

BachIsBest said:


> As an important historical note, we know Bach consistently requested more singers than what he had available. Ideally, according to his letters, he would have liked to have around 32 singers; this is what Gardiner generally bases his forces on. It is unlikely Bach ever heard his music sung with many more than 16ish singers (if even that) but he generally wanted it sung with more. As 32 was already close to fantastical for his day, it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable he might have preferred even more if he could choose, and hear, any number of high-quality singers.
> 
> All this is to say I don't think OVPP have such an exclusive claim to being the "authentic" Bach voice.


I think as Gardiner himself says anyone who says their performance is 'authenitic' is suffering under a delusion as Bach along with Handel te al would adapt his music to what he had available. If he had a choir of 32 you bet he would've use them. The charge Gardiner uses a 'huge' choir for the mass is actually quite ridiculous as it was considered small when the recording was made withOVPP in p,aces.


----------



## gellio

Have Herreweghe's on Harmonia Mundi, but just picked up Suzuki's. I hope it's good.


----------



## Guest002

gellio said:


> View attachment 150411
> 
> 
> Have Herreweghe's on Harmonia Mundi, but just picked up Suzuki's. I hope it's good.


It's superb. (All of his Bach is. If you only have the money to acquire one set of cantatas, for example: get Suzuki's.)
Just my personal view, of course, and our tastes may be wildly different.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

gellio said:


> View attachment 150411
> 
> 
> Have Herreweghe's on Harmonia Mundi, but just picked up Suzuki's. I hope it's good.


Some accuse Suzuki of being slick and detached, but I don't hear it (but that's exactly how I hear Herreweghe!) Amazing sound quality, virtuosic playing and singing, and soloists with fresh, pure voices. Next to Hengelbrock it's my favorite HIP version.


----------



## gellio

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> It's superb. (All of his Bach is. If you only have the money to acquire one set of cantatas, for example: get Suzuki's.)
> Just my personal view, of course, and our tastes may be wildly different.


I have Gardiner's complete on the sacred and Suzuki's on the secular.


----------



## Guest002

gellio said:


> I have Gardiner's complete on the sacred and Suzuki's on the secular.


Oh well. In my view, that's at least the wrong way round: but you do you! It's not that Gardiner is ghastly or anything 
When one is starting from a relatively blank slate, it doesn't matter what you listen to, so long as you listen.
There's all the time in the world to sort it out afterwards.


----------



## ArtMusic

A superb new recording,


----------



## gellio

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> Oh well. In my view, that's at least the wrong way round: but you do you! It's not that Gardiner is ghastly or anything
> When one is starting from a relatively blank slate, it doesn't matter what you listen to, so long as you listen.
> There's all the time in the world to sort it out afterwards.


That's exactly right. I had actually looked for Suzuki's complete scared but it was way too expensive and I've had good experiences with Gardiner elsewhere.

When I first started getting into opera and classical music, there were two names I knew: Pavarotti and Solti. So if the box had either on it, I bought it, then through those experiences I learned more orchestras, conductors and singers. I like the cantatas that I've heard, but Bach is a rarity for me. I much prefer the Classical period (and even the Romantic) to the Baroque. So aside from Bach, Handel and Vivaldi I don't listen to too much Baroque and I don't listen to it very frequently.

I've been sidelined from this with Brahms _Ein deustches Requiem_ which is stunning.


----------



## mparta

I've thought that Gardiner's approach for this, which is essentially to my hearing a more virtuoso piece, a demonstration of his credentials for a big mass, as opposed to the Lutheran passions-- anyway, the Gardiner is very bright and really spits it out in a way that's exciting, good singing.









My new acquisition, just listened for the first time yesterday, absolutely wonderful. The acoustic has a bit of extra resonance but the performance is great. Apparently there's some region thing for the dvd and my all-region Blu-ray player was misbehaving, so I have to figure out and fix that before I'd comment on the film. Usual luxury presentation from this source and the music performance is as good as any I've heard. Will repeat soon.

I have and kept the Suzuki recordings and the big Gardiner box (gave away the Koopman set), but I find Suzuki bland in all, having heard his Matthew Passion in performance. The cantatas are ok as are the passions and the Mass, but not my top choice at all. In everything except the B minor mass I have tended to favor Herreweghe for everything he does, the most consistent Bach I know and of everything he does, almost always the keeper.

but this Savall is wonderful.


----------



## mparta

PS: been looking at that Dutch Van Veldhoven. Wonder if it's worth it?


----------



## arapinho1

IMO it is. Their YT channel is fantastic


----------



## Simon23

Two of the best recordings by far are Klemperer and Richter. Both are large-scale, emotional, with great soloists.


----------



## FastkeinBrahms

Today, I have been listening to two recordings at the opposite ends of the spectrum: Jochum's EMI recording with the Bavaria RSO and chorus: Gorgeous, moving, full of sprituality and at a great pace, I agree with Allegro con brio on this one. And Marc Minkowski with just ten voices, but what warmth he brings to this music, nothing of the asceticism of Parrot in his equally minimalistic rendering, although I enjoy the latter for the sheer transparency of every line. 

In short: I enjoy all performances that strive to serve the music rather than the ego of the conductor, and especially Bach's universal musical language allows many different tongues of interpretation.


----------



## gellio

I'm not crazy about the Suzuki. Seems dull.


----------



## mparta

at only 1.5 full hearings but...

They are really spectacular in many aspects. Virtuosic singing, a bass that's amazing and a tenor that's really remarkable in fitting into the voices as instruments mentality. The orchestra playing equally fine, especially the winds, wow, some wonderful unisons and gorgeous reed playing.

But the minimal choral representation, I guess one to a part, lacks grandeur when needed. Gloria needs to sound like the heavens are opening, not something out of a mummer's parade. The "resurrexit" sounds like Jesus bolts out of the tomb and onto a high speed motorbike. Yikes, too fast, shouldn't just do it fast because you can!

But much is quite extraordinarily beautiful. So I'd say high marks for what's good, and even what's not doesn't preclude enjoyment, so it will get another go around. But sometimes tradition does what it does because the tempo and the style of tradition are really what is in the music, not just schlamperei.

I think this approach might work better with the passions. I'm thinking that's next. The Amazon price for this is one of those goofy $900 fake things (surely nobody does that), but they're easily obtainable on the Channel Classics sight, quick delivery.

More music that is better than it can be performed, overall very impressed but with caveats.


----------



## mparta

gellio said:


> I'm not crazy about the Suzuki. Seems dull.


dull recordings and dull in performance, Matthew Passion at Carnegie Hall a few years ago just forgettable. How can that be?


----------



## Captainnumber36

Listening to a version of this right now. It's so good.


----------



## guyseid

I wonder no one mentioned the recording of Andrew Andrew Parrott and the Taverner Consort & Players.
This is one of my favorite recordings. One voice per part, very intimate, great soloists.
I love Gardiner and Herreweghe too, but Parrott is special.


----------



## JTS

guyseid said:


> I wonder no one mentioned the recording of Andrew Andrew Parrott and the Taverner Consort & Players.
> This is one of my favorite recordings. One voice per part, very intimate, great soloists.
> I love Gardiner and Herreweghe too, but Parrott is special.


Aftpraid the castrated voices in Parrotf's recordings tend to be one step too far for me. Agree concerning Gardiner an£ Herreweghe


----------



## premont

JTS said:


> Aftpraid the castrated voices in Parrotf's recordings tend to be one step too far for me. Agree concerning Gardiner an£ Herreweghe


The altos are boys, and the sopranos are women, so where do you hear castrated voices?


----------



## JTS

premont said:


> The altos are boys, and the sopranos are women, so where do you hear castrated voices?


Parrot tends to encourage a very thin sound. A matter of taste. I prefer a fuller sound from the voices.

NB you do realise I was not using the word 'castrated' literally!


----------



## Pyotr

Is Bach's Mass in B Minor a Catholic Mass?


----------



## Tarneem

thomanerchor is my way to go. God bless those angels


----------



## tedmoy

Joris said:


> How about Richter?


Yes, his version is my very favorite.


----------

