# The Greatness of Goldberg Variations



## Normida (Sep 13, 2018)

from many years I listend many Piano pieces from Chopin, Beethoven, Schubert, and more. but no one reached the greatness of Goldberg Variations by J. S. Bach. It contains so much techanques so much rich and so much emotional moves that flow with the rythm. each of the 30th variations are completely perfect, and you start to get confuse about which one of these variations are the best.

I can say that I'm really sad about those stupid people who think that moonlight or Clair de lune are the most greatest piano pieces in the history of music. They may be the popluer but they're not the greatest piano pieces have been writting in the history.

If Bach did not compose any music except Goldberg Variations, It would a sign proof of his greatness.

Listen to the best version of Goldberg Variations by Glenn Gould.


__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content









J. S. Bach - Goldberg Variations BWV 988 - Glenn Gould (1956) Complete

__
https://soundcloud.com/ibrahim-alsalih%2Fj-s-bach-goldberg-variations-bwv-988-by-pianist-glenn-gould


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

people who listen claire de lune or moonlight sonata are usually not serious classical music listeners. Bach's keyboard music is no doubt great, I love it myself - French suites, English suites, the 6 partitas, Goldbergs, the keyboard concertos. But I love equally well Chopin, Schubert, Schumann, Beethoven, Scarlatti, Couperin and countless others. They are like different flavors and I cannot eat just one flavor all the time.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

A serious classical music listener is a person who has a serious look on his/her face when listening.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Normida said:


> . . . .
> 
> I can say that I'm really sad about those stupid people who think that moonlight or Clair de lune are the most greatest piano pieces in the history of music. They may be the popluer but they're not the greatest piano pieces have been writting in the history.
> 
> . . . .


Except the Goldberg Variations is not a piano piece. This from one of those stupid people who likes the Moonlight Sonata, Claire de Lune and the Goldberg Variations. Not Gould '55 especially though.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^^ But if your avatar is you then you are doing pretty well as far as musical taste is concerned. 

I also like the Moonlight and the Goldbergs.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

> Listen to the best version of Goldberg Variations by Glenn Gould.


Can we make our own choices or is it mandatory?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Jeremy Denk: “The best reason to hate Bach's Goldberg Variations—aside from the obvious reason that everyone asks you all the time which of the two Glenn Gould recordings you prefer—is that everybody loves them. Not a moment goes by when someone doesn't release a new recording, accompanied by breathless press. They're like a trendy bar that (infuriatingly) keeps staying trendy. Yes, I'm suspicious of the Goldbergs' popularity. Classical Music is not really supposed to be that popular. I worried for years that I would be seduced into playing them, and would become like all the others—besotted, cultish—and that is exactly what happened. I have been assimilated into the Goldberg Borg.”

Denk’s recording includes an excellent video walk-through of the variations as he plays them at the keyboard and offers his commentary.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

I think the 2 books of Well Tempered Clavier are the greatest sets of keyboard pieces Bach ever wrote. In terms of devices and techniques, singing quality, Goldberg Variations are also very fine works. Especially, the eventual return to the Aria after that long musical journey moves me deeply, but WTC seems to have more variety. 
Beethoven's Sonata Quasi Una Fantasia Op.27 No.2 in C sharp minor is still a great work of keyboard music literature. I don't like the cliched nickname "Moonlight", which wasn't even conceived by Beethoven himself. I don't like how we all have to call it by the name just cause that's the image most people associate the piece with.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Normida said:


> from many years I listend many Piano pieces from Chopin, Beethoven, Schubert, and more. but no one reached the greatness of Goldberg Variations by J. S. Bach. It contains so much techanques so much rich and so much emotional moves that flow with the rythm. each of the 30th variations are completely perfect, and you start to get confuse about which one of these variations are the best.
> 
> I can say that I'm really sad about those stupid people who think that moonlight or Clair de lune are the most greatest piano pieces in the history of music. They may be the popluer but they're not the greatest piano pieces have been writting in the history.
> 
> ...


You didn't establish such folk's stupidity.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

jegreenwood said:


> Except the *Goldberg Variations is not a piano piece. * This from one of those stupid people who likes the Moonlight Sonata, Claire de Lune and the Goldberg Variations. Not Gould '55 especially though.


It was not written originally for the piano as they piano wasn't invented. But it can be played on the piano with great effect.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Rogerx said:


> Can we make our own choices or is it mandatory?


It is certainly not mandatory to like it [Gould's Goldbergs]


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

DavidA said:


> It was not written originally for the piano as they piano wasn't invented. But it can be played on the piano with great effect.


Really! I didn't know that! 

Seriously, I was annoyed by the OP, in a first post on this forum, describing people whose opinion differed from his/hers as stupid.


----------



## ribonucleic (Aug 20, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Jeremy Denk: "I have been assimilated into the Goldberg Borg."


The Goldborg.

Anyway, I listen to the Goldberg Variations more often than any other piece of classical music. Until now, at least, I have done so without worrying that it marks me as a dilettante. _That _ brings us to the cusp of a much larger discussion of snobbism in classical music - one best tackled elsewhere.

So I'll just say that, with age, I've come to prefer the autumnal profundity of Gould 1981 to the youthful brio of Gould 1955, but prefer Hewitt and especially Perahia to either. (For some reason, my tolerance of the sound of the harpsichord has decreased to the point where I can only tolerate it only in Scarlatti.)


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

jegreenwood said:


> Really! I didn't know that!
> 
> Seriously, I was annoyed by the OP, in a first post on this forum, describing people whose opinion differed from his/hers as stupid.


Now and then, a new member wants to make a splash with his/her first postings. It's rather immature and attention-seeking, but they usually settle down with time.


----------



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

Bulldog said:


> Now and then, a new member wants to make a splash with his/her first postings. It's rather immature and attention-seeking, but they usually settle down with time.


I'm not sure that's necessarily true. I remember my first thread that I created was a poll called "The greatest piece ever written," containing what I thought were fifteen acceptable candidates for the greatest piece ever written. The results were essentially just the same as this thread. However, I did it not for attention but because I was sincerely so limited in my knowledge of classical music that I had assumed these were the fifteen. After some months, I began to explore other composers than the basic Tchaikovsky and Beethoven (the only two I really knew), and I've been trying to listen to new stuff ever since.

The point being: I think the OP is like I was, in that they have probably been exposed to limited amounts of music, and this forum will open them up to so many new pieces.

Also keep in mind that the OP obviously speaks English as a second or third language, meaning many of their choice words may have been not what they were trying to convey.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Tchaikov6 said:


> Also keep in mind that the OP obviously speaks English as a second or third language, meaning many of their choice words may have been not what they were trying to convey.


Maybe, but how many meanings might "stupid people" have?

You first posting on TC was a poll? That's a brave choice to make. My first postings all involved Bach's music; I wanted to start off with my relative strengths.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Tchaikov6 said:


> I'm not sure that's necessarily true. I remember my first thread that I created was a poll called "The greatest piece ever written," containing what I thought were fifteen acceptable candidates for the greatest piece ever written. The results were essentially just the same as this thread. However, I did it not for attention but because I was sincerely so limited in my knowledge of classical music that I had assumed these were the fifteen. After some months, I began to explore other composers than the basic Tchaikovsky and Beethoven (the only two I really knew), and I've been trying to listen to new stuff ever since.
> 
> The point being: I think the OP is like I was, in that they have probably been exposed to limited amounts of music, and this forum will open them up to so many new pieces.
> 
> Also keep in mind that the OP obviously speaks English as a second or third language, meaning many of their choice words may have been not what they were trying to convey.


There's a difference between naive enthusiasm, which I see generally treated sympathetically here (sorry if that wasn't the case for you) and naive, rude condescension. "Stupid" is not an uncommon word.


----------



## Tchaikov6 (Mar 30, 2016)

Bulldog said:


> Maybe, but how many meanings might "stupid people" have?
> 
> *You first posting on TC was a poll?* That's a brave choice to make. My first postings all involved Bach's music; I wanted to start off with my relative strengths.


Here it is, very embarrassing thread looking back on it.

And that's true, both you and jegreenwood make very good points that "stupid" is probably a pretty easy word to translate. Personally, I'd like to see what the OP has to say about the responses first before coming to a complete conclusion, but their post is quite pretentious.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Tchaikov6 said:


> Here it is, very embarrassing thread looking back on it.
> 
> And that's true, both you and jegreenwood make very good points that "stupid" is probably a pretty easy word to translate. Personally, I'd like to see what the OP has to say about the responses first before coming to a complete conclusion, but their post is quite pretentious.


The ironic thing is, while I might not focus exclusively on Clair de lune or the "Moonlight" sonata, or even all music with "moonlight" in its name (I think the OP was more trying to be funny and clever there than insulting, but English is probably not his first language as has been suggested and it didn't translate well), to me the piano works of Debussy and Beethoven as a whole are two of the greatest monuments to the keyboard in all western music.

Also, my fellow Goldberg fans, including the OP, may not, unless you play the flute, be familiar with the 30 Caprices of Sigfrid Karg-Elert, op. 107, an ingenious and elaborate tribute to the Goldberg Variations. But, poor Sigfrid Karg-Elert! You know you haven't been accepted as a great composer when spell check rejects all three parts of your name.


----------



## JayBee (Apr 14, 2018)

I have just been listening to some samples of Karg-Elert. Thank you for introducing me to him! I have to be in the mood for the sound of the flute, but when I am, I very much appreciate it and the music written for it. Again, thank you.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude (May 29, 2016)

I like de Lune, Moonlight and Goldberg. But I already know I'm stupid. Mother in law said so.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

My friends, the Thema Goldberg Variations and Glenn Gould is expired. The reasons:

1. The Variations aren't Bachs Crown work and as far as I know (as a German and NOT because of my expertise in the composer, which is at least mediocre) not even between his best 5 works.

2. Glenn, was a Bach phenomenon. But personally, I can not confirm this, because of my restricted knowledge. What I can say, and here I'm not alone, is that Glenn had his own way playing Bach, which many times was very peculiar. This peculiarity worked fine with Johann, but didn't work with Beethoven. (here I have a very well established opinion) *I say boldly that I prefer Arrau for Bach (and Beethoven) because I don't like any experiments and liberties with composers don't allow them in their music. *(Bach for an unknown reason, because his manuscripts they don't have instructions for the interpreter or they seldom have, Ludwig, because has put almost everything he wanted on the music score.)

_*Wanda Landowska, is also a perfect alternative for any work of J.S Bach. The same for Sir Andras Schiff._


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Rosalyn Tureck's Goldbergs:

I do not understand what the fanfare is about them. I just finished listening to them again (I revisit them every few years or so), and once again, I am baffled by the praise. Technique wise, they sound like a well schooled, slightly better than average skilled high school piano student albeit with a slightly more mature phrasing. It plods along, often at an excruciatingly slow pace, often sounding heavy handed and mechanical.

I have now listened to this recording about 5-6 times and doubt I will again being that as I get older, I realize I don't have as much time as I used to in this life and rather listen to recordings that are outstanding (Both Gould's, Gavrilov's, Feltsman's), or have something more to unpack (Schiff's, Perahia's) or try one's I haven't heard yet.

V


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Bulldog said:


> A serious classical music listener is a person who has a serious look on his/her face when listening.


Don't forget the serious gestures he makes to accompany the serious face!!


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

Normida said:


> from many years I listend many Piano pieces from Chopin, Beethoven, Schubert, and more. but no one reached the greatness of Goldberg Variations by J. S. Bach. It contains so much techanques so much rich and so much emotional moves that flow with the rythm. each of the 30th variations are completely perfect, and you start to get confuse about which one of these variations are the best.
> 
> I can say that I'm really sad about those stupid people who think that moonlight or Clair de lune are the most greatest piano pieces in the history of music. They may be the popluer but they're not the greatest piano pieces have been writting in the history.
> 
> ...


My theory is this: When (like me) you think Gould is the best interpretor of the Goldberg Variations, it's actually Gould you're listening to and not Bach.


----------



## Razumovskymas (Sep 20, 2016)

His partita's are even better though! 

I mean Gould's


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

DavidA said:


> It was not written originally for the piano as they piano wasn't invented. But it can be played on the piano with great effect.


I believe the Goldbergs were written about 1741, many years after the invention of the piano around 1700. In the 1730's Bach had tried out a model by Silbermann and offered criticism, which was evidently taken to heart. In 1747, Bach became a sales agent for Silbermann's improved piano and sold at least a couple - sales documents survive. In the same year he wrote his _Musical Offering_ for Frederick the Great, who had a collection of pianos. That work was "put forward by the musicologist Charles Rosen as the most significant piano composition in history (partly because it is one of the first)."


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Interesting, what's the source of that quote? I know that the three voice fugue that he had improvised would have been written on one of Frederick's/his son Carl's fortepianos, but the rest of it that he'd worked out at home... I guess I didn't realize he had a piano at home to work with.

I wouldn't say it's the best, but my favorite Goldberg is definitely Gould's original 1955 recording. Just something about it.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

The quote is from the Wiki entry on the Musical Offering. It seems to me that Tom Service wrote on that subject in The Guardian some time back, but I can't find it now.

Here's a link to *Rosen's article *in the NYT.​


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Varick said:


> Rosalyn Tureck's Goldbergs:
> 
> I do not understand what the fanfare is about them. I just finished listening to them again (I revisit them every few years or so), and once again, I am baffled by the praise. Technique wise, they sound like a well schooled, slightly better than average skilled high school piano student albeit with a slightly more mature phrasing. It plods along, often at an excruciatingly slow pace, often sounding heavy handed and mechanical.


That's not what I hear when I listen to Tureck's Bach. Different strokes I guess.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Now Maria Yudina's Goldbergs... Now we are on to something! Amazing: also about the 4th or 5th time listening to them and they are wonderful. Very different from most interpretations. A bit harsh? Perhaps, but I think that has more to do with the recording quality than anything. Fascinating passages and accents throughout each movement. Definitely worth exploring.

V


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Varick said:


> Rosalyn Tureck's Goldbergs:
> 
> I do not understand what the fanfare is about them. I just finished listening to them again (I revisit them every few years or so), and once again, I am baffled by the praise. Technique wise, they sound like a well schooled, slightly better than average skilled high school piano student albeit with a slightly more mature phrasing. It plods along, often at an excruciatingly slow pace, often sounding heavy handed and mechanical.
> 
> ...


She recorded the whole thing seven times. Which one are you talking about?


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

I've tried the Goldbergs many times from many different performers. Each time I've liked them a bit more, but ultimately end up with more admiration and very little love. I find this is a frequent reaction I have with Bach. I can appreciate the craft, but I'm frequently unmoved by the art. This isn't always the case. For example, I deeply love the WTC, both books, all four discs. It's an even longer journey than the Goldbergs, but at the end I really feel like I've been through something profound, as opposed to just hearing an ostentatious, technical, intellectual exercise on how many interesting things you can do with a simple melody; and I don't mean that as a criticism of the variation form, as I adore many variations by other composers, including Beethoven's Diabelli's. I'm sure I will eventually hear the Goldbergs again, and maybe then they'll finally click, or maybe this might be one work whose "greatness" will forever elude me. 

Until then, I'll remain one of the dum-dums that prefers Beethoven's Moonlight (though there are many other Beethoven's I'd take before it) and Clair de lune (ditto).


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

The extraordinary quality of the Goldberg Variations is the return of the opening aria at the end after all the variations between them have been played like one, long, continuous, incredible journey. Most theme and variations do not return to the exact opening theme, which is certainly true, for example, of Beethoven’s Diabelli Variations. Then perhaps the Goldbergs are like the TS Eliot poem:

We shall not cease from exploration, 
And the end of all our exploring 
Will be to arrive where we started 
And know the place for the first time.

That’s what I hear as unique and extraordinary about the Goldberg Variations, and the entire set, even with repeats, takes only about an hour. But it’s a matter of finding the right performance to experience this great exploratory journey as a metaphor of life.
.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

While I very much like the idea of "returning to the beginning" in the arts--indeed, many of my favorite films, novels, poems, and, yes, pieces of music have codas or endings in which some theme or motif established at the beginning or early on is returned to in the end either directly, or in some way that's meaningfully transformed--I'm not sure that facet alone is especially remarkable. It's a rather easy and common technique to end where you began, but that return will only be meaningful and impactful if the piece did manage to take you on an emotional journey before that return. I understand that many feel the Goldbergs do that, but they don't for me; at least, not to the extent that I find the return to the main aria especially moving or profound or whatnot.


----------



## chrish (Aug 21, 2016)

Clair de lune and Moonlight are the two pieces along with few Chopin compositions, that got me into Piano music in the first place. Without listening to them, I don't think I would have ever bothered.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Mandryka said:


> She recorded the whole thing seven times. Which one are you talking about?


You learn something everyday. I don't know where it is right now, it's buried in a box filled with other CDs and stacked with other boxes of CDs, but this is the recording that I have: On my computer it says the recording is from 2000, but I'm thinking that is an error









V


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Varick said:


> You learn something everyday. I don't know where it is right now, it's buried in a box filled with other CDs and stacked with other boxes of CDs, but this is the recording that I have: On my computer it says the recording is from 2000, but I'm thinking that is an error
> 
> View attachment 117124
> 
> ...


Yes, I know that one and indeed I saw her play them in a concert around the time that she released that performance. If I want to hear her this music I tend to pick the recording she made 40 years earlier. Generally I'm very keen on her earlier recordings of Bach.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

*The Goldberg Variations*

I find these to be the supreme work written for keyboard. Bach has even greater simplicity than Mozart and even greater emotional depth.

I think my tastes are changing again. Whoever showed my Kempfs version planted the seed in my brain.

:tiphat:

What are some of your favorite versions?

I bring back Lang Lang for this, I do love his schmaltzy take.
I need to re-listen to both of Gould's takes.
I love Kempff.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

My favourite from this moment. I believe there are snips on You tube.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Rogerx said:


> My favourite from this moment. I believe there are snips on You tube.


I'll take a listen. He seems to be one of your favorite pianists, I see you posting him a lot in the listening to now thread.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

This can turn into an anything Bach thread. I have also loved his Cello Suites (the other instrument I learned) and Brandenburg Concertos. His St. Matthew's Passion also caught my ear.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Alex T. is grand.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I find these to be the supreme work written for keyboard. Bach has even greater simplicity than Mozart and even greater emotional depth.
> 
> I think my tastes are changing again. Whoever showed my Kempfs version planted the seed in my brain.
> 
> ...


I think you will enjoy hearing this

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bach-Klavierbuchlein-Wilhelm-Friedemann-1999-10-19/dp/B013Q7N40G


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> I think you will enjoy hearing this
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bach-Klavierbuchlein-Wilhelm-Friedemann-1999-10-19/dp/B013Q7N40G


Thanks. I needed to get out of my own box of what I already know by him.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

Captainnumber36 said:


> This can turn into an anything Bach thread.


Great, my violin teacher just asked me what I want to play and she gave me a few recommendations and I chose Bach's concerto for 2 violins. I believe my violin teacher really wants to play with me so that's why I chose this one, but his 1st violin concerto in a minor speaks to me more for some reason, probably because it's obviously very good but I also love minor and I prefer it over major. Btw I'm listening to Hillary Hahn and I do prefer her over Oistrakh and Manze but I can see why other people prefer Oistrakh and Manze.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Thanks. I needed to get out of my own box of what I already know by him.


There's quite a lot of domestic music by Bach, stuff he wrote for his kids or just to play in the house rather than in church or in a concert. For me that's a real satisfying side of his music to hear, at least when played "modestly" - no extrovert swagger, no big gestures - as in that Payne set. Another example would be inventions - and the French Suites.

I think that you were wrong to say that the Goldberg Variations are "simple" - contrapuntally they're not - but I know what you mean in at least some of the variations.


----------



## Jogaga (Nov 24, 2021)

Classic András Schiff


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> There's quite a lot of domestic music by Bach, stuff he wrote for his kids or just to play in the house rather than in church or in a concert. For me that's a real satisfying side of his music to hear, at least when played "modestly" - no extrovert swagger, no big gestures - as in that Payne set. Another example would be inventions - and the French Suites.
> 
> I think that you were wrong to say that the Goldberg Variations are "simple" - contrapuntally they're not - but I know what you mean in at least some of the variations.


I suppose what I mean is, it's not "showy". It speaks volumes by saying very little.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Yes though since Gould 55 people have tended to play it like bit of bravura music. The one to watch out for -- it doesn't exist yet -- is Filippo Gorini. Check his Art of Fugue, you may well enjoy it.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Jogaga said:


> Classic András Schiff


He's becoming one of my favorite pianists. I just put his version on, I will report back.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Wow, so far Schiff is my favorite. It's exactly how I heard it in my head.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

edited and deleted.


----------



## allaroundmusicenthusiast (Jun 3, 2020)

Scott Ross, on the instrument for which they were written.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Goldberg Variations is a work that's never really clicked with me. I've probably given them half-a-dozen or more listens over the years and while I have grown to enjoy them more with time I've yet to experience them in a way that would make me think they're one of the great masterpieces for keyboard. Thus far, Schiff is my favorite of those I've heard, though I also like Hewitt and Gould for offering different perspectives. Personally, I do think the WTC is a far better work overall.


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

Eva Yojimbo said:


> While I very much like the idea of "returning to the beginning" in the arts--indeed, many of my favorite films, novels, poems, and, yes, pieces of music have codas or endings in which some theme or motif established at the beginning or early on is returned to in the end either directly, or in some way that's meaningfully transformed--I'm not sure that facet alone is especially remarkable. It's a rather easy and common technique to end where you began, but that return will only be meaningful and impactful if the piece did manage to take you on an emotional journey before that return. I understand that many feel the Goldbergs do that, but they don't for me; at least, not to the extent that I find the return to the main aria especially moving or profound or whatnot.


Profoundity of emotion=/=profoundity of feeling, emotion is superfacial by nature, like deep water do not get disturbed as easily as shallow water. Simpler expression always has deeper meaning, peacefulness of the emotional movement implies deeper thoughts.

Goldberg variation is as archtypical as it is timelessly innovative for me, almost like something older than humanity and yet continue to be more futuristic than science. Like Giza pyramids, why did not the builders build them into futuristic structures like people love to imagine? a lot of balconies, bridges, weird shapes of arcs, pillars running from here to there, yet, they are the most sophisticated structures that are not natural on this planet.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

My apologies for rushing to create a new GV thread without doing a search. I do typically try to look up old threads first.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

allaroundmusicenthusiast said:


> Scott Ross, on the instrument for which they were written.


Yes, there are nuances of sound available on a harpsichord that aren't available on a piano. On a harpsichord the Variations can be more, well, varied.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

*Structure*

Bach's title is rather misleading, as it is not the Aria that becomes the theme - the melancholic melody returns only at the end - but rather the accompanying bass line of thirty two notes (the same as the total number of sections). The thirty variations are first divided into two big groups, pivoting on the grand overture in French style of variation 16, and then into ten clusters of three. This division is not haphazard, but can be regarded as a 'Gemüths-ergetzende' reference to biblical law (the Ten Commandments) and God's nature (the trinity). The ten clusters all follow the same pattern: character piece, virtuoso duet and canon. And finally, the canons have their own structure. In the first, the two following voices enter on the same note (no. 3); then on an interval of a second (one tone apart, no. 6); then on a third (two tones, no. 9), up to a ninth in no. 27, which is eight tones apart. Variation 30, which should have been the tenth canon in the sequence, appears in the surprising form of a quodlibet, a sort of light-hearted medley, in which Bach's listeners would certainly have spotted two folk tunes straight away. (All of Bach)

*Jean Rondeau playing the Goldberg Variations BWV 988 * (harpsichord)
Netherlands Bach Society






*Grigory Sokolov performs J.S. Bach Goldberg Variations* (piano)


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Goldberg Variations is a work that's never really clicked with me. I've probably given them half-a-dozen or more listens over the years and while I have grown to enjoy them more with time I've yet to experience them in a way that would make me think they're one of the great masterpieces for keyboard. Thus far, Schiff is my favorite of those I've heard, though I also like Hewitt and Gould for offering different perspectives. Personally, I do think the WTC is a far better work overall.


Try this:


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I really enjoyed the 1955 Gould. That did it for me.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

It seems as though my taste is combining. I just love a whole lot of classical music.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> It seems as though my taste is combining. I just love a whole lot of classical music.


Well that's a good way to be, Captain.


----------

