# Bach's music is hard!



## Aurelian (Sep 9, 2011)

The Well-Tempered Clavier is not easy! (I am especially thinking of the A-Minor fugue from Book 1.)
The solo violin works...enough said.
The trumpet part of the Second Brandenburg Concerto is the hardest (normal) trumpet piece in the repertoire.

Were the musicians in Cothen and Leipzig really that good, or did Bach have unrealistic expectations?


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

The Well Tempered Clavier is no joke to play, that's for sure. Some of it is technically more demanding than I want to deal with right now, in its own bizarre Bachian way.


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

Bach was genius, so naturally he wrote complex and complicated music, especially for keyboard because he could play it... And he was a really fantastic improviser. Where he had to deal with modest forces (like choir, soloists, etc) he made it a little easier for performers. His cantatas serve as an example in this case.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Have a lobotomy, split your brain into two halves that can't can't think together, only separately. That should help. 

You'll probably have difficulty performing any other task of every day life, but you'll be able to play Bach like a beast.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Bach did not write for amateurs! 

No kidding. His music is defined by the pursuit of his own conception of perfection; the theory, the drive behind the very form which creates these rather challenging pieces. 

Just been playing his flute sonatas and partitas today and it's really vivid how the high era of music with the baroque era can seem intangible...or impossible to play for us modern amateurs. 

Thankfully we have paid musicians who are skilled enough to show us how it's done


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Bach is hard


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

^^^^^^^^^^
That is a masterpiece.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Bach was a very fine keyboard virtuoso himself and his music reflects that.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

I find gross technical demands moderate. But what makes Bach's music so difficult to play is that one must have such a precise evenness of tone and such a light touch.

I can play through the Well-Tempered Clavier fairly well, but I haven't the commodious dexterity necessary to give Bach's music the proper sound. It takes so much dedication, but it's so rewarding.

Another thing about Bach's music, and this is surely subjective: it's that his music is very comfortable for the hands, it "feels" right somehow.


----------



## Ravndal (Jun 8, 2012)

^oh i disagree with that, Bach seriously screws up my hands


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Bach's flute music is also quite hard to play, but _soooo _enjoyable. I've played and performed a lot of Bach so far in my short life, and it's always very enjoyable in its straightforward, methodical style. No tricks (well, maybe a few ) and wonderful patterns and progressions. He wrote 7 flute sonatas, and I've done 6 of them, plus his orchestral suite no. 2. I take Bach's flute music over Beethoven's flute music any day!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I think Bach's keyboard music has always been considered quite difficult. From an 1802 review of the Eroica Variations: "If they are successful in executing all the many difficulties with ease, and in mastering every prescribed expression exactly so that it will sound like a fresh emotion, then there will certainly be no need to set aside any composition as unplayable. I say none because enough practice is provided here for the playing even of Seb. Bach's fugues."


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Indeed. Studying a piece by Bach is a very intense intellectual work. First, you must look at the score and try to understand the contrapuntal structure (since it is usually a fugue: themes, episodes, etc.). Then I usually study the piece playing it very slowly and with one hand at a time. When playing with the two hands, the most important thing is not only to memorize the hand movements, but also how it sounds. Once I can anticipate in my mind how it will sound, the piece flows by itself very easily. The problem with Bach in this aspect is that the music can be very complex in how it actually sounds because of all that counterpoint, so it's hard and it takes time to memorize the music itself (how it sounds, not only the hand movements).
This is the most difficult piece by Bach that I have played, 



 (starts at 5:48), the Gigue from the Keyboard Partita No.5.
I have encountered similar technical challenges when I was trying to learn Ligeti piano etude "Fem", the phrasing is so asymmetrical that it is very difficult to memorize and to anticipate mentally how it will sound what you are playing, even if you have memorized the hand movements.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Bach's flute music is also quite hard to play, but _soooo _enjoyable. I've played and performed a lot of Bach so far in my short life, and it's always very enjoyable in its straightforward, methodical style. No tricks (well, maybe a few ) and wonderful patterns and progressions. He wrote 7 flute sonatas, and I've done 6 of them, plus his orchestral suite no. 2. I take Bach's flute music over Beethoven's flute music any day!


I hope to be able to do that some day soon!

Unfortunately I lost my copy of the sonatas (and the incredible partita which is my favourite) - this is the version edited by Moyse. I bought a copy edited by Bennett who is quite hilarious but not very good at signposting. In the flute sonata no.V, he writes: "these six lines are often vandalised by players taking a breath".

Lol. I managed to vandalise 5 of the 6 lines before I read his notes 

The CPE Bach sonata was included in the Moyse version I had. Really sad about losing it. I liked the annotations by Moyse much more. What I'm finding is that the slower interpretations by advocates like Jed Wentz, are really turning his music into my favourite flute pieces. Before, it was always a bit of a triplet or quatrain race to get to the end of the sonata. Wentz's interpretation claims to be faithful to the score; certainly very original and bringing more of Bach's masterpieces to life.

Agree about Bach's incredible writing. Beethoven is rather tedious in comparison. Did the guy ever write anything decent for flute anyway lol


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Head_case said:


> Agree about Bach's incredible writing. Beethoven is rather tedious in comparison. Did the guy ever write anything decent for flute anyway lol


If you don't demand anything absolutely soul-stunningly GREAT, you might like his flute and piano variations Opp. 105 and 107.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

It's not that I haven't tried.....I waded through the whole duration of this one again:






It is the worse that rumpelstilkin composers can offer.

I do appreciate Beethoven's string quartet writing. Perhaps he was a better keyboard writer than he was a flute sonata writer. I just don't like keyboards. Even Sanmartini, Delusse, Jolivet, Tulou and Handel offer more interesting flute repertoire than Beethoven in my flute playing experience.

However Bach's the best


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

Try these variations & airs, they are lovely and composed later in Beethoven's life, at about 1819...


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

Ravndal, I used to hurt my hands playing Bach when I began playing his music. I was actually learning to play Liszt's transcriptions of certain Preludes & Fugues that helped my Bach playing enormously. Have you ever played any of the WTC on the harpsichord? I find the harpsichord a little easier on the hands owing to the slightly smaller dimensions.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Head_case said:


> It's not that I haven't tried.....I waded through the whole duration of this one again:
> 
> It is the worse that rumpelstilkin composers can offer.
> 
> ...


Hahaha Headcase I can count on you to defend me! :lol:

I think one of the reasons Beethoven wrote so poorly for the flute was that the flute was poor _itself_, and very underdeveloped at that time of history. It couldn't be as virtuosic as it is today, but Bach used the traverso in a virtuosic way that was _idiomatic_. Bach probably knew the limitations of the flute, but exploited what it can do. Listening to Beethoven's stuff, I can tell he certainly knew the limitations of the flute of his time, but he instead makes the piano virtuosic and the flute a little tooting thing that follows along, completely out of character with what the flute can really do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DM9xZSctU18#t=193s although it's a smooth tempo, it's virtuosic comparatively.

@Renaissance, yes I know those variations. I'm still so surprised Beethoven wrote them. I would never ever ever play those, unless I was paid. Last year, a flutist at my music school did one or two of those variations for a recital, and the piano part was uncannily hard, while the flute just did long tones and quarters. :lol:

Erggg people are still picking on little comments I add onto posts that aren't vital to the central meaning. Main point: Bach is awesome for flute.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Renaissance said:


> Try these variations & airs, they are lovely and composed later in Beethoven's life, at about 1819...


Aggggh. It's like a mini piano concerto with a flute side salad accompaniment :/

I don't know how to say this less subtlely....
*
I hate pianos! *

There - I said it 

Beethoven writes ...like a piano composer. Does he ever match Bach's elegance on The Well-tempered Klavier? I don't believe so, but I enjoy Bach's harpsichord music much more than any rollicking Beethoven piano concerto (anyone want to buy a Kissin piano concerto CD lol).

This is the kind of flute music I love:






Listen to the rhythm carefully. The andante of the first part gives way to a baroque dance rhythm. The flute's sonority is foregrounded over the basso continuo - not swamped by the piano as the Beethoven flute music invariably tends to be, even with a pianist cut down to size with one piano leg to stand on. Close your eyes, and realise how glorious the baroque traverso sounds, rising and falling on the crest of the basso continuo.

Any flute player (well, better ones than me mostly ) will tell you that they can spot a virtuoso flute composer a mile off. This is one of my favourite pieces for playing:

http://gtmusicalinstruments.com/music/instruments/flet_barokowy/O_Maracewicz_JS_Bach_Partita_A.mp3

It has all of those taut Bach flute lines, perfectly balanced and framed; being a Paritita in A minor, the darkness of the music creates a brooding sensuality framed within the dance like quatrains. Even the intervals between the E and the A notes are so perfect, starting off in perfect halves/symmetry.

Enjoy. And witness Bach's mastery over form


----------



## Renaissance (Jul 10, 2012)

I know, I never said that Beethoven wrote better music for flute than Bach.


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

Yes! Bach treated the flute exquisitely!

When I listen to the wind works of Beethoven: his Octet in E Flat, Op. 103; his Trio for 2 Oboes and Cor anglais in C, Op. 87; and his Trio for Piano, Flute and Basson in G, WoO 37, I am struck by the seeming continuity with Haydn's wind-based _divertimenti_ which are hardly exciting works [in my opinion] that treat the wind instruments with the skill of Bach. Likewise with Mozart's Divertimento in D, K 15o--these works treat the woodwinds insipidly, without flourish or alacrity.

The vast majority of Beethoven's works that prominently feature the winds were from his early period, when he was arguably most heavily influenced by his immediate predecessors Haydn and Mozart. Hummel's flute sonatas aren't very interesting either, in my opinion. It seems as though the flute's heyday was in the Baroque and very early Classical Era.


----------



## Head_case (Feb 5, 2010)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> Hahaha Headcase I can count on you to defend me! :lol:
> 
> I think one of the reasons Beethoven wrote so poorly for the flute was that the flute was poor _itself_, and very underdeveloped at that time of history. It couldn't be as virtuosic as it is today, but Bach used the traverso in a virtuosic way that was _idiomatic_. Bach probably knew the limitations of the flute, but exploited what it can do. Listening to Beethoven's stuff, I can tell he certainly knew the limitations of the flute of his time, but he instead makes the piano virtuosic and the flute a little tooting thing that follows along, completely out of character with what the flute can really do.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DM9xZSctU18#t=193s


Lol! Just typical of a female flute player to upload a link of Emmanuel Pahud. All the chicks think he's hot. I think his flute sucks lol. He needs a proper baroque traverso 

I couldn't agree more: it's not Bach who needs defending...! Flute players unite lol. Bach understood the dynamics of the flute from the original Hotteterre models right up to the first Naust models. By then, the baroque traverso was already very advanced. I personally prefer the Naust Workshop era: thereafter, the baroque traverso flute deteriorates into the 'romantic flute' which is a different design for a different kind of music altogether.










This is one of the popular baroque traversos by Simon Polak. Jed Wentz has one of these too (a Beukers I think).

When I look at Beethoven's music for flute, it looks to me like he is a composer of instruments, rather than having the flute specifically in mind. Only a flute specialising composer like Bach or Quantz understands the intricacies and nuances of intonation and challenges of octave leaps; appogiatura and triple tonguing rhythms. An excellent general composer would still write without the instruments dynamics and range - that's the same point you've made. I wonder what he would have written for a flute like the Naust Workshop flute. Maybe Beethoven would have written better flute parts? But had Bach had access to these later flutes...wow. Just imagine what would have followed after the 7 sonatas...! This is a truly amazing baroque traverso (which Jed Wentz uses too). Its sonority is very special.

Technically on the flute front, this is where Beethoven fails for me. His works just do not have the concept of the flute's sonority in mind. He's making music, but it's music for the masses, rather than music for the King. Frederick the Great played the flute, and Quantz was fortunate to have him as a student; as a result, the works by Quantz and his star pupil also have a peculiar elegance of form which is exhilarating to play. He wrote so many incredible flute concertos...! Bach...wrote to a different kind of King. Thus, his idea of divine perfection.

Postscript: Sublimal message:



> *Main point: Bach is awesome for flute.*


Yay!


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Fundamentally, for a keyboardist, at least, playing anything with multiple independent lines is at minimal, 'awkward,' in that the sort of writing is in no way 'intuitively' fitting 'pianistic' conformations of any sort. That messes with the more usual mental habits as well as it messes with the motor habits of the player.

It is probably because of the polyphonists before and including Bach, where this maxim about what qualifies a musician as a musician came about, 
_"You cannot call yourself a real musician until you can track, write, or play *a minimum* of four individual voices."_

Chopin is extremely difficult, but once learned, with the exception of a very few of those piano works, they 'fit like a glove.'

I tend to agree with whomever noted that Bach was most often not writing idiomatically for instruments. His writing seems to have little consideration for the instrument, or what was most idiomatic to it -- (Not an uncommon impulse or trait in those keyboard players who compose.)

Nonetheless, the solo 'Cello Suites, especially, do show he knew exactly what was or was not possible on those instruments.


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Well, the WTC was something i've always wanted to play someday. I picture myself one day playing it for my future sons and/or daughters.

I've been playing piano for quite a while, though i'm aware that i'll never be a virtuoso. I play for my amusement only as i play other instruments (like guitar, mandolin or even portuguese guitar) with simple folk music.

In June 2012 nevertheless, so great was my desire to play the WTC, i decided to acquire a copy. After 15 minutes i could play C Major prelude. Then came the fugue...no need to explain any further.

Right now i'm up to C# Major prelude (badly played) and i'm starting to think that this was not such a good idea.

Bach is definately hard and complex, specially for an amateur like me. Eventhough i make lots of mistakes, i play it with such smile in my face!!! However when i show what i can play to my friends they think i'm really good (because this kind of music isn't what they usually listen to) hehehehe

To all of you who are struggling to play Bach, you have my support because i understand your pain.

Yet there are another men who i hope to play someday when i'm on my 50's or 60's...Wagner and Verdi.


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

Bach was one of those astounding musical minds who wrote "simple" music (he avoided that term), when he wrote say opening themes before exhuasting those themes to no end. From simplicity, as if were nothing, to the most beautiful and complex pieces of music, usually expressed in his fugues. It was as if he was celebrating God's creation, from nothingness to the most complex beauties surrounding him. _Das Wohltemperierte Klavier_ and _ARIA mit verschiedenen Verænderungen _(_Golberg Variations)_ are classica Bach examples of this.


----------



## worov (Oct 12, 2012)

Well, Bach violin works can be quite hard too. Take a look at this :

Bach : Chaconne from Partita in D minor performed by Salvatore Accardo


----------

