# Is Bach's WTC your favourite piece of music?



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Please don't vote 'yes' based on other people's opinions or it's historical significance etc - just whether you love the work more than any other.

If you want, please do also put those feelings into words in a post.

I have made the poll anonymous.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

WTC is very high on my list, but I don't "love the work more than any other". It is a towering achievement alongside Beethovens late quartets or the Ring cycle etc. So I did not vote.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

It scores a rather rare 6/6 on the Artrockometer, meaning it is one of about 100 classical music compositions I love most. That said, it is not my absolute favourite piece (that would be Mahler's singphony Das Lied von der Erde), and not even my favourite Bach piece (that would be the St Matthew's Passion). So I had to vote 'no'.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I'm always "yes" for the WTC, but I expect it to get a very low percentage of total votes (same with any other work).


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

One doesn’t help greatness of the music but there are other works by JSB I prefer


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Bulldog said:


> I'm always "yes" for the WTC, but I expect it to get a very low percentage of total votes (same with any other work).


But we would expect a good number to vote positively since it is in the top tier.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

_[Duplicate post deleted]_


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

The fact that the Great 48 aren't even close to getting a "Yes" vote from me or in the poll overall, despite constituting such a magnificent musical edifice in their own right, just shows how much wonderful music there is out there.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

janxharris said:


> But we would expect a good number to vote positively since it is in the top tier.


I don't know what you would consider a good number. My guess is the upper limit is 10.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

I prefer The Art of Fugue.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

No, but it's probably my favorite overall among works that can be played on the piano. Well, that and the Goldberg Variations and the Partitas and French and English Suites and Italian Concerto and French Overture and the Art of Fugue and the pair of fugues from Musical Offering...

Yeah, Bach is that good.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Is the WTC one piece of music? Do listeners have one favorite piece of music?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

starthrower said:


> Is the WTC one piece of music? Do listeners have one favorite piece of music?


Well I think it is and it isn't. If Chopin's Op. 28 preludes can be considered a unit, I don't know why at least each of the separate books of the WTC can't be considered one too.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

starthrower said:


> Is the WTC one piece of music? Do listeners have one favorite piece of music?


A wide berth. It's 1 piece, 2 pieces, 48 pieces, and 96 pieces. Take your pick.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Richard Bratby writing in The Spectator (Johann Sebastian wasn't even the greatest composer in his own family):

"_I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._"

Please note - I am not attempting to 'prove' anything here - just trying to understand why I do not quite get his music despite so many here on TC rating him so highly.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

janxharris said:


> Richard Bratby writing in The Spectator (Johann Sebastian wasn't even the greatest composer in his own family):
> 
> "_I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._"
> 
> Please note - I am not attempting to 'prove' anything here - just trying to understand why I do not quite get his music despite so many here on TC rating him so highly.


I'd say Hough is outnumbered, as are all anti-Bachians. But I don't care if the whole Musical Establishment is or was anti-Bach. I'm not.

The article cited doesn't really demonstrate that Mozart is "greater" or that Bach is "lesser" in any way other than making that particular writer uncomfortable due to Bach's religion...and that I think is the key to a lot of anti-Bach or indifferent-to-Bach feeling. You really can't separate the man from his faith in the way it's more possible with the more secular Mozart, for example. Bach's very greatest music, actually _all_ of Bach's music -- and in my opinion the very greatest music ever written -- is religious expression, take it or leave it, like it or lump it.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

consuono said:


> I'd say Hough is outnumbered, as are all anti-Bachians. But I don't care if the whole Musical Establishment is or was anti-Bach. I'm not.


Indeed consuono - as I say, I'm not quoting to prove anything. I guess it helps to know that I'm not completely alone. I'm intrigued to know if there is something in one's character / brain-wiring etc that determines one's response.

I will keep trying JSB's music.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> You really can't separate the man from his faith in the way it's more possible with Mozart, for example. Bach's very greatest music is religious expression, take it or leave it, like it or lump it.


On 25 October 1777, Mozart wrote to his father:
"Papa must not worry, for God is ever before my eyes. I realize His omnipotence and I fear His anger; but I also recognize His love, His compassion, and His tenderness towards His creatures. He will never forsake His own. If it is according to His will, so let it be according to mine. Thus all will be well and I must needs be happy and contented."

On January 4, 1783, he wrote to his father about his Mass K.427:
"About my moral commitment, yes, that's absolutely right; - it flowed out of my pen not unintentionally - I truly made that promise in my heart and really hope to keep it. - When I made it, my wife was still single - but the promise was easy to make because I was determined to marry her as soon as she recovered her health. - Time and circumstances have delayed our trip, as you yourself know; - but as proof that I really made that promise I have the score of half a mass lying here in hopes of getting finished."

On 4 April 1787, he wrote to his father:
"This very moment I have received a piece of news which greatly distresses me, the more so as I gathered from your last letter that, thank God, you were very well indeed. But now I hear that you are really ill. I need hardly tell you how greatly I am longing to receive some reassuring news from yourself. And I still expect it, although I have now made a habit of being prepared in all affairs of life for the worst. As death, when we come to consider it closely, is the true goal of our existence, I have formed during the last few years, such close relations with this best and truest friend of mankind, that his image is not only no longer terrifying to me, but is indeed very soothing and consoling! And I thank my God for graciously granting me the opportunity of learning that death is the key which unlocks the door to our true happiness."

"Ruth Halliwell, a contrbutor to The Cambridge Mozart Encyclopedia, writes, "An educated guess at the totality of Mozart's beliefs based on reconciling the motley evidence would probably posit a broad belief in Christianity, but impatience with many of the requirements of the Catholic church." Another contributor, Bruce MacIntyre suggests that Mozart seems to have been a freethinking Catholic with a private relationship to God."

"According to his first biographer, Franz Xaver Niemetschek, who is generally an accurate witness:
Church music . . . was Mozart's favourite form of composition. But he was able to dedicate himself least of all to it." (The Cambridge Companion to Mozart , edited by Simon P. Keefe , Page 127)

'C-D-F-E' is an expressive device deep rooted in the catholic music tradition, dating back to the credo of Josquin des Prez's Missa pange lingua. Some believe it symbolizes the word "credo", which means "I believe".

*[ 8:03 ]*





Shostakovich: "I remember quite a few musical opinions that Glazunov gave on a variety of subjects, such as: "The finale of Mozart's Jupiter Symphony is like the cathedral of Cologne." Honestly, to this day I can't think of a better description of that amazing music." (Testimony: The Memoirs of Dmitri Shostakovich, Page 62)


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

janxharris said:


> Richard Bratby writing in The Spectator (Johann Sebastian wasn't even the greatest composer in his own family):
> 
> "_I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._"
> 
> Please note - I am not attempting to 'prove' anything here - just trying to understand why I do not quite get his music despite so many here on TC rating him so highly.


I think Bratby's article is just an exercise in being an idiot. Like a schoolboy sticking two fingers up at his teacher behind his back. A second rate hack looking at a genius. Oh well...


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

janxharris said:


> Richard Bratby writing in The Spectator (Johann Sebastian wasn't even the greatest composer in his own family):
> 
> "_I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._"
> 
> Please note - I am not attempting to 'prove' anything here - just trying to understand why I do not quite get his music despite so many here on TC rating him so highly.


The author of that article makes a couple claims that are exaggerated, and lacking proper context. For example when he says Beethoven considered Handel _far_ greater, I'm not aware of any such statement made by Beethoven, while its true Beethoven felt that Handel was the greatest composer, I'm not sure where the 'far' part comes from, if indeed it is true then it is also true that Beethoven considered Handel _far_ greater than Mozart, Haydn and all other composers.

As far as Mozart's opinion, he was aware of CPE's music, before J.S.'s. I'm not aware of Mozart making any claims of CPE's superiority after becoming closely familiarized with the music of J.S. Bach.

As far as your own opinion, I'm not sure why it should seem so mysterious to you. There are no composers that are universally loved by every person. We all have our unique tastes, that doesn't mean we can't learn some of the reasons why others rate a given composer so highly. Aside from that I wouldn't worry about it, and just continue to spend most of your time with the music you enjoy.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

janxharris said:


> Richard Bratby writing in The Spectator (Johann Sebastian wasn't even the greatest composer in his own family):
> 
> "_I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._"
> 
> Please note - I am not attempting to 'prove' anything here - just trying to understand why I do not quite get his music despite so many here on TC rating him so highly.


Just note another phrase by the idiotic Bratby making a fool of himself:

"if you've ever witnessed a solo violinist hijacking an orchestral concert to saw through all 15 tortured minutes of the D minor Chaconne, you might call it something else entirely."

This is the piece musical geniuses (people quite unlike our untalented hack) have wondered over. The piece about which Brahms said that if he could have even conceived of writing something so heavenly he would have died with joy. I heard Alina Ibraginova mesmerise a whole packed Albert Hall with the piece. It does put a small minded critic in his place


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

janxharris said:


> I'm not completely alone.


If you're looking for "peculiar cases" of famous musicians disliking Bach, - the case of Berlioz may be of interest to you. He disliked Palestrina, Bach, Haydn, and had mixed feelings about Mozart (though there is a detailed article that speculates Berlioz was simply jealous:
View attachment 130858
), and did not sympathize with Mendelssohn's enthusiasm for Bach at the time.

On Bach
By Hector Berlioz (1803-1869)
From Berlioz's Autobiography

YOU will not, my dear Demarest, expect an analysis from me of Bach's great work: such a task would quite exceed my prescribed limits. Indeed, the movement performed at the Conservatoire three years ago may be considered the type of the author's style throughout the work. The Germans profess an unlimited admiration for Bach's recitatives; but their peculiar characteristic necessarily escaped me, as I did not understand the language and was unable to appreciate their expression. Whoever is familiar with our musical customs in Paris must witness, in order to believe, the attention, respect, and even reverence with which a German public listens to such a composition. Every one follows the words on the book with his eyes; not a movement among the audience, not a murmur of praise or blame, not a sound of applause; they are listening to a solemn discourse, they are hearing the gospel sung, they are attending divine service rather than a concert. And really such music ought to be thus listened to. They adore Bach, and believe in him, without supposing for a moment that his divinity could ever be called into question. A heretic would horrify them, he is forbidden even to speak of him. God is God and Bach is Bach.
Some days after the performance of Bach's chef d'œuvre, the Singing Academy announced Graun's 'Tod Jesu.' This is another sacred work, a holy book; the worshipers of which are, however, mainly to be found in Berlin, whereas the religion of Bach is professed throughout the north of Germany.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

DavidA said:


> I think Bratby's article is just an exercise in being an idiot. Like a schoolboy sticking two fingers up at his teacher behind his back. A second rate hack looking at a genius. Oh well...


Harsh words DavidA. Hope you aren't suggesting that Bach naysayers are ipso facto idiots.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

tdc said:


> As far as your own opinion, I'm not sure why it should seem so mysterious to you. There are no composers that are universally loved by every person. We all have our unique tastes, that doesn't mean we can't learn some of the reasons why others rate a given composer so highly. Aside from that I wouldn't worry about it, and just continue to spend most of your time with the music you enjoy.


I believe you have issues with LVB if I remember correctly?

It's not something I worry about - but, yes, it is mystifying...always want to understand what's behind such phenomenon.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

janxharris said:


> Harsh words DavidA. Hope you aren't suggesting that Bach naysayers are ipso facto idiots.


I'm just responding to the tone of Batby's article in kind. I mean how would you respond to it?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

tdc said:


> As far as Mozart's opinion, he was aware of CPE's music, before J.S.'s. I'm not aware of Mozart making any claims of CPE's superiority after becoming closely familiarized with the music of J.S. Bach.


From what I know, there isn't really any strong evidence Mozart regarded Emanuel greater than Sebastian. Mozart also studied Emanuel's music as well as Sebastian's in his Vienna period. I don't think Mozart ever picked one composer as his 'greatest idol'. He recognized good things in them all. It is believed Fantasies K.396, K.397 are inspired by Emanuel. Also I think that the D minor K.466 shows Emanuel's influence (Wq.22)

On 20 April 1782 Mozart wrote to his father:
"If Papa has not yet had those [instrumental] works by Eberlin copied, so much the better, for in the meantime I have got hold of them and now I see (for I had forgotten them) that they are unfortunately far too trivial to deserve a place beside Handel and Bach. With due respect for his four-part composition I may say that his clavier fugues are nothing but long-drawn-out voluntaries..."

"Through Swieten, Mozart became more aware of Bach's music and that of other Lutheran masters. He was not unaware of them before. In an excess of enthusiasm about Georg Benda's melodramas he wrote in a latter to his father, dated Mannheim 12 November 1778, that this composer was his favorite among all the Lutheran Kapellmeisters."

Mozart wrote to his father on 29 March 1783 about the musical gatherings in the apartments of Baron van Swieten: "we love to amuse ourselves with all kind of masters, ancient and modern." So music was the main object of these Kenner's interest - provided it was masterful. Occasionally, one of the other of the composers Mozart and his colleagues studied in these sessions is mentioned in the Mozart correspondence by name: Johann Ernst Eberlin, for instance, or Georg Friedrich Handel, or J.S. Bach and his sons Wilhelm Friedemann and Carl Phillp Emmanuel, or Michael Haydn. Some of these were still among the living; the works Mozart and his colleagues examined were written for the most part in the first half of the eighteenth century. Nonetheless, some of the composers were already considered to be "old," or, to put it another way, "not modern." http://mrc.hanyang.ac.kr/wp-content/jspm/20/jspm_2006_20_10.pdf


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

tdc said:


> The author of that article makes a couple claims that are exaggerated, and lacking proper context. For example when he says Beethoven considered Handel _far_ greater, I'm not aware of any such statement made by Beethoven, while its true Beethoven felt that Handel was the greatest composer, I'm not sure where the 'far' part comes from, if indeed it is true then it is also true that Beethoven considered Handel _far_ greater than Mozart, Haydn and all other composers.
> 
> As far as Mozart's opinion, he was aware of CPE's music, before J.S.'s. I'm not aware of Mozart making any claims of CPE's superiority after becoming closely familiarized with the music of J.S. Bach.
> ...


The thing is, Handel's collected works were published not long after his death. Bach was known mainly through his keyboard music, and maybe the odd choral work here or there in a passed-along manuscript, although Mozart's known to have heard a performance of a Bach motet. Mozart and Beethoven had nothing like a complete picture of Bach's work. The article is mainly just a rehash of a lot of postmodernish stuff (odd for the Spectator): the disdain for "medieval certainties" (as if anything religious is by definition "medieval" and not like the cool kids) or anything that smells like an artistic hierarchy.

But it's true, if someone doesn't like or "get" Bach, so be it. No accounting for taste.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

DavidA said:


> I'm just responding to the tone of Batby's article in kind. I mean how would you respond to it?


I guess it is rather provocative - par for the course for a writer I guess. If that is how he genuinely feels then it is permissible.

If he'd been speaking about some unknown contemporary composer it might have been less jarring.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I will repeat here my previous post on the WTC, expressing the idea that a piece's _utility_ as a discrete, absorbable experiential entity is to be considered. Who here is prepared to sit and listen to the WTC at one sitting? It has great excellence, but we (most of us) enjoy it piecemeal, do we not?

"Should a concept such as utility be invoked in making such a judgment? By utility, I mean the ability to absorb or experience or "consume'' the piece in one convenient sitting, or in "one continuous motion". It would be difficult (though not impossible) to absorb the WTC in one continuous motion; the Ring?--not so much. A quasi-parallel case might be looking deeply at all of Monet's studies of Rouen Cathedral (though paintings can be cycled through at any pace chosen by the viewer). The WTC might be looked at in this way. I must say that I sat cheerfully through a concert of all of the Brandenburg Concertos at one sitting, so a lot depends on the stamina of the auditor. But a case can be made that a great piece of music should be able to be absorbed and admired as such within a certain timeframe, complete unto itself and not a compendium of similar segments like a musical millipede."


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

DavidA said:


> Just note another phrase by the idiotic Bratby making a fool of himself:
> 
> "if you've ever witnessed a solo violinist hijacking an orchestral concert to saw through all 15 tortured minutes of the D minor Chaconne, you might call it something else entirely."
> 
> This is the piece musical geniuses (people quite unlike our untalented hack) have wondered over. The piece about which Brahms said that if he could have even conceived of writing something so heavenly he would have died with joy. I heard Alina Ibraginova mesmerise a whole packed Albert Hall with the piece. It does put a small minded critic in his place


That's right. They assert vacuous and silly things to catch some attention. It's what they do for a living.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> If you're looking for "peculiar cases" of famous musicians disliking Bach, - you might want to look at Berlioz. He disliked Palestrina, Bach, Haydn, and had mixed feelings about Mozart (though there is a detailed article that speculates Berlioz was simply jealous:
> View attachment 130858
> ), and did not sympathize with Mendelssohn's enthusiasm for Bach at the time.
> 
> ...


Bach couldn't have known about the modern theories of theology so we can listen with him as he expresses the approachable passion narratives. It's a sterling perspective, as they say.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> I will repeat here my previous post on the WTC, expressing the idea that a piece's _utility_ as a discrete, absorbable experiential entity is to be considered. Who here is prepared to sit and listen to the WTC at one sitting? It has great excellence, but we (most of us) enjoy it piecemeal, do we not?
> 
> "Should a concept such as utility be invoked in making such a judgment? By utility, I mean the ability to absorb or experience or "consume'' the piece in one convenient sitting, or in "one continuous motion". It would be difficult (though not impossible) to absorb the WTC in one continuous motion; the Ring?--not so much. A quasi-parallel case might be looking deeply at all of Monet's studies of Rouen Cathedral (though paintings can be cycled through at any pace chosen by the viewer). The WTC might be looked at in this way. I must say that I sat cheerfully through a concert of all of the Brandenburg Concertos at one sitting, so a lot depends on the stamina of the auditor. But a case can be made that a great piece of music should be able to be absorbed and admired as such within a certain timeframe, complete unto itself and not a compendium of similar segments like a musical millipede."


Heh, well, maybe..
This young lady plays so fast that we might be able to sit still through one Book.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Luchesi said:


> Bach couldn't have known about the *modern theories of theology* so we can listen with him as he expresses the approachable passion narratives. It's a sterling perspective, as they say.


Thank goodness he didn't. Many of them as vacuous as Bratby's article


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

DavidA said:


> Thank goodness he didn't. Many of them as vacuous as Bratby's article


And if he had, he wouldn't have been the composer he was anyway.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Heh, well, maybe..
> This young lady plays so fast that we might be able to sit still through one Book.


I'm sorry, but that's awful. :lol:


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

DavidA said:


> Thank goodness he didn't. Many of them as vacuous as Bratby's article


Yeah, give me that old time religion. I wonder what JsB would've thought of it.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

consuono said:


> I'm sorry, but that's awful. :lol:


I want to hear (and collect) them all, from the slowest to the fastest! 
JsB could have probably played them very zippy if he was in that mood? What do we know?


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> I will repeat here my previous post on the WTC, expressing the idea that a piece's _utility_ as a discrete, absorbable experiential entity is to be considered. Who here is prepared to sit and listen to the WTC at one sitting? It has great excellence, but we (most of us) enjoy it piecemeal, do we not?
> 
> "Should a concept such as utility be invoked in making such a judgment? By utility, I mean the ability to absorb or experience or "consume'' the piece in one convenient sitting, or in "one continuous motion". It would be difficult (though not impossible) to absorb the WTC in one continuous motion; the Ring?--not so much. A quasi-parallel case might be looking deeply at all of Monet's studies of Rouen Cathedral (though paintings can be cycled through at any pace chosen by the viewer). The WTC might be looked at in this way. I must say that I sat cheerfully through a concert of all of the Brandenburg Concertos at one sitting, so a lot depends on the stamina of the auditor. But a case can be made that a great piece of music should be able to be absorbed and admired as such within a certain timeframe, complete unto itself and not a compendium of similar segments like a musical millipede."


Morton Feldman would not agree with your premise. In fact he purposely created works of long duration as part of his conception of the work. Plus there is some testimony by one of Bach's sons (I think CPE) that he did perform the entire WTC in one sitting, or at least one of the books. I've heard that but can't cite the source.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Luchesi said:


> Heh, well, maybe..
> This young lady plays so fast that we might be able to sit still through one Book.


This is the version for folks who have a busy schedule. I wouldn't call it awful, but it doesn't ring my bell at all.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> I want to hear (and collect) them all, from the slowest to the fastest!
> JsB could have probably played them very zippy if he was in that mood? What do we know?


If you're going to play it that zippy, you'd better have Gould-like clarity. It's not there in that video from what I can hear.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

consuono said:


> If you're going to play it that zippy, you'd better have Gould-like clarity. It's not there in that video from what I can hear.


It's obvious that clarity was not her goal. She prefers washes of sound.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> It's obvious that clarity was not her goal. She prefers washes of sound.


Well in that case I'd say Debussy may be more her bag than Bach.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

SanAntone said:


> Morton Feldman would not agree with your premise. In fact he purposely created works of long duration as part of his conception of the work. Plus there is some testimony by one of Bach's sons (I think CPE) that he did perform the entire WTC in one sitting, or at least one of the books. I've heard that but can't cite the source.


The young LvB too, I think. I'd have to look it up.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Luchesi said:


> The young LvB too, I think. I'd have to look it up.


Beethoven was said to have been the first major composer, aside from Bach's sons, to be raised on JS Bach's music from earliest childhood.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> It's obvious that clarity was not her goal. She prefers washes of sound.


I'm jealous that she can play like that, live. She's expressing herself and she might rebelling a little against the performers of the past who have slower recordings. Young people are like that, if unconsciously. She shouldn't play like Richter, so it's a dilemma for young recording artists.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> The thing is, Handel's collected works were published not long after his death. Bach was known mainly through his keyboard music, and maybe the odd choral work here or there in a passed-along manuscript, although Mozart's known to have heard a performance of a Bach motet. Mozart and Beethoven had nothing like a complete picture of Bach's work.


But then is there evidence Mozart and Beethoven had full view of Handel's work? (as explained in the article I cited earlier, Berlioz didn't even bother look for Mozart's complete works either:
View attachment 130858
). There's a possibility Mozart may have known Bach's B minor mass, Haydn certainly had a copy of it at the Esterhazy estate, and by 1800, "it was easily accessible to connoisseurs in Vienna". 
It's quite possible Beethoven connected emotionally with Handel more in terms of temperament (ex. the way to "make an effect" in the 9th symphony). Even if he knew other Bach works, I don't think that would have changed his decision. 
By 1799, Bach's accomplishments in music were so widely acknowledged that "the leading musical periodical of the day published a diagram created by Kollmann in the form of a "sun of composers". Johann Sebastian Bach was at the center, the man from whom all true musical wisdom proceeded, surrounded by George Frideric Handel, Carl Heinrich Graun and Joseph Haydn, and they in turn were surrounded by other composers."









Haydn's copy of the b-minor mass and mozart's mass in c minor: Viennese traditions of the b-minor mass
"From the early 1800s Bach's B-minor Mass was easily accessible to connoisseurs in Vienna. A copy of the Mass is listed in Johann Traeg's sales catalogue of 1804. The entry on page 58 of the "First" and, as it were, last "supplement to the catalogue of manuscript and printed music which are to be had at the purveyors of art and music Johann Traeg and Son in Vienna" reads: [No.] 151 Bach, J. S. Missa a 5 Voci 2 Viol. 2 Fl. 2 Ob. 3 Trombe Tymp A e B. In the same catalogue Bach's Magnificat, a "Missa a 4 Voci con Stromenti', the six parts of the Christmas Oratorio, six chorale cantatas (BWV 101, 125, 133, 94, 69a [?], 14), the cantata Phoebus and Pan (BWV 201) and an "Aria" for two choirs and instruments (probably the final chorus of the St Matthew Passion) were also listed. The scoring "a 5 Voci" obviously refers to the B-minor Mass, whereas the setting "a 4 Voci" cannot yet be securely identified. Around the same time, the B-minor Mass shows up as No. 193 in "J. Haydn's Verzeichniss musicalischer Werke theils eigner, theils fremder Comp[o]sition': Joh: Sebastian Bach. Missa. 5 Voci, erster und zweyter Theil in der Partitur. The whereabouts of either manuscript copy formerly remained unknown. Until recently, a manuscript score copied after 1800, which later was given or sold to the avid Bach collector Georg Poelchau and finally ended up in his collection in the Königliche Bibliothek in Berlin (now the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preubischer Kulturbesitz; shelfmark Mus. ms. Bach P 11-12), was regarded as the earliest evidence of the B-minor Mass in Vienna."


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> But then is there evidence Mozart and Beethoven had full view of Handel's work?


Probably a much fuller view than they ever had of Bach's work. 


> The books that certainly belonged to Beethoven's music library are piano compositions by Bach, Clementi, Cramer, Reicha, string quartets by Haydn and Mozart, symphonies by Haydn, operas by Cherubini, Dalayrac, Gluck, Méhul, Monsigny, Mozart, Paisiello, Salieri, Sarti, oratorios and masses by Haydn as well as Mozart's requiem. Only the works by Händel were complete. Shortly before he died, Beethoven received the 40-folio London Händel edition as a gift. Instruction books for singing, piano and organ by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Knecht and von Türk were also part of Beethoven's possession. The exquisite collection of music theory publications Beethoven owned featured works by Albrechtsberger, Kirnberger, Koch, Marpurg, Mattheson, Riepel and Vogler. Works on music history include publications by Burney, Forkel and Schubart. Apart from that some magazines on music and aesthetic remained. However, those only constitute a small share of Beethoven's magazine consumption.


https://www.beethoven.de/en/g/Beethovens-Bibliothek-wird-rekonstruiert


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

My impression is that Bach was one of the first baroque composers to benefit from early music revival that started taking place in the late 18th century. I think Mendelssohn's contribution to the revival is somewhat exaggerated. All he did was introducing Bach's passion to the wider public, but then nobody (aside from the connoisseurs) wanted to hear baroque music up until that time. Even if Mendelssohn didn't 'do it', I think other people would have 'done it' sooner or later.
"The Passion was performed under the Cantor of St. Thomas until about 1800. Specifically, in 1780, the Cantor, Doles, had three of Bach's Passions performed, assumed to include the St. John and St. Matthew, and "possibly the St. Luke"."

I speculate that Beethoven's knowledge of Bach would not have been extremely limited:
Beethoven from his childhood acquainted himself thoroughly with the Well-tempered clavier, then possibly with the Musical offering, and the Art of the fugue, (through van Swieten, just as Mozart did), and then in his Vienna years, Mass in B minor, (which became accessible to connoisseurs in Vienna from 1800). The Goldberg variations were published during Bach's lifetime (1741), and Beethoven modeled his Diabelli on them.

Pg. 68: "....From this standpoint, let us take yet another look at one of the works which Mozart studied intensively, the six-part Ricercar from Bach's A Musical Offering. Focus on the end of the opening statement (measures 9-11 in Figure 5.4): As the second voice enters, the first voice continues with a sequence of ascending fourths...."
Pg. 69: "....The first movement opens with a simple ascending C minor arpeggio, played forte, followed by a contrasting piano sequence consisting of a descending fifth G-C (inversion of a fourth), and a descending diminished seventh A˛- B˝-the same interval which marks the opening motivic statement of Bach's A Musical Offering (Figure 5.6)..."
"....The first voice descends in half-steps: G-Fˇ-F˝-E˝-E˛-D-again an explicit reference to the descending line in the opening of Bach's A Musical Offering. And, as with Bach's work, it is introduced as a mezzosoprano voice...."
<W.A. Mozart's Fantasy in C minor, K. 475, And the Generalization of the Lydian Principle Through Motivic Thorough-Composition by John Sigerson>






"The hypothesis that Mozart learned (presumably in 1782) from his study of the Art of Fugue how to combine a fugue subject with its own inversion ignores the composer's earlier experimentation with rectus and inversus combinations in the revision of the K. 173 finale and in the K. 401 keyboard fugue; there is, moreover, no firm evidence linking Mozart to The Art of Fugue. The only item left on this list, the "full exploitation of contrapuntal devices" in K. 426, is the one aspect of this work that is so atypical - for Mozart, his contemporaries and most of his predecessors - as to suggest the influence of J. S. Bach and no one else."
<Engaging Bach: The Keyboard Legacy from Marpurg to Mendelssohn, By Matthew Dirst, Matthew Charles Dirst, Page 78>

https://books.google.ca/books?id=8JkyP5AHK5cC&pg=PA434
a letter from van Swieten to Beethoven, dating from 1794, when Beethoven 23 years old: 
_Monday, December 15, 
Herr Beethoven
If you are not hindered this coming Wednesday, I wish to see you at my home at 8:30 in the evening with your nightcap in your bag. Give me your immediate answer.
Swieten_
Exposure to bach and Handel's music seems to have been important to Beethoven just as it had been to Mozart. Ferdinand Ries later wrote, "Of all composers, Beethoven valued Mozart and Handel most highly, then J. S. Bach."


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> I speculate that Beethoven's knowledge of Bach would not have been extremely limited:
> Beethoven from his childhood acquainted himself thoroughly with the Well-tempered clavier, then possibly with the Musical offering, and the Art of the fugue,


The only Bach works that I feel there's solid musical evidence that Beethoven knew well are keyboard works. The last movement of Op. 109 is even more suggestive in its way of the Goldbergs than the Diabelli, so in any case I think Beethoven was familiar with that. 
At any rate, I think it's safe to say that Beethoven and Mozart were not as familiar with Bach's work as they were with Handel's. 
PS...the Art of Fugue is pretty much a keyboard work.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Luchesi said:


> Bach couldn't have known about the modern theories of theology so we can listen with him as he expresses the approachable passion narratives. It's a sterling perspective, as they say.


Berlioz was an (agnostic) atheist, and that may have affected his perception of Bach's music, in comparison with Gluck's, for example.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> "According to his first biographer, Franz Xaver Niemetschek, who is generally an accurate witness: Church music . . . was Mozart's favourite form of composition. But he was able to dedicate himself least of all to it." (The Cambridge Companion to Mozart , edited by Simon P. Keefe , Page 127)


A few more points I want to add to my previous post: I think (like his father) Mozart considered 'religious music' as the essence of his craft, and identified himself primarily as a religious composer.

"Mozart wrote the Vesperae de Dominica in Salzburg in 1779, the same year as the Coronation Mass - a work, which the composer himself held in high esteem. It was no doubt this work that Mozart presented to Baron van Swieten when he later sought to introduce himself to the Viennese musical world as a composer of church music in the serious _stile antico_."






"In April 1791, Mozart applied to become the Kapellmeister at St. Stephen's Cathedral, and was designated by the City Council to take over this job following the death of the then-ailing incumbent, Leopold Hofmann. This never took place, since Mozart died (December 1791) before Hofmann did (1793)".

"Otta Biba has made a strong case that Mozart never lost interest in sacred music and the church style. ... The motet 'Ave verum corpus', K. 618 was written in June 1791 for the feast of Corpus Christi and can be seen as a test for his pending appointment at St Stephen's."






"When exactly it (K.341) was completed is uncertain, but the eminent scholar H. C. Robbins Landon reasons that it was not as late as suggested by those who have called it an "audition" piece for the post of Kapellmeister at Vienna's St. Stephen's Church, which would have been around 1788."


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

6 out of 42 votes (21st July 2020) - that's an impressive 14.29%.


----------



## Agamenon (Apr 22, 2019)

I prefer the Goldberg variations. My desert island work!


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Thought it worth bumping this.

Beethoven's 9th symphony currently has 11.11% of votes against Bach's 12.77%.

(Both works are currently in the TC top tier in case you did not know).


.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Curiously, the equivalent Beethoven's 9th poll has had 77 votes and this only 51. Worth bumping I thought

Bach still 'winning' - 13.73% against Beethoven's 12.99%.
.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

janxharris said:


> Curiously, the equivalent Beethoven's 9th poll has had 77 votes and this only 51. Worth bumping I thought
> 
> Bach still 'winning' - 13.73% against Beethoven's 12.99%.
> .


It doesn't matter though. In most ways it's apples and oranges.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano, and you are told you are to remain there while Gould plays the entire WTC. Or, alternatively, you are told you will be locked into another room wherein you will find The English Consort, with Trevor Pinnock and the whole gang, and they'e going to play all the Brandenburgs before you're allowed to leave. Which do you choose? I know which room I choose.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

consuono said:


> It doesn't matter though. In most ways it's apples and oranges.


As the TC tier list says - its not an objective ranking.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

janxharris said:


> Richard Bratby writing in The Spectator (Johann Sebastian wasn't even the greatest composer in his own family):
> 
> "_I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._"
> 
> Please note - I am not attempting to 'prove' anything here - just trying to understand why I do not quite get his music despite so many here on TC rating him so highly.


Personally I don't feel an emotional connection to almost all of Bach, unlike with much of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, and Ravel. I admire his skill, but the circumstances all have to be right to elicit emotion (which is probably different for everyone). There are 2 pieces I do feel emotion though in Bach, and quite a lot, from the pure beauty of the sonorities and harmony. The first movement of BWV 140 and the fugue of BWV 565. There is just some kind of overwhelming joy I feel in this opening movement.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano, and you are told you are to remain there while Gould plays the entire WTC. Or, alternatively, you are told you will be locked into another room wherein you will find The English Consort, with Trevor Pinnock and the whole gang, and they'e going to play all the Brandenburgs before you're allowed to leave. Which do you choose? I know which room I choose.


If it had to be Gould in the first room, I would choose the Brandenburgs without a drop of hesitation. If it were mostly any other pianist, Room I for me!


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> Personally I don't feel an emotional connection to almost all of Bach, unlike with much of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, and Ravel.


To each his own. To me, Ravel is among the iciest of composers.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano, and you are told you are to remain there while Gould plays the entire WTC. Or, alternatively, you are told you will be locked into another room wherein you will find The English Consort, with Trevor Pinnock and the whole gang, and they'e going to play all the Brandenburgs before you're allowed to leave. Which do you choose? I know which room I choose.


I'd go to both rooms.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

consuono said:


> I'd go to both rooms.


Which one first? To get it over with? Or out of greater enthusiasm?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> Which one first? To get it over with? Or out of greater enthusiasm?


I'd go to both, or either, with equal enthusiasm. It wouldn't be a chore.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano, and you are told you are to remain there while Gould plays the entire WTC. Or, alternatively, you are told you will be locked into another room wherein you will find The English Consort, with Trevor Pinnock and the whole gang, and they'e going to play all the Brandenburgs before you're allowed to leave. Which do you choose? I know which room I choose.


Me too - Gould's WTC. That's not because of Gould. I find the WTC has a staying power for me that doesn't hold with the Brandenburgs. However, if the pianist was someone like Barenboim, I'd go with Pinnock.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano, and you are told you are to remain there while Gould plays the entire WTC. Or, alternatively, you are told you will be locked into another room wherein you will find The English Consort, with Trevor Pinnock and the whole gang, and they'e going to play all the Brandenburgs before you're allowed to leave. Which do you choose? I know which room I choose.


Since I'll be listening only, the Brandenburgs for me. I love parts of the WTC but (as listening material anyway) not all of it.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

As anyone could guess, I would prefer the variety (in instrumentation certainly) of the Brandenburgs to the relative homogeneity of the WTC at one sitting. It is a matter of the greater preference. Is not the WTC Too Much of a Good Thing to experience all at once?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> As anyone could guess, I would prefer the variety (in instrumentation certainly) of the Brandenburgs to the relative homogeneity of the WTC at one sitting. It is a matter of the greater preference. Is not the WTC Too Much of a Good Thing to experience all at once?


Well by that logic so are all the Brandenburgs. There's more variety in either book of the WTC though.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Is not the WTC Too Much of a Good Thing to experience all at once?


When I was a teenager, my mom would tell me "you can't go out tonight; you've been having too much fun". There can never be too much of a good thing.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

I'll say I'd much rather listen to two hours of WTC, or even both books at 4+ hours than to sit through an entire Wagner opera...er music drama. (And hey, yeah I do think Wagner was a great composer.)

PS...and playing it? I could go on for hours, repeating some two or three times. And after all, I think the WTC was written with the *player* in mind rather than public performance.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Strange Magic said:


> Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano


That would be worse than being locked into a room with MR. 
1. Gould's humming
2. Gould's dry mechanical playing
3. non-HIP performance of WTC
- combination of three things I would avoid at all cost



Johann Sebastian Bach said:


> i suggest millionrainbows and Woodduck get a room together and try to procreate a real musician.
> 
> 
> Woodduck said:
> ...


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> 3. non-HIP performance of WTC


Really? What instructions did Bach leave for performing it in public?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> Really? What instructions did Bach leave for performing it in public?


I think I told you about this before:


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> That would be worse than being locked into a room with MR.
> 1. Gould's humming
> 2. Gould's dry mechanical playing
> 3. non-HIP performance of WTC
> - combination of three things I would avoid at all cost


The humming doesn't bother me, Gould's playing is most enjoyable, and I love the WTC on piano, harpsichord, clavichord, organ, etc.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Strange Magic said:


> As anyone could guess, I would prefer the variety (in instrumentation certainly) of the Brandenburgs to the relative homogeneity of the WTC at one sitting. It is a matter of the greater preference. Is not the WTC Too Much of a Good Thing to experience all at once?


I have heard Angela Hewitt play WTC book 2 in concert and I can assure you it does become too much of a good thing by the end. That doesn't diminish the genius of the work but Bach never intended it to be played like that.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Bulldog said:


> The humming doesn't bother me, Gould's playing is most enjoyable, and I love the WTC on piano, harpsichord, clavichord, organ, etc.


You might remember that Gould quipped that he couldn't understand people sitting for an hour and a half or more listening to piano playing in a concert hall setting. He would never do it. He said he didn't like the sound of the piano.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Strange Magic said:


> Consider: you are to be locked into a room with Glenn Gould (I'm picking a name) and a piano, and you are told you are to remain there while Gould plays the entire WTC. Or, alternatively, you are told you will be locked into another room wherein you will find The English Consort, with Trevor Pinnock and the whole gang, and they'e going to play all the Brandenburgs before you're allowed to leave. Which do you choose? I know which room I choose.


I would choose the Brandenburg concertos. This is because of Gould. Being forced to listen to his WTC in one row would be like Chinese torture.

If the alternative to Gould was a harpsichordist of distinction, I would choose the WTC.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> The humming doesn't bother me, Gould's playing is most enjoyable, and I love the WTC on piano, harpsichord, clavichord, organ, etc.


I can't stand performances where they play pre-Romantic keyboard music at mezzo-piano on the modern grand (especially in the bass) thinking that it can successfully emulate the harpsichord or fortepiano sonorities.
These lecture videos pretty much sum up the "issues" I have with them:

















This is just ewww..


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

hammeredklavier said:


> I can't stand performances where they play pre-Romantic keyboard music at mezzo-piano on the modern grand (especially in the bass) thinking that it can successfully emulate the harpsichord or fortepiano sonorities.
> These lecture videos pretty much sum up the "issues" I have with them:
> 
> 
> ...


I can't stand the harpsichord. Gould's playing is certainly not as you suggest


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

I actually dislike Gould _because_ I think it sounds harpsichord-like - no dynamic variation. Sure, modern piano won't replicate what Bach heard, but do you think that if he were alive today, he would insist we play it on much more limited instruments? I have my doubts.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

DavidA said:


> Gould's playing is certainly not as you suggest


Compare these for example:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

hammeredklavier said:


> Compare these for example:


Sorry thought we were discussing a Bach playing :lol:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

It is interesting that the WTC is both performer-dependent and instrument-dependent to the extent expressed in this thread. This is likely a contributing factor in "explaining" why it does not command more of a predominance in the poll. Would we say the same things so vigorously about Beethoven's Ninth?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

DavidA said:


> Sorry thought we were discussing a Bach playing :lol:


My assessment on Gould; "dry mechanical playing" was probably a little harsh. I can see he was a respectable player, but I don't really get why certain performers (or conductors) should regarded as being so much better than others. I think most of the "professionals" that people consider as tier-one are good. I also greatly enjoy Koopman and Pieter-Jan Belder's HIP performances. I can't honestly see how they're worse than Gould. I was just expressing my opinion Gould's Bach isn't something to die for, at least not to the extent some people in this thread make it out to be. There are still dozens of other performers I can turn to instead. Maybe I'm just not that obsessed about performers in general.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

hammeredklavier said:


> My assessment on Gould; "dry mechanical playing" was probably a little harsh. I can see he was a respectable player, but I don't really get why certain performers (or conductors) should regarded as being so much better than others. I think most of the "professionals" that people consider as tier-one are good. I also greatly enjoy Koopman and Pieter-Jan Belder's HIP performances. I can't honestly see how they're worse than Gould. I was just expressing my opinion Gould's Bach isn't something to die for, at least not to the extent some people in this thread make it out to be. There are still dozens of other performers I can turn to instead. Maybe I'm just not that obsessed about performers in general.


Well as you can't appear to distinguish back from Beethoven in the process then leave it at that


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> I think I told you about this before:


Well, I said "instructions from Bach", not Professors Schrank, Krank and Drank.


> I also greatly enjoy Koopman and Pieter-Jan Belder's HIP performances.


If there's a female voice in any recordings of the liturgical choral works I don't see how it can be "historically informed". I've never seen any great virtue in putting the sort of limitations on ourselves -- to the "historically-informed" letter -- that Bach most likely despised. It's like insisting on having boys play women's roles in Shakespeare. If you want to listen to the WTC on the non-organ keyboard instrument that Bach preferred, it would most likely be the clavichord.


> Forkel, who was born in the last year of Bach' life, 1749, got his information from the composer's sons... They told Forkel that J. S. Bach considered the clavichord the best instrument for "private entertainment and study," and few scholars have a problem with this attribution: the use of the clavichord for private study was attested in German sources as early as 1610.
> ...
> 
> Ledbetter notes that Bach, unlike his sons, wrote almost no keyboard music that seems to call for the clavichord's unique expressive nuances He adds that Bach used "the vague word clavier" ("keyboard instrument") because the Well-Tempered Clavier was meant for use in teaching or private study, rather than concert life; there was no telling what instrument a person may have at home. Still, the clavichord has some appealing features. One of them is its sound, which can be sweeter than that of the more muscular harpsichord. Another is its ability to let the player subtly shape inner voices and bass lines, so that the ear doesn't lose track of them in complex textures.


http://bsherman.net/Bachonclavichord.htm



hammeredklavier said:


> I can't stand performances where they play pre-Romantic keyboard music at mezzo-piano on the modern grand (especially in the bass) thinking that it can successfully emulate the harpsichord or fortepiano sonorities.


By the way, I can't stand the sound of a fortepiano. Thank God somebody had the good sense to improve the thing. It sounds like an out-of-tune upright. I probably would've preferred a clavichord or harpsichord. Pedal clavichords might've been awesome.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> By the way, I can't stand the sound of a fortepiano. It sounds like an out-of-tune upright.


I wonder what you think about HIP in general. Fortepianos are tuned for HIP. I don't get why you find them out-of-tune.



> Thank God somebody had the good sense to improve the thing.


It wasn't "improved", it was simply "changed". Maybe you're just not used to the sound.





The "negative attributes" of the modern grand in pre-Romantic music performance are still an "elephant in the room":
1. Crossed-strung bass muddy, lacks clarity and focus.
2. Equal distribution of voices creates unpleasant, confusing sound picture.
3. Favors legato and staccato touch, limits in-between lengths
4. Massive sound makes chamber music problematic.





"I think that instruments from every period have effects and colours that cannot be reproduced on today's pianos-that compositions were always conceived with the instruments of their time in mind, and only on those can they achieve their full effect" (Anton Rubinstein, 1892)

"We cannot do full justice to music from other periods unless we hear it as its creator did, and attempt to reproduce it, as far as possible, in the style and with the resources of the period when it was written" (Paul Badura-Skoda)



> I've never seen any great virtue in putting the sort of limitations on ourselves


Have you watched these videos yet? You sound like you haven't:


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> I wonder what you think about HIP in general. Fortepianos are tuned for HIP. I don't get why you find them out-of-tune.


"Tuned for HIP" is meaningless.


> "We cannot do full justice to music from other periods unless we hear it as its creator did, and attempt to reproduce it, as far as possible, in the style and with the resources of the period when it was written" (Paul Badura-Skoda)


That's the problem: we can't possibly "hear it as its creator did". That's conjecture. And wouldn't Bach have enjoyed being able to perform his choral works with more resources than he could scrape together? Do you think he enjoyed those limitations? I don't think so. Nor do I think he would object to my playing the WTC on my piano. I think it would be idiotic to say that Shakespeare should only be performed using only the resources available to Shakespeare and using only his precise pronunciation. (Would that include no electric lighting?)
HIP is just a conjectural, arbitrary (a=415??) academic style that turns music into museum pieces. Some of it I like, most of it is too thin and too fast. But it's just another approach that has its fanatical adherents at the moment. It isn't definitive or authoritative.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Strange Magic said:


> It is interesting that the WTC is both performer-dependent and instrument-dependent to the extent expressed in this thread. This is likely a contributing factor in "explaining" why it does not command more of a predominance in the poll. Would we say the same things so vigorously about Beethoven's Ninth?


Perhaps it would be worth comparing like with like - I couldn't find an orchestral arrangement of the WTC but Liszt did arrange the 9th: 




BTW the 9th has only just overtaken the WTC...both getting very respectable scores.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> I can't stand performances where they play pre-Romantic keyboard music at mezzo-piano on the modern grand (especially in the bass) thinking that it can successfully emulate the harpsichord or fortepiano sonorities.
> These lecture videos pretty much sum up the "issues" I have with them:


I think it depends on how good your hearing is. Trebles naturally resonate louder at further distances in recording. A lot of people to me seem treble-deaf, for instance, they can stand ie. a normal Wagner vocal recording without it hurting their ears, even though the vocals are sometimes 3x louder than the orchestra, maybe because they've listened to too much music loudly and their ears have adjusted. But the piano in that video sounds perfectly balanced for my ears, while the other has naturally 'high-resonating trebles' that need to be toned down. Hence why music is normally composed as a pyramid △ with the bass much louder than the treble. The problem with the piano can moreso be the timbre itself, it sounds a bit faded or blurry in that recording.

Maybe someone can conduct a hearing survey to test how crisp the treble ears of the forum are. I actually won't listen to a majority of Wagner recordings because they're so unbalanced and discomforting. For other recordings like Bach, I will 
occasionally manually boost the bass if the recording sounds silly. It's supposed to sound like counterpoint.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

I think individual voices can be more clearly delineated on a piano than on a harpsichord, where to me it sounds more muddled together. The thing with playing Bach or Mozart on a modern piano is that they didn't write for an instrument with the modern piano's powerful bass, so sometimes something seems missing. I think if you want a little hint as to what Bach would sound like if he had composed for the modern piano, listen to or play Liszt's transcriptions of Bach organ works (which were excellently done, btw), like this:




Or this:





Now I don't think either the harpsichord or the organ can match the piano's clarity here. But of course the piano can't match the organ's power and grandeur.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

My comments above about HIP is not to say that I dislike HIP in an absolute way. The following performance of a work I've referenced elsewhere is wonderful in its "swelling" feeling, countertenor notwithstanding  :


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Thought it worth bumping again as 13 more members have voted on the equavalent Beethoven 9th Symphony poll. Perhaps you missed this.

Beethoven currently fairing better at 14.29% (WTC 11.27%).


----------



## EmperorOfIceCream (Jan 3, 2020)

Hot-take: WTC is not Bach's best keyboard composition. His suites, in particular the Six Partitas, show much more range of expression and style, and have much better drama. The prelude-fugue 48 times rule is very constraining, and thus I think the Partitas are much richer and powerful -- they can stand along with Beethoven sonatas or Chopin preludes as being grand and emotionally affecting. I think that WTC belongs more towards the category of Art of Fugue: beautiful and amazing, but more of a formal and structural beauty than a dramatic one.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

janxharris said:


> Thought it worth bumping again as 13 more members have voted on the equavalent Beethoven 9th Symphony poll. Perhaps you missed this.
> 
> Beethoven currently fairing better at 14.29% (WTC 11.27%).


It's not even my favourite Beethoven symphony. Maybe my 4th favourite Beethoven symphony.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

EmperorOfIceCream said:


> Hot-take: WTC is not Bach's best keyboard composition. His suites, in particular the Six Partitas, show much more range of expression and style, and have much better drama. The prelude-fugue 48 times rule is very constraining, and thus I think the Partitas are much richer and powerful -- they can stand along with Beethoven sonatas or Chopin preludes as being grand and emotionally affecting. I think that WTC belongs more towards the category of Art of Fugue: beautiful and amazing, but more of a formal and structural beauty than a dramatic one.


I agree with this. The 3 keyboard suites are all superior to the WTC. The most akin to WTC are the French suites. The Partitas and English suites are more complex than the WTC. If I should chose between WTC and the 3 suites, I would take the suites


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Jacck said:


> I agree with this. The 3 keyboard suites are all superior to the WTC. The most akin to WTC are the French suites. The Partitas and English suites are more complex than the WTC. If I should chose between WTC and the 3 suites, I would take the suites


I don't want to say anything to criticise the suites, especially the English suites. However, I suppose I must prefer formal and structural beauty over drama. Perhaps that why I prefer Bach to Beethoven (again, without saying anything to criticise Beethoven).


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

I think the suites, in particular the six partitas, get overshadowed by the WTC which is a tremendous shame as they contain some remarkable music. However, that in no way ought to diminish the kaleidoscopic creativity and variety of the WTC.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Eclectic Al said:


> It's not even my favourite Beethoven symphony. Maybe my 4th favourite Beethoven symphony.


To clarify - the WTC and the 9th are in TC's top tier (in case you didn't know); so I thought a poll on each might be of interest.


----------



## OperasAndPassions (Aug 14, 2020)

Not my favorite even by Bach - that would be the St Matthew Passion. But it is certainly my favorite work by him for solo keyboard. For solo instruments in general, it would be the Sonatas and Partitas for Violin Solo.
My favorite piece of music ever would be the said Passion, in any version, HIP or non-HIP. I love both more Bach real approaches, as well as the grand Richter-esque older efforts.


----------



## dukeofcurls (Aug 15, 2020)

it isn't even the best collection of Baroque keyboard music, Scarlatti's sonatas beat it handily


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

My preferred order:

WTC
Art of Fugue (preferred on solo keyboard)
Goldberg Variations
Partitas
Chromatic Fantasy & Fugue
French Suites
French Overture
English Suites
Inventions/Sinfonias
Capriccio on the Departure of his Most Beloved Brother
Italian Concerto


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I think the suites, in particular the six partitas, get overshadowed by the WTC which is a tremendous shame as they contain some remarkable music. However, that in no way ought to diminish the kaleidoscopic creativity and variety of the WTC.


Overshadowed? I think to most piansts they're different, separate worlds. They demand that you think differently in your approach.

late Middle English: via Old French from Latin_ different- _'carrying away, differing,' from the verb _differre _(see differ) .


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> My preferred order:
> 
> WTC
> Art of Fugue (preferred on solo keyboard)
> ...


Hey Bulldog, overall you tend to prefer piano or harpsichord/clavichord for these works? Do you have particular favorite recordings that stand over the others for any of them (could you please tell me which?)?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Allerius said:


> Hey Bulldog, overall you tend to prefer piano or harpsichord/clavichord for these works? Do you have particular favorite recordings that stand over the others for any of them (could you please tell me which?)?


I prefer harpsichord, but am fine with piano.

Favorites:
WTC - Tureck, Koroliov, Belder, Leonhardt
Art of Fugue - Gilbert
Goldberg Variations - Tureck/DG, Gould (81), Rousset
Partitas - Richter, Rousset
Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue - Kipnis
French Suites - Cates, Curtis
French Overture - Rousset
Inventions/Sinfonias - van Asperen
Capriccio - Suzuki
Italian Concerto - Hewitt/DG


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Overshadowed? I think to most piansts they're different, separate worlds. They demand that you think differently in your approach.
> ...


I don't think that way. They're not that separate; Bach used dance forms constantly, and often within both books of WTC. Likewise you have contrapuntal writing in the keyboard suites, including the partitas. They're different in form, but hardly "separate worlds".

I think the partitas (and most of the keyboard suites) are "overshadowed" in the sense of not being as well-known as the WTC and Inventions mainly because pianists don't become as acquainted with them as teaching pieces.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

janxharris said:


> Thought it worth bumping again as 13 more members have voted on the equavalent Beethoven 9th Symphony poll. Perhaps you missed this.
> 
> Beethoven currently fairing better at 14.29% (WTC 11.27%).


I think these polls don't really tell much. Most people who would vote no don't bother (I know I never voted). Also a symphony vs. a piano work is like a Bombardier plane vs. BMW.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Phil loves classical said:


> I think these polls don't really tell much. Most people who would vote no don't bother (I know I never voted). Also a symphony vs. a piano work is like a Bombardier plane vs. BMW.


...well there is a piano version of the 9th...


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

janxharris said:


> ...well there is a piano version of the 9th...


Ok... that's an auto with a Bombardier engine vs. a Porsche. Biggest difference is a gigantic form vs. a set of smaller ones.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Phil loves classical said:


> Ok... that's an auto with a Bombardier engine vs. a Porsche. Biggest difference is a gigantic form vs. a set of smaller ones.


It's a fair point PLC.

That both have got such high marks is quite interesting nevertheless.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

consuono said:


> I don't think that way. They're not that separate; Bach used dance forms constantly, and often within both books of WTC. Likewise you have contrapuntal writing in the keyboard suites, including the partitas. They're different in form, but hardly "separate worlds".
> 
> I think the partitas (and most of the keyboard suites) are "overshadowed" in the sense of not being as well-known as the WTC and Inventions mainly because pianists don't become as acquainted with them as teaching pieces.


I think Bach thought differently when composing his partitas and suites because they have a succession of movements to express the whole imagined space in that key or those related keys. Preludes with their fugues are so much 'just' a prelude and its related fugue.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> I think Bach thought differently when composing his partitas and suites because they have a succession of movements to express the whole imagined space in that key or those related keys. Preludes with their fugues are so much 'just' a prelude and its related fugue.


Well, yeah, a prelude-fugue pair has two sections while a suite has six or so...yes.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

It depends on who is playing it, but it can be absolutely transcendent.


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

It isn't my favourite piece of music because I don't think it is a single piece. My test for this is: 

Would I listen to the entire thing in one sitting? No (unless givien the opportunity to hear a great pianist in concert if it happened - but this is an extraordinary situation).

Was it intended to be digested in a single performance? Not to my knowledge.

Unlike Beethoven's 5th, or Brahms' Clarinet Quintet, WTC becomes a bit monotonous after 6-12 individual preludes and fugues (despite their genius and beauty). This is no surprise, given it's 'sameness' of form(s) in contrast to the specialised nature of the different movements of a symphony where the individual parts are tailored, in their diverse functions, to give rise to a coherent whole, loosely like the way different parts of an organism are. Individual preludes and fugues in the WTC are not, or if they are, to nowhere near the same degree.

I tend to view the WTC as a collection of individual works, not a single work. However, I'm open to suggestions otherwise from more knowledgeable people than me.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

RogerWaters said:


> It isn't my favourite piece of music because I don't think it is a single piece. My test for this is:
> 
> Would I sit through an entire performance of it? No.
> 
> ...


I tend to agree with that. Now there are some who do like to listen to the entire WTC in one sitting, and that's fine. I don't think the work was meant to be performed publicly anyway though. It was written for the private learning and enjoyment of players.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

RogerWaters said:


> Unlike Beethoven's 5th, or Brahms' Clarinet Quintet, WTC becomes a bit monotonous after 6-12 individual preludes and fugues (despite their genius and beauty). This is no surprise, given it's 'sameness' of form(s) in contrast to the specialised nature of the different movements of a symphony where the individual parts are tailored, in their diverse functions, to give rise to a coherent whole, loosely like the way different parts of an organism are. Individual preludes and fugues in the WTC are not, or if they are, to nowhere near the same degree.


Given that I listen to the WTC in one sitting without a moment of boredom, I'd have to say that I don't find the experience monotonous. Yes, it's prelude/fugue, prelude/fugue, etc. However, there are a host of differences other than a variety of form. Differences in mood, tempo, and dynamics are obvious throughout the work as well as variety of key. Anyways, I always feel amazement when listening.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Bulldog said:


> Given that I listen to the WTC in one sitting without a moment of boredom, I'd have to say that I don't find the experience monotonous. Yes, it's prelude/fugue, prelude/fugue, etc. However, there are a host of differences other than a variety of form. Differences in mood, tempo, and dynamics are obvious throughout the work as well as variety of key. Anyways, I always feel amazement when listening.


It's not really relevant anyway since the two cycles were never supposed to be listened to in such a manner. I have done so a few times but mostly if I'm playing the whole thing it's because I'm using it as background music when studying and the like.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

janxharris said:


> Indeed consuono - as I say, I'm not quoting to prove anything. I guess it helps to know that I'm not completely alone. I'm intrigued to know if there is something in one's character / brain-wiring etc that determines one's response.
> 
> *I will keep trying JSB's music*.


I implore you to do so. Maybe you'll never get "the epiphany" and pass on to your final slumber wondering. But if one day you DO get it, Oh my... it will truly be a religious experience. I hope it comes to you and soon. It will be as if all your life you have been walking through a museum of great art with the lights off, vaguely making out shapes and images. Then, suddenly, someone turns the lights on, and there before you, the illumination of greatness that only light could bring into your world. I do hope for your sake.

V


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Waldesnacht said:


> It's not really relevant anyway since the two cycles were never supposed to be listened to in such a manner. I have done so a few times but mostly if I'm playing the whole thing it's because I'm using it as background music when studying and the like.


I doubt they were intended to be played in such a manner, too.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Luchesi said:


> I want to hear (and collect) them all, from the slowest to the fastest!
> JsB could have probably played them very zippy if he was in that mood? What do we know?


the zippyness isn't necessarily the problem. It's playing the WTC like they're Chopin Nocturnes that makes them awful.

V


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

consuono said:


> Well, I said "instructions from Bach", not Professors *Schrank, Krank* and *Drank*.


LOL!!!!

A bit harsh. I think they had some valid points to make, but there is also truth in your very funny assessment of them.

V


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> "We cannot do full justice to music from other periods unless we hear it as its creator did, and attempt to reproduce it, as far as possible, in the style and with the resources of the period when it was written" (Paul Badura-Skoda)


I call complete and utter *balderdash* on such an asinine statement.

V


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Although it's not my favorite piece/set of pieces of music, I really admire the WTC, and think that it's revelatory to hear it while looking at it's score. I like to listen to an entire book when I go for it instead of to individual preludes and fugues. Kenneth Gilbert's (below) is one of my current favorite performances on the harpsichord.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Varick said:


> I implore you to do so. Maybe you'll never get "the epiphany" and pass on to your final slumber wondering. But if one day you DO get it, Oh my... it will truly be a religious experience. I hope it comes to you and soon. It will be as if all your life you have been walking through a museum of great art with the lights off, vaguely making out shapes and images. Then, suddenly, someone turns the lights on, and there before you, the illumination of greatness that only light could bring into your world. I do hope for your sake.
> 
> V


Nice post Varick. 
The more I listen to the WTC the worse the experience gets.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

janxharris said:


> Nice post Varick.
> The more I listen to the WTC the worse the experience gets.


Well, don't listen to it then! :lol:


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

DavidA said:


> Well, don't listen to it then! :lol:


Since it's so highly regarded by so many here I feel that I must give it a fair hearing.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

janxharris said:


> Nice post Varick.
> The more I listen to the WTC the worse the experience gets.


Well, I would give different pieces of JSB multiple tries than WTC. WTC is more of a study of every key signature than it is a piece to be listened to like a Beethoven sonata or Chopin Polonaise. I could sit down and listen to any one of the Books of the WTC and enjoy them in one sitting, but my love of JSB runs very deep. I would try more approachable pieces like his Cello Suites, French Suites, Brandenburgs, Orchestral suites. I wouldn't even try at this point the Golbergs. It's one of my favorite pieces in the entire classical canon, but I know more than a few people who literally listened to that piece more than 10 times before it clicked (I'm one of them), yet liked a bunch of other Bach. Check out his Magnificat and Mass in B Minor if you like choral/sacred works.

But first, I would take a break from anything JSB. Listen to music for a few months that you really love and enjoy and then try again. Just my suggestion.

V


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Varick said:


> I call complete and utter *balderdash* on such an asinine statement.
> 
> V


Glad for your opinion. I'm too timid to say it, but we definitely agree. The score's the thing not some 'historical view', which is likely wrong-headed and misleading anyway. Because historicity is not the point, it's not what art is expressing, as it is developed through the generations. It's high-minded!


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Varick said:


> the zippyness isn't necessarily the problem. It's playing the WTC like they're Chopin Nocturnes that makes them awful.
> 
> V


Why?...........


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

janxharris said:


> Nice post Varick.
> The more I listen to the WTC the worse the experience gets.


Which music do you admire?, so we can figure this out..


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Luchesi said:


> Why?...........


Well, the WTC is first and foremost a study of every key signature, the structure of those keys and the what can be done with those keys. Yes there is massive depth, beauty, & structure that only JSB (IMO) could infuse into this massive study, but the WTC was not primarily made to be an expressive work of beauty, grace, and reflection into the human heart like the Chopin Nocturnes were.

Second, we are talking Baroque vs Romantic eras. They need a different approach. There is a zeitgeist of each era that should be factored in when performing any piece. I love different approaches to music and specific pieces that any good performer should put their unique stamp on, but as with everything, you can take things too far. Baroque pieces shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the Romantic era as they shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the early Classical era. Instrumentation is one thing (which is why I reject the stringent adherence to the HIP philosophy and I have no problem with transcribing music for different instruments - something I am waiting for an explanation from those who are devout HIPsters of why most of them have no problem with transcriptions for other instruments, but god forbid you add in a few more violins or voices to a chorus or play something on piano when written for harpsichord), but certain dynamics should remain constant.

Chopin Nocturnes shouldn't be performed on a harpsichord due to the lack of dynamic range on a harpsichord that is needed for the Nocturnes. Sure, the notes could be played, but who the hell wants to hear it?

But hey, if you enjoyed her performance of the WTC, then keep enjoying. I thought it dreadful.

V


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Varick said:


> Well, the WTC is first and foremost a study of every key signature, the structure of those keys and the what can be done with those keys. Yes there is massive depth, beauty, & structure that only JSB (IMO) could infuse into this massive study, but the WTC was not primarily made to be an expressive work of beauty, grace, and reflection into the human heart like the Chopin Nocturnes were.


I think the idea that the WTC is an exploration of keys _entails_ the idea that it's expressive music. In the first half of the c18, in Bach's circle, keys are _essentially_ expressive. I can find some references from, for example, Johannes Mattheson (I think), if you want. A HIP performance will bring this out. Parenthetically, this is one reason why equal temperament doesn't do the music justice.

Re instruments for WTC, he could well have had piano textures and sounds in mind for some of the second book, though clearly not a modern concert instrument. It's very misleading to say that WTC is harpsichord music, as if the only _clavier_ was a harpsichord!


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Luchesi said:


> Which music do you admire?, so we can figure this out..


I'm not sure that this will help, but as you asked here are pieces I regularly listen to:

Sibelius - Symphonies 4, 5, 6 and 7 and also Tapiola
Stravinsky - Rite of Spring
Vaughan Williams - Symphonies 3 and 5, The Lark Ascending
Elgar - Cello Concerto
Wagner - Tristan and Isolde Prelude to Act I
Beethoven - Symphonies 5, 6 and 9
Messiaen - Quartet for the end of time
Mahler - Symphony No.1 1st and 2nd Movement, No.2 1st Movement, No.5 4th Movement, No.7 2nd Movement
Debussy - La Mer, Prelude a la midi d'un faune, Clair de Lune
Liszt - Consolation No.3, Piano Concerto No.1
Mozart - Symphony 40
Chopin - various pieces

I have listened to a lot of JSB - Goldberg, A of F, B minor Mass, St. Matthew Passion and the WTC. I can't say I enjoy any of them but I do like his Double Violin Concerto.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

janxharris said:


> I'm not sure that this will help, but as you asked here are pieces I regularly listen to:
> 
> Sibelius - Symphonies 4, 5, 6 and 7 and also Tapiola
> Stravinsky - Rite of Spring
> ...


Those in your list seem to exude a lot of drama. And you're correct, you won't find that type of obvious drama in Bach.

Glenn Gould said Mozart was the one who began adding too much drama and less pure musical inventiveness. Mozart died too late.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Varick said:


> Well, the WTC is first and foremost a study of every key signature, the structure of those keys and the what can be done with those keys. Yes there is massive depth, beauty, & structure that only JSB (IMO) could infuse into this massive study, but the WTC was not primarily made to be an expressive work of beauty, grace, and reflection into the human heart like the Chopin Nocturnes were.
> 
> Second, we are talking Baroque vs Romantic eras. They need a different approach. There is a zeitgeist of each era that should be factored in when performing any piece. I love different approaches to music and specific pieces that any good performer should put their unique stamp on, but as with everything, you can take things too far. Baroque pieces shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the Romantic era as they shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the early Classical era. Instrumentation is one thing (which is why I reject the stringent adherence to the HIP philosophy and I have no problem with transcribing music for different instruments - something I am waiting for an explanation from those who are devout HIPsters of why most of them have no problem with transcriptions for other instruments, but god forbid you add in a few more violins or voices to a chorus or play something on piano when written for harpsichord), but certain dynamics should remain constant.
> 
> ...


I want all the extreme interpretations so that I can decide for myself. Don't we all? One for the changing mood of every changing day. You'd rather not have a wider choice?

I also need some of their wacky ideas for when I play the 48. I don't play them like studies.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Luchesi said:


> Those in your list seem to exude a lot of drama. And you're correct, you won't find that type of obvious drama in Bach.
> 
> Glenn Gould said Mozart was the one who began adding too much drama and less pure musical inventiveness. Mozart died too late.


I agree there is drama but that does not have to be at the expense of being musically inventive. There are of course plenty here that appreciate both drama and the 'pure musical inventiveness' of someone like Bach.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

janxharris said:


> I agree there is drama but that does not have to be at the expense of being musically inventive. There are of course plenty here that appreciate both drama and the 'pure musical inventiveness' of someone like Bach.


But you're not one of them? Let's try another question. What do you dislike in Bach? Old-fashioned sounding, can't put your finger on it, but it detracts from the wholeness of the experience? If so, I think I know why...from my own journey..


----------



## RogerWaters (Feb 13, 2017)

Having said the above, I am listening to WTC in detail each night. Leonhardt on harpsichord; Nikolayeva on piano.

Is there a source which lists clearly how many voices each fugue has? Sometimes it is hard to tell - when 4 or more voices are being employed. Thanks.

Can people actually hold in their minds what each voice is doing at any moment when listening to a 4+ voice fugue? I certaintly can't. I can with 3 but that's my limit at present.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Depending on which edition one looks at, the score might well include a reference to the number of voices involved in the heading to each fugue. I came back to piano lessons a couple of years ago after decades spent playing without lessons, and blanched when my first assignment turned out to be the B flat minor fugue (I'd played the prelude at my introductory lesson) from Book 1, which is a five-voicer! (It's a wonderful piece though and I love playing the pair of them together.)

My answer to your second question kind of follows on from that. Not only would my answer be "not all the time", I actively found it unhelpful to try and do so while learning to play the fugue. The approach which ultimately worked for me was simply to learn the notes, then let the counterpoint reveal itself as my playing of it got more fluent. I find the same applies when I listen - I park my conscious mind and just let the music appeal to my ear and my soul, then the counterpoint emerges of its own accord.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Luchesi said:


> But you're not one of them? Let's try another question. What do you dislike in Bach? Old-fashioned sounding, can't put your finger on it, but it detracts from the wholeness of the experience? If so, I think I know why...from my own journey..


_In general_ I find his music bland, unispired, mechanical and fomulaic especially in his constant use of counterpoint for seemingly no other reason than to demonstrate how complex he can be.

There is constant use of cadences (yes - this was the norm in that period) - perhaps not at quite the level we see in the classical era - but, nonetheless, extremely irritating.

Sorry - you did ask.

As I said - I do like his Double Violin Concerto - it has passion and seems to drive forward and sounds inspired. I would not say that I adore it though.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

If you can find the time, dedication, and around 20 minutes every day to sit down with your complete concentration, a libretto, and perhaps an apparatus for taking notes, the best way to appreciate Bach is by listening to one cantata a day. If, after a week or two, you aren’t totally awed by his art then I would safely say that you will never connect with it. I have been doing this for three months now and I wonder why I ever listen to anything else.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

janxharris said:


> _In general_ I find his music bland, unispired, mechanical and fomulaic especially in his constant use of counterpoint for seemingly no other reason than to demonstrate how complex he can be.
> ...


Almost all music, at least before the "modern" era, could be called mechanical and formulaic. And even in "modern" music that edgy avoidance of the "formulaic" becomes, ironically, formulaic. I don't think Bach is saying how "complex he can be". I look at it as Bach saying how every voice has a part that is important and interesting in itself and has its place.
And I'm going to be as kind as I can about this, but if you find the following "bland and uninspired", then you're either ignorant (in a non-derogatory sense) or deaf. There's nothing more to add.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

janxharris said:


> _In general_ I find his music bland, unispired, mechanical and fomulaic especially in his constant use of counterpoint for seemingly no other reason than to demonstrate how complex he can be.
> 
> There is constant use of cadences (yes - this was the norm in that period) - perhaps not at quite the level we see in the classical era - but, nonetheless, extremely irritating.
> 
> ...


Thank you much. That will help me moderate my views of people (students) who dislike the 'blandness' of JsB, because you're well-spoken and you've given it thought (it's not just a contrarian or ego thing.) It's difficult for the rest of us to understand, since we find so much cleverness in Bach.. (but what do we compare it to?)

The system has failed you. That sounds harsh. Perhaps you've been wrung out and mangled by the later composers.

I can recommend you do the tactile thing. Get enchanted with the intervals and basic elements with which Bach surprises even the mature musician. 'Not helpful?

I'm short-tempered because TC ate another of my posts! Grrrrrrr


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Luchesi said:


> Thank you much. That will help me moderate my views of people (students) who dislike the 'blandness' of JsB, because you're well-spoken and you've given it thought (it's not just a contrarian or ego thing.) It's difficult for the rest of us to understand, since we find so much cleverness in Bach.. (but what do we compare it to?)
> 
> *The system has failed you*. That sounds harsh. *Perhaps you've been wrung out and mangled by the later composers*.
> 
> ...


Thank you too.

Not exactly sure what you mean by emboldened.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

janxharris said:


> Thank you too.
> 
> Not exactly sure what you mean by emboldened.


My prize student (who's all grown up now) said to me, Vivaldi is for people who can only listen while Bach is for people who can play. Rameau and Couperin are somewhere in the middle.

Also, his list in the sequence for getting to appreciate composers;

Chopin
Mozart
Schubert
Mendelssohn
Bach is after LvB, Haydn, Handel -- so your plight is in this


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

janxharris said:


> _In general_ I find his music bland, unispired, mechanical and fomulaic especially in his constant use of counterpoint for seemingly no other reason than to demonstrate how complex he can be.


One of the things which strikes me is the sheer volume of music that people like Bach churned out.

What that implies is that he can't have been trying to demonstrate how complex he could be (or only rarely), as he would have run out of time. The bulk of the music must just have come completely naturally to him. (I would say the same of others who produced vast amounts of music - such as Haydn.)

Hence, I can believe criticisms like mechanical or formulaic, but not that he was (often) seeking to demonstrate complexity. The fact that I don't find his pieces mechanical or formulaic is then the amazing thing, given the rate at which he could chuck it out.

I guess that is a matter of personality: I like things which are almost predictable. If something is entirely predictable then that is boring, but if it is not at all predictable then it approaches randomness and that is boring too. My ideal is a well formulated standard structure, with piquant variety around that. Bach delivers (as does Haydn).


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Eclectic Al said:


> One of the things which strikes me is the sheer volume of music that people like Bach churned out.
> 
> What that implies is that he can't have been trying to demonstrate how complex he could be (or only rarely), as he would have run out of time. The bulk of the music must just have come completely naturally to him. (I would say the same of others who produced vast amounts of music - such as Haydn.)
> 
> ...


Yes, up until recordings, a composer was harangued by the fact that listeners would only hear his large offering once. All that work!!! Would they be able to follow it to the sections I'm justifiably proud of?? What's the solution?


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

janxharris said:


> Thank you too.
> 
> Not exactly sure what you mean by emboldened.


From what I've read, I think it is dramatic gestures and moods you are more into. Bach can be more cerebral in a way. Also I don't think you're into tight forms. The only way I got into Bach (and I'm not his biggest fan) is by getting into the nitty gritty, the stuff he builds from. You're looking from a more macro view as I take it. Music that speeds up, gets louder, climax, slows down. There isn't any of that in Bach. It's one tempo. It starts, always full on, and it stops. That why i said he has less variety in intensity and rhythms than later composers. To like Bach I believe you have to appreciate the choice of notes, note placement and duration. It's actually the innards of music. Debussy once said only Bach understood the truth behind music (probably an exaggeration, because he also liked Mozart).


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

janxharris said:


> Chopin - various pieces





janxharris said:


> _In general_ I find his music bland, unispired, mechanical and fomulaic especially in his constant use of counterpoint for seemingly no other reason than to demonstrate how complex he can be.


do you like any of the preludes or fantasies then?

If you like:









you might also like certain bits of:

*[ 3:38 ]*


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> And I'm going to be as kind as I can about this, but if you find the following "bland and uninspired", then you're either ignorant (in a non-derogatory sense) or deaf. There's nothing more to add.


I wouldn't call anyone ignorant or deaf *just because* they don't appreciate the same music as I do. I sort of understand janxharris' lack of appreciation for general 18th century music (which he expressed on many occasions), at least he doesn't seem to have "double standards", unlike some other people in this forum. 
There are people who think Bach's counterpoint represents "religious dogma", or feels like "wigs and kneehighs", no matter how well-crafted it is. Bach (Mozart, Beethoven, or any others for that matter) doesn't have to appreciated by every single person on this planet by to be considered great.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Varick said:


> Baroque pieces shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the Romantic era as they shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the early Classical era.


It depends on which "Baroque piece" we're talking about. Late Baroque and early Classical are quite close in terms of timeline, also in style of composition and performance.

The "Galant" Style in J. S. Bach's "Musical Offering:" Widening the Dimensions
Gregory Butler
"What has been written about galant features in Bach's late works in general and the Musical Offering in particular has tended to focus on surface details. As a result galant style is said to be characterized by simplified melody clearly articulated into short, balanced phrases, and employing such figures as triplets, syncopations, and appoggiatura "sigh" motives, dominating a thinned-out, polarized texture in which the bass part abandons any thematic engagement with the upper part for a sort of bland, generic diet of repeated notes and other similar patterns. The view that in the case of the Musical offering these references to the galant style were intended by Bach both to demonstrate his engagement with progressive tendencies and to appeal to certain aesthetic sensibilities at the Potsdam court of the collection's dedicatee is widely accepted by Bach scholars. ..."






*[ 4:05 ]*





*[ 19:30 ]*


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

consuono said:


> Almost all music, at least before the "modern" era, could be called mechanical and formulaic. And even in "modern" music that edgy avoidance of the "formulaic" becomes, ironically, formulaic. I don't think Bach is saying how "complex he can be". I look at it as Bach saying how every voice has a part that is important and interesting in itself and has its place.
> And I'm going to be as kind as I can about this, but if you find the following "bland and uninspired", then you're either ignorant (in a non-derogatory sense) or deaf. There's nothing more to add.


I thought the Dona Nobis Pacem was pleasant enough. The Musical Offering just seemed to be A of F revisited; again, pleasant, but it doesn't seem to go anywhere.

In Sibelius's 7th Symphony there is a hymn-like and contrapuntal section (so it's perhaps comparable to Bach) near the beginning that has a unique harmonic/melodic sound world - and that, for me, places it above the mechanical and formulaic.






However, I would never describe someone as ignorant (even in the non-derogatory sense) if they didn't 'get' it.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

OK, a completely different suggestion (- and put plugs in your ears, purists).

I have a CD of Stokowski Bach arrangements. The one I have is Matthias Bamert conducting the BBC Philharmonic on Chandos, but I am sure there are others. Try the famous Toccata & Fugue in D minor as played in Stokowski's sound world. There's drama. I could see Sibelius composing the start. Grand gesture upfront, and then some scurrying strings - very Sibelian. There's also Adagio in C (BWV 564), which comes out like a particularly beautiful slow movement, which fits more in the classical or early romantic era, and of course the Air on the G string. A lot of this is on Spotify.

The concerti for multiple harpsichords are another thing again, the final movement of the one for 4 (BWV 1065) is jazzy, and there's a bit of a wall of sound feel in some of them, say the joyous opening of BWV 1064 for 3 - so much harpsichord stuff that it becomes a mush of harpsichord-ness. I like Pinnock and the English Concert in these. Impossible not to be cheered - so life affirming. There's also a minimalist feel in the relentlessness, but without the vacuousness that can arise in minimalism. Just listened again to BWV 1064 - it's absolutely brilliant.

I like organ music too, and there is plenty of drama just in the sound of a mighty organ. One fascinating thing is the way with Bach you will hear a range of settings of the same tune. The similarity of the theme, and the variety of settings are then endlessly fascinating. For example, in Clavierubung III there are two settings of Vater unser im Himmelreich. One is deep, sehr innig, and endlessly fascinating; the other is fleet and charming. I like Peter Hurford in this stuff.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Phil loves classical said:


> From what I've read, I think it is dramatic gestures and moods you are more into. Bach can be more cerebral in a way. Also I don't think you're into tight forms. The only way I got into Bach (and I'm not his biggest fan) is by getting into the nitty gritty, the stuff he builds from. You're looking from a more macro view as I take it. Music that speeds up, gets louder, climax, slows down. There isn't any of that in Bach. It's one tempo. It starts, always full on, and it stops. That why i said he has less variety in intensity and rhythms than later composers. To like Bach I believe you have to appreciate the choice of notes, note placement and duration. It's actually the innards of music. Debussy once said only Bach understood the truth behind music (probably an exaggeration, because he also liked Mozart).


Nice post. I do like drama (who doesn't) - but not too much from the heavily Romantic Era (a la Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff). More than anything variety and contrast I think is key. I think it's fair to say that Bach's Double Violin Concerto achieves both drama and variety and the opening tune is very distinctive.

I said I didn't adore it but lisening now it sounds fantastic.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

hammeredklavier said:


> do you like any of the preludes or fantasies then?
> 
> you might also like certain bits of:


im taking a while to listen. will come back.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> Music that speeds up, gets louder, climax, slows down. There isn't any of that in Bach. It's one tempo. It starts, always full on, and it stops. That why i said he has less variety in intensity and rhythms than later composers.


I've never really thought about it but isn't the Chaconne from 1004 a bit like that? The opening of the passions have a pretty dramatic climax too. I expect there are some keyboard music examples, BWV 656 for example.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

> Phil loves classical: "Music that speeds up, gets louder, climax, slows down. There isn't any of that in Bach. It's one tempo. It starts, always full on, and it stops. That why i said he has less variety in intensity and rhythms than later composers."


I have an old college music textbook. When discussing the Baroque, there is talk of Terraced Dynamics (Loud/Soft Switch only; no gradations of volume), and Unflagging Rhythm (Start piece; keep flogging away at it at unvarying tempo). There were other characteristics also but those two hallmarks pretty well "explain" why we don't find much variation in volume and tempi in Bach.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> I have an old college music textbook. When discussing the Baroque, there is talk of Terraced Dynamics (Loud/Soft Switch only; no gradations of volume), and Unflagging Rhythm (Start piece; keep flogging away at it at unvarying tempo). There were other characteristics also but those two hallmarks pretty well "explain" why we don't find much variation in volume and tempi in Bach.


That's just a harpsichord thing! No one in their right minds would play a violin or a flute or an orchestra like that!


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> I have an old college music textbook. When discussing the Baroque, there is talk of Terraced Dynamics (Loud/Soft Switch only; no gradations of volume), and Unflagging Rhythm (Start piece; keep flogging away at it at unvarying tempo). There were other characteristics also but those two hallmarks pretty well "explain" why we don't find much variation in volume and tempi in Bach.


With the long development of music they had finally reached a lofty point for them to express their admiration for God, so the music intentionally has a constancy and an unwavering (abiding) backdrop, as was their concept of the godhead.
Of course I might just be projecting..


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Luchesi said:


> With the long development of music they had finally reached a lofty point for them to express their admiration for God, so the music intentionally has a constancy and an unwavering (abiding) backdrop, as was their concept of the godhead.
> Of course I might just be projecting..


LOL

,Amdahl,Cm svm sc,dm c


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Varick said:


> Baroque pieces shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the Romantic era as *they* shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the early Classical era.





hammeredklavier said:


> It depends on which "Baroque piece" we're talking about. Late Baroque and early Classical are quite close in terms of timeline, also in style of composition and performance.


I knew that was going to be misinterpreted at some point and the fault is mine. I should have been more specific in how I worded that. When I wrote the "they" that I emboldened above, I meant, and should have stated, _"...as Romantic pieces shouldn't be performed as if they were composed in the early Classical era." _ I completely understand why you read it the way you did. My apologies for being unclear.

V


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

hammeredklavier said:


> do you like any of the preludes or fantasies then?


Of the four I quite like the E minor Chopin Prelude.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

The tempo changes in the gloria (which feel almost Classical) are atypical for Bach:

*[ 5:48 ]*


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

I think one thing that distinguishes Bach's counterpoint from his contemporaries' is his frequent use of intricate figures* like this:







Bach seems to be fond of using them to intensify fugal passages and evoke religious sentiments. The feeling of nostalgia created is like tsunami to me, but I also suspect this might one element in Bach people like janxharris find "mechanical" or "monotonous".

*[ 2:10 ]*





*[ 1:14 ]*





*I don't quite find these figures in J. E. Eberlin (from what I've listened to), an early 18th century Salzburg master whose counterpoint had massive influence on young Mozart. It might be the reason why early Mozart counterpoint sounds like this: 





and not like this:


----------

