# A query about the Well-Tempered Clavier



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

So I've been doing all these polls, and although there have been a few results that surprised me, I've figured that those surprises have been due to incorrect assumptions on my part. Of course (a) the poll system has plenty of flaws, and (b) they're just snapshots of opinions rather than precise measurements of quantities. But one particular finding intrigues me, namely:

In one poll, Book 1 of Bach's Well-tempered Clavier got a 60% vote (27 of 45 people), while in another, Book 2 got an 80% vote (24 of 30 people).
I had always assumed that, although 20 years separate the two books, they were generally considered as a single work; and hence, I expected that the votes should be roughly similar. But 60 and 80 are quite different - granted, both are relatively high scores for these polls, but it's still a very big gap. Certainly I could put the disparity down to the flaws of the polls, not least of which is that each poll has a somewhat different set of participants. But I have a sort of "control" reference, which is that I accidentally put Chopin's Scherzo no.3 in two different polls, and the two results there were very similar (49% vs 45%).

So, _is_ the Bach result just a polling anomaly, or do fans of Bach's keyboard music generally consider Book 2 of the 48 to be superior (or in some other way preferable) to Book 1?


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I don't know about superior, but the music in Book II is generally more intricate and chromatic, especially the fugue themes.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

I consider Book II to be more accessible _to the non-musician_ who listens to the music in large chunks. Book I can feel more like a series of exercises.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I would say it is a sampling anomaly. I for one don't recall voting for both of them, though my memory isn't super sharp. I certainly would have voted for both if I didn't. Have you noticed a difference in participation levels between the two?


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Weston said:


> I would say it is a sampling anomaly. I for one don't recall voting for both of them, though my memory isn't super sharp. I certainly would have voted for both if I didn't. Have you noticed a difference in participation levels between the two?


There were different levels of participation all right. I think it was about 15 people voted for both, and something like 11 voted for book 1 but didn't participate in the poll containing book 2, while 9 voted for book 2 but didn't participate in the poll containing book 1. The two sort of cancelled each other out; if all book 2 voters also voted for 1, and vice versa, the ratio of book 1 to 2 would change from 60:80 to about 66:85. It's the sheer size of the difference that caught my attention.

More people voted in the book 1 poll than the book 2 one, so it's possible that most or all of that extra number wouldn't have voted for book 2 if they'd participated in that poll, which would push book 2's score down quite a bit.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I don't know about TC polls, but I do believe that Bk. 1 is a little more popular than Bk. 2.

1. Bk. 1 tends to be preferred by the general classical music fan.
2. Bk. 2, being more complex, is preferred by those of greater musical knowledge/experience.

Since I treat both books as one body of music, the above means nothing to me as a listening experience.


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

Surely this is a result of sampling error? The sampling frame is different in the two polls and as neither of the polls can meet the requirements for a representative sample of the membership of TC, both polls will be likely to have a flawed sampling frame, and thus there will be a sampling error.

Notwithstanding this, the polls are intersting (and potentially useful) and are worthwhile conducting, although generalisations arising from the results are difficult to substantiate solely from the polls themselves

I like the polls - they're interesting when read alongside the accompanying discussion


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Yes, looking further I see that I underestimated how different the samples could be.
31 people voted in one poll (I said 30 above, but another's been added) and 45 in the other - but only 22 people voted in both.


----------



## PierreN (Aug 4, 2013)

It seems likely to me also that the disparity in the polls (in which I didn't participate) must mainly be up to sampling error, or other confounding factors. It also seems to me that some of the preludes and fugues of Book 2 are more exemplary of Bach's mature style, such as preludes 7-11, 17-21 and 23. Prelude 21 in particular, in B-flat Major, exhibits a sort of contrapunctal freedom that doesn't have many equivalents in the preludes of Book 1. The difference in maturity and style in the writing of the fugues between both books may also be apparent in the enhanced economy of means and the purity of motivic materials, as is exemplified in the Inventions and Sinfonias. Book 1 is a bit more flashy, akin to the six Partitas (and some bits like the early Toccatas for harpsichord and early organ works, while Book 2 is more in the style of the six English suites or the six French suites. For sheer enjoyment, I like both books equally. Bach's evolution towards motivic simplicity culminates with the Art of the Fugue. The six Partitas seem to me like an anomaly in the chronology of Bach's output.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

I would say it's a preference rather than about superiority.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Never bothered to think about it, but I would say Book II, though I think Book I contains some of the deepest (simplest) individual pieces.


----------

