Author Topic: Bach's Bungalow  (Read 80309 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Maciek

  • Ban them all!
  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 5198
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #20 on: May 01, 2007, 12:42:34 PM »
Don, nice avatar! 8)

Don

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #21 on: May 01, 2007, 04:57:03 PM »
Don, nice avatar! 8)

Yes, it's the best I've used on this board although I do miss an adorable dog.

Offline Norbeone

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 338
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2007, 03:41:08 PM »
Oh my word, the official Bach Bungalow thread is only 2 pages long!   :o

I'll think of two quick possible discussions off the top of my head, in an attempt to revive it.

St. John Passion or St. Matthew Passion?

Did Bach compose the Toccata and Fugue in D Minor or not?!?!?


Lame, I know, but give it a whirl anyway   ;D

Offline Catison

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1180
  • Morty imagines "Organ, fog horn, cello, & kazoo"..
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #23 on: September 14, 2007, 04:09:59 PM »
Well, something I wanted to discuss (or read a discussion about) is the one-per-part question in the cantatas.  I have this recording by Rifkin and absolutely love it.



It is one of the few recordings I constantly keep on my music player.  I didn't realize there was any controversy about these recordings until I saw the Amazon reviews.  These cantatas are recorded with one voice per part, a HIP invention, I assume.  I didn't realize this, but now I know why I love the sound so much: the voices are so clear and transparent, you can hear all the parts extremely well.

Does anyone know where the idea for the one-per-part cantata came from?  Why do HIPsters swear by it?  And where can I get my hands on more recordings like this?
-Brett

Offline aquablob

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 700
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #24 on: September 14, 2007, 05:04:33 PM »
Well, something I wanted to discuss (or read a discussion about) is the one-per-part question in the cantatas.  I have this recording by Rifkin and absolutely love it.



It is one of the few recordings I constantly keep on my music player.  I didn't realize there was any controversy about these recordings until I saw the Amazon reviews.  These cantatas are recorded with one voice per part, a HIP invention, I assume.  I didn't realize this, but now I know why I love the sound so much: the voices are so clear and transparent, you can hear all the parts extremely well.

Does anyone know where the idea for the one-per-part cantata came from?  Why do HIPsters swear by it?  And where can I get my hands on more recordings like this?

So far as I understand it, the one-per-part cantata theory is, in much part, Rifkin's, and HIPsters in general do not subscribe to the theory. Here is a brief article on the subject: http://www.bsherman.org/oneperpart.html

I have actually exchanged E-mails with Mr. Rifkin, though the subject matter at hand was Scott Joplin, not Bach!

I have not yet heard the Rifkin one-per-part Bach recordings, but your positive review puts it high on my to-do list.

Don

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2007, 07:41:30 PM »

Does anyone know where the idea for the one-per-part cantata came from?  Why do HIPsters swear by it?  And where can I get my hands on more recordings like this?

Concerning more recordings that are on voice per part, there's the new Chandos/Purcell cycle of early Bach Cantatas; so far two volumes.  I think the new Kuijken/Accent cycle is also one voice.  So is Junghanel/Harmonia Mundi and Parrott/EMI.

Offline val

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 2090
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #26 on: September 15, 2007, 04:00:36 AM »
Paul McCreesh also uses one voice for each part in his recording of the Magnificat and the Easter Oratoria.

I was not very convinced.

Offline Novi

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1206
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #27 on: September 15, 2007, 04:52:57 AM »
Paul McCreesh also uses one voice for each part in his recording of the Magnificat and the Easter Oratoria.

And his SMP as well.
Durch alle Töne tönet
Im bunten Erdentraum
Ein leiser Ton gezogen
Für den der heimlich lauschet.

DavidW

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #28 on: September 15, 2007, 05:18:58 AM »
I've changed my mind about Suzuki, well I was too harsh before.  He's no Harnoncourt, but the SQ is amazing, and the effortless light harmonious style is wonderful. :)

longears

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #29 on: September 15, 2007, 05:24:23 AM »
How do the Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin rank among the rest of Bach's output?
Like one of the countless mountain tops in the Himalayas.  :)
  8)

Offline Josquin des Prez

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3655
  • Lyric Suite, Opus131
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2007, 08:50:30 AM »
I just noticed that the last issue of Suzuki's cantatas are in SACD. Is BIS going to re-release his previous volumes in SACD as well? I hope he's going to finish this series soon, i'd love to have all of the cantatas in modern sound. I own the Harnoncourt and i must confess i'm kinda sick of it. For some inexplicable reason, most of it just sounds out of tune, and i still can't get around it, even after so many years. I have the same problem with a lot of Loenhardt's recordings, including his keyboard music. It's annoying.

Offline Josquin des Prez

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3655
  • Lyric Suite, Opus131
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2007, 08:53:48 AM »
Did Bach compose the Toccata and Fugue in D Minor or not?!?!?

I personally think he did. The toccata might be a bit controversial but it's hard to believe anybody but Bach could have wrote the fugue. If there was another composer able to write organ music at that level we would have known of him by now...

DavidW

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2007, 09:10:22 AM »
I just noticed that the last issue of Suzuki's cantatas are in SACD. Is BIS going to re-release his previous volumes in SACD as well? I hope he's going to finish this series soon, i'd love to have all of the cantatas in modern sound. I own the Harnoncourt and i must confess i'm kinda sick of it. For some inexplicable reason, most of it just sounds out of tune, and i still can't get around it, even after so many years. I have the same problem with a lot of Loenhardt's recordings, including his keyboard music. It's annoying.

Are you saying that the Suzuki cycle on SACD is incomplete?  I never looked into that, dang.  Well if they don't do SACD releases of the previous volumes (I have no idea if they will or not) certainly there are other recordings from other artists that you can use to fill the gaps, right?

Offline Josquin des Prez

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3655
  • Lyric Suite, Opus131
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #33 on: September 15, 2007, 09:19:47 AM »
Are you saying that the Suzuki cycle on SACD is incomplete? 

At volume 34 (which i think it's the last one released) he's around 50 cantatas short, which means there's at least another 10 volumes to go, give or take. Only his very last recordings are on SACD.

certainly there are other recordings from other artists that you can use to fill the gaps, right?

I don't know. I tried the Koopman and i thought it was average at best. I also have the complete set which came with the brilliant box, which is serviceable, but nothing more. Those are the most recent recordings along with Suzuki. I wish he would stop getting side tracked and focus on completing the set.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2007, 09:23:11 AM by Josquin des Prez »

Offline Josquin des Prez

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3655
  • Lyric Suite, Opus131
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2007, 09:27:11 AM »
And where can I get my hands on more recordings like this?

The Cantus Coln recording of the mass in b minor is one voice per part, and i love it.

DavidW

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #35 on: September 15, 2007, 09:45:45 AM »
I don't know. I tried the Koopman and i thought it was average at best. I also have the complete set which came with the brilliant box, which is serviceable, but nothing more. Those are the most recent recordings along with Suzuki. I wish he would stop getting side tracked and focus on completing the set.

Well that's hardly an exhaustive survey!  Have you tried Herreweghe (spelling?)?  Gardiner?  Richter?  You don't have to do it by complete box, you can shop outside of the box, it might be rewarding. :)

Don

  • Guest
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2007, 10:03:40 PM »
I personally think he did. The toccata might be a bit controversial but it's hard to believe anybody but Bach could have wrote the fugue. If there was another composer able to write organ music at that level we would have known of him by now...

My sentiments exactly.

Online Que

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 14185
  • "One HIP dude"
  • Location: The Hague, Netherlands
  • Currently Listening to:
    Still nuts about harpsichord music and exploring Early Music.
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #37 on: September 16, 2007, 07:11:20 AM »
I never liked it .... it's widely thought not to be by him. I mean ... listen to it. :P

Huhh?  ::) If it really is widely thought not to be by him, then that fact escaped my attention.

Besides that,  I fully agree with Don and JdP: firstly it sounds like Bach, secondly I wouldn't have a clue what other composer could possibly be the author.

Q
À chacun son goût.

Offline Marc

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3144
  • Sine Cerere et Bach friget Venus
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #38 on: September 16, 2007, 09:45:03 PM »
Huhh?  ::)

Yeah, I know the feeling.

Quote from: Que
If it really is widely thought not to be by him, then that fact escaped my attention.

But hey, that is possible, is it not? :)

It all 'begins' with: Peter Williams, BWV 565: a toccata in D minor for organ by J. S. Bach?, Early Music, vol. 9, July 1981, page 330-337.

Quote from: Que
Besides that,  I fully agree with Don and JdP: firstly it sounds like Bach, secondly I wouldn't have a clue what other composer could possibly be the author.

But it seems that many scholars think the piece is very different from almost all the other 'original' Bach keyboard pieces. They think it's a work by Johann Peter Kellner (1705-1772).
Try this (it's in German, BTW):
http://www.johann-peter-kellner.de/htm/werke/emele.htm

But there are many many other sites that discuss this matter (Google!). For instance - of course - on various Wikipedia's:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toccata_and_Fugue_in_D_minor

And, in your favourite language: ;)
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toccata_et_Fuga_in_d-moll_(BWV_565)
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Peter_Kellner
« Last Edit: September 16, 2007, 09:47:46 PM by Marc »
Help support the GMG Classical Music Forum by purchasing from Amazon using this link, this link, or this link

Offline zamyrabyrd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3023
  • selig sind
Re: Bach's Bungalow
« Reply #39 on: September 16, 2007, 10:35:37 PM »
Mean temperament in the music of Bach, I think, was discussed in the old GMG. It might be well to bring the subject up again as it is a terribly important issue. I was really astonished by the revelations of this article and website:

http://bach.tuning.googlepages.com/introduction

The number of spirals in the heading of the WTC, handwritten by Bach, referred to the beats of a mean or rather "well" tempered keyboard:

"Tuning is performed for some twelve semitone contiguous range.
The small knot is the basic tempering unit, which denotes one beat per second, while the double knot indicates two beats per second (or equivalently one beat per second in the octave below).
The ends of the spiral denote the interval closing the tuning circle and two cases are shown beating once per second (left) and twice per second (right)."

There's some incredible stuff here too:
http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html

"Debated for thousands of years, temperament is an arcane subject to most musicians today. This may be due to 20th century use of Equal Temperament. With equal harmony and dissonance everywhere in the scale, there is little to debate about different keys' characters. As a result, most modern ears have become accustomed to an ever-present, mild dissonance in keyboard harmony, never hearing a harsh third or a pure one, either."

This has to do mainly with the tuning of thirds as I understand it. In certain keys like C, the major thirds in "well" tuning are pure, or free of  beats. Hearing or playing the WTC according to Bach's tuning must be a revelation. This of course would contradict what Schoenberg had to say about tonality, since everything is transposable, all tonal music is in the key of C.

Interest in this must be fairly recent (although I ALWAYS had questions about it while studying). Grout dismisses the tuning of Bach in one sentence, saying that he probably preferred equal temperament (although this was not the most popular then). Even Badura-Skoda's book about the Interpretation of Bach at the Keyboard (1990) says virtually nothing about the differing systems of tuning.

Any comments? I find this subject REALLY exciting.

ZB
"I write to discover what I know."
 ― Flannery O'Connor

Buying Music From Amazon?
Please consider using these links. A small percentage of every sale using these links is passed on to GMG and helps keep this forum online.
Amazon US
Amazon Canada
Amazon UK