J. S. Bach: English Suites versus French Suites

[71 dB]

I wonder which suites people prefer?
Is there a strong consensus or not?
Is this a 50 % - 50 % case? Vote! 

[Bulldog]

Although the English Suites are more architecturally complex, I love the Allemande and Sarabande movements of the French suites.

[cliftwood]

It's impossible for me to make this choice.

The English and French Suites are tied for second place , behind the Partitas.

[prémont]

The English and the French Suites are so different in conception, that I do not think, they can be compared in the way, you want.

[Sean]

The English and the French Suites are so different in conception, that I do not think, they can be compared in the way, you want.

Come off it, they're all Bachian counterpoint: are you some farcical egghead academic?

[Scarpia]

It's impossible for me to make this choice.

The English and French Suites are tied for second place , behind the Partitas.

Partitas are my favorite, English has to come next because the Overture (or prelude, etc) is usually my favorite part of a suit, and the French Suites don't have any. 

[71 dB]

Partitas are my favorite, English has to come next because the Overture (or prelude, etc) is usually my favorite part of a suit, and the French Suites don't have any.

I pretty much agree with this. 

[Jo498]

The Partitas are my favorite by some margin. I only somewhat recently got more into the English suites (except for the a minor that I had liked for quite a while) but despite their smaller scale I still like the French suites better. More melodic, playful and elegant. The English suites can be a bit "stiff"; in brief I think the Partitas are superior as large scale works whereas the more modest French suites are something else and very convincing at their smaller scale.

[Sergeant Rock]

I prefer the French Suites.

Sarge

[kishnevi]

I prefer whichever one I have heard most recently.

[XB-70 Valkyrie]

To listen to: English Suites. I think they are far more musically satisfying, especially No. 6!

To play: French Suites. The English Suites are above my level, especially in the time it would take to master all of the movements of a given piece. I played the first five movements of No. IV on piano before I just got tired of it. I never really had a feel for the courante, which I feel is way more difficult than all the rest of the piece. Today, I'm at peace playing three part inventions and Prelude and (soon hopefully) Fugue No. 7 from Book I of the WTC.

[Monsieur Croche]

Come off it, they're all Bachian counterpoint: are you some farcical egghead academic?

Right you are... after all, J.S. Bach is renowned to this day as a totally capricious non-formalist composer, and that makes his naming one set English Suites and the other French Suites about as haphazard and arbitrary as it gets!

Even the egghead academic experts also know that any of the music he composed over ca. fifty years is all near to indistinguishably the same, ergo virtually interchangeable from one piece to the next (i.e. perfectly made and as near to perfectly boring, too.)

So, since their is virtually no difference betwixt and between, including The Partitas, I'll say whichever French Suite, English Suite, or Partita that has more than that one catchy or hit tune movement without all its other movements being a mind-numbing pedantic crossword puzzle-like spinning out... the one I think comes closest to meeting that criterion is the Partita no.1 in Bb.


Best regards

P.s. re: "...they're all Bachian counterpoint." Well... I will accept "18th century North European counterpoint," anyway.  (People tend to think, and write of, as if this one Thuringian composer single-handedly conceived of and executed the idea of counterpoint -- and/or at least his style of counterpoint -- as if he had plucked it out of thin air, lol.)

[Marc]

Any time I have seen or heard the "mind-numbing pedantic crossword puzzle" comment about Bach, the truth of the matter is that the person who says it - and genuinely feels/thinks that - is most often bumping into his/her own listening experience and the subsequent acquired cumulative listening habit.

[Monsieur Croche]

Any time I have seen or heard the "mind-numbing pedantic crossword puzzle" comment about Bach, the truth of the matter is that the person who says it - and genuinely feels/thinks that - is most often bumping into his/her own listening experience and the subsequent acquired cumulative listening habit.

Or it could be, regardless of admiring this composer's profound ability to take one idea and keep it going in transformative ways, more a preference for a different approach or aesthetic.  As Debussy commented to Durand, after having completed an edition of both books of the WTC for that publisher, "The old Saxon gets hold of an idea and never lets go of it."

My musical / listening habits result from a first-hand involvement via piano training from six through conservatory and beyond with a later second full training in theory and comp, which of course also then covers a wide array of the literature; if nothing else, such an involvement makes for a very long attention span when listening, lol.  I teethed on the contrapuntal, Bartok Microkosmos, pieces from the Schrirmer Beginner's Bach edition, and Schuman's Album für die Jugend. Indeed, this so formed my taste that I'm near certain it has spoiled me for those composers and works that are primarily harmonic, regardless of how good or great they are (Sibelius, for example.)

My take on a lot of Bach is rather like my take on Chopin, whom I admire no less than Bach or many another, i.e these Bach works under discussion are far more interesting (and fun) to play than to listen to.  Still, especially with these suites and the partitas, I do get the strong feeling of 'oh my, he does go on and on, doesn't he,' at which point engagement becomes only cerebral and without much if any visceral pleasure or enthusiasm.  Habits or not, it comes down to a matter of personal taste.


Best regards

[Marc]

Or it could be, regardless of admiring this composer's profound ability to take one idea and keep it going in transformative ways, more a preference for a different approach or aesthetic.  As Debussy commented to Durand, after having completed an edition of both books of the WTC for that publisher, "The old Saxon gets hold of an idea and never lets go of it."

My musical / listening habits result from a first-hand involvement via piano training from six through conservatory and beyond with a later second full training in theory and comp, which of course also then covers a wide array of the literature; if nothing else, such an involvement makes for a very long attention span when listening, lol.  I teethed on the contrapuntal, Bartok Microkosmos, pieces from the Schrirmer Beginner's Bach edition, and Schuman's Album für die Jugend. Indeed, this so formed my taste that I'm near certain it has spoiled me for those composers and works that are primarily harmonic, regardless of how good or great they are (Sibelius, for example.)

My take on a lot of Bach is rather like my take on Chopin, whom I admire no less than Bach or many another, i.e these Bach works under discussion are far more interesting (and fun) to play than to listen to. Still, especially with these suites and the partitas, I do get the strong feeling of 'oh my, he does go on and on, doesn't he,' at which point engagement becomes only cerebral and without much if any visceral pleasure or enthusiasm.

I'm only a lover of music, but with the exception of making love to a lovely woman , there's nothing in this world I like to do more than listening to Bach.
The old Saxon gets hold of an idea and never lets go of it without ever getting boring, that's what I always say.

Habits or not, it comes down to a matter of personal taste.

True.

Btw, in my former post, I slightly 'modified' a quote from you.

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,25360.msg942503.html#msg942503

[Jo498]

I cannot play these pieces on the piano but, oddly, what got me into Bach's keyboard music was playing some of the suite movements and two-part inventions in arrangements for two clarinets with my teacher... I had found most of it somewhat boring before when only listening. I can understand that some movements of the English suites and partitas (and especially the interminable "solo violin fugues") seem longwinded but it hardly applies to the fairly short and playful French suites. And there are lots of not too long charming movements in the other suites as well.

[amw]

I actually never thought about it much, but I prefer the English Suites, both to play and to listen to. (They are not noticeably more difficult than the French Suites or the Partitas for me.) I do find the g minor, e minor and d minor to be at a higher musical level than the others, though. Of the French Suites for me only the g major is of the same level and even then it's somewhat overstuffed with galanteries.

The more contrapuntal movements are typically the most interesting for me, so that's usually preludes/overtures and sometimes gigues.

[Mandryka]

I actually never thought about it much, but I prefer the English Suites, both to play and to listen to. (They are not noticeably more difficult than the French Suites or the Partitas for me.) I do find the g minor, e minor and d minor to be at a higher musical level than the others, though. Of the French Suites for me only the g major is of the same level and even then it's somewhat overstuffed with galanteries.

The more contrapuntal movements are typically the most interesting for me, so that's usually preludes/overtures and sometimes gigues.

The attraction of the French Suites for me comes from their intimacy.

[SergeCpp]

There was a pair of weeks in my life (in ~2010) when I listened to English Suites (mostly Perahia but also Schiff and Hewitt; all are on Piano) every evening in headphones with lights either dimmed or off and the eyes closed. I cannot say that for French Suites. So, I answered in this poll: English Suites.

French Suites for me somewhat eclectic in musical content (I cannot define this term, but I feel the difference in... say, style maybe), I listen more 1st and 2nd and to lesser extent I listen 3rd to 6th.

English Suites for me completely consistent and I just physically cannot stop listening to them in the middle. Suites are frequently placed on albums not in numerical order so I make my own ordered playlists. Order is important for me because it is something constantly developed there (musically, emotionally) from 1st to 6th.

It is not topic dedicated for English Suites so I will not unwind my further thoughts on English Suites here. Just this: First movement of 4th resembles to me magical train journey through the Mystery Land. While moving the train passes by several wonderful views (expressed in music by contrapuntal voices) and we see and wave to friendly Creatures (also voices) of that Land and they answer by waving to us. Firstly I observed this association when listening to Angela Hewitt's interpretation of English Suites with eyes closed and lights off.

Frankly speaking, there are some beautiful performances of French Suites, that I can listen completely, such as Pieter-Jan Belder (Harpsichord) and Evgeni Koroliov (Piano). By investigating YouTube these years I discovered other fine interpretations.

So, I not say here that ES are better than FS, just more suitable for me.

[Ratliff]

I prefer the English suites, partly because the overture is usually my favorite movement and the French suites don't have Overtures.