Your Preferred Bach Pianist

[Marc]

Talk about being a little child, and nevermind wishing me well and cherishing this or that...do even read your own stuff before posting it? Oh and the so-called "arguments" you put forth are so ridiculous, these little fantasies you have based on? They're not even worth addressing. I merely made a few general statements (not opinion) which have been qualified and pan out very true in reality. Those who don't realize this need to get out more and wake up. And only a musical ignoramus would state in an unqualified manor that Gould wasn't a great player, and that Bach on the piano is automatically romantic or artifical and nonsense of this sort.

Well, James, have a look in your own mirror then. What is this fake discussion: bad reading (by whom?) or a misunderstanding? Or what?

I have mentioned that, to me, the harpsichord and the piano are two totally different instruments. In fact, their sound is so different to me, that on first hearing the harpsichord, I did not automatically think that it was considered to be the predecessor of the piano. In a way, it has always stayed that way.

I don't think that Bach played on the piano is automatically romantic, Gould's playing be a good example of that. But the sound of the piano is a sound that was wanted by composers and listeners during the romantic period. So, in that way, with its louder and broader sound qualities/quantities, and the possibility to vary the dynamics more, it is a 19th century instrument, as a follow-up of the fortepiano. This is, btw, not an opinion, it's a fact.

I've only talked about artificial Gould piano stuff concerning his 'hick-up' recordings of the Inventionen and Sinfonien, trying to give this 19th instrument a more direct sound. To me, this recording is a failure: artificial semi-baroque playing on an artificial fake-baroque instrument. Am I not allowed to think or say that, just because facts proof that a majory thinks otherwise? Apparently not, if James the Censor was in charge here.

Btw, fwiw: during the years, I've spoken to Gould admirers who hate that hickup issue, too. But 'of course' those admirers are a minority. And I should not need to mention it any way.

I never would blabber that Gould wasn't a great player, I only mentioned that I don't prefer him in this oeuvre.

I don't think that playing Bach on the piano is artificial in a way that it shoud be forbidden, banned or automatically be sentenced. The piano is a lovely instrument. I play my modest Bach on the piano myself, I don't have problems with listening to Bach on modern instruments, I don't object to jazz arrangements of his work, I like listening to a Fugue played by a saxophone quartet, et cetera.

But yes, I agree with a.o. members Bulldog and Antoine Marchand that the piano isn't offering the ideal sound for Bach. Or, maybe I should say, the Bach I personally like to hear. I just like the sound of the harpsichord more, IMO it gives more depth to the composition, and I do not think it's a lesser or better instrument than the piano, it's just a completely different sounding instrument that I love very much, and that gives me a more enjoyable Bach. Again: to my own likings.

About the worshipping of Gould: I never said that he was called a demi-God on this board (you suggested once that I did), I only admitted that I might be prejudiced against Gould (which is unfair towards him of course) because lots of his followers talk about him like he's some demi-God. I've talked once with a director of a Glenn Gould-festival .... well, the pope could not worship the Holy Trinity more. Things like these are also happening f.i. in the mentioned documentary by Bruno Monsaingeon .... one of the reasons I offered a link to that one. But yes, I admit again: Gould himself can't be blamed for that, and neither can his playing. So I'd better not mentioned that. My mistake.

Concerning the 'facts' about Gould's popularity: all these 'facts' are the sums of opinions by people who prefer another Bach than people like yours truly. That's why I'm really not that bothered by those facts. Like I'm also not bothered if someone claims that Händel is The Greatest baroque composer, because The Greatest Composer of All Time said so, too.

Millions of people (more and less opiniated, scholars and laymen) also consider Mozart one of the greatest composers of all time. Do you? Do you even care? Are you bothered if those facts are presented to you? Or do you need to get out more and wake up?

To me, life is more about questions than answers. I very rarely look at things in black and white. Questions make life interesting, people who already 'know it all' are not that interesting to me, though I wish them well.
Personally, I tend to think sometimes that those people are mainly scared; they don't want to be insecure, uncertain and precarious.
So they enlarge their own opinions to facts and claim that the others are just jealous or frustrated.

About myself: even if I post my own opinion I have doubts about that, or I realize that it's just a tiny part of a so called 'reality'. (I don't believe in Truth anyhow.)
Also my own preferences and opinions have changed from time to time. Stupid, eh?

To some people this 'grey' position might be a proof of utterless boredom, but I'm sorry to say: that's just the way I look at life .... people, music, art, politics, or whatever.

And, as I have been saying in various posts: Glenn Gould is one of the most intriguing musical artists of the period 1950-1985. No question about that.

[Franco]

Marc, you can expect a "Whatever dood" from James in response to your well reasoned, well said, and respectful post.

[Josquin des Prez]

Marc, i think you should at least try his Partitas and his 1959 recording of the Goldbergs. Those are his finest performances IMHO. 

[Marc]

Marc, you can expect a "Whatever dood" from James in response to your well reasoned, well said, and respectful post.

Just wanted to offer him a summary, which turned out to be a rather 'big one'.
If he reacts that way: no problem. I won't be frustrated .... I think.

Marc, i think you should at least try his Partitas and his 1959 recording of the Goldbergs. Those are his finest performances IMHO.

Not that I haven't 'tried' Gould before .... I have at least those Goldbergs somewhere on good old MC, hidden deep into da house, but thanx anyway for the advice. I might (ab)use the library for that!

[DavidRoss]

About the worshipping of Gould: I never said that he was called a demi-God on this board (you suggested once that I did), I only admitted that I might be prejudiced against Gould (which is unfair towards him of course) because lots of his followers talk about him like he's some demi-God. I've talked once with a director of a Glenn Gould-festival .... well, the pope could not worship the Holy Trinity more. Things like these are also happening f.i. in the mentioned documentary by Bruno Monsaingeon .... one of the reasons I offered a link to that one. But yes, I admit again: Gould himself can't be blamed for that, and neither can his playing. So I'd better not mentioned that. My mistake.

We used to have a young fellow around here who was like this about Gould.  He's not been around the past few years.  Maybe he grew up and got a life?

I think Gould is the performer who most seems to attract this sort of worshipper among classical music fans, though some--like Richter, perhaps, or Karajan, for instance, come close.  More commonly it is composers who are thus idolized--especially Wagner and Mahler!  I've experienced similar reactions when suggesting that as good as they are, neither quite belongs on that pedestal.  The fan-boys usually respond by attacking me as if I hate their music and am too stupid to appreciate it.  Such attacks, of course, reveal much about the character and cognitive ability of those who make them, and little about anything else.  [insert shoulder shrug emoticon here]

Speaking of which, you seem not yet to have encountered much of James, a fellow as difficult to swap views with as someone with severe autism.  Your lengthy response may have fallen on deaf ears concerning him, but rest assured that others of us enjoyed it and got something out of it, so your effort was hardly wasted.  Thank you.     

[Marc]

Well, I won't deny that I have some monomaniacal tendencies, too. I'm pretty much of a Bach-worshipper, but his music is entirely human to me and I also love to listen to many other composers and music. From Hildegard up to Pärt .... and I even kinda enjoyed listening to some Wedding Musicke once, composed by a certain Henning.
Not to mention some simple (or less simple) rock, pop, punk or whatever music.

And if someone does not share my preferences .... Well, all right! .... (Santana).

Oh, before assumptions are made: Santana is well all right to me, but not my fave band.
I'm a kinda monomaniac Beatles Apple Scruff.

[Bulldog]

Concerning the 'facts' about Gould's popularity: all these 'facts' are the sums of opinions by people who prefer another Bach than people like yours truly.

Okay, I'll bite.  What do you feel are the differences between your Bach and the Bach that James and others prefer?

[Marc]

You're such a windbag ... and full of yourself rambling on and on and on, keep it on topic and get to the point sheesh! The facts about his artistic merit, success and popularity based on his genius, musicianship, recordings, writings etc are substantiated in various ways ... it's not merely 'the sum of opinions by people who prefer another Bach than people like you'  ... whatever that means! And only from 1950 to 1985?? LOL No, he's one of the greatest players of all time. Stop it already.

[Marc]

Okay, I'll bite. What do you feel are the differences between your Bach and the Bach that James and others prefer?

I love the piano and see no principal objections against it. I'm not really a principal man maybe.
But to me (and maybe also to James et al), it's mainly the sound of the instruments that causes the differences. IMO, the beautiful brilliance of the harpsichord can not be equalled by the piano. The harpsichord sound literally 'thrills' me.
'Unfortunately' I rediscovered the organ last year, which meant that harpsichord listening somehow descended on my 'hearing list'. Strange thing though: on the organ I seem to be more 'relaxed' in my preferences. On that instrument, much legato playing doesn't really annoy me. Still, I prefer it in another way.

Nevertheless it's quite possible that the preferences of the way of playing Bach (either on which instrument) by James and me might have many correspondences. I like my Bach played expressive, brilliant and with, if possible, vivid phrasing and articulation. Especially because of the broader sound of the piano, I think this is better realized (in general) on a harpsichord. I've also experienced that, whilst listening to Bach keyboard music, I really can get into some dazzling experience when it's played on a harpsichord, forgetting the entire world around me. This hasn't really happen (yet?) whilst listening to Bach's piano. Hence my preference.

I have already written in this thread that IMO Gould did understand very well that Bach should not be played in a romantic legato way, but I also think that his ideas would have been better realized at another instrument.

I just think of this subject this way, too bad if anyone does not approve or agree. It's got not much to do with such things as 'historical correctness'. Because, if so, maybe most of Bach's chamber music for keyboards should be played on a clavichord. In general, in early 18th century Germany, the household keyboard instrument was a clavichord, whilst the church instrument was the organ. In a country like France things were different. The harpsichord was a much more 'celebrated' instrument there. Couperin, Rameau et al were very skilled harpsichord composers. From what I know, Bach rated them likewise.

A side-step to this 'historical correctness': I think that interpreting music is something else than scholarship. I know from interviews that people like Leonhardt do not really agree with that. He even stated many times that such a thing like interpretation doesn't really exist! Even though I think he's a great Bach 'interpreter', I really think this is bs .... excusez le mot.

[Bulldog]

I've also experienced that, whilst listening to Bach keyboard music, I really can get into some dazzling experience when it's played on a harpsichord, forgetting the entire world around me. This hasn't really happen (yet?) whilst listening to Bach's piano. Hence my preference.

I can agree with the above.  With Bach played on harpsichord, there are times when I can close my eyes and feel transported back in time to Bach's home, watching and listening to him play his own music.  It's quite an experience, and one that I've never felt when Bach's played on a modern piano.  Of course, this is nothing but subjective.  However, it matters to me.

[Marc]

I can agree with the above.  With Bach played on harpsichord, there are times when I can close my eyes and feel transported back in time to Bach's home, watching and listening to him play his own music.  It's quite an experience, and one that I've never felt when Bach's played on a modern piano.  Of course, this is nothing but subjective.  However, it matters to me.

What happens when you hear a clavichord?
Forget it, I already know: you see the poor bastard Johann Gottfried Bernhard Bach, in a small and cold student room in Jena, playing a clavichord that once belonged to his great-grandfather, which had not been tuned for over a century.

[Scarpia]

I can agree with the above.  With Bach played on harpsichord, there are times when I can close my eyes and feel transported back in time to Bach's home, watching and listening to him play his own music.  It's quite an experience, and one that I've never felt when Bach's played on a modern piano.  Of course, this is nothing but subjective.  However, it matters to me.

If you put on "Switched On Bach" you can feel transported back to Bach's home, listening to him play on his Moog synthesizer.  Of course, it helps if you drop a little acid first.   

[Bulldog]

If you put on "Switched On Bach" you can feel transported back to Bach's home, listening to him play on his Moog synthesizer.  Of course, it helps if you drop a little acid first.   

I can't tolerate Wendy Carlos.  Do me a favor and don't mention her again.

[DavidRoss]

If you put on "Switched On Bach" you can feel transported back to Bach's home, listening to him play on his Moog synthesizer.  Of course, it helps if you drop a little acid first.   

And take a trip to Sweden?

[Lethevich]

We used to have a young fellow around here who was like this about Gould.  He's not been around the past few years.  Maybe he grew up and got a life?

Contrapunctus disappeared for a while, then came back and when pressed announced that he now liked plenty of pianists just as much as Gould, and now doesn't care so much about him. It was even more of a mind-f**k than the idea of Saul calling Mendelssohn only a "decent" composer.

[cliftwood]

Too late for the poll, but my choices would be:

Pogolerich..based one one recording that is remarkable.

Schepkin..

Koroliov..

Schiff..

Perahia..

Hewitt..

Gulda..

Feltsman..

Sheppard..

Gould.. not in my top ten favorites but impossible to leave off the list.

[Bulldog]

Contrapunctus disappeared for a while, then came back and when pressed announced that he now liked plenty of pianists just as much as Gould, and now doesn't care so much about him.

When young, we tend to change our minds quite often.

[springrite]

I am surprised that two of my choice got only one vote IMartins and Schepkin) and two only got two votes (Horszowski  and Nokolayeva). I must have unique taste for Bach. 

[Verena]

I am surprised that two of my choice got only one vote IMartins and Schepkin) and two only got two votes (Horszowski  and Nokolayeva). I must have unique taste for Bach.

I also voted for Nikolayeva. I guess she is not very well kown in comparison to most younger pianists. Also, I suspect that many recordings that are easily available show her past her prime. There is a potentially spellbinding (strange phrase I know) Goldberg by her on BBC Legends, but it is so full of mistakes that I find it difficult to listen to. Also, her "romantic" Bach is not to all tastes (I love it).

[DarkAngel]

Too late for the poll, but my choices would be:

Pogolerich..based one one recording that is remarkable.

Schepkin..

Koroliov..

Schiff..

Perahia..

Hewitt..

Gulda..

Feltsman..

Sheppard..

Gould.. not in my top ten favorites but impossible to leave off the list.

Bulldog
Here was our third vote for Sheppard.......23 voters with 10 votes each and only 2 for Sheppard 
A very negative surprise

A very pleasant surprise
How did Feinberg get 8 votes (same as Richter!) when he has tiny amount of recordings available, they are expensive and some not the best sound, never read about him in mainstream press like Penguin Guide etc, I thought his Bach WTC was a well kept secret.....