Blind comparison : J.S. Bach, Fuga sopra il Magnificat BWV 733

Started by Discobole, February 19, 2012, 06:45:42 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

premont

#40
Here are my votes:

1)  Played in the straight style which prevailed in the 1950es-60es (legato articulation, long archs of phrasing and very little rubato). I liked the registration, but the change just before the end sounds ridiculous. The playing is from a technical point of view assured, but the interpretation is IMO only middle of the road and not very interesting. 

2) A bit more informed playing. Still long archs of phrasing but more distinctive articulation. The organ is a neo-baroque organ and its distinctive character (the principals and the rattling of the 16F reed in the pedal) makes me think of the organ of the Monastery church in Sorø.

3) The playing style is now HIP with rhythmic articulation and some rubato. Probably not a historical organ, though.

4) This is also HIP, but too excentric. The tempo is ponderous and the articulation is awfully mannered. The worst of the twelwe IMO.

5) HIP in the "Dutch" way with a fine equilibrium of all the components of performance (tempo, registration, articulation, agogics et.c) on a probably historical instrument of Schnitger type. One of the best.

6) HIP, but a hectic, maybe youthful performance, with wilfull agogics, and it is utterly unsatisfying. If the organist is the one I think, he was 34 at the time of the recording and uses to be more convincing. The organ is historical in middle-German style.

7) HIP and much more mature and balanced playing. There is some nervous feeling beneth the surface, but I think it adds energy to the interpretation, which I find rather good. I am not sure that the organ is historical, but if not it is a very good copy in middle-German style.

8) HIP and played with great authority and boldness. There is some distortion of the sound, the organ may be modern.

9) Not that different from no.1 but played with more authority, and as such preferable to no.1.

10) HIP, grandiose and well articulated. Great historical organ like the G. Silbermann in the Cathedral of Freiberg or the Z. Hildebrandt organ in Naumburg. Is no.8 and no.10 played by the same organist?

11) HIP and would be quite impressive without all these unnecessary extra trills, which I find add an inappropiate comical effect to the music.. I do not know others than Koopman who plays like that, at least on recordings.

12) HIP and like no. 5 played in the Dutch way, on a bigger organ and IMO with too sharp mixtures . Of the two I prefer no. 5.

My preferred versions from the point of view of interpretation are 5., 8, 7 and 10 in that order.
The ones I like the least are no. 4. and 6.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

#41
Quote from: Discobole on February 23, 2012, 03:24:04 PM
2 (m.r. 4.11). Version 2 : Simon Preston (organ ? ; 1997?)



I unfortunately don't have the details of this recording with me.

The BWV 733 was recorded Nov.97 on the Marcussen organ (1942) of the Monastery church in Sorø. At least I recognised the very characteristic organ.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

#42
Quote from: Discobole on February 23, 2012, 03:42:00 PM
Many thanks for the precision. I understand why you thought it was Knud Vad, then ;) Recognizing organs is a very impressive skill :o

Yes, and Knud Vad and Simon Preston share a position as to interpretation right between straight style (pre-HIP) and proper HIP style. However I think it would be difficult to confuse them in the choral-free works.

Now I must say good night. Thanks for the game. I shall comment further to morrow.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

DavidW

I was not surprised that #11 = Koopman because right after I posted Windows figured out what that track was and tagged it as Koopman! :o

I am really surprised that the sublime #2 is Preston, but really that amazingly balanced #8 is Leonhardt, I associate HIP with #6, 11 and assumed that both #2 and 8 were both traditional performances.

I think I'm going to see if I can find some Preston and Leonhardt on spotify. :)

And of course I have Fagius, I like his quick, rushed light style even if nobody else does. ;D

Que

So, I picked Preston, Koopman, Leonhardt and Alain as the leading pack, and picked Leonhardt and Koopman as top choices! :D

Not bad... 8) But I totally missed the boat on Vernet! :o While I do currently enjoy his cycle very much.
But then again a brief listening of twelfe versions of one short piece can cause this kind of flukes.
Next time I'll take more time for listening.

The surprise is Preston, which I always avoided. Despite not mentioning it, in retrospect I also rather liked version no. 5 that turned out to be Fouccroulle. Maybe the fact that I find it was underpowered was due to the organ, as premont suggested.

Pity Marcon ended up so low, though I do totally understand why. Still, I do appreciate the rigour and musicality of it. But Marcon is not a Bachian - his Italian repertoire is on the other hand awesome.

I really do need to get my hands on the Leonhardt recordings if those ever get reissued! :)

Q

mc ukrneal

Very interesting. I'll need to go back to #8 and relisten. For me this was a fantastic exercise as someone who doesn't really focus on organ. I've learned a lot from the listening as well as the many comments, including some of the impressive predictions on what kind of organ was used! That was amazing for me. I could hear there were differences of course, but still, that is an impressive feat. Thanks for including us in this Discobole!!
Be kind to your fellow posters!!

Opus106

Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 23, 2012, 09:56:45 PM
I've learned a lot from the listening as well as the many comments, including some of the impressive predictions on what kind of organ was used!

I was actually awaiting The Amazing Premont'sTM comments. And even wondered whether this would be a truly 'blind' test for him. :)
Regards,
Navneeth

mc ukrneal

Quote from: Discobole on February 23, 2012, 04:00:36 PM
About the versions not included in the listening
In particular Michel Chapuis, but I didn't have his (recently republished by United Archives) complete set immediately available when I prepared the listening.
This version was just restocked at Berkshire. I don't know how much it costs to send to France, but it is at least an option.
Be kind to your fellow posters!!

premont

Quote from: Opus106 on February 23, 2012, 10:23:00 PM
I was actually awaiting The Amazing Premont'sTM comments. And even wondered whether this would be a truly 'blind' test for him. :)

I have heard all the recordings before except the Francis Jacob. But that was years back and not at all recently, and I refrained from a relisten yesterday, as this would be a kind of unsportsmanlike cheating.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Marc

Quote from: (: premont :) on February 24, 2012, 07:20:14 AM
I have heard all the recordings before except the Francis Jacob. But that was years back and not at all recently, and I refrained from a relisten yesterday, as this would be a kind of unsportsmanlike cheating.

Hi all!

I would have loved to join in, but I'm too busy recently.
Couldn't find the time.

All I can add is: I have heard all the recordings before including the Francis Jacob. :P

[.... sneakingly sneaking away .... ;D]

premont

So I chose Foccroulle, Leonhardt, Francis Jacob and Vernet in that order and rejected Marcon and Fagius. Not surprising, except that I use to enjoy Fagius´ Bach more than I enjoyed his fussy BWV 733 yesterday.

Listing to that many versions of the same short piece may actually be confusing, and I agree with Que, that it is necessary to use more time for the listening.

If there is any interest, I might arrange a second half of this entertaining game.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

Quote from: Marc on February 24, 2012, 07:39:00 AM
All I can add is: I have heard all the recordings before including the Francis Jacob. :P

You are indeed a fortunate man.  ;)

γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

γνῶθι σεαυτόν

premont

Quote from: Discobole on February 24, 2012, 08:26:21 AM
That would be great, definitely count me in 8)

Do you think about another Bach composition, or something else ?

In the first hand I thought of another organ piece by Bach - this would give me the greatest flexibility, e.g. the Dorian P&F or rather the prelude only as the example else would be too long.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Bulldog

Wow!  I'm really out of step with the group.  I didn't participate in the comparisons, but your least preferred version (Marcon) has been my favorite for a few years now.  I just love the tempo, power and uplifting nature of the interpretation; at peak volume, it knocks my socks off!

premont

Quote from: Bulldog on February 24, 2012, 08:52:23 AM
..your least preferred version (Marcon) has been my favorite for a few years now.  I just love the tempo, power and uplifting nature of the interpretation;
at peak volume, it knocks my socks off!

Well, I think it sucks (socks if you want).
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Marc

Quote from: (: premont :) on February 24, 2012, 08:51:11 AM
In the first hand I thought of another organ piece by Bach - this would give me the greatest flexibility, e.g. the Dorian P&F or rather the prelude only as the example else would be too long.

What about BWV 562 in C-minor?

BTW, for those who got inspired by this thread:

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,638.0.html

premont

Quote from: Marc on February 24, 2012, 09:14:37 AM
What about BWV 562 in C-minor?

Thanks. A good alternative. I have to look up which recordings I own of it.
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

madaboutmahler

Thank you for the results, very fascinating to see! I will make sure to purchase the winners sometime in the future... ;)

Looking forward to seeing the Schumann results now!
"Music is ... A higher revelation than all Wisdom & Philosophy"
— Ludwig van Beethoven

Bulldog

Quote from: (: premont :) on February 24, 2012, 09:04:51 AM
Well, I think it sucks (socks if you want).

And I thought you only disliked the tempo and articulation. ;)