Topic: Bach's Bungalow

[aquablob]

Thought I'd make a little "new GMG" history by creating the generic Bach thread. Feel free to discuss anything Bach-related here.

My initial purpose for starting the thread, however, was to prompt discussion about the WTC. To which preludes and fugues are you most partial? Of the two volumes, which do you prefer? Any favorite recordings?

The recording that prompted me to create this thread: Friedrich Gulda playing the B minor fugue from Book 1.

[facehugger]

damn you, i wanted bach!

[Maciek]

My initial purpose for starting the thread, however, was to prompt discussion about the WTC. Of the two volumes, which do you prefer?

I definitely prefer volume 2 - both for playing and listening.

Maciek

[facehugger]

as to the wtc query

nothing beats tureck playing the b minor from the first book.

i like glenn gould if i'm in the mood to have my perceptions challenged and see new stuff, andras schiff for competent 'regular' playing, tureck for sating myself in beauty.

i want to get a decent harpsichord recording, any recommendations?

[Don]

as to the wtc query

nothing beats tureck playing the b minor from the first book.

i like glenn gould if i'm in the mood to have my perceptions challenged and see new stuff, andras schiff for competent 'regular' playing, tureck for sating myself in beauty.

i want to get a decent harpsichord recording, any recommendations?

There are quite a few great sets out there:  Landowska, van Asperen, Leonhardt, Verlet and Walcha.  Then there's Robert Levin who plays harpsichord, clavichord, fortepiano and organ in his complete set.  My favorite is Glen Wilson on Teldec; unfortunately, his set might be currently oop.

[Que]

There are quite a few great sets out there:  Landowska, van Asperen, Leonhardt, Verlet and Walcha.  Then there's Robert Levin who plays harpsichord, clavichord, fortepiano and organ in his complete set.  My favorite is Glen Wilson on Teldec; unfortunately, his set might be currently oop.

Strongly second the recommendation for the Wilson set!

Don, How's the Levin set? As good as his Die Kunst der Fuge?
Wouldn't mind the multiple instruments - sounds interesting.

Q

[(: premont :)]

Don, How's the Levin set? As good as his Die Kunst der Fuge?
Wouldn't mind the multiple instruments - sounds interesting.

Excuse me for interfering, but did Levin record Die Kunst der Fuge. New to me.

Levin´s WTC is fast, brilliant, transparent, very good. My favorites though being the same as Don´s  - except Landowska. Others to consider are the scholary Moroney and the colourful Dantone.

[Que]

Excuse me for interfering, but did Levin record Die Kunst der Fuge. New to me.

Levin´s WTC is fast, brilliant, transparent, very good. My favorites though being the same as Don´s  - except Landowska. Others to consider are the scholary Moroney and the colourful Dantone.

Oopps! Sorry, I had Robert Hill in mind, and not Robert Levin - my bad
Was still interested in comments on Levin's WTC though - thanks!

I've heard Dantone's WTC - made a very positive impression, indeed very colourful.
And your description of Moroney as "scholarly" is also very much to the point - not my preference.

Q

[Norbeone]

I'm very interested in getting the Levin, after listening to samples on amazon. Sounds completely unboring! I find other early keyboardists like Gilbert and sometimes even Leonhardt to be much too plain.

As for which book I prefer, I really don't know. Book 2 is packed with (occasionally) more complex, and somewhat deeper movements, but some of them aren't quite as fun or beautiful as they're counterparts from book 1 (the B Minor and C# major being one example).

Lately i've been playing and listening to the Bb minor from Book 1 over and over again. It's stunningly emotional yet so cleanly structured. Oh, and Gould is the king as far as this one's concerned!

 

[Don]

I'm very interested in getting the Levin, after listening to samples on amazon. Sounds completely unboring! I find other early keyboardists like Gilbert and sometimes even Leonhardt to be much too plain.

As for which book I prefer, I really don't know. Book 2 is packed with (occasionally) more complex, and somewhat deeper movements, but some of them aren't quite as fun or beautiful as they're counterparts from book 1 (the B Minor and C# major being one example).


 

I find talk about preferences between Book 1 and 2 a little odd; it's like asking whether one prefers the 1st half of the Goldbergs to the 2nd half.  Anyways, I snap up any recordings I can of each and both Books.

[Don]

On to the subject of recordings of the Leipzig Chorales, has anyone heard either of these versions?:

Claudio Astronio/Stradivarius
John O'Donnell/Melba

[Maciek]

Well, I agree with you that they're both worth hearing in as many takes as possible, and if I had the money I'd probably snatch up all the recordings available too.

But comparing the two volumes to two "halves" of the Goldbergs is completely wrong.

For one thing, we don't even know if volume no. 2 is in fact volume no. 2 - AFAIK the title page of the manuscript was never discovered, and we just have to assume that the title would have been WTC simply because the structure is the same. And we're probably right. But we can't be sure.

Another thing is that the two volumes were composed more than 20 years apart, and vol. 2 is written by a much older composer who is, in a way, summing up his (musical) life. So this is, in many respects, a more mature work (I'm not saying "better"!).

Also, the first volume was prefaced by a note stating an educational purpose of the cycle, while there was probably no such note in the second volume - perhaps Bach wrote this one with a purely musical goal in mind?

And last of all: these are two cycles. They were prepared by Bach as cycles, ie. each volume is meant as a separate, complete entity, so there's absolutely nothing artificial in treating them apart.

I find vol. 2 more appealing because for me it is much more poetic and "subjective" in comparison to the technical "coolness" of some of the pieces in the first volume. Needless to say, I love both of them, as I love and cherish everything Bach had ever written (at least everything that I've heard ).

Cheers,
Maciek

[Don]

Well, I agree with you that they're both worth hearing in as many takes as possible, and if I had the money I'd probably snatch up all the recordings available too.

But comparing the two volumes to two "halves" of the Goldbergs is completely wrong.

You are being quite strict.  Yes, I know about the dates of composition and the notion of separate cycles.  I was just referring to the quality of music that I find equal between the two Books.  Also, when I listen to the WTC, I always go with both Books (unless the recording is of just one Book).

For me, both Books represent the best that music has to offer, so I have no interest in differentiating between the quality of each just like I wouldn't make any judgements as to which of my children I love more than the others.

[Maciek]

You are being quite strict.

Fair enough. Sorry.

[Don]

Fair enough. Sorry.

No problem.  Right now I'm listening to Fellner's WTC Bk. 1 - a compelling mix of Bach's warmth and underbelly.

[val]

aquariuswb


The recording that prompted me to create this thread: Friedrich Gulda playing the B minor fugue from Book 1.

I like very much listening to Gustav Leonhardt in the harpsichord in the WTC.

But Gulda is another thing. One of the greatest musical and spiritual experiences I had .

[aquablob]

But Gulda is another thing. One of the greatest musical and spiritual experiences I had .

Yes!

[Don Giovanni]

How do the Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin rank among the rest of Bach's output?

[Que]

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. 

Q

[Don]

How do the Sonatas and Partitas for Solo Violin rank among the rest of Bach's output?

Right at the top.  I must admit to preferring a few of Bach's keyboard works, but that's only because I'm partial to keyboard music.