Bach's Bungalow

[DavidW]

Well I think that either side Ray will fall on the issue he needs to get in some quality listening before hand.  Blind buying a 22 cd box set would be a bit silly.  Especially that set is known to be a polarizing love or hate it kind of interpretation.

[Bulldog]

Well I think that either side Ray will fall on the issue he needs to get in some quality listening before hand.  Blind buying a 22 cd box set would be a bit silly.

Yes, very silly.  First, one needs to determine what type of interpretation is wanted.  If a high degree of reverence is wanted, buying Gardiner would be a waste of money.

[knight66]

He goes too fast, taking everything at a jaunty gallop.  And then he has so much trouble with clear articulation.  I wouldn't call Gardiner a respectable Bachian as much as the worst I've heard.

I bought and got rid of a number of his phase 1 Bach recordings. I did not like the sense of rush. However, the recordings on his own label, much more recent, have matured and they have been rethought allowing more space and for the solo arias to be more reflective. I would not want that big box. But for the cantatas, I have enjoyed all the double discs I have bought.

Mike

[DavidW]

I'll try some of those newer recordings then Mike.

[SonicMan46]

Well, since Gardiner seems to have evoked some conflicting comments, I decided to listen to two versions of the BWV 147 Cantata that I own currently - first, I still like Gardiner (PIs, excellent vocalists, and I like the instruments up front and in my face - tempos not a concern for me - just a 2 min difference between the 2 conductors in this work); now, I do like Suzuki more (and hopefully so since I bought into the 4 anniversary boxes a while back, i.e. 40 discs).

Now, I would not presume to tell anyone to buy a 22-CD box w/o having heard some of the recordings and having done comparisons; but I do own a half dozen of these discs in the Gardiner box offering and was comfortable w/ the purchase - my purpose was to point out (as others have done in the purchases thread) that the box is a steal at basically $2 a disc - of course, assuming that Gardiner satisfies, and he indeed has for many listeners over the years - these works always seem to elicit varied opinions but the ultimate choice is always up to the purchaser! 


 

[prémont]

My own history with Gardiner has not been easy -he sometimes seems to me excessively "nervous"-, but I have never considered him as a "superficial" director. Right now -motivated by your comment-, I am listening to his Johannes-Passion and, IMO, it's an excellent version, superbly sung and, overall, quite recommendable.

My experience with Gardiner´s Bach is mixed and limited. I find his Orchestral suites and Brandenburgs - first and foremost the latter - outstanding. My first acquaintance with his Bach vocal music was the h-minor Mass, and I recall a hypomanic Gloria and a Kyrie and Credo lacking in depth. But his SJP has got much dramatic tension and captures the spirit of this work well IMO. And the musicians are first class. Now I intend to purchase the newly rereleased Archiv Sacred cantatas box to get a broader view of his style.

[jlaurson]

Dip Your Ears, No. 105
Chailly's Bach
http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2010/11/dip-your-ears-no-105.html




J.S. Bach
Christmas Oratorio
Riccardo Chailly
incl. Carolyn Sampson
2CD Decca

[Lethevich]

Can I ask a silly/annoying question? The Sonatas & Partitas for solo violin and the cello suites are considered masterpieces, but how do the sonatas for violin and keyboard (BWV 1014-1026) and cello sonatas compare to the two? Simply in their forms I am tempted to imagine "these must be just as good, but with some accompaniment as well", but in the case of the cello sonatas especially, they are much less widely recorded. Are these works adaptations, or lower in inspiration - essentially, what's their story? I assume that the cello pieces were originally written for an earlier version of the instrument - were the suites and sonatas written for slightly different instruments, and does that in some way account for the neglect of the sonatas?

Also, a really, really stupid question. Why are there so-called trio sonatas for (as I would expect) an instrument trio, but also for solo organ?

[Scarpia]

Can I ask a silly/annoying question? The Sonatas & Partitas for solo violin and the cello suites are considered masterpieces, but how do the sonatas for violin and keyboard (BWV 1014-1026) and cello sonatas compare to the two? Simply in their forms I am tempted to imagine "these must be just as good, but with some accompaniment as well", but in the case of the cello sonatas especially, they are much less widely recorded. Are these works adaptations, or lower in inspiration - essentially, what's their story? I assume that the cello pieces were originally written for an earlier version of the instrument - were the suites and sonatas written for slightly different instruments, and does that in some way account for the neglect of the sonatas?

Also, a really, really stupid question. Why are there so-called trio sonatas for (as I would expect) an instrument trio, but also for solo organ?

The trio sonatas for organ are are written for three distinct voices, left hand, right and and pedal, and are true "trio sonatas."  They have often been transcribed for a tradition trio ensemble.

I don't know of any accompanied cello sonatas by Bach, perhaps you mean the sonatas for viola da gamba?    The sonatas for instrument unaccompanied are very different than the sonatas for accompanied instrument.  In them Bach manages to create counterpoint using a single instrument, using a combination of double-stops and alternation of notes in different registers.  They are miracles of composition, and the accompanied sonatas are more or less standard baroque sonatas, definitely as good as any that have been written, but not in a category of their own.  For whatever reason, I feel more love for the accompanied sonatas for da Gamba than for violin.

[Opus106]

Why are there so-called trio sonatas for (as I would expect) an instrument trio, but also for solo organ?

Actually, the works (BWV 525-530) were originally intended for the organ, thereby condensing three instrumental parts (harpsichord, violin and cello) into one organ (sort of, I guess, like the concerti he transcribed and the one he wrote (the Italian Concerto) for keyboard).

[Lethevich]

Thanks for the answers! I do mean the sonatas originally for viola da gamba (BWV 1027–1029), but I was under the impression that they were now generally played on the cello - the way that his "cello suites" have become associated with the instrument as well, despite being written for an older incarnation of that instrument (I think) - also the viola da gamba?

I generally see them called cello sonatas in the non-HIP recordings anyway. Speaking of which, what does this cover mean? It seems to credit him with both instruments, is this via overdubbing?

[FideLeo]

thereby condensing three instrumental parts (harpsichord, violin and cello) into one organ

Baroque trio sonatas usually have two treble parts, so perhaps you meant two violins and harpsichord (and/or cello) continuo?

[Opus106]

Baroque trio sonatas usually have two treble parts, so perhaps you meant two violins and harpsichord (and/or cello) continuo?

No, I was just misinformed. Thanks for the correction.

[Scarpia]

Thanks for the answers! I do mean the sonatas originally for viola da gamba (BWV 1027–1029), but I was under the impression that they were now generally played on the cello - the way that his "cello suites" have become associated with the instrument as well, despite being written for an older incarnation of that instrument (I think) - also the viola da gamba?

I generally see them called cello sonatas in the non-HIP recordings anyway. Speaking of which, what does this cover mean? It seems to credit him with both instruments, is this via overdubbing?

The cello pre-dates Bach's time and Bach's cello suites were written for cello, although the last one appears to be for a cello with an fifth string.  At the time cello was typically used as a continuo instrument (reinforcing the bass line) and viola da gamba as a solo instrument, so writing for solo cello was something out of the ordinary.

I think performance of the viola da gamba suites on cello would have to be considered a transcription, since the instruments are rather different and have a different tuning.  I have half a dozen recordings, and only one on cello, which I don't find very satisfactory.  I don't find the cello sound suits the music.

I'm not sure it would be possible to play the cello suites on viola da gamba without some adaption, since the tuning of the instruments is different and it is not clear all of the double-stopping and chords on the cello could be played on viola da gamba without some modification.

[Scarpia]

No, I was just misinformed. Thanks for the correction.

I think the "trio" sonata in baroque music really refers to three independent voices.  Sometimes Bach sonatas for solo instrument and harpsichord are described as trio sonatas because the right hand of the harpsichord acts as an independent melody (rather than simply filling in harmony).  But more typically a trio sonata is two melody instruments with continuo, which can be a harpsichord more usually with a cello or bassoon reinforcing the bass line.

[FideLeo]

Sometimes Bach sonatas for solo instrument and harpsichord are described as trio sonatas because the right hand of the harpsichord acts as an independent melody (rather than simply filling in harmony).

What are some actual examples of this?  Just curious.

ps. I recall some modern transcriptions of the organ trio sonatas do this, but at the moment I can't think of any such use by Bach himself.

[Opus106]

What are some actual examples of this?  Just curious.

Wikipedia puts the accompanied sonatas (what Scarpia meant by "sonatas for solo instrument and harpsichord") in that category.

A further innovation of Bach was the creation of what are strictly trio sonatas, involving a concertante (obligato) harpsichord part and one melodic instrument, thus for two players. Known examples are the six sonatas for harpsichord and solo violin (BWV 1014-1019), three sonatas for harpsichord and viola da gamba (BWV 1027-1029) and the three sonatas for harpsichord and flauto traverso (BWV 1030-1032)

[FideLeo]

Wikipedia puts the accompanied sonatas (what Scarpia meant by "sonatas for solo instrument and harpsichord") in that category.

Did Bach call them 'trio' sonatas himself? 

[Scarpia]

What are some actual examples of this?  Just curious.

ps. I recall some modern transcriptions of the organ trio sonatas do this, but what else...

Bach Trio Sonata BWV 1039 and the sonata for viola da gamba BWV 1027 are essentially identical.   The second flute becomes the harpsichord's right hand.  The viola da gamba sonata is not typical called a trio sonata but has its essential form.

[Opus106]

Did Bach call them 'trio' sonatas himself? 

I don't know. However, BWV 1025, scored for violin and harpsichord, is called Trio in A major. (I'm quoting from Christoph Wolff's Johann Sebastian Bach: The Learned Musician, p. 357.)