J.S. Bach on the Organ

[prémont]

Here's another hasty guess: Weinberger Box I, Weinberger Box II (since the integral of Membran Documents comes in two boxes).

You must think of Stockmeier.

Actually I think Jens meant Walcha I and Walcha II, but unfortunately typed faster, than he was thinking. 

[jlaurson]

You obviously know something, that I do not know.
Which recording is Weinberger I and which recording is Weinberger II ??

Weinberger I is the Yale manuscript of BWV 957, "Mach's mit mir, Gott, nach Deiner Guet" (disc 12). What I (sloppily) call "Weinberger II" is another chorale prelude on "Mach's mit mir, Gott, nach Deiner Guet" -- without a BWV number (deest.) but with stylistic elements suggesting authorship by JSB. (disc 19)

EDIT: BWV numbers are jumpy.

[jlaurson]

You must think of Stockmeier.

Actually I think Jens meant Walcha I and Walcha II, but unfortunately typed faster, than he was thinking. 

Couldn't have meant that, since BWV957 wasn't discovered until long after Walcha was dead. :-)
(Nor has Stockmeier recorded it.)

[Marc]

You must think of Stockmeier.

Yep.
Bedtime, I guess.

Marc,  I believe I have the Weinberger Box II, which has 22 CD's (more than any other Bach boxes I am aware of) with the disclaimer that not all works have definitively been confirmed to have been composed by JS Bach ...

Yeah, I have that one, too. But Premont is right: this is the only (grand) integral by Weinberger.

Actually I think Jens meant Walcha I and Walcha II, but unfortunately typed faster, than he was thinking. 

I think you win.
EDIT: we both lost.

[prémont]

Weinberger I is the Yale manuscript of BWV 597, "Mach's mit mir, Gott, nach Deiner Guet" (disc 12). What I (sloppily) call "Weinberger II" is another chorale prelude on "Mach's mit mir, Gott, nach Deiner Guet" -- without a BWV number (deest.) but with stylistic elements suggesting authorship by JSB. (disc 19)

This must be an improvised emergency solution. BWV 597 is one of the Concerto transcriptions AFAIR the anonymous in Es-major.

[prémont]

Couldn't have meant that, since BWV957 wasn't discovered until long after Walcha was dead. :-)
(Nor has Stockmeier recorded it.)

Of course, but if you confused the names, considerations like this would not count.

[Marc]

This must be an improvised emergency solution. BWV 597 is one of the Concerto transcriptions AFAIR the anonymous in Es-major.

Actually I think Jens meant BWV 957, but unfortunately typed faster than he was thinking.

[prémont]

I think you win.
EDIT: we both lost.

No, I win, Jens is presenting us with a rambling story.

[prémont]

Actually I think Jens meant BWV 957, but unfortunately typed faster than he was thinking.

Yes, he seems to do that rather often.

[Antoine Marchand]

No, I win, Jens is presenting us with a rambling story.

No, you're tied. Jens was talking about BWV 957 in the post quoted by you. Therefore, his "alibi" is plausible. 

[jlaurson]

Yes, he seems to do that rather often.

[in my best Miss-Piggy voice:]
Excusez-Moi ?!


Apart from that: I've even mentioned the name of the chorale... I had been talking about 957 throughout... I actually thought your 'misunderstanding' was part of an elaborate joke.

[prémont]

Weinberger I is the Yale manuscript of BWV 957, "Mach's mit mir, Gott, nach Deiner Guet" (disc 12). What I (sloppily) call "Weinberger II" is another chorale prelude on "Mach's mit mir, Gott, nach Deiner Guet" -- without a BWV number (deest.) but with stylistic elements suggesting authorship by JSB. (disc 19)

EDIT: BWV numbers are jumpy.

E.g. Weinberger has recorded more than eleven different Chorale preludes by Bach on Allein Gott. According to your terminology they should be called Weinberger I, Weinberger II, Weinberger III, Weinberger IV, Weinberger V, and so on??

[Marc]

No, I win, Jens is presenting us with a rambling story.

I don't think so. (I agree with Antoine here.)
But he's wrong about the discovery date of BWV 957. It was already mentioned in the 1st published edition of the Schmieder BWV catalogue (1950), as Fugue (for keyboard) in G-Major.

[prémont]

I actually thought your 'misunderstanding' was part of an elaborate joke.

Mark you, I am always deadly serious. 

[jlaurson]

I don't think so. (I agree with Antoine here.)
But he's wrong about the discovery date of BWV 957. It was already mentioned in the 1st published edition of the Schmieder BWV catalogue (1950), as Fugue (for keyboard) in G-Major.

That's true, of course... I was thinking of the Neumeister Chorales.
And also confused (not really, but it played into it) that it was among the ("Neumeister") Yale Manuscripts which moved it from apocryphal status to the established core?

[Marc]

E.g. Weinberger has recorded more than eleven different Chorale preludes by Bach on Allein Gott. According to your terminology they should be called Weinberger I, Weinberger II, Weinberger III, Weinberger IV, Weinberger V, and so on??

Well, at the site of Bachcantatas.com this is done, though not numbered by performer, but indeed by chorale.
F.i.: Liebster Jesu, wir sind hier BWV 633 = I, 634 = II, 706 = III, et cetera.
And even on this site every posting gets a number .... this will be my (lucky) number CMXXXVIII.

[prémont]

I don't think so. (I agree with Antoine here.)
But he's wrong about the discovery date of BWV 957. It was already mentioned in the 1st published edition of the Schmieder BWV catalogue (1950), as Fugue (for keyboard) in G-Major.

It is published already in the first complete Bach edition from the 19th century (by F.C.Griepenkerl et alii) among the "piano"-works. The first recording I know of it was made by Martin Galling (on harpsichord) ca. 1966.

[Antoine Marchand]

Mark you, I am always deadly serious. 

You're so Bachian, my friend! (I'm not joking).

[prémont]

Well, at the site of Bachcantatas.com this is done, though not numbered by performer, but indeed by chorale.
F.i.: Liebster Jesu, wir sind hier BWV 633 = I, 634 = II, 706 = III, et cetera.
And even on this site every posting gets a number .... this will be my (lucky) number CMXXXVIII.

Marc you: It is reasonable to number them by chorale, but nonsense to do it by performer.

And the Bachcantatas site is not the most authoritative source I know.

[prémont]

No, you're tied. Jens was talking about BWV 957 in the post quoted by you. Therefore, his "alibi" is plausible. 

No I am tired, it is late here.