Bach: Well-Tempered Clavier

[Marc]

Seems like there a so many great recordings of WTC besides Gould. I agree with the sowing machine analogy (at least sometimes). I find Gould to be almost unbearable sometimes on WTC. Today, I happened to be listening to this:

Just some excerpts from WTC I on there. But captivating stuff.

Or this one, with a few excerpts on organ:



Could not find this one on f.i. Amazon.
This is the official link:

http://www.helior.nl/product/koororgel-martinikerk-groningen/

For those interested if this beautiful recital disc is delivered outside NL: e-mail info@helior.nl

Not sure if it's still availabe on Groningen Orgelland: info@groningenorgelland.nl

[Mandryka]

I
use the piano as a piano, i.c. a 19th century instrument.

That could include:

Touch
Articulation
Ornamentation
Rubato
Voice leading
Voice alignment
Dynamic Variation
Timbre

[Marc]

That could include:

Touch
Articulation
Ornamentation
Rubato
Voice leading
Voice alignment
Dynamic Variation
Timbre

Indeed.
But at least not trying to create an artificial 'staccato' harpsichord sound effect on an instrument that's got a completely different timbre and is far more appropriate for more legato and enitrely different dynamic effects... to me, that just sounds unnatural.

[Jo498]

I don't think Gould is simply imitating a harpsichord. For one thing, his preference for non legato extends to almost any music he played; in Beethoven or Mozart the contrast between Gould's way and the "normal" way to play the music might even be more pronounced (and this cannot be because of harpsichord imiation).
And Gould is using different articulations, just very little legato, it's more shades of non legato and staccato. (E.g. take the passage in the major mode in the fugal section of the Toccata in the 6th partita: Gould clearly makes a quite effective contrast here with softer (not only in volume) and more legato playing.)

As far as "pinprick" staccatissimo goes, Mustonen has out-Goulded Gould in some recordings but to be fair Mustonen also uses a broader articulation spectrum while generally also favoring non legato and staccato.

(The harpsichord recording Gould made of 4 Handel suites shows that he was not really experienced with these instruments because he pounds so strongly that there are a lot of extraneous noises...)

[James]

Of course, he also gained a "cult following" and apparently his music is still selling ...

Of course, that's because he's a genius musician & player. Anyone with ears & a brain can instantly hear that. His name is synonymous with Bach more than any other keyboard player (no one cares about the harpsichord really, let's be honest) and he became internationally recognized right off. So an international following, musicians and music lovers alike. All that great Bach stuff he did is really hard to top .. super high level musicianship, it'll live on forever. One of the greatest musicians of the 20th century, easily.

[prémont]

I don't think Gould is simply imitating a harpsichord. For one thing, his preference for non legato extends to almost any music he played; in Beethoven or Mozart the contrast between Gould's way and the "normal" way to play the music might even be more pronounced (and this cannot be because of harpsichord imiation).

I do not think Gould tried to imitate a period harpsichord, but instead the common way at that time to play a revival harpsichord - which was what in the 1960es usually was understood as harpsichord, and a short listening test (the you tube clip) reveals the similarity between Gould's and Karl Richter's "standard" touch. And I find it unlikely, that this similarity could be random.

Concerning Mozart and Beethoven Gould probably knew, that the "common" articulation at the time of Mozart and at least early Beethoven still was non-legato.

On a harpsichord you must press the keys (not hammer upon them as Richter does in the clip) and together with the fast action this allows a very differentiated articulation. The problem is, that legato playing is natural for the modern piano, and a (in the Baroque sense) correct non-legato, which indeed is very close (ordentlisches Fortgehen), is difficult to realise in fast tempo on a modern piano with its slower action and hammer touch. To avoid legato playing pianists trying to play non-legato will tend to exaggerate the detached playing doing staccato instead. This becomes tiring listening rather fast.

I fully agree with Marc, that pianists should play piano-wise whatever they play. Playing otherwise will sound like playing against the instrument.

[Wakefield]

I don't think Gould is simply imitating a harpsichord. For one thing, his preference for non legato extends to almost any music he played; in Beethoven or Mozart the contrast between Gould's way and the "normal" way to play the music might even be more pronounced (and this cannot be because of harpsichord imiation).
And Gould is using different articulations, just very little legato, it's more shades of non legato and staccato. (E.g. take the passage in the major mode in the fugal section of the Toccata in the 6th partita: Gould clearly makes a quite effective contrast here with softer (not only in volume) and more legato playing.)

As far as "pinprick" staccatissimo goes, Mustonen has out-Goulded Gould in some recordings but to be fair Mustonen also uses a broader articulation spectrum while generally also favoring non legato and staccato.

(The harpsichord recording Gould made of 4 Handel suites shows that he was not really experienced with these instruments because he pounds so strongly that there are a lot of extraneous noises...)

Your description seems irreproachable. To compare Gould to Walcha or Richter (or asserting a sort of common lineage), well, doesn't make any sense to me.

I don't usually listen to Bach played on piano, with the exception of three or four pianists: Rosalyn Truck (her BBC Legends is my favorite WTC on piano); Angela Hewitt, Ivo Janssen and, of course, Gould. Very dissimilar pianists, but I don't care of searching historical consistency when Bach is played on piano (because the use of this instrument is an anachronism itself).

I heard some samples of Mustonen and sound very intereting (I just knew his sister (?) Ella, a harpsichordist). Thanks for pointing out to him! 

[North Star]

I heard some samples of Mustonen and sound very intereting (I just knew her sister (?) Ella, a harpsichordist). Thanks for pointing out to him! 

Yes, Elina is his sister.

[Wakefield]

Yes, Elina is his sister.

Elina, yes! Thanks!

[Jo498]

FWIW Mustonen has a complete WTC I split between two two-disc-sets where each half is mixed with Shostakovich's 24 P & F. The first volume is on RCA, the second on Ondine. It's quite interesting but not really my favorite, I am afraid.

Olli Mustonen definitely "out-goulds" Gould with relentless staccato in his Beethoven variations (Diabellis and one other disc with op.35 etc.)

Elina Mustonen recorded the French and English suites on harpsichord, I am not aware of a WTC.

[prémont]

To compare Gould to Walcha or Richter (or asserting a sort of common lineage), well, doesn't make any sense to me.

I do not claim a common lineage in the strict sense, I only ask myself from where Gould got his excentric ideas about piano playing style. Obviously not from the piano playing of the 1950es. He may well have got inspiration from contemporary revival harpsichord playing. At least the similarity in effect is striking.

.. but I don't care of searching historical consistency when Bach is played on piano (because the use of this instrument is an anachronism itself).

BTW you never answered my question about which particularly Bachian elements you hear in Gould's Bach. Instead you pointed to some rather un-Bachian details. Maybe the answer should be read between the lines just above. 

[milk]

I've got her WTC. I have to go back and listen. I forget what it sounds like. But this live fortepiano recording is so much fun. She does 846, 850, 851, and 875. I don't know if her playing comports with the style of the period of the instrument (1824). Anyway, I'll have to head over to her complete WTC - which is nothing like this.

[Mandryka]

To compare Gould to Walcha or Richter (or asserting a sort of common lineage), well, doesn't make any sense to me.

Fast and stiff.

[Jo498]

But Gould played *everything* comparably "fast and stiff". I still do not see a reason why he should have been using this stylistic feature for Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, even the romantics and moderns he played if it was mainly inspired by 1950s "revival" harpsichord players.

[prémont]

But Gould played *everything* comparably "fast and stiff". I still do not see a reason why he should have been using this stylistic feature for Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, even the romantics and moderns he played if it was mainly inspired by 1950s "revival" harpsichord players.

From Gould hands I only know as well as all his Bach,Beethoven and Handel. I parted with CDs since long, but IIRC his Beethoven is not quite as fast and stiff as his Bach, but you may be right that this style more or less was a general feature in his playing, so to say his brand. However, I still find the similarity between his Bach-style and the style of the most prominent revival harpsichord players noticeable not to say striking.

[Parsifal]

From Gould hands I only know as well as all his Bach,Beethoven and Handel. I parted with CDs since long, but IIRC his Beethoven is not quite as fast and stiff as his Bach, but you may be right that this style more or less was a general feature in his playing, so to say his brand. However, I still find the similarity between his Bach-style and the style of the most prominent revival harpsichord players noticeable not to say striking.

He may not be everyone's cup of tea (he is far from my favorite Bach performer on Piano) but he was a genius who more-or-less discovered a new way to perform Bach on the piano. Be brought a new level of clarity and precision to the performance of these works on piano. You don't like the recordings. Fine. But the continuous effort to brand his performances as somehow illegitimate is tiresome.

[Mandryka]

Playing stiffly was part of the modernist post war musical ideology. Taruskin discusses this at some length with various quotes by critics saying things like Bach is all about a uniform pulse. Changes in pulse were only tolerated to mark some major structural event.

Toscanini bought into these ideas I think, and so did the revival harpsichordists and Glenn Gould

This all started with my comments on WTC 2, which was made after he had given up concertising. My feeling is that GG is less generally stiff in Brahms and Scriabin and Schoenberg, more stiff in Bach, Mozart, Haydn and early Beethoven, and that his later recordings are stiffer than his earlier ones. I haven't checked this out at all carefully, I propose it just as a hypothesis for refutation.

[prémont]

He may not be everyone's cup of tea (he is far from my favorite Bach performer on Piano) but he was a genius who more-or-less discovered a new way to perform Bach on the piano. Be brought a new level of clarity and precision to the performance of these works on piano. You don't like the recordings. Fine. But the continuous effort to brand his performances as somehow illegitimate is tiresome.

It never occurred to me, that his style should be illegitimate whatever its background might be, Think of how much musicians owe to their forerunners. Toscanini/Karajan, Furtwängler/Barenboim e.g. Everyone creates his own style based on elements from the past. Even the greatest art is rarely plucked out of the air.

[Parsifal]

This is the comment that got my back up.

This is the kind of touch I most often hear in Gould's Bach-playing on piano, a relentless, hammering and unvaried touch unsuited for piano. Therefore I think Gould's model was the common revival harpsichord sound, and I have never understood, why he did not choose to play harpsichord instead of trying to play harpsichord on piano.

I probably overreacted, but the judgmental tone of the comment hit a nerve.

[Jo498]

According to Taruskin the "modernist" way to play Bach/Baroque is to play it like Stravinskian neobaroque...
I wonder how other pianists who departed from a more or less "romantic" way of playing Bach played Bach in the 1950s. Gulda who was about the same age plays also fairly "motoric"; I have not heard the Demus WTC that apparently was praised once in Piano Quarterly or some other magazine.

But apparently Gould really struck a nerve, otherwise his interpretations would not have been considered so extraordinary.