Bach: Well-Tempered Clavier

[Mandryka]

Tureck (who to my ears seems similarly "dry" . . .)

I don't think this is quite the case in the DG recording of WTC 2 - which seems to be more ubiquitously inflected rhythmically than Gould's. It may well be that she became a stiffy later on.

[prémont]

Piggybacking off of this Gould discussion, it's been a while since I listened to Wanda Landowska. So, then, what's her style by comparison? She used a weird instrument and there must be something anachronistic there? Does Gould react to her in some way?

This may well have been a contributing factor. Even some of Landowska's pupils reacted to her slowish, colorful and romantic style.

[prémont]

I don't think this is quite the case in the DG recording of WTC 2 - which seems to be more ubiquitously inflected rhythmically than Gould's. It may well be that she became a stiffy later on.

I heard/saw her at a recital in the late 1960es. As far as I recall the motoric rhythms were somewhat predominant.

[Mandryka]

I heard/saw her at a recital in the late 1960es. As far as I recall the motoric rhythms were somewhat predominant.

Yes I saw her towards the end of her career play the Goldbergs and it was most uninspiring.

[James]

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.

Gould was not inspired by revival harpsichordists, or any other player in particular - though he admired great musicians and studied great composers. He played with an immense musicality. His genius and talent were evident extremely early in age and he spent virtually all of his lifetime on the planet dealing with music in various capacities. He was a child prodigy. His interpretations stem from his insights, tastes and his imagination. The majority of musicians within the classical world (especially) are bland & anonymous, churning out lifeless, boring performances .. but not Gould, he was a true original, the integrity is there and he shed a dazzling light on what he played.

[Mandryka]

Bernard Roberts's way with Bk 2 makes all the voices clear at all times. He places the voices in a way which makes them stand in an interesting relation to each other, not just one voice dominating and one voice accompanying. His way of using piano is restrained in terms or colour and dynamics, which leaves the music sounding more noble than sentimental or thrilling.

What he does is quite brave in the world of piano, where the musicians sometimes bring along 19th century aesthetic ideas.

What he lacks is expressive rubato, hence at an emotional level this doesn't seem as successful as  Leonhardt, Asperen, Chorzempa, Gilbert, Wilson . . .

[James]

Hard to imagine anything topping Gould's truly extraordinary WTC.
Sounds as fresh now as it did over 50 years ago!
Rightfully hailed as one of the greatest piano recordings of all time.
Line above tone here, rhythmic integrity, temporal variety & excitement.

[milk]

I'm just listening to prelude 874...and flipping around between Gould and others, like Watchorn, Wilson, Woodward and Leonhardt. Lots of W's on the board. I imagine many pianists would say Gould inspired them (but maybe not his style? just him?) Are there popular pianists today who take after him, stylistically? If you can always tell the musician after a few notes then they definitely have something. That's something I forgot about "what makes the best the best." Gould is always Gould. You can't miss him. I don't think I'd be listening to classical music if not for Gould. Gould is pretty flexible in 874. But I somehow feel there is always a "box" in Gould. Something annoys me about him these days. He's very insistent. Moving on to prelude 876 and Crossland: there's a lot of sunlight there. But Gould? It's a kind of insanity! I think Gould is really too insistent. It's like he wants us to see the math of it? I imagine for Gould that Bach is a world that keeps going. But (now moving to Wilson who takes it much more "normally") Gould is still a bit too much.   

[Jo498]

Could you please refer to the pieces by key and Book I/II...

As I said, Mustonen is something of an excentric in his own right. But I would be very surprised if his staccato preference was not inspired by Gould. Gulda is roughly contemporary with Gould and his WTC is also very "dry" at times (and very directly recorded which adds to the dry and percussive character). Meyer (1940s and 50s, Inventions/Sinfonias, Italian Concerto and a few suites and toccatas) is not as dry but also fairly fast, "light" and not "romantic". Overall, I do not know enough Bach recordings on piano clearly pre-Gould.

[milk]

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.

I haven't had the good fortune to see lots of concerts but I did see Demus here in Japan a few years ago, in a very small venue (mostly for his Japanese students). That concert really blew me away - not that I have much to compare it to. It was all WTC, though I don't remember the pieces or which book he played more of. I do remember that after playing 2 or 3 sets he would go to the back of the room and sit down for about 30 seconds and sort of ponder before returning to the piano and continuing.
That concert really moved me. I can't tell you what he was doing musically but it just seemed so imaginative to me. I remember one of his students telling me that he had a really smooth velvet touch and I remember thinking I couldn't disagree more. I guess I thought he really played with the counterpoint and that he was very angular, if that makes any sense.
I wish I could have purchased the recording they made but they wanted like 200$ for it. I don't know...I just thought, "well, that's a bit much."
 

[Jo498]

Was the Demus WTC ever on CD? Or did he re-record it? I have book II on 3 LPs (rec. 1971) but I cannot play them now... There seems a more recent Bach (partitas and Goldbergs) set on Nuova Era CDs.
Demus will be 88 on Friday, apparently he is still active. Of the Austrian pianists of his generation, Gulda, Brendel, Badura-Skoda and Demus he seems the least well represented on recordings, at least on CD. There are quite a few LPs, though.

[Mandryka]

You can download his WTC from the 1970s here, I think it's worth hearing.

https://archive.org/details/04BWV849
https://archive.org/details/ppyjc61_yahoo_889

[aukhawk]

Something annoys me about him [Gould] these days. He's very insistent. Moving on to prelude 876 and Crossland: there's a lot of sunlight there. But Gould? It's a kind of insanity! I think Gould is really too insistent. It's like he wants us to see the math of it? I imagine for Gould that Bach is a world that keeps going. But (now moving to Wilson who takes it much more "normally") Gould is still a bit too much.

I think 'insistent' is a rather good way of putting it.  He wants to make every note count.  Rather like someone talking a bit too loud and standing a bit too close.  Of course the close-miked piano adds to that feeling, and I'm sure it was a creative decision to record the piano in this way.  OF COURSE IT IS GOING TO GET INSIDE YOUR HEAD.

Well after following this discussion with interest I just had to listen to Gould yesterday.  I listened to some of Book I (I like the music better in Book I).  The first thing I noticed was that the piano sounded much better than I remember - too close for modern taste to be sure, but very well balanced in its way.   I was dozing a bit (for some reason I often do, when I try to listen really hard ) but my attention was grabbed by the 14th Fugue (F# minor) and was held during the following 2 pairs (15th and 16th, G major and G minor).  At this point I stopped and tried a few others in my collection for comparison.

Hewitt (her 2nd recording, which I guessed might be more of a contrast than her first), Richter, MacGregor (not a CD, but she can be found on YouTube) and as a sanity check, Kenneth Gilbert on harpsichord.  (I was going to include Roberts which I do have, but I remember I disliked him so much on first hearing that he's now only on some dusty backup drive somewhere.)

It's a bit of a simplification to describe Gould as 'fast'.  He was never the outright fastest of this group in any of these six pieces.  In the 14th Fugue (which had first caught my attention) he started slow and gradually got slower as the piece progressed.  Overall only Richter took longer over it.  In the 15th Prelude he was very fast and sewing-machiney if you like, but for the 43 seconds that it lasted that effect worked for me better than MacGregor who matched him for speed but with more variation of touch.  In the 16th Prelude he was the slowest of all, and in the Fugue the 2nd-slowest (after Richter).
So I'd suggest it is more that Gould just wants to be different - is drawn towards the extremes of tempo and avoids the middle ground.  In contrast to his latter-day compatriot Hewitt who makes a positive virtue of occupying the middle ground.

After listening to Gould, the other pianists just sounded as though they were coming to Bach via Chopin.  They were an easier listen, to be sure.  But Gould more effective at channelling Bach, it seemed to me.  If I could only have one I'd probably take Richter, as the most musical of this small selection of performers.

Whenever I think of Gould, I also think of Bobby Fischer (who my father, a rather good chess player, worshipped as a hero).  Similar types, surely.

[Mandryka]

After listening to Gould, the other pianists just sounded as though they were coming to Bach via Chopin.  They were an easier listen, to be sure.  But Gould more effective at channelling Bach, it seemed to me.  If I could only have one I'd probably take Richter, as the most musical of this small selection of performers.

Richter actually seems to be very much coming at it from a 19th century point of view to me. Legato, pedal, colourful timbres, an articulation which brings out  long and sinuous melodies. I'm going from memory here, I could be wrong.

But Gould more effective at channelling Bach, it seemed to me.

Because . . . ?

So I'd suggest it is more that Gould just wants to be different - is drawn towards the extremes of tempo and avoids the middle ground. 

People play fast when  they're nervous. I suggest he was nervous of WTC, of the feelings that it was evoking in him, despite himself.

Hewitt who makes a positive virtue of occupying the middle ground.

I think that's a bit unfair to her you know, for one thing the interpretation avoids forcefulness, again from memory. I'm talking about the second recording. And she has her own ideas about voice leading and ornamentation.

[George]

Perhaps it's a little of an annoying question...I've been through these threads many times...but I wonder if those contributing to the discussion on Gould could each offer their top 3 piano interpretations? I find myself biased towards the harpsichord and much more clear about what I like there. But for piano...I don't have Hewitt. Crossland is good as is Woodward. But, just listening to Woodward, the recording is very reverberant. I feel like I'm at the back of an empty hall. Or, what are best WTC on piano recorded in the last twenty years or so? Gould is tightly-wrought and intense. As a character, he reminds me of Fischer too. But that might be unfair. Gould was eccentric and, perhaps, obsessive or maybe somewhat compulsive. Fischer seemed like a true paranoid.

My top 3 - Feinberg, Richter and Tureck (DG.)

[milk]

My top 3 - Feinberg, Richter and Tureck (DG.)

Ah! Feinberg! I just realized I have book 2. I shall buy 1 presently. I love that performance. Somehow the Feinberg recalls my experience of the Demus concert. But I can't be sure if I am remembering correctly.

[XB-70 Valkyrie]

I just received and have started listening to the latest Andras Schiff on ECM (only listened to 1-8 in Bk I). Of course, it is quite polished, elegant, and understated, but there are some very nice instances of skillful use of piano to highlight the various voices. I am not sure it will become a favorite like Richter or Feinberg, but I am enjoying it quite a bit. Has anyone heard it?

I think Richard Egarr will be my next version...

[Mandryka]

Perhaps it's a little of an annoying question...I've been through these threads many times...but I wonder if those contributing to the discussion on Gould could each offer their top 3 piano interpretations?

Nikolayeva 1972

[prémont]

If it must be on piano, Ivo Janssen:

https://www.amazon.com/J-S-Bach-Complete-Keyboard/dp/B0053HBKZO

[Mandryka]

If it must be on piano, Ivo Janssen:

https://www.amazon.com/J-S-Bach-Complete-Keyboard/dp/B0053HBKZO

Have you heard Peter Hill?