Bach on the piano

[Mandryka]

When I wrote the previous post I was under the influence of this idea: it's interesting to consider how from the second half of the XVIIIth century (but especially during the XIXth Century) indications and "performance directives" of scores were progressively growing up. That's the reason why a great part of the work of studies on the realm of HIP performance have consisted in trying to rediscover, for instance, a lot of unspoken musical practices that men of Baroque and previous ages considered implicit in their scores. That said, I think "a proper piano score" is, by definition, considerably more detailed that, for example, a typical score for harpsichord. Again: a Romantic instrument (like modern piano) at some extent "claims" for a more complete score like those written by a Romantic or modern composer.     

Can you give -- or give a reference to -- a concrete example?

It's interesting this because one of the ideas I've read in this forum is that romantic performance doesn't take its inspiration from the music (rather it takes itsinspiration from the performer's state of mind.) But it seems that the music is extremely open, and that you have to go to facts  about histoical performance practice to know how to play it -- facts which maybe had their origin in the states of mind of historical performers!

I'm sorry if that's not clear.

[Mandryka]

A very relevant question, which I shall try to write something sensible about to morrow, as bedtime approaches at the moment.

Me too. Good night premont.

[Antoine Marchand]

It all depends upon how much the composer wants to influence the interpretation and how well established the performing traditions in question are. In Bach´s case he relied largely upon the performing traditions. But if he had wanted to give detailled instructions concerning the interpretation, this might have made the scores very complicated and not necessarily less complicated than detailled romantic piano scores.

Well, here I don't think like you. When Bach relies largely upon the performing tradition of his age, he is not taking a personal decision, but following the spirit of his age.

[prémont]

Well, here I don't think like you. When Bach relies largely upon the performing tradition of his age, he is not taking a personal decision, but following the spirit of his age.

Well. actually Bach has written more detailled performing instructions in his scores (particularly concerning articulation) than was the rule at the time. So maybe he took some kind of decision, depending only largely upon the contemporary performance tradition.

[kishnevi]

One other thing-- many of these transcriptions are of pieces not written for harpsichord.  One of Busoni's most famous transcriptions (if not the most famous one period) is the Chaconne from the Second Violin Partita, and he also transcribed various movements from the cantatas, especially the chorales.  Liszt transcribed some of the organ works and cantata pieces for solo piano.

At least one place where every pianist has to make an overt transcription of some sort is the portion of the Goldberg Variations written with a 2 keyboard instrument in mind.

[Opus106]

One other thing-- many of these transcriptions are of pieces not written for harpsichord.  One of Busoni's most famous transcriptions (if not the most famous one period) is the Chaconne from the Second Violin Partita, and he also transcribed various movements from the cantatas, especially the chorales.  Liszt transcribed some of the organ works and cantata pieces for solo piano.

Yes, I had that in mind, and I even had doubts whether Busoni had even transcribed portions of the WTC. I had not posed this question before as the pieces that were on record were mostly chorale preludes and the Chaconne, as you said. But Mandryka's video of the G minor prelude bought this question back to the fore-front. (In hindsight, I feel that I shouldn't have used Busoni's name but instead Siloti's.) Interestingly, Wikipedia calls Bach-Siloti B minor prelude as an "arrangement".

[Mandryka]

I've never knowingly  heard any of this



I suspect very little Bach Busoni is perormed, apart from the organ transcriptions. I have a record of the transcription of the Goldbergs but the performance is not very interesting (Claus Tanski). Hamelin seems to be taking up playing  Busoni transcriptions a bit, so maybe things will change.

Siloti is interesting -- I know him through the organ prelude I posted above and a harpsichord prelude that Gilels played often, and which Weissenberg and Sokolov also performed.

[prémont]

I've never knowingly  heard any of this

Nor have I. Interesting to se, that there are three (!) WTC books in his edition.

When I think of Busoni arrangements of Bach´s harpsichord works, it is about the d-minor concerto BWV 1052 and the Goldberg variations. Never heard the Goldbergs, though.

[prémont]

What sort of dynamic effects were possible on baroque harpsichords, organs and clavichords?

The dynamic level of the clavichord is very low, but the touch allows some variation of this level. I use to say that a clavichord can sound soft, softer and still softer. If you want to hear what is being played, you have to be rather close to the instrument, and I do not think this instrument - even supplied with a pedal section - is suited for performance of Bach´s greater organ works. The clavichord was used as practising instrument and was well suited for this purpose (relatively inexpensive and no problems with the neighbour).

As to the harpsichord and the organ the touch allows no dynamic variation. If you want to change the dynamics you have to change the registration used. On the baroque organ it was impossible to change the registration during the playing, but on instruments with more manuals you could change the sound by changing the manual you were using. On a harpsichord on the other hand it is possible to change the registration during the playing. Of course these changes of registration or manual were not made to accentuate a few individual notes but rather to change the sound of longer passages. Unless where an echo effect were wanted, e.g.  in some fantasies of Sweelinck, or if contrasting tutti-solo effects were wanted (concerto arrangements).

According to baroque aestetics any given musical composition aimed to display a certain affect, and  it follows logically, that the interpretation should be  marked by a certain integrity including a high degree of unity of sound, and  listened to in this light Walcha´s registration changes in the BWV 535 prelude are fuzzy and spoil the unity of the artistic message. He rather expresses a romantic aestetic ideal of the same kind as Siloti´s arrangement displays. But if you like this or not is of course a question of taste. Many listernes still prefer baroque music with this kind of  romantic "seasoning".

[Mandryka]

I've never knowingly  heard any of this

That was a senor moment (my first and only), because there's a famous recording of Busoni himself playing BWV 846

http://www.youtube.com/v/DrF1OQL4ZtQ

Extraordinary in the fugue 

[Mandryka]

The dynamic level of the clavichord is very low, but the touch allows some variation of this level. I use to say that a clavichord can sound soft, softer and still softer. If you want to hear what is being played, you have to be rather close to the instrument, and I do not think this instrument - even supplied with a pedal section - is suited for performance of Bach´s greater organ works. The clavichord was used as practising instrument and was well suited for this purpose (relatively inexpensive and no problems with the neighbour).

As to the harpsichord and the organ the touch allows no dynamic variation. If you want to change the dynamics you have to change the registration used. On the baroque organ it was impossible to change the registration during the playing, but on instruments with more manuals you could change the sound by changing the manual you were using. On a harpsichord on the other hand it is possible to change the registration during the playing. Of course these changes of registration or manual were not made to accentuate a few individual notes but rather to change the sound of longer passages. Unless where an echo effect were wanted, e.g.  in some fantasies of Sweelinck, or if contrasting tutti-solo effects were wanted (concerto arrangements).

According to baroque aestetics any given musical composition aimed to display a certain affect, and  it follows logically, that the interpretation should be  marked by a certain integrity including a high degree of unity of sound, and  listened to in this light Walcha´s registration changes in the BWV 535 prelude are fuzzy and spoil the unity of the artistic message. He rather expresses a romantic aestetic ideal of the same kind as Siloti´s arrangement displays. But if you like this or not is of course a question of taste. Many listernes still prefer baroque music with this kind of  romantic "seasoning".

These ideas:  unity of affect implies integrity (of sound?) implies unity of sound are new to me. I need to think about what it entails. Thanks for the response though.

If we take a highly dynamically and tonally  nuanced performance of a Baroque piece, does that necessarily bring with it incoherence ? Take, for example,Cortot's performance of the first movement cadenza of Brandenburg 5, which starts at 6,22 here:

http://www.youtube.com/v/H6IE5wlfSlM

[prémont]

What sort of dynamic effects were possible on baroque harpsichords, organs and clavichords?

I have tried to find out whether Walcha´s register changes in the prelude BWV 535 were possible on the Cappel organ if it was left in its original state at the time of recording (1952). The sources I can find do not mention anything about a possible modernisation of the registration device. The Cappel organ has got two manuals, and if Walcha (or rather his assistant Ursula) changed registration on manual one while he was playing on manual two and vice versa, I think his registrations for this prelude BWV 535 should be possible from a technical point of view in the baroque age. On the other hand I have also listened to his contemporary BWV 538 recording on the same organ, and here are several instances of register changes of the manual he is playing on while he is playing on it, proving to me, that the organ must have undergone at least some modernisation already at the time of recording.

[PaulSC]

Premont, thank you for a thoughtful and informative post summarizing the question of dynamic control on various Baroque keyboard instruments. I wonder, however, if you shortchange the role of the clavichord. It was used for practice, true, but also for private enjoyment (which, after all, often intermingles with practice). I would be curious to know — although I can't imagine what documentary evidence might exist — how Bach played his own music at the clavichord. Did he make expressive swells? Did he alter the balance between voices in a polyphonic texture?

[SonicMan46]

OK - I like to collect Bach's Keyboard Works w/ both a harpsichord & piano version (or more than one in some cases) but just me!

Concerning the French Suites, I have David Cates on the harpsichord (image below) - pleased and I believe still a strong recommendation from Don (i.e. Bulldog); now I had the Andras Schiff piano recordings (also below), but was not that pleased - SO, what 'piano' versions of these works might be suggested (please do not recommend Gould - I needed 'allergy shots' against him in my LP collecting days - buy again just me and humming, I guess -  ) - thanks for any comments and help - Dave 

 

[PaulSC]

OK - I like to collect Bach's Keyboard Works w/ both a harpsichord & piano version (or more than one in some cases) but just me!

Concerning the French Suites, I have David Cates on the harpsichord (image below) - pleased and I believe still a strong recommendation from Don (i.e. Bulldog); now I had the Andras Schiff piano recordings (also below), but was not that pleased - SO, what 'piano' versions of these works might be suggested (please do not recommend Gould - I needed 'allergy shots' against him in my LP collecting days - buy again just me and humming, I guess -  ) - thanks for any comments and help - Dave 

 

Well, I'm with you on a number of points — I like to have Bach's major keyboard works on both harpsichord and piano, and I wouldn't pick Schiff in the French Suites or Gould in nearly anything. But I've not yet settled on one or more piano recordings of the French Suites. Two on my radar at the moment are Ivo Jansson and Evgeny Koroliov. Anyway, if you make a decision, I'd like to hear about it — maybe it will point me toward something...

[Mandryka]

Concerning the French Suites, I have David Cates on the harpsichord

It depends what you like about the Cates performances. Koroliov is lyrical and expansive like Cates and his piano tone is ravishing, burnished (like Cates's harpsichord.) He uses hesitation much less than Cates and for me this makes the performances ultimately a bit boring. Rubsam on the other hand uses more agogic hesitation than Cates -- these works appear quite rhythmically complicated when he plays them, and you may not like that. I find it annoying. The set I have enjoyed most is from Joanna Macgregor -- but she's not really like Cates! You have to suck these things and see.

My favourite  piano versions aren't in complete sets -- there's a wonderful C minor suite from Richter in Hungary in 1952, and Horszowski played the E major in the late 80s a lot -- most attractively IMO on the Paris recording rather than the BBC one. But this is hard music for me, and to some extent I have been spoilt by Landowska's early recording of the E major suite -- I want to hear them played like that whatever the instrument.

[prémont]

I would be curious to know — although I can't imagine what documentary evidence might exist — how Bach played his own music at the clavichord. Did he make expressive swells? Did he alter the balance between voices in a polyphonic texture?

We shall never know, but if he did, I think he did this only in a very subtle way. Because the playing mechanics of the harpsichord and organ tell us, that dynamic variations in the modern "piano way" wasn´t part of the baroque keyboard style. F.i. metre was indicated by articulation (rhythmic articulation) and not by dynamic stressing of the good beats. This way of playing extended to string- and wind instruments as well, even if these were capable of more detailled dynamic variation than the harpsichord (compare Bach´s ample articulation signs in his chamber music and instrumental parts in his cantatas).

I wonder, however, if you shortchange the role of the clavichord. It was used for practice, true, but also for private enjoyment (which, after all, often intermingles with practice).

In a similar way I wonder if you overestimate the role of the clavichord, which exclusively enjoyed "private" use and was unsuited for recitals and chamber music making.

[prémont]

...   on my radar at the moment are Ivo Jansson  ...

To day I pulled the trigger and ordered the Ivo Janssen 20 CD Bach box, so maybe I can comment about his French suites in foreseeable time.

[PaulSC]

To day I pulled the trigger and ordered the Ivo Janssen 20 CD Bach box, so maybe I can comment about his French suites in foreseeable time.

I would certainly value any comments you have to offer at that time. Cheers!

[Antoine Marchand]

To day I pulled the trigger and ordered the Ivo Janssen 20 CD Bach box, so maybe I can comment about his French suites in foreseeable time.

But you don't like Bach on piano!!!