GMG Classical Music Forum

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41f7jWjqV0L._AC_US160_.jpg) (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51e+Hp+D2rL._AC_US160_.jpg) (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/515lwECTi+L._AC_US160_.jpg)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/210wBPTo3AL._AC_US160_.jpg) (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61tOIYxo57L._AC_US160_.jpg) (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51ZHKcVLU0L._AC_US160_.jpg)

? ? ? ? ? ?

I don't have a complete set by any one conductor but a generous helping from many. So I chose "other(s)":

Herreweghe
Coin
Gardiner
Rilling
Suzuki

Gardiner

I have Gardiner, Rilling, and Leonhardt-Harnoncourt.

Of the three, I much prefer Gardiner.  Of what I've heard from the others, nothing has made me feel they are better than his, although they may be equal to him.

Rilling. I´ve had the Gardiner 23CD set & own most of the Karl Richter recordings, plus owned a good deal of the Leusink ones but got rid of them.

It isn't close. Suzuki.

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 05, 2016, 07:58:30 AM
I don't have a complete set by any one conductor but a generous helping from many. So I chose "other(s)":

Herreweghe
Coin
Gardiner
Rilling
Suzuki

I'm not that fond of the old-fashioned Bach, so I prefer HIP/PI or HIP-influenced performances.
And I do like Herreweghe and Coin, too.
And Milnes, Kuijken, Junghänel, Pierlot, et cetera and et al.

But from the integrals (so far), I still think that Leonhardt and Harnoncourt offer the most expressive, thoughful and credible set.
Some (or even many) may dislike the boy sopranos, well, I don't. Most of them doing are doing a very good job IMO.
Paul Esswood was a great countertenor, René Jacobs had a very flexible voice in his younger years, Kurt Equiluz and Max van Egmond were both very impressive Bach singers, and Ruud van der Meer is mostly very reliable, too.
The quality of interpretation stays on level, the quality of playing improves. The same goes for Koopman, whilst Suzuki, for instance, is getting more slick and smooth during his journey. Gardiner's set is live, but the overall quality is truly impressive. Of course there are ups and downs, but I like these 'later' recordings better than many of his earlier studio cantata work for Deutsche Grammophon.
I don't own the integral Rilling, but I do have about 20 discs, and I don't think I'm ever going to buy the entire set. I do admire some great voices from the past, but in most cases Rilling's approach just doesn't seem to work for me anymore.

All of this of course being very personal and subjective, and I do realize that many Bach lovers and listeners will just shake their heads in disbelief, but, there you have it: I like the Leonhardt/Harnoncourt box best!

I have never wanted to have more than one of the huge block sets of the entire cantatas, but these two are the best ones, imo.  One for absolute completeness at a budget price and the other for quality:

For cost = the Brilliant set by Pieter Jan Leusink

Not 100% "Complete" but all the cantatas for the Liturgical Year, andhaving the best sound and best interpretation (period instruments and OVPP) = Kuijken

The other big sets are on Spotify anyway.

I have quite a few individual recordings by Gardiner, Suzuki, Rilling and Herreweghe. I listen to Gardiner the most and Rilling the least, so picked "other".

No one seems familiar with the Koopman box?
Generally in my findings, his Bach is very good.

Quote from: James on November 06, 2016, 06:00:04 AM
No one seems familiar with the Koopman box?
Generally in my findings, his Bach is very good.

And very expensive, whenever I have gone looking for it.

I must admit that my view of Leonhardt/Harnoncourt is influenced by my general aversion to boy sopranos.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 06, 2016, 10:11:40 AM

I must admit that my view of Leonhardt/Harnoncourt is influenced by my general aversion to boy sopranos.

I must admit to having a sometimes, but not always, similar aversion. However, when one can get beyond this the Leonhardt/Harnoncourt versions are very good. I always think that Gardiner [my own personal favourite] owes a fair bit to their legacy. Gardiner, however, has the advantage of of a truly wonderful choir as well as the taut, sometimes electric live performances.

Quote from: James on November 06, 2016, 06:00:04 AM
No one seems familiar with the Koopman box?
Generally in my findings, his Bach is very good.

I am 'familiar' with him:
The quality of interpretation stays on level, the quality of playing improves. The same goes for Koopman, whilst Suzuki, for instance, is getting more slick and smooth during his journey.

Overall, Koopman is a solid choice, and during the years he's gained ground on Suzuki in my book, but the remarkable thing is: whilst he can be very playful and virtuoso in Bach's instrumental works (sometimes even too much), he's much more restrained and severe in Bach's religious vocal works (sometimes even too much). And yes, his set is expensive. But a far far far (and far) better choice still than the inexpensive Leusink, whose messy set I just don't like.
My tuppence worth of course.

Quote from: Turner on November 05, 2016, 09:47:41 AM
Rilling. I´ve had the Gardiner 23CD set & own most of the Karl Richter recordings, plus owned a good deal of the Leusink ones but got rid of them.

It's interesting. I learned to love these (and other Bach works) because of Karl Richter's performances, and yet, for all the years I've been on GMG, I have never once (that I can remember) seen a thread on Karl ("the other Richter" we could call him!). I have a few of the large LP sets of his, as well as some of the CDs and the B minor Mass. Although HIP purists will look down their noses at his performances, and the size of the forces employed, I still find them to be very fine musically, and very much congruent with the spirit of the music. Many, but not all HIP performances cut the melodic lines all to hell and sound quite anemic by comparison--historically defensible maybe, but not what I enjoy listening to. Some of the soloists, incl. Dietrich Fischer Dieskau, Edith Mathis really outclass many if not most other soloists I have heard in these works. Koopman is quite good as well, IMO.

In any case, I am curious to know how many here have listened to all 212 (?) cantatas.
As much as I would like to get a complete set, I know that I would likely never listen to even half of them--not enough time sadly.

Quote from: Marc on November 06, 2016, 05:19:34 AM
I'm not that fond of the old-fashioned Bach, so I prefer HIP/PI or HIP-influenced performances.
And I do like Herreweghe and Coin, too.
And Milnes, Kuijken, Junghänel, Pierlot, et cetera and et al.

But from the integrals (so far), I still think that Leonhardt and Harnoncourt offer the most expressive, thoughful and credible set.
Some (or even many) may dislike the boy sopranos, well, I don't. Most of them doing are doing a very good job IMO.
Paul Esswood was a great countertenor, René Jacobs had a very flexible voice in his younger years, Kurt Equiluz and Max van Egmond were both very impressive Bach singers, and Ruud van der Meer is mostly very reliable, too.
The quality of interpretation stays on level, the quality of playing improves. The same goes for Koopman, whilst Suzuki, for instance, is getting more slick and smooth during his journey. Gardiner's set is live, but the overall quality is truly impressive. Of course there are ups and downs, but I like these 'later' recordings better than many of his earlier studio cantata work for Deutsche Grammophon.
I don't own the integral Rilling, but I do have about 20 discs, and I don't think I'm ever going to buy the entire set. I do admire some great voices from the past, but in most cases Rilling's approach just doesn't seem to work for me anymore.

All of this of course being very personal and subjective, and I do realize that many Bach lovers and listeners will just shake their heads in disbelief, but, there you have it: I like the Leonhardt/Harnoncourt box best!

Sensible. :) I don't agree with all of it but hard to argue.

But I will say, if "old-fashioned" means I don't have to listen to OVPP or boy sopranos (or God forbid, both :blank:) then more power to "old-fashioned"! ;D

Some of Rilling's singers may indeed seem "overly operatic" but I'm not sure I'd put him in the "old-fashioned" category. For me that's Klemperer, Furtwängler, maybe even Karl Richter, simply because of their tendency to slowness (and "bigness", I suppose). Rilling simply isn't that slow or big.

But one thing to note about "slowness and bigness": it shouldn't be confused with a wholesale heist of the sincerity, or feeling, in the music, which is fundamentally what the music is all about.

To go out on a limb, it's my view that the pursuit for "correctness" has jaded many a listener to what the recordings of the past have to offer. That's unfortunate.

And to go even further out on the limb, I'm not convinced in the least that OVPP is a workable alternative, assuming of course that OVPP was intended as a corrective to "wrong-headed" (old-fashioned) performances. To me OVPP creates a serious imbalance in the cantata - a gaping hole, really - since the chorus is essentially excised. I'd rather have something in the way of massed voices there than practically nothing. To me the OVPP pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction from "old-fashioned".   

Of course, I can't - and won't - go so far as to say OVPP excises feeling, or sincerity, from the cantata, but to me it surely dampens it. To my ears anyway.... :)   

Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on November 06, 2016, 08:32:52 PM
It's interesting. I learned to love these (and other Bach works) because of Karl Richter's performances, and yet, for all the years I've been on GMG, I have never once (that I can remember) seen a thread on Karl ("the other Richter" we could call him!). I have a few of the large LP sets of his, as well as some of the CDs and the B minor Mass. Although HIP purists will look down their noses at his performances, and the size of the forces employed, I still find them to be very fine musically, and very much congruent with the spirit of the music. Many, but not all HIP performances cut the melodic lines all to hell and sound quite anemic by comparison--historically defensible maybe, but not what I enjoy listening to. Some of the soloists, incl. Dietrich Fischer Dieskau, Edith Mathis really outclass many if not most other soloists I have heard in these works. Koopman is quite good as well, IMO.

Ah, see my post above!

Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on November 06, 2016, 08:39:57 PM
Sensible. :) I don't agree with all of it but hard to argue.

But I will say, if "old-fashioned" means I don't have to listen to OVPP or boy sopranos (or God forbid, both :blank:) then more power to "old-fashioned"! ;D

Some of Rilling's singers may indeed seem "overly operatic" but I'm not sure I'd put him in the "old-fashioned" category. For me that's Klemperer, Furtwängler, maybe even Karl Richter, simply because of their tendency to slowness (and "bigness", I suppose). Rilling simply isn't that slow or big.

But one thing to note about "slowness and bigness": it shouldn't be confused with a wholesale heist of the sincerity, or feeling, in the music, which is fundamentally what the music is all about.

To go out on a limb, it's my view that the pursuit for "correctness" has jaded many a listener to what the recordings of the past have to offer. That's unfortunate.

And to go even further out on the limb, I'm not convinced in the least that OVPP is a workable alternative, assuming of course that OVPP was intended as a corrective to "wrong-headed" (old-fashioned) performances. To me OVPP creates a serious imbalance in the cantata - a gaping hole, really - since the chorus is essentially excised. I'd rather have something in the way of massed voices there than practically nothing. To me the OVPP pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction from "old-fashioned".   

Of course, I can't - and won't - go so far as to say OVPP excises feeling, or sincerity, from the cantata, but to me it surely dampens it. To my ears anyway.... :)   

I agree that Rilling is a mix, I like some of his recordings and I certainly like Augér, Watkinson (despite vibrato), Baldin, Equiluz, Heldwein and other voices... but I do prefer the HIP-approach of many others, mainly because of the way they express the things they are singing (about). A lot of this has been discussed in the 'casual' Bach cantatas thread (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=117.0) and I do not have the time to repeat myself entirely. I also have my reservations against the historical 'truth' of the OVPP-theory, but as long as the voices blend, I can perfectly enjoy them.

All in all, I was mainly reacting to James's original question... without really wanting to start another debate about the 'what's needed, required or even 'justified' in performances of Bach's cantatas in a historical/musicological/desirable sense', even though it's a legitimate and interesting discussion.

On a personal note though: from childhood on I liked the HIP-recordings most, so my preferences aren't really musicologically based. But, by reading some stuff about Bach and his time, I came to understand better why I apparantly like that 'historical' approach. I also think it's helpful to listen to older music than Bach, because it gives the listener a chance to listen to Bach, Händel, Haydn or Mozart with less '19th-century ears'. And to me, many 'old-fashioned' Bach recordings are still suffering from that 19th-century approach. As if things only got better after him, and his music needed to be enlarged, slowed down or whatever. To me, Bach isn't the beginning of classical music, but he's a Class of his Own. And to me, his work sounds great already, if not better, with the amount of forces he used himself. His work also sounds great, if not better, without the 19th-century dramatic approach in a romantic way, with more legato's, diminuendo's and crescendo's, ritardando's and ritenuto's that weren't customary in baroque music.

That's just my opinion, but of course it shouldn't be a law for each and every musician or music lover. Everybody should enjoy their 'own' Bach. I'm not part of the HIP-army that condemns each and every non-HIP performance. Many music lovers like Bach in a different way, and his music is so good that, in the end, it survives each and every approach. Anyone who likes Richter, Klemperer, Karajan... please do. But it's just not my cup of Bach.

Back to the orginal question: I prefer Leonhardt/Harnoncourt, because I like their music as speech approach, which makes their cantatas sound like musical sermons.
Koopman, Suzuki and Gardiner join 2nd place, I have my reservations against Rilling's approach and I don't seem to be able to enjoy Leusink's set (despite exceptions).

I do not know the Richter well enough (I have two of the older multi-disc Archiv-volumes grouped for Christmas, Easter etc.) but strange as it sounds his approach could historically be considered as a kind of "proto-HIP" because it uses some historical information although the choir and the "chamber" orchestra are still big sounding ensembles and overall it sounds very different from what we think of as historically informed. (It is not complete but similar to Kuijken in covering most/all of the liturgical year.) Certainly some of the solo singers are very good.

I remember that even when I started listening to classical music in the mid/late 1980s that Richter or Rilling (or e.g. Marriner for orchestral works) was still the "standard" approach and despite more than 20 years of HIP efforts many listeners considered Harnoncourt etc. rather exotic (or even repulsive).

Interesting. In terms of proto-HIP, I have a Marcel DuPre disc of Bach's organ music, and the liner notes argue (in rather contorted fashion) that his style was very much historically informed. To my ears, much of it is extremely overblown and overly romantic--much more so than Richter, Münchinger, and members of that generation.

I am not as informed here as others but  compared to "full blown romanticism" of Mengelberg or Furtwängler Richter uses reduced forces, harpsichord and some other features that would have been considered "informed" in the 1960s. There was also the central German tradition using boys choirs, e.g. Ramin.

As for organ playing, there were several "waves" in the 20th century, starting with Albert Schweitzer or even earlier, all claiming to recover some features of Bach's style that had not been properly heeded in the late romantic way of playing.

Quote from: Marc on November 06, 2016, 08:11:56 PMhe's much more restrained and severe in Bach's religious vocal works (sometimes even too much).

Just a little sidebar to this .. his Christmas Oratorio recording is great.

Quote from: James on November 07, 2016, 02:00:47 AM
Just a little sidebar to this .. his Christmas Oratorio recording is great.

I agree.
It's one of my favourites.
And his B-minor Mass is very good, too, even though it's rarely mentioned.

Well, I might be cheating a little bit in that I only have the Suzuki.

But about 60% of the way through I'm very, very happy with my choice. On a certain Bach cantata discussion board, I've seen "complaints" that Suzuki is often faster than more traditional versions... in which case I think that's exactly what I like about it. There is such life and animation in it. This kind of Bach, with figurations repeated over and over, can easily become very stodgy. Suzuki isn't stodgy, and having not been influenced by other versions I've never felt that any of it is rushed.

I did do a comparison once on a particular movement where Suzuki completely delighted me, and no other version that I found came close. But of course, given that it was a movement I particularly liked it probably wasn't a very fair choice.

I have heard/owned two disc with Suzuki. The first must have been one of the first (incl. BWV 4) and it was sold cheaply as some kind of teaser, probably with a catalogue. I found it terrible: weak, unexpressive, no contrasts, poor articulation of German etc.
The other one is a later recording with BWV 140, 112 and 29 and it does not suffer from any of the problems the older recording had. It is overall very good. However, for this later one I can understand how some listeners describe his approach as "slick". It is very far from the (sometimes rough) "Klangrede" of Harnoncourt/Leonhardt, brilliant but "neutral".

Quote from: ørfeo on November 07, 2016, 02:34:22 AM
Well, I might be cheating a little bit in that I only have the Suzuki.

But about 60% of the way through I'm very, very happy with my choice. On a certain Bach cantata discussion board, I've seen "complaints" that Suzuki is often faster than more traditional versions... in which case I think that's exactly what I like about it. There is such life and animation in it. This kind of Bach, with figurations repeated over and over, can easily become very stodgy. Suzuki isn't stodgy, and having not been influenced by other versions I've never felt that any of it is rushed.

I did do a comparison once on a particular movement where Suzuki completely delighted me, and no other version that I found came close. But of course, given that it was a movement I particularly liked it probably wasn't a very fair choice.

You made a very wise choice indeed! I think the fleetness is a virtue.  And one thing that does come through on these too is sincerity. Suzuki is a believing Lutheran.

Quote from: Marc on November 07, 2016, 02:08:34 AM
I agree.
It's one of my favourites.
And his B-minor Mass is very good, too, even though it's rarely mentioned.

I haven't heard that one .. I saw a video of his Matthew Passion a few years back, it was also good.

I prefer HIP performances of Bach's orchestral and religious work .. the nuance, no vibrato, paler tones etc.

Quote from: James on November 08, 2016, 02:55:45 AM
I haven't heard that one .. I saw a video of his Matthew Passion a few years back, it was also good.

I prefer HIP performances of Bach's orchestral and religious work .. the nuance, no vibrato, paler tones etc.

The video is probably the performance in Amersfoort, NL, Sint Joriskerk, 2005.
It's available both on CD and DVD, and I prefer it to Koopman's studio recording, because there's more involvement.

His studio Johannes-Passion is also very good, with plenty of drama and nuances. Like the Mass, this recording, compared to other Koopman/Bach stuff, remained rather unnoticed, too.

Anyway: I think that, if you want to buy a complete cantatas box, you're gonna find much to enjoy in either Koopman, Suzuki or Gardiner. Maybe, for the nuance, Koopman and Suzuki will turn out to be the best choices. Suzuki is less expensive, yet with Koopman you seem to know what you're gonna get: reliable HIP-quality throughout.

Quote from: Marc on November 08, 2016, 03:05:22 AMSuzuki or Gardiner.

Gardiner often leaves me cold. I haven't heard a thing from Suzuki.

Quote from: James on November 08, 2016, 02:48:00 PM
Gardiner often leaves me cold. I haven't heard a thing from Suzuki.

The only thing I have heard from Suzuki are the Brandenburgs. They left me cold, even for period instrument they were rather dull.

Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on November 08, 2016, 02:52:12 PM
The only thing I have heard from Suzuki are the Brandenburgs. They left me cold, even for period instrument they were rather dull.

Hmmmm  .. but I'll have to at least listen to some of his Cantata recordings soon.

Quote from: James on November 08, 2016, 02:48:00 PM
Gardiner often leaves me cold. I haven't heard a thing from Suzuki.

I am surprised. You really should give Suzuki a listen.

From my (limited) experience, Suzuki is even "colder" than Gardiner (or rather "squeaky clean"). The later live Gardiner is better (more involved) than the bunch of DG recordings. But there is no shortcut for trying them out. At least the later Suzuki seem very good in their way (i.e. if one does not expect "Klangrede" or strong emotions).

Quote from: Jo498 on November 08, 2016, 10:39:26 PM
[...] The later live Gardiner is better (more involved) than the bunch of DG recordings. [...]

That's my experience, too.

Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on November 08, 2016, 02:52:12 PM
The only thing I have heard from Suzuki are the Brandenburgs. They left me cold, even for period instrument they were rather dull.

I am not a great advocate for the Suzuki Bach Cantatas but to be fair his Cantatas are much better performances than his Brandenburgs.

Own Gardiner, Suzuki, Harnoncourt/Leonhardt.  Gardiner is my favorite.

Quote from: James on November 08, 2016, 02:48:00 PM
Gardiner often leaves me cold. I haven't heard a thing from Suzuki.

Have to retract this ... I'm in the process of re-visiting the big Archiv/DG Gardiner set I have, focusing on the Cantata discs (just 35 Cantatas in all)..
I'm enjoying the performances and recording quality thus far.

Quote from: aligreto on November 09, 2016, 07:41:50 AMI am not a great advocate for the Suzuki Bach Cantatas but to be fair his Cantatas are much better performances than his Brandenburgs.

My personal favorites for the Brandenburgs have been in place for a long time. My top HIP favorite for the Brandenburg Concertos is Archiv/Pinnock.

However, Ton Koopman's Brandenburg recordings on Erato are great too, ditto his Orchestral Suites disc!

Another huge, huge, left-field favorite is Wendy Carlos's Switched-On Brandenburgs, a fresh & masterful treatment.

Best Bach Complete Cantatas Box?

Difficult question. Each set has its pro's et contra's. I own all sets except Koopman, which I find to be too expensive. Probably I have not yet heard more than one third of the lot. I think I prefer Harnoncourt / Leonhardt. I consider Suzuki to be an acquired taste, both as to cantatas and instrumental music, but in my case it has been worth the effort.

Quote from: (: premont :) on November 13, 2016, 04:48:06 AM
Best Bach Complete Cantatas Box?

Difficult question. Each set has its pro's et contra's. I own all sets except Koopman, which I find to be too expensive. Probably I have not yet heard more than one third of the lot. I think I prefer Harnoncourt / Leonhardt. I consider Suzuki to be an acquired taste, both as to cantatas and instrumental music, but in my case it has been worth the effort.

Leusink not getting much praise is understandable, I think. 

Quote from: James on November 13, 2016, 03:58:42 AM
Have to retract this ... I'm in the process of re-visiting the big Archiv/DG Gardiner set I have, focusing on the Cantata discs (just 35 Cantatas in all)..
I'm enjoying the performances and recording quality thus far.

I started off with the original  Archiv CDs but that project was abandoned as you know. However I did like them and I have always kept them. As soon as the SDG set was issued I started to collect the individual sets. I found them to be a step above the studio Archiv editions due to the live performance aspect, which is palpable. If you enjoy the performances and recording quality of the Archiv/DG Gardiner set you will also definitely enjoy the [IMO enhanced] SDG recordings.

Quote from: Turner on November 13, 2016, 05:21:04 AM
Leusink not getting much praise is understandable, I think.

Taste is a very objective thing obviously. I did buy a number of the Leusink recordings but I sold them on almost as soon as I heard them.

Quote from: Turner on November 13, 2016, 05:21:04 AM
Leusink not getting much praise is understandable, I think.

I'll praise it! Vigorous and lively. Some discs are excellent, some ragged. I'll take it over Rilling. Not in the same league as the best HIP sets, but nothing to sneeze at either.

A couple of years late to this discussion but I find myself listening more often to Bach's cantatas and I wanted to thank you all for voting. I ended up spending lot of money based on your discussion, all of it well spent. I stayed lurking for so long as it has taken me a long time to dare express an opinion on works I treasure so highly and I still have not listened to all the recordings in any one set.

My go-to cantata recordings are Philippe Herreweghe and I wish he had a complete set, but my vote has gone to Suzuki who is normally a safe choice. However, it really depends on if I want my taste-challenged, in which case Harnoncourt & Leonhardt, I also greatly enjoy Gardiner who at times excels beyond even Herreweghe. I also dip into Kuijken (an honorable mention). However, Rilling, Leusink, and Koopman all have their place and I can also really enjoy them - or occasionally quickly switch to Suzuki or Gardiner when, to my ears, they fall below par.

I wonder if any of you have changed in taste since you voted or if anyone else has anything to add?

Quote from: Marc on November 06, 2016, 05:19:34 AM
I'm not that fond of the old-fashioned Bach, so I prefer HIP/PI or HIP-influenced performances.
And I do like Herreweghe and Coin, too.
And Milnes, Kuijken, Junghänel, Pierlot, et cetera and et al.

But from the integrals (so far), I still think that Leonhardt and Harnoncourt offer the most expressive, thoughful and credible set.
Some (or even many) may dislike the boy sopranos, well, I don't. Most of them doing are doing a very good job IMO.
Paul Esswood was a great countertenor, René Jacobs had a very flexible voice in his younger years, Kurt Equiluz and Max van Egmond were both very impressive Bach singers, and Ruud van der Meer is mostly very reliable, too.
The quality of interpretation stays on level, the quality of playing improves. The same goes for Koopman, whilst Suzuki, for instance, is getting more slick and smooth during his journey. Gardiner's set is live, but the overall quality is truly impressive. Of course there are ups and downs, but I like these 'later' recordings better than many of his earlier studio cantata work for Deutsche Grammophon.
I don't own the integral Rilling, but I do have about 20 discs, and I don't think I'm ever going to buy the entire set. I do admire some great voices from the past, but in most cases Rilling's approach just doesn't seem to work for me anymore.

All of this of course being very personal and subjective, and I do realize that many Bach lovers and listeners will just shake their heads in disbelief, but, there you have it: I like the Leonhardt/Harnoncourt box best!

Welll I agree  with  most  of what  you  say. I'm listening  to the Koopman  set  but I can"t  help it that the Harnoncourt/Leonhardt  set still  holds their ground  and   as  the most expressive.

Musical  sermons
I like that, it is a good and sensitive observation

I still like Suzuki best. I prefer H&L to Gardiner most of the time.

It's a bit scary we can find so many people who have heard so many complete recordings! I have heard 4 cycles complete and large chunks of 3 more. Yikes.

It took me far too long to start listening to Bach's Cantatas but I then realized what pearls they are, thus I started the collecting. It always surprises me when I come across people who have not listened to more than the top handful, I think I am less surprised to discover those that have listened to them have more than one set.

Quote from: Gorio1968 on June 06, 2018, 11:44:46 PM
It took me far too long to start listening to Bach's Cantatas but I then realized what pearls they are, thus I started the collecting. It always surprises me when I come across people who have not listened to more than the top handful, I think I am less surprised to discover those that have listened to them have more than one set.

You can't  love  what  you  don't  know. The  cantatas  are a source  of everlasting  joy.

For me this would be Suzuki, without doubt. Not one CD in this complete survey disappointed me. Apart from the voice of Robin Blaze, which can be annoying, its perfect in every other sense.

My taste hasn't changed because I still haven't even finished the Suzuki recordings - no plans to start listening to anyone else in the meantime. About 6 years and 2 months so far...