Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
Dear Bat: No, but as it is a live recording it has to be quite similar to equal. I would like to have this record. Never listened to it. Any link?
The Keyboard Music of Bach
- Thread starter Rodrigo de Sá
- Start date
Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
I don't have the records here, so let me just comment on two of the sets mentioned: the complete edition of Froberger by Asperen and the one record(I think) by Blandine Verlet.
Asperen's are very interesting records; the playing varies from pedantic to excellent, but the harpsichords he plays alone are worth buying the sets (there you will find Gilbert's famous Couchet [if ever it was a Couchet at all] and the plain marvelous 1640 Rückers, perhaps my prefered harpsichord (together with the big Zell, which does not belong here). But please be aware that what I consider pedantic (the exageration of every twist and turn) may be thought as expressive. My doubts are chiefly aimed at volume 1, *I think* - I'm writing from memory. You will also find that he plays a lot with what is called 'semitonia', that is, the choice of sharpening or flatenning of natural notes. This leads to some surprises; as he often brings the pieces closer to tonality, I do not like them very much, but that really is a question of taste, and it was permissible at the time.
Blandine Verlet's is quite different. A very intense reading, in a marvelous harpsichord, which has a little bit of dynamics (most harpsichords do, but in this case it is quite marked). It is the famous Rückers of Colmar. I personally like it because of all the passion and 'going beyond measure' which I think is a trait of Froberger's harpsichord music (his organ music sounds almost flat, in comparison, and is far easier to play).
I don't know any interpretation of Buxtehude's harpsichord music. I only know a few dances which are quite boring. There is a magnificent g minor prelude and there could be more. The Hansen edition (the one I have) also has some choral preludes that can be played manualiter, but I think they are really organ pieces. That said, if you have big hands, you can play a lot of organ stuff on the harpsichord. I don't know if that is what Mortensen does. If someone out there knows, please be so kind as to tell me. But Buxtehude was, I really think, an organ composer. One of the very few that really understood all the power and tragedy inherent to the instrument. As a matter of fact, I consider Buxtehude *the* best organ composer ever, even above Bach. Of course you have to play it on a big Arp Schnitger (that was what he specifically asked for but never got) - that *is* the voice of hell.
Forgive this meandering - I really love Buxtehude to passion, and I played several of his praeludia and chorals. Meanwhile, should you want to give a listening to the organ music of Buxtehude, try Harald Vogel (MD+G) volumes 4 and 7: magnificent, unbelievable, really. As a bonus, you will understand a lot about the organ: the registrations are given in detail.
Asperen's are very interesting records; the playing varies from pedantic to excellent, but the harpsichords he plays alone are worth buying the sets (there you will find Gilbert's famous Couchet [if ever it was a Couchet at all] and the plain marvelous 1640 Rückers, perhaps my prefered harpsichord (together with the big Zell, which does not belong here). But please be aware that what I consider pedantic (the exageration of every twist and turn) may be thought as expressive. My doubts are chiefly aimed at volume 1, *I think* - I'm writing from memory. You will also find that he plays a lot with what is called 'semitonia', that is, the choice of sharpening or flatenning of natural notes. This leads to some surprises; as he often brings the pieces closer to tonality, I do not like them very much, but that really is a question of taste, and it was permissible at the time.
Blandine Verlet's is quite different. A very intense reading, in a marvelous harpsichord, which has a little bit of dynamics (most harpsichords do, but in this case it is quite marked). It is the famous Rückers of Colmar. I personally like it because of all the passion and 'going beyond measure' which I think is a trait of Froberger's harpsichord music (his organ music sounds almost flat, in comparison, and is far easier to play).
I don't know any interpretation of Buxtehude's harpsichord music. I only know a few dances which are quite boring. There is a magnificent g minor prelude and there could be more. The Hansen edition (the one I have) also has some choral preludes that can be played manualiter, but I think they are really organ pieces. That said, if you have big hands, you can play a lot of organ stuff on the harpsichord. I don't know if that is what Mortensen does. If someone out there knows, please be so kind as to tell me. But Buxtehude was, I really think, an organ composer. One of the very few that really understood all the power and tragedy inherent to the instrument. As a matter of fact, I consider Buxtehude *the* best organ composer ever, even above Bach. Of course you have to play it on a big Arp Schnitger (that was what he specifically asked for but never got) - that *is* the voice of hell.
Forgive this meandering - I really love Buxtehude to passion, and I played several of his praeludia and chorals. Meanwhile, should you want to give a listening to the organ music of Buxtehude, try Harald Vogel (MD+G) volumes 4 and 7: magnificent, unbelievable, really. As a bonus, you will understand a lot about the organ: the registrations are given in detail.
Last edited by a moderator:
RdS, is the Blandine Verlet recording of Froberger a recent one or one which she recorded in 1989? How does Leonhardt's 1990 recording of Froberger (and Weckmann) compare? What about Siegbert Rampe as an interpreter of Froberger? And is Marie Alan Claire's complete recordings of Buxtehude's organ works worth purchasing? Please forgive the incessant questions but I am quite curious about these recordings.
I had purchased Mitzi Meyerson's Buxtehude and was quite impressed with her performance. And if anyone can recommend a good Scarlatti recital, I would be most obliged.
BTW, the discussion above was very interesting and edifying, highlighting differing yet undeniably valid opinions on interpretations of Bach's music. I will be re-listening to the works discussed above in lieu of the comments.
Regards.
I had purchased Mitzi Meyerson's Buxtehude and was quite impressed with her performance. And if anyone can recommend a good Scarlatti recital, I would be most obliged.
BTW, the discussion above was very interesting and edifying, highlighting differing yet undeniably valid opinions on interpretations of Bach's music. I will be re-listening to the works discussed above in lieu of the comments.
Regards.
bat
Connoisseur Par Excelence
Dear experts, you can find a short review of it at
http://www.scena.org/lsm/sm3-4/sm3-4CDreviews.htm
The 4-cd box is available at least at fnac.com and alapage.com.
Mine arrived yesterday. Quick listening has revealed me an irresistible drive and flow in this recording. Sound quality is fine and much better than I expected. Nice instrument too. I read somewhere that there were some tuning problems with this recording, but it is not so. The tuning(s) is (are?) just very far from equal temperament (that's why I asked you). Compared to Parmentier it is extremely different, and much more fun. Compared to Jarrett... well, this is better. It is not a live recording.
http://www.scena.org/lsm/sm3-4/sm3-4CDreviews.htm
The 4-cd box is available at least at fnac.com and alapage.com.
Mine arrived yesterday. Quick listening has revealed me an irresistible drive and flow in this recording. Sound quality is fine and much better than I expected. Nice instrument too. I read somewhere that there were some tuning problems with this recording, but it is not so. The tuning(s) is (are?) just very far from equal temperament (that's why I asked you). Compared to Parmentier it is extremely different, and much more fun. Compared to Jarrett... well, this is better. It is not a live recording.
RdS said:
Dear RdS
Well spoken. I just wonder why we differ just in this case.
As to Phil.Em. Bach: I think he is too unreliable. And the fact that he is the only source is no help.
The Danish historian Saxo Grammaticus (ca 1200 a.d. wrote about the merits of the danes "Gesta Danorum",
and he is the only source except for the archaeological evidence. His work is filled with wishfull thinking and cock-and-bull story, making GT look like reading for Sunday school children. Would you regard him as reliable, just because he is the only source?
As to Leonhardt I never said he is more authentic than others. I said that his phrasing is more physiological than some others. And I really mean physiological. A singer or a woodwindplayer will understand.
As a rule I never use the word "authentic". If I in my contributions to this forum ever used that word, I would ask someone to correct me. I consider, like you (and for the same reasons), the concept "authenthic" as entirely absurd. I ask for HIP performance, and the use of period instruments is an important consideration here. Surely the construction of the period instruments can tell a lot about playing tecnique, your example with the organ pedals shows what I think of: They had to use the toes almost exclusively, and this tells about the articulation, which had to be detached. But we are certainly free to use what we want, provided we achieve the same effect. Why should Leonhardt use "autentic" fingering, when he can play in the same way using modern fingering. And of course he uses modern fingering. I remember a danish organist Joergen-Ernst Hansen playing Buxtehude with the heels on the black keys, and the musical result was most convincing, so why worry about that.
The question of Bach implying 16F harpsichord sound is very interesting, compare some earlier post from me.
The problem of balance in the violin-harpsichord sonatas and the harpsichord concertos might be solved in this way.
But this has been tabu among HIP-people so far. I have never heard about a true period harpsichord with 16F register. At any rate I find it improbable, that Bach was able to misjudge the balance of en ensemble in the way we think, when we listen to his harpsichordconcertos played only with plain 8F sound.
Maybee I am naive, but I think, that the more we knew about Bachs own way of playing his own music, the more we were able to appreciate his genius. He should have known best, what he intended, and he surely was able to realize his ideas, given his reported unsurpassable virtuosity. But unfortunately we shall never know.
But to say that you probably wouldn't like his way of playing is to misjudge his genius. I know that some conductors can conduct Stravinsky better than Stravinsky did, but he was tecnically a mediocre conductor. Bach was the greatest musician of his time.
Regards,
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear RdS and Sn66
Mortensen has recorded all in all four CDs with harpsichord music of Buxtehude. Thee for Da Capo and one for Kontrapunkt.
The CDs contain suites, liedvariations and some of the manualiter organworks ( Canzonas, C-dur fuge, Præludium g-minor, Toccata G-major). I have heard Alessandrinis, Meyersons and a few more CDs with Buxtehude harpsichordmusic, but Mortensen is far superior first and foremost as to the realisation of the "Fantastic" style. His imagination is rich and unsurpassed.
As to Vogels Buxtehude I agree with you entirely, that his is almost a reference recording, not the least for organological reasons.
Marie-Claire Alain recorded the complete Buxtehude on Danish organs ca. 1970 for Erato, released on LP in Denmark by EMI.
A very playful, lively and musical interpretation. I have never seen this released for CD, but another one may know better.
Some twenty years later she recorded ca. 40% of Buxtehudes works on the Schnitger.-organ in Sct. Martini, Groningen for Erato-2CDs, and I own this, but I haven't listened to it sufficiently to judge it. Maybe I shall manage to hear it in the week-end.
Regards,
Mortensen has recorded all in all four CDs with harpsichord music of Buxtehude. Thee for Da Capo and one for Kontrapunkt.
The CDs contain suites, liedvariations and some of the manualiter organworks ( Canzonas, C-dur fuge, Præludium g-minor, Toccata G-major). I have heard Alessandrinis, Meyersons and a few more CDs with Buxtehude harpsichordmusic, but Mortensen is far superior first and foremost as to the realisation of the "Fantastic" style. His imagination is rich and unsurpassed.
As to Vogels Buxtehude I agree with you entirely, that his is almost a reference recording, not the least for organological reasons.
Marie-Claire Alain recorded the complete Buxtehude on Danish organs ca. 1970 for Erato, released on LP in Denmark by EMI.
A very playful, lively and musical interpretation. I have never seen this released for CD, but another one may know better.
Some twenty years later she recorded ca. 40% of Buxtehudes works on the Schnitger.-organ in Sct. Martini, Groningen for Erato-2CDs, and I own this, but I haven't listened to it sufficiently to judge it. Maybe I shall manage to hear it in the week-end.
Regards,
Last edited by a moderator:
bat
Connoisseur Par Excelence
I already returned van Asperen to library. Btw, Ross plays wtc1 in less than 102 minutes. Parmentier plays it in 126 mins 29 seconds. Ross is 20 % faster! His tuning is in my opinion mean tone.
bat
Connoisseur Par Excelence
Enzio Forsblom recorded a blinding (IMO) Buxtehude record in 1995 on the Raphaelis organ in Roskilde Cathedral, Denmark. Demonstration quality sound. Pe-zulu may know that one.
Bat,
Yes I certainly know it. Excellent sound , excellent organ, reliable
playing, as far as I know Forsbloms last recording. The works aren't the most hair raising among Buxtehudes pieces.
Besides Forsblom (for the Swedish firm Proprius) has recorded Die Kunst der Fuge, only on LP, in a natural and unaffected style
on the choir organ in Aarhus Domkirke. And for the same firm
on the Frobenius organ, Sct.Catrinae Kirke, Ribe recorded some preludes and fugues by Bach (BWV 544 and 546 ) in a glowing and passionate style.
Regards,
Yes I certainly know it. Excellent sound , excellent organ, reliable
playing, as far as I know Forsbloms last recording. The works aren't the most hair raising among Buxtehudes pieces.
Besides Forsblom (for the Swedish firm Proprius) has recorded Die Kunst der Fuge, only on LP, in a natural and unaffected style
on the choir organ in Aarhus Domkirke. And for the same firm
on the Frobenius organ, Sct.Catrinae Kirke, Ribe recorded some preludes and fugues by Bach (BWV 544 and 546 ) in a glowing and passionate style.
Regards,
But talking about Buxtehudes organworks I would first and foremost recommend the scolar Harald Vogel. As a supplement to him the master of Stylus Phantasticus Ulrik Spang-Hanssen (Classico) and the chambermusic like fluent Rene Saorgin (French Harmonia Mundi) and last but not least the grand old master Walter Kraft (Vox) on the by Kemper rebuilt Totentanzkapelle organ in Marienkircke, Lubeck, whose recording, even if a bit oldfashioned (ca 1960), for Buxtehude was what Walchas Lubeck- and Cappel recordings were for Bach.
Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
pe-zulu said:
Dear Pe-Zulu: There was no point at all! I was speaking honestly because I thought that myvision might be flawed. As a matter of fact I, too, find it odd that we should agree on most things but not on this one. And I have been giving some thought to the matter.
It seems to me that your reading of Bach is very vocally oriented (the phisiological approach you mention) whereas mine is more instrumental. Let's take, as an example, the doric tocatta: I favour the following beat: the first not is stressed and more or less linked to the second, and the rest are played marked, that is, quite detached. This motiv, as you well know, dominates the piece (there are many examples of this in Bach). Now I think th may be maintained throughout the piece. Always the same? Of course not, there are points where you almost do not do it, and others where you must overdo it (I don't have the partitions here, or else I might be clearer). The stressing must be architectural, and therefore, used sparingly. This is entirely derived from my experience of Bach's music and, chiefly, of tracker action organs. Unlike Walcha, I never sang each voice separately (well, I usually play them separately).
On the other hand, concerning 16th century polyphony, I absolutely concur with you: I tried hard as hell to acquire a singing sound from a very bad organ in order to give expression to the kind of decrescendo in phrase endings like a,g,f,e,d. This involves the kind of breathing approach that you prone.
With Buxtehude and Lübeck (I never played Lübeck well: it is much more difficult, I think, than Buxtehude and perhaps even than Bach) I think a 'gesture based approach' is justified (as in Vogel, but a more keyboard oriented one like Oster can perform wonders), except in the fugues, which require a more instrument oriented approach (and are truly impossible to play legato, even with foot crossing). But a 'singing' approach, like MC Alain's is, to my mind, completely misguided - even if I admire MC Alain greatly and find she is usually underrated. THIS IS ALSO AN ANSWER I FORGOT TO GIVE TO SN! SORRY.
With Bach, I think a 'singing in long phrases' approach is what satisfies me most. Perhaps because I know almost all of his keyboard music more or less by heart and therefore I know the affects and seek only the general architecture. But, even if I think Leonhardt is too 'expressive' with some Bach, I cannot deny that I love most of his records. His WTC is very, very hard to beat, and it was recorded at around 1970 (I sometimes wonder how would he play it, now)! And, of course, his first partitas are fabulous, his English suites very profound, and his 2nd (well, the Zell one) Chromatic Fantasy almost unbeatable (I rank only Walcha and Gilbert - doch! - along with him) and certainly unbeatable on his terms.
As to HIP, I agree with you. So, all in all, we seem to agree... even if we disagree on minor issues. You liked Rousset's Englische Sviten but prefer Leonhardt's; I love Leonhardt's but prefer Rousset's. Well. ood think there are disagreements like this: I liked our little discussion, and hope we'll have more.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
sn66 said:
Dear sn66: I think the record is the one from 89; I am not sure, most of my records are not with me at this moment. Well, she is very intense, furious and drepressed, there is true passion, turmoil, and, when you lest expect it, acceptance of gief. A rather disturbing reading, but passionate. Leonhardt's Weckman-Froberger is shorter, played more straightforwardly, but I am affraid his harpsichord is not very suited to the music he plays (well... IMO, of course). Verlet's hasa dark reediness that I just love.
I only know MC Alain's double Buxtehude record. I listened to the vinyl version (I don't quite remember it). I am very sorry to say that what seems to be a spontaneous profoundity in Bach turns to seem to me a total lack of understanding of Buxtehude. This is natural. MC Alain has a mystical (when she plays modern music) and at the same time most humane (with Bach) mind, but she does not seem to me to dwelve deeply into all the abysses and huge growling hellpits of Buxtehude. The most impressive Te Deum (wonderful under Vogel and even Saorgin) is rendered as nothing happened. Perhaps I did not understand the recordings, and my views are too far removed from hers. She is a lady, and plays as such. Buxtehude was a man, and very cognizant with the dirty sides of life (his friendship with Reincken seems to attest to that even if he seems to have been a generous person). So SIN and HELL and almost manic FrENZY, but also MYSTICAL SELF ABANDON were all very well known to Buxtehude. In fact, I can only find the late Beethoven to have so far reaching a range of emotions as Buxtehude (I often compare opus 111, which I used to know very well, to Buxtehude).
I cannot suggest a Scarlatti record. I don't like the music (never played anything by him but I did study a lot of similar stuff) and I can only suffer it when played on the piano!
Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
For 16' tone harpsichords see, perhaps, this, but I should be able to find a photo of the three manual Hass; if I am not mistaken, it used to be played by Raphael Puyana, and the composition is:
first manual: 16 2
second manual: 8 4
third manual: 8
The 16' strings have their own soundboard. The effect is massive in the extreme, not very transparent, but rather powerful.
Too little is known about German harpsichords. Nowadays most people select a 'Mietke' harpsichord, because it is known that Bach once bought one for the Cöthen Court. But - and there lies the rub - nobody really knows how it was originally strung. Most builders use yellow brass; but no less an authority than Martin Skowroneck builds them in a totally different way. My harpsichord maintainer, who has studied the matter with care, thinks they were strung in iron; and he told me that there is no way of knowing the string scales (gauges) or even sizes. So I have listened to soft and very hard 'Mietkes'. The original one can be appreciated in Asperen's version of the Goldbergs. It is still in playing state, but it is so much modified that the sound you get means nothing. It is also apallingly ugly: a muffled 8', another reedy one and a monstruously aggressive 4' (all said on an IMO basis).
There are very interesting reconstructions by Bernard von Tucher. The Grabners have a very dark but very reedy sound. The Vaters are mellow; some others are clearly organ oriented (even the name of the stops: Principal I; Principal II, Flöte; Zung (diapason I, II, flute and reed).
One thing is certain, though: even if they are, I think, the most beautiful sounding harpsichords ever made, the French (Blanchet, Goujon, Hemsh, Taskin) ones are most probably not what Bach had in mind. What did he have in mind? We don't know. The Lautenwerk?
first manual: 16 2
second manual: 8 4
third manual: 8
The 16' strings have their own soundboard. The effect is massive in the extreme, not very transparent, but rather powerful.
Too little is known about German harpsichords. Nowadays most people select a 'Mietke' harpsichord, because it is known that Bach once bought one for the Cöthen Court. But - and there lies the rub - nobody really knows how it was originally strung. Most builders use yellow brass; but no less an authority than Martin Skowroneck builds them in a totally different way. My harpsichord maintainer, who has studied the matter with care, thinks they were strung in iron; and he told me that there is no way of knowing the string scales (gauges) or even sizes. So I have listened to soft and very hard 'Mietkes'. The original one can be appreciated in Asperen's version of the Goldbergs. It is still in playing state, but it is so much modified that the sound you get means nothing. It is also apallingly ugly: a muffled 8', another reedy one and a monstruously aggressive 4' (all said on an IMO basis).
There are very interesting reconstructions by Bernard von Tucher. The Grabners have a very dark but very reedy sound. The Vaters are mellow; some others are clearly organ oriented (even the name of the stops: Principal I; Principal II, Flöte; Zung (diapason I, II, flute and reed).
One thing is certain, though: even if they are, I think, the most beautiful sounding harpsichords ever made, the French (Blanchet, Goujon, Hemsh, Taskin) ones are most probably not what Bach had in mind. What did he have in mind? We don't know. The Lautenwerk?
Last edited by a moderator:
bat
Connoisseur Par Excelence
Blasphemy! As a harpsichord composer Domenico Scarlatti is one of the greatest - perhaps the greatest. Ask anyone.
Based on what I've heard, lautenwerk sounds like a banjo.
Based on what I've heard, lautenwerk sounds like a banjo.
Rodrigo de Sá
This club's crushing bore
bat said:
About Scarlatti, I meekly agree. But I just hate the stuff!! And the irritating side of the harpsichord is manyfolded by his music. A soft, Lipatti-like approach is all I can stand.
Dear Pe-ZUlu: I'll answer later on the Gesta Danorum which I actually read when I was very young.
Dear RdS
Thanks, you always and even in the rare situation when we disagree, cause me to look at many things from new and fruitful angles.
I think my wiew upon phrasing is more vocally inspired than my wiew upon articulation. As a rule I think, that a phrase on any instrument shouldn't be longer, than you can capture it in one breath as if you sing or play a woodwind instrument. A classic example of unphysiological and for that reason unnatural phrasing (by Beethoven) is the bas intro in the Choral symphony, especially the third phrase which is meant to be sung in one breath, which is next to impossible to realize (und freuuuuuuudenvollere).
The problem of the last note in one phrase being the first in the next phrase is IMO solved in the most musical way by taking the breath just before the note.
The articulation on the other hand must of course be non legato, and as if you "tongue" every note. Slurs are used for ornamentation or to emphasize the rhytm. The many examples of Bachs own articulation in his chamber works show us some of his principles.
If we still think of the Dorian toccata, it is IMO most probable that the first THREE semiquavers should be tied (as a slow mordent) to emphasize the beat, and the next five should be rather detached. In the third Brandenburgs first movement there are numerous examples of this way of slurring in 4/4 metre (e.g. the solo theme from bar 47). I think it makes a lot of difference whether you tie two or three notes. How strict you tie (or not) should depend upon the acoustics and the pitch, but I think that one should aim to obtain the same overall effect throughout the movement. Otherwise the rhytm may become undefined.
Another example: In the manual episodes of the e-minor prelude BWV 548 the semiquaver should be tied to the preceding dotted quaver to emphasize the beat. Compare with the third movement of the violin/harpsichord sonata in c-minor. And by studying Bachs chamber music it is possible to solve very many articulation problems in his music. But of course the articulation must "breath" too, and in this connection the relative length of the notes in the non-legato is crucial. Part of the greatness of Gustav Leonhardt depends upon the fact , that he almost always chooses the best solution in these questions. Just in a few instances I think he plays too much legato.
But the articulation must be supported by the agogics, and this is perhaps the most personal factor in an interpretation and decide very much whether we like the interpretation or not.
Talking about the playfulness of M-C Alains first Buxtehude integral I implied that she succeds relatively well with the more playfull pieces (Preludes C-major,A-major.E-major fx).
But I agree fully with you that she doesn't grasp the dramatic and daemonic side of the music, and her Preludes in d-minor,g-minor not to mention the Toccata in d-minor are nice but uneventful. This is true of both sets as well. But on the other hand, in some way I worship her simple and unaffected way of playing the ornamented chorale preludes. For me she would never be a first choice in Buxtehude. My former organ teacher said, that she plays without "balls" . I like you thought-provoking comparation of Buxtehude with Beethoven.
Domenico Scarlatti? Many years ago I played and listened to quite a lot of his sonatas. Brilliant and charming music but on a rather superficial level. His fathers fantastic toccatas and the sonatas of Della Ciaja are far deeper music and not less brilliant.
Lego?? Well, I understand that you can play with Lego in more than one sense. The next might be Lego organs. But I doubt if this can save Legos ailing economy.
My preferred harpsichord for Bach is the Zell, but many others have proved to do justice to his music. The 16F theory is most interesting, but is certainly opposed by the front rank HIP gang, I suppose.
Regards,
Thanks, you always and even in the rare situation when we disagree, cause me to look at many things from new and fruitful angles.
I think my wiew upon phrasing is more vocally inspired than my wiew upon articulation. As a rule I think, that a phrase on any instrument shouldn't be longer, than you can capture it in one breath as if you sing or play a woodwind instrument. A classic example of unphysiological and for that reason unnatural phrasing (by Beethoven) is the bas intro in the Choral symphony, especially the third phrase which is meant to be sung in one breath, which is next to impossible to realize (und freuuuuuuudenvollere).
The problem of the last note in one phrase being the first in the next phrase is IMO solved in the most musical way by taking the breath just before the note.
The articulation on the other hand must of course be non legato, and as if you "tongue" every note. Slurs are used for ornamentation or to emphasize the rhytm. The many examples of Bachs own articulation in his chamber works show us some of his principles.
If we still think of the Dorian toccata, it is IMO most probable that the first THREE semiquavers should be tied (as a slow mordent) to emphasize the beat, and the next five should be rather detached. In the third Brandenburgs first movement there are numerous examples of this way of slurring in 4/4 metre (e.g. the solo theme from bar 47). I think it makes a lot of difference whether you tie two or three notes. How strict you tie (or not) should depend upon the acoustics and the pitch, but I think that one should aim to obtain the same overall effect throughout the movement. Otherwise the rhytm may become undefined.
Another example: In the manual episodes of the e-minor prelude BWV 548 the semiquaver should be tied to the preceding dotted quaver to emphasize the beat. Compare with the third movement of the violin/harpsichord sonata in c-minor. And by studying Bachs chamber music it is possible to solve very many articulation problems in his music. But of course the articulation must "breath" too, and in this connection the relative length of the notes in the non-legato is crucial. Part of the greatness of Gustav Leonhardt depends upon the fact , that he almost always chooses the best solution in these questions. Just in a few instances I think he plays too much legato.
But the articulation must be supported by the agogics, and this is perhaps the most personal factor in an interpretation and decide very much whether we like the interpretation or not.
Talking about the playfulness of M-C Alains first Buxtehude integral I implied that she succeds relatively well with the more playfull pieces (Preludes C-major,A-major.E-major fx).
But I agree fully with you that she doesn't grasp the dramatic and daemonic side of the music, and her Preludes in d-minor,g-minor not to mention the Toccata in d-minor are nice but uneventful. This is true of both sets as well. But on the other hand, in some way I worship her simple and unaffected way of playing the ornamented chorale preludes. For me she would never be a first choice in Buxtehude. My former organ teacher said, that she plays without "balls" . I like you thought-provoking comparation of Buxtehude with Beethoven.
Domenico Scarlatti? Many years ago I played and listened to quite a lot of his sonatas. Brilliant and charming music but on a rather superficial level. His fathers fantastic toccatas and the sonatas of Della Ciaja are far deeper music and not less brilliant.
Lego?? Well, I understand that you can play with Lego in more than one sense. The next might be Lego organs. But I doubt if this can save Legos ailing economy.
My preferred harpsichord for Bach is the Zell, but many others have proved to do justice to his music. The 16F theory is most interesting, but is certainly opposed by the front rank HIP gang, I suppose.
Regards,
Last edited by a moderator:
