In my previous blog I reviewed several discs with music transcribed for keyboard. Recorder players are also keen transcribers as they find that there is not enough music for their instrument, especially in the repertoire of the 18th century. The recorder was one of the main instruments of the Renaissance and was still frequently played during the 17th century. It lost its appeal to composers after 1700, when the transverse flute became increasingly popular. Again, Bach is one of the most frequently-transcribed composers: almost anyone wants to play some music by him, but unfortunately he did not serve recorder players very well. Their instrument is given parts in some of the Brandenburg Concertos and participates in a number of cantatas, but there are no sonatas for recorder, neither solo nor trio sonatas. There are quite a number of recordings on the market, in which recorder players perform Bach's sonatas for transverse flute. Those are also included in the recordings which are the subject of this blog, but they cover a wider range of repertoire.
Stefano Bagliano and Andrea Coen [1] play three of Bach's flute sonatas, However, one of them, included as BWV 1020 in the Schmieder catalogue, is probably not from JS Bach's pen, but rather written by his son Carl Philipp Emanuel. It is scored for an obbligato harpsichord and flute; in this performance Bagliano plays a soprano recorder which produces a rather penetrating sound, at the cost of the harpsichord. Given that all the parts are treated on equal footing by the composer, that is a problem. The balance between the recorder and the organ is generally better, especially if Bagliano plays an alto recorder. The repertoire is unusual: I can't remember ever having heard some of the 3-part Sinfonias and contrapuncti from Die Kunst der Fuge in a performance by recorder and keyboard. In the Sonata BWV 1032 the recorder is accompanied by the organ in the first two movements, but by the harpsichord in the third, which is rather unsatisfying. The playing leaves nothing to be desired, but all in all I am not really convinced by this recording.
It is no coincidence that the organ is a better match for the recorder than the harpsichord. Both are wind instruments, and the recorder can sound like one of the stops of the organ. The balance is generally better, as the next disc shows. Agnès Blanche Marc and Helene von Rechenberg [2] confine themselves to the oeuvre of Bach and play three of his chamber works for transverse flute(s): BWV 1030, 1031 and 1039. The have extended their programme with the triosonata for organ BWV 527 and the chorale trio Herr Jesu Christ, dich zu uns wend (BWV 655). In these two pieces Ms Marc plays a soprano recorder, and even here it is too dominant, although that may well be due to the recording. In the trio sonata this damages the equal role of all three parts. In the chorale trio it would not be that much of a problem, if the recorder would play the cantus firmus, but here it plays the upper part. The effect is that it overshadows the cantus firmus played at a lower pitch at the organ. I am hesitant to rank this recording among those in the tradition of historical performance practice. The booklet mentions the recorders that are used here, but not whether they are copies of historical instruments. The organ definitely is no historical instrument: It was originally built in 1930 and has been rebuilt in 1983/84; a number of pipes from the old organ were included. Parts of the rebuilt instrument have "a classic 'neo-baroque' disposition", according to the booklet. Those are not the features which makes it suitable for a performance that does justice to the baroque performance practice. Obviously, the organ is in modern pitch and has an equal temperament. That is not what is required in a performance of music by Bach. It results in performances that are a bit dull, even though the playing is alright.
The last two discs have much in common: Bach is in the centre of attention, and the instruments are recorder and lute. This turns out to be a pretty much ideal partnership. Under the title 'Dialogues' Dorothee Oberlinger and Edin Karamazov [3] play a programme of pieces by Bach that are arranged for either instrument solo or for the combination of both. Again, we get two of Bach's flute sonatas (BWV 1034 and 1035), but also the allemande from the Partita BWV 1013 for flute solo. The longest item is the last of the programme: the lute suite BWV 997, here in an arrangement for recorder and lute. It works pretty well, and overall the balance is much better than in the two previous recordings. Both players execute their selection of works with much sensitivity and stylistic understanding. Only in the performance of the Concerto in d minor (BWV 974), Bach's arrangement of Alessandro Marcello's oboe concerto, I think Ms Oberlinger goes a little too far in her ornamentation. However, this is a very enjoying disc that will please Bach lovers just as much as recorder and lute aficionados.
That may also be the case with the last disc. Tabea Debus and Alon Sariel [4] open and close their programme with Bach: they start with the lute suite BWV 997 that also figures on the previous disc, but play only three of the four movements. The Partita BWV 1006 for violin solo is performed here in an arrangement for recorder and lute. I don't think I have ever heard this piece with this combination of instruments, but it works surprisingly well. In between are pieces by Silvius Leopold Weiss and Heinrich Franz Ignaz Biber as well as Bach's son Carl Philipp Emanuel. The latter is represented here by his little-known harp sonata - a quite original choice. The pieces by Biber are played well, but especially the passacaglia that closes the collection of Mystery Sonatas is the least-convincing item, probably because the recorder can't quite reproduce the dynamic capabilities of the violin. The two players are excellent, and because of that this disc is interesting and entertaining.
[1] JS Bach: "Music for Recorder & Harpsichord"
Stefano Bagliano, recorder; Andrea Coen, harpsichord
Brilliant Classics 95777 (© 2021) details
[2] JS Bach: "Bach & Flauto & Organo"
Agnès Blanche Marc, recorder; Helene von Rechenberg, organ
Spektral SRL4-20180 (© 2022) details
[3] JS Bach: "Dialoge"
Dorothee Oberlinger, recorder; Edin Karamazov, lute
deutsche harmonia mundi 19439875862 (© 2021) details
[4] "Sounds familiar"
Tabea Debus, recorder; Alon Sariel, lute
gwk records GWK 156 (© 2022) details
Showing posts with label Bach (Johann Sebastian). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bach (Johann Sebastian). Show all posts
Friday, November 4, 2022
Thursday, October 6, 2022
The 'Utrecht Passion' - a faux pas
When historical performance emerged, the ideal was to perform music according to the intentions of the composers. That included scepticism towards the phenomenon of arrangements, unless they were from the pen of the composer himself. With time, performers realized that this was a very common phenomenon. We know this practice from the Middle Ages and Renaissance, when some popular songs or tunes appeared numerous times in all sorts of arrangements by different composers. It did not end there: in the baroque period arrangements were also quite common, and this practice continued in the classical and romantic periods, when arrangements were often a way to be able to play music at home that was originally written for a large orchestra.
The word 'arrangement' is a collective term for all kinds of adaptations. Some were made by a composer himself. Bach, for instance, used his secular cantatas for sacred music, such as the Christmas Oratorio. Obviously, such arrangements are very different from that infamous arrangement of Bach's first prelude from the Welltempered Clavier I by Charles Gounod, who turned it into a rather sentimental Ave Maria. The most strict way of adapting a piece is what is known as contrafact: the original text of a piece is replaced by a different text. In a way it is the most easy kind of adaptation, as the music remains untouched. On the other hand, it is not easy to write a text which exactly fits the music. It is this kind of arrangement that was presented at the 2022 Utrecht Early Music Festival as the 'Utrecht Passion'.
What exactly was that about? Let me quote the programme. "The Utrechter Passion is nothing more than Johann Sebastian Bach's St John Passion with a new libretto. Instead of the suffering of Christ, the story focuses on the suffering of LGBTQIA+ people, who were discriminated against and murdered, nowadays and in the past. (...) Bach's music remains completely intact. Everything sounds the same, except for the words, which completely conform to Bach's melodic lines."
The text was written by Thomas Höft, and as he is not a musician, it is only logical that he left the music untouched. Whether he succeeded in writing a text that fit the music is something I can't judge, as I did not attend the performance. I also can't assess the text itself: I assume that a translation was shown as supertitles during the performance, but I have no access to the (German) text of Höft's adaptation.
We know quite some contrafacta from the renaissance and baroque periods. To mention a few examples: in 1607 Aquilino Coppini published a collection of madrigals by Claudio Monteverdi with sacred texts. This allowed the inhabitants of convents to enjoy the music without being confronted with texts that were considered not suitable for their ears. It is not known whether Monteverdi agreed or disagreed. The latter seems unlikely, as he himself adapted his famous Lamento d'Arianna into the Pianto della Madonna. Many German hymns are contrafacta. One of the most famous is O Haupt voll Blut und Wunden: the melody is from the pen of Hans-Leo Hassler (1564-1612), who used it for a secular text, Mein Gmüth ist mir verwirret.
From this angle it seems there is no objection whatsoever against to what Thomas Höft did with Bach's St John Passion. In my view, that would be the wrong conclusion. I have chosen the title of this blog for a reason. I sincerely believe that this project was a serious mistake. I see two reasons for that.
One of the basic principles of historical performance practice has always been that a performance should stay as closely as possible to what the composer intended. And that could become a problem, if the text of a piece as written by the composer is changed. In my view it is not right to use the music of a composer for a text he may not have agreed with. Today's performers are not the owner of what a composer has written. That was the approach of representatives of the traditional performance practice, who performed the music according to their own taste. Precisely that is something the pioneers of historical performance practice wanted to get rid of.
Then the obvious question is: what about the adaptations of the past, as the ones referred to above? First: we may think about them what we want. If we reject this practice per se, we should not perform such pieces, like Coppini's sacred adaptations of Monteverdi's madrigals. However, there is no need to judge a practice of the past. There is a difference between accepting what has come down to us from history as a matter of fact and applying that practice ourselves today.
There is another issue here. If we look at the originals and the contrafacta, they are mostly pretty close, both chronologically and culturally. Coppini published his adaptations at the time that Monteverdi was at the height of his career. Both were devout members of the Catholic church, and that alone makes it unlikely that Monteverdi would have disapproved of those sacred adaptations. The same goes for the other example I used: the first time Hassler's melody was used for a sacred hymn was only a few years after he published his song, when it was used for the text Herzlich tut mich verlangen. As there can be little doubt that Hassler, although he composed music for the Catholic liturgy and for Catholic rulers, was a Lutheran, it is highly unlikely that he would have rejected the adaptation of his song. The reason that original and adaptation were so close in time, is that before the 18th century it was rather unusual to perform music that was considered 'old' - something written earlier than, say, about twenty years or so ago.
And here we have the difference between those adaptations and the 'Utrecht Passion'. There is a gap in time, and with it a cultural gap, between 2022 and the time and spiritual world of Bach. It is questionable whether Bach would have agreed with this kind of adaptation. We can't be sure, and we can't ask him. Therefore we should leave his music as it is, and not misuse it to express views of different people in a different time.
There is another reason why I think this adaptation is a faux pas. If we look at the adaptations of the renaissance and baroque periods, we notice that it was always a secular piece that was turned into a sacred one, never the other way around. Bach used secular cantatas for sacred music, but never turned anything sacred into a secular piece. Secular songs were used for sacred hymns, not vice versa (except perhaps as satire). If such pieces exist, I have not encountered them. This can be easily explained: in a time the whole society in Europe was Christian, either Catholic or Protestant (or something else), the sacred was considered superior to the secular. Turning a secular piece into a sacred work was a promotion. Adapting a sacred work into a secular piece would have been considered a degradation, and even something close to blasphemy. From that angle the procedure Thomas Höft has followed, turning a sacred work into a secular piece, goes directly against the spirit of the time Bach wrote his St John Passion.
The text in the festival's programme says: "We find the rewriting of this passion an exciting experiment within the historical performance practice. It allows us to experience Bach's music in an entirely new way and to rediscover emotions obscured by the patina of the long performance tradition". I sincerely believe they have got it all very wrong. This 'experiment' is basically a violation of some fundamental principles of historical performance practice and entirely anachronistic.
The word 'arrangement' is a collective term for all kinds of adaptations. Some were made by a composer himself. Bach, for instance, used his secular cantatas for sacred music, such as the Christmas Oratorio. Obviously, such arrangements are very different from that infamous arrangement of Bach's first prelude from the Welltempered Clavier I by Charles Gounod, who turned it into a rather sentimental Ave Maria. The most strict way of adapting a piece is what is known as contrafact: the original text of a piece is replaced by a different text. In a way it is the most easy kind of adaptation, as the music remains untouched. On the other hand, it is not easy to write a text which exactly fits the music. It is this kind of arrangement that was presented at the 2022 Utrecht Early Music Festival as the 'Utrecht Passion'.
What exactly was that about? Let me quote the programme. "The Utrechter Passion is nothing more than Johann Sebastian Bach's St John Passion with a new libretto. Instead of the suffering of Christ, the story focuses on the suffering of LGBTQIA+ people, who were discriminated against and murdered, nowadays and in the past. (...) Bach's music remains completely intact. Everything sounds the same, except for the words, which completely conform to Bach's melodic lines."
The text was written by Thomas Höft, and as he is not a musician, it is only logical that he left the music untouched. Whether he succeeded in writing a text that fit the music is something I can't judge, as I did not attend the performance. I also can't assess the text itself: I assume that a translation was shown as supertitles during the performance, but I have no access to the (German) text of Höft's adaptation.
We know quite some contrafacta from the renaissance and baroque periods. To mention a few examples: in 1607 Aquilino Coppini published a collection of madrigals by Claudio Monteverdi with sacred texts. This allowed the inhabitants of convents to enjoy the music without being confronted with texts that were considered not suitable for their ears. It is not known whether Monteverdi agreed or disagreed. The latter seems unlikely, as he himself adapted his famous Lamento d'Arianna into the Pianto della Madonna. Many German hymns are contrafacta. One of the most famous is O Haupt voll Blut und Wunden: the melody is from the pen of Hans-Leo Hassler (1564-1612), who used it for a secular text, Mein Gmüth ist mir verwirret.
From this angle it seems there is no objection whatsoever against to what Thomas Höft did with Bach's St John Passion. In my view, that would be the wrong conclusion. I have chosen the title of this blog for a reason. I sincerely believe that this project was a serious mistake. I see two reasons for that.
One of the basic principles of historical performance practice has always been that a performance should stay as closely as possible to what the composer intended. And that could become a problem, if the text of a piece as written by the composer is changed. In my view it is not right to use the music of a composer for a text he may not have agreed with. Today's performers are not the owner of what a composer has written. That was the approach of representatives of the traditional performance practice, who performed the music according to their own taste. Precisely that is something the pioneers of historical performance practice wanted to get rid of.
Then the obvious question is: what about the adaptations of the past, as the ones referred to above? First: we may think about them what we want. If we reject this practice per se, we should not perform such pieces, like Coppini's sacred adaptations of Monteverdi's madrigals. However, there is no need to judge a practice of the past. There is a difference between accepting what has come down to us from history as a matter of fact and applying that practice ourselves today.
There is another issue here. If we look at the originals and the contrafacta, they are mostly pretty close, both chronologically and culturally. Coppini published his adaptations at the time that Monteverdi was at the height of his career. Both were devout members of the Catholic church, and that alone makes it unlikely that Monteverdi would have disapproved of those sacred adaptations. The same goes for the other example I used: the first time Hassler's melody was used for a sacred hymn was only a few years after he published his song, when it was used for the text Herzlich tut mich verlangen. As there can be little doubt that Hassler, although he composed music for the Catholic liturgy and for Catholic rulers, was a Lutheran, it is highly unlikely that he would have rejected the adaptation of his song. The reason that original and adaptation were so close in time, is that before the 18th century it was rather unusual to perform music that was considered 'old' - something written earlier than, say, about twenty years or so ago.
And here we have the difference between those adaptations and the 'Utrecht Passion'. There is a gap in time, and with it a cultural gap, between 2022 and the time and spiritual world of Bach. It is questionable whether Bach would have agreed with this kind of adaptation. We can't be sure, and we can't ask him. Therefore we should leave his music as it is, and not misuse it to express views of different people in a different time.
There is another reason why I think this adaptation is a faux pas. If we look at the adaptations of the renaissance and baroque periods, we notice that it was always a secular piece that was turned into a sacred one, never the other way around. Bach used secular cantatas for sacred music, but never turned anything sacred into a secular piece. Secular songs were used for sacred hymns, not vice versa (except perhaps as satire). If such pieces exist, I have not encountered them. This can be easily explained: in a time the whole society in Europe was Christian, either Catholic or Protestant (or something else), the sacred was considered superior to the secular. Turning a secular piece into a sacred work was a promotion. Adapting a sacred work into a secular piece would have been considered a degradation, and even something close to blasphemy. From that angle the procedure Thomas Höft has followed, turning a sacred work into a secular piece, goes directly against the spirit of the time Bach wrote his St John Passion.
The text in the festival's programme says: "We find the rewriting of this passion an exciting experiment within the historical performance practice. It allows us to experience Bach's music in an entirely new way and to rediscover emotions obscured by the patina of the long performance tradition". I sincerely believe they have got it all very wrong. This 'experiment' is basically a violation of some fundamental principles of historical performance practice and entirely anachronistic.
Friday, July 30, 2021
Bach arranged
When in the 19th century the music of Johann Sebastian Bach was rediscovered, it was usually arranged in order to be performed. This was partly inevitable, as some of the instruments Bach required were not available anymore, such as the harpsichord and the viola da gamba. It was the aim of the historical performance movement to perform music according to the intentions of the composers and with the instruments they had in mind. At first, its representatives were rather sceptical about any arrangement of what had been written down, but with time they started to recognize that this was common practice at the time. Bach himself had paved the way in that he arranged instrumental concertos by Italian comtemporaries for harpsichord or organ, as well as pieces of his own pen. Among the latter are the works he composed for a single instrument: the violin and the cello. His pupil Johann Friedrich Agricola stated: "The composer himself often played them on the clavichord, adding as much in the nature of harmony as he found necessary." His own transcriptions that have been preserved, show how he proceeded. The best example is the Sonata BWV 964, which is a transcription of the Sonata BWV 1003 for violin solo. This practice has encouraged Gustav Leonhardt, one of the pioneers of historical performance practice, to arrange Bach's solo works for violin and cello himself. He was always rather modest about these attempts: he once stated that Bach certainly would have forgiven him his attempts to arrange his music, but whether he would have agreed with the way he had done it, was an entirely different matter. It is telling that he never arranged the Sonata BWV 1003, which has been preserved in Bach's own transcription. After all, who would be so audacious to think that he would be able to emulate Bach's own arrangement, let alone surpass it? In 2017, his pupil Siebe Henstra edited Leonhardt's transcriptions, which were then published by Bärenreiter. The Italian harpsichordist Roberto Loreggian [1] has recorded the complete transcriptions: five of the six works for solo violin (except the opening movement of BWV 1005, which is available in Bach's own transcription BWV 968), the cello suites 4 to 6, the allemande from the Partita BWV 1013 for transverse flute and the sarabande from the Suite BWV 997 for lute. This edition is a rich source for keyboard players, not in the first place to perform them in concerts, but rather to study them, learning from them how one could proceed. In the liner-notes Federico Lanzelotti explains in detail what exactly Leonhardt has done, and how he arranged these pieces in such a way that they turned into full-blooded keyboard works. It should be noted, though, that for Leonhardt the practice of arranging was a 'work in progress', as he regularly 'corrected' his transcriptions. As much as one may appreciate Loreggian's recording, they are a bit problematic. First, as Leonhardt's own recordings are still available, one is inclined to turn to them if one wants to know how they should sound. And many lovers of his playing may still have a vivid memory of his performances. In comparsion, Loreggian is no competition. He is a fine player and I have heard very good recordings of his, but here he is rather disappointing. His playing is often a bit awkward. The rhythmic flexibility and the typical 'swing' in Leonhardt's playing, which often made it hard to keep your feet still, is missing here. The chords are also often a bit ponderous. I would advise anyone, who would like to add Leonhardt's transcriptions to his collection, to purchase the master's own recordings.
Whereas Leonhardt's transcriptions are founded on Bach's own practice, Annegret Siedel and Ute Gremmel-Geuchen [2] take a bit more freedom in their approach to the transcription practice. A number of pieces are played on organ and violin, a combination we don't find in Bach's oeuvre, but which was very common in northern Germany. They play one of the trio sonatas (No. 4, BWV 528) and some chorale arrangements. The programme opens and closes with two of Bach's own arrangements of concertos by Italian composers, in which Annegret Siedel participates in the slow movements. In the concerto after Vivaldi BWV 596, she plays the original violin part, whereas in the Concerto BWV 974 after an oboe concerto by Alessandro Marcello, she plays Bach's ornamented solo part. The two artists also play separately. Ute Gremmel-Geuchen plays Alfred Bertholet's arrangement of seven sections from the motet Jesu, meine Freude, including some of the dicta (quotations from the Bible), which Bach added to the chorale stanzas. This is one of the most remarkable pieces, alongside Annegret Siedel's performance of the Toccata BWV 565, transposed from d minor to a minor. There are strong doubts about the authenticity of this piece. It is also questionable whether it was first conceived for organ. Some scholars assume it may have been written for the violin in the first place, and if that is correct, Bach may be the composer after all. Siedel is not the first who plays it on the violin; Jaap Schröder also recorded it. It works quite well on the violin, and this is definitely one of the highlights of this disc. Overall, this is a rather good demonstration of the practice of arrangement and transcription, even though some of the arrangements have no predecessors in Bach's own oeuvre. The playing of the two artists is excellent.
In the case of Bach, it is often not that simple to distinguish between arrangement and reconstruction. The Toccata BWV 565 just mentioned is a good example. If it is played on the violin, is that an arrangement or rather a reconstruction of how it may have been intended in the first place? The next disc offers another example. Enrico Gatti [3] plays the Partita in a minor (BWV 1013) for transverse flute on the violin, transposed to g minor. This work may also have been intended for the violin: the first movement does give the performer hardly any time to breathe, and this work has been preserved in a copy, which also includes the sonatas and partitas for violin solo. If the flute version is indeed a later arrangement, that would fit into the general picture of Bach's chamber music, as many of the sonatas that we know and that are performed and recorded regularly, are in fact arrangements of earlier compositions for different scorings. 'Cross-dressing Bach', the recording by Gatti and the harpsichordist Rinaldo Alessandrini, opens and closes with two of the three sonatas for harpsichord and viola da gamba. The first (not included here) was originally conceived for two flutes and basso continuo. The Sonata BWV 1028 exists in a version for two violins and basso continuo, whereas the Sonata BWV 1029 bears the traces of a concerto and may be a reduction of such a work. Alessandrini plays Bach's own Sonata BWV 964 mentioned above. The rest of the programme consists of the Trio BWV 583 for organ and an original work for harpsichord and violin, the Fugue BWV 1026. For lovers of Bach's music, this disc is highly recommendable, as it offers different perspectives on some of his best-known works. Both the arrangements and/or reconstructions are pretty convincing, and they are played very well. I only had liked stronger dynamic contrasts in Gatti's playing.
The disc with the title 'The Melancholic Bach' most definitely offers no reconstructions. Bach liked to play the viola, but he did not compose any solo concertos or sonatas for it. Its main role is that of playing an obbligato part in some cantatas and taking some of the main parts in the Brandenburg Concertos 3 and 6. The programme that Emilio Moreno and Aarón Zapico [4] have recorded, comprises mainly organ works, such as chorale arrangements from the Orgelbüchlein. In his chorale arrangements, Bach often used the form of a trio, and pieces for two manuals and pedal are often very suitable to be adapted to a combination of a harpsichord and a melody instrument. Bach himself arranged his organ works for several combinations of instruments, and from that perspective this approach is entirely legitimate. Whether the result is musically satisfying is an entirely different matter. In several cases, it is, but there are also pieces where the viola has little profile and is overshadowed by the harpsichord. This disc does not offer a really new perspective. It seems to me that it is mainly of interest for those who have a special liking of the viola (or play the instrument themselves). The quality of the playing of the two artists leaves nothing to be desired.
The next disc also features the viola, but here the word 'arrangement' strictly speaking misses the point; one could argue that a recording of Bach's sonatas for harpsichord and viola da gamba [5] on the viola should not be reviewed under the title 'Bach arranged'. All three sonatas are played in the original key; no transposition was needed. In 17th- century German music, parts for violas and for viole da gamba were often interchangeable, and composers of the generation after Bach mostly considered viola and viola da gamba as alternatives. Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, for instance, composed a sonata for viola or viola da gamba (Wq 88). As I mentioned before, Bach liked to play the viola himself, and as the first two of his 'gamba sonatas' are known in various versions, there is no objection whatsoever to a performance on the viola. And certainly even less so, when they are played so well as by Marie Stockmarr Becker, with Ilaria Macedonio as her congenial partner. Together they present outstanding accounts, which bring these sonatas into blossom. One probably has to get used to the different sound of the viola, and the balance between the two instruments, which seems to favour the viola a little. However, this disc is a valuable addition to the Bach discography. Lovers of Bach and lovers of the viola will both greatly enjoy this disc, which unfortunately is a little short in playing time (45').
The suites for cello solo have been arranged frequently, not only for harpsichord, but also for the viola da gamba and the violin, and Frans Brüggen once recorded three of them on the recorder. The catalogue also includes several recordings of transcriptions for the lute or the theorbo, among them those of Nigel North, Pascal Monteilhet and Hopkinson Smith. For this kind of arrangements one can also find justification in Bach's own oeuvre: he transcribed the fifth suite for the lute (BWV 995). Alberto Crugnola [6] has recorded the suites 1, 2 and 4, transcribing them to more appropriate keys (C major, a minor and B flat major respectively). He tried to imagine how Adam Falckenhagen, one of his favourite composers, may have done it. Whereas a transcription for harpsichord forces the arranger to add harmony, the lutenist can focus on things where his instrument requires adaptations, especially in the realm of phrasing, articulation and dynamics. After all, these suites should sound like true lute pieces. Crugnola does entirely succeed in this matter. He delivers a speech-like performance; the dynamics are nicely differentiated and the dance rhyrthms come off perfectly. With this disc he offers a very nice interpretation of these three suites. It is to be hoped that hen will have the opportunity to record the remaining three in due course.
The last disc includes arrangements which are probably most alien to the world of Bach. The Cellini Consort [7] is a consort of three viols - the kind of ensemble which was common in the 16th century, and held its ground only in a few regions in the 17th century, mainly England and the Habsburg court in Vienna. Elsewhere music for such an ensemble was sporadically written. However, although the viola da gamba was gradually overshadowed by the cello in the course of the 18th century, in the music by the likes of Bach and Telemann it plays quite a prominent role. That said, only in two pieces Bach included parts for two viole da gamba: the Actus Tragicus (BWV 106) and the Brandenburg Concerto No. 6. The Cellini Consort is certainly not the first of its kind to turn to Bach for an extension of its repertoire. Other viol consorts - and also recorder consorts, for that matter - have done the same, and often they turn to the organ works. Because of the importance of counterpoint in these works, and the many long lines included in them, they are perfectly suited to be performed by a consort of instruments of the same family. The line-up of such ensembles only emphasizes the equal importance of all the musical parts. The Cellini Consort plays five organ works, among them Wer nur den lieben Gott lässt walten (BWV 691), which closes this disc, just as the disc by Moreno and Zapico. In addition, the consort plays the French Suite No. 5 and the Italian Concerto, both originally intended for the harpsichord. These transcriptions are less convincing: the way the sound of the harpsichord is produced is much more different from that of a consort of viols than in the case of the organ. In the French Suite the performance on viols goes at the cost of transparency, whereas in the Italian Concerto I miss the 'attack' of the harpsichord. It may well be the fact that this piece is written in the Italian style which makes it a less suitable item for a performance by a consort of viols. Obviously, the 'gamba sonata' BWV 1028 comes off best, alongside the organ pieces. Whether one finds these arrangements convincing or not, the playing of the Cellini Consort is excellent, and lovers of the viola da gamba and of consort music will certainly enjoy this recording.
[1] "Violin Sonatas & Partitas, Cello Suites - Transcribed for harpsichord by Gustav Leonhardt"
Roberto Loreggian, harpsichord
Brilliant Classics 95757 (3 CDs) (© 2018) details
[2] "© J.S. Bach" (Arrangements for violin & organ)
Annegret Siedel, violin; Ute Gremmel-Geuchen, organ
Aeolus AE11281 (© 2020) details
[3] "Cross-dressing Bach - Chamber rarities and alternative versions"
Enrico Gatti, violin; Rinaldo Alessandrini, harpsichord
Glossa GCD 921210 (© 2018) details
[4] "The Melancholic Bach - Music for viola da braccio & harpsichord"
Emilio Moreno, viola; Aarón Zapico, harpsichord
Glossa GCD 920316 (© 2019) details
[5] "Sonatas for viola (da gamba) and harpsichord BWV 1027-1029"
Ilaria Macedonio, harpsichord; Marie Stockmarr Becker, viola
Channel Classics CCS 43721 (© 2021) details
[6] "Für die Prinzessin" (For the Princess) - Suites BWV 1007, 1008 & 1010
Alberto Crugnola, lute
NovAntiqua NA51 ([2020]) details
[7] "Wo soll ich fliehen hin - Transcriptions for Viol Trio"
Cellini Consort
Ramée RAM 1911 (© 2019) details
Whereas Leonhardt's transcriptions are founded on Bach's own practice, Annegret Siedel and Ute Gremmel-Geuchen [2] take a bit more freedom in their approach to the transcription practice. A number of pieces are played on organ and violin, a combination we don't find in Bach's oeuvre, but which was very common in northern Germany. They play one of the trio sonatas (No. 4, BWV 528) and some chorale arrangements. The programme opens and closes with two of Bach's own arrangements of concertos by Italian composers, in which Annegret Siedel participates in the slow movements. In the concerto after Vivaldi BWV 596, she plays the original violin part, whereas in the Concerto BWV 974 after an oboe concerto by Alessandro Marcello, she plays Bach's ornamented solo part. The two artists also play separately. Ute Gremmel-Geuchen plays Alfred Bertholet's arrangement of seven sections from the motet Jesu, meine Freude, including some of the dicta (quotations from the Bible), which Bach added to the chorale stanzas. This is one of the most remarkable pieces, alongside Annegret Siedel's performance of the Toccata BWV 565, transposed from d minor to a minor. There are strong doubts about the authenticity of this piece. It is also questionable whether it was first conceived for organ. Some scholars assume it may have been written for the violin in the first place, and if that is correct, Bach may be the composer after all. Siedel is not the first who plays it on the violin; Jaap Schröder also recorded it. It works quite well on the violin, and this is definitely one of the highlights of this disc. Overall, this is a rather good demonstration of the practice of arrangement and transcription, even though some of the arrangements have no predecessors in Bach's own oeuvre. The playing of the two artists is excellent.
In the case of Bach, it is often not that simple to distinguish between arrangement and reconstruction. The Toccata BWV 565 just mentioned is a good example. If it is played on the violin, is that an arrangement or rather a reconstruction of how it may have been intended in the first place? The next disc offers another example. Enrico Gatti [3] plays the Partita in a minor (BWV 1013) for transverse flute on the violin, transposed to g minor. This work may also have been intended for the violin: the first movement does give the performer hardly any time to breathe, and this work has been preserved in a copy, which also includes the sonatas and partitas for violin solo. If the flute version is indeed a later arrangement, that would fit into the general picture of Bach's chamber music, as many of the sonatas that we know and that are performed and recorded regularly, are in fact arrangements of earlier compositions for different scorings. 'Cross-dressing Bach', the recording by Gatti and the harpsichordist Rinaldo Alessandrini, opens and closes with two of the three sonatas for harpsichord and viola da gamba. The first (not included here) was originally conceived for two flutes and basso continuo. The Sonata BWV 1028 exists in a version for two violins and basso continuo, whereas the Sonata BWV 1029 bears the traces of a concerto and may be a reduction of such a work. Alessandrini plays Bach's own Sonata BWV 964 mentioned above. The rest of the programme consists of the Trio BWV 583 for organ and an original work for harpsichord and violin, the Fugue BWV 1026. For lovers of Bach's music, this disc is highly recommendable, as it offers different perspectives on some of his best-known works. Both the arrangements and/or reconstructions are pretty convincing, and they are played very well. I only had liked stronger dynamic contrasts in Gatti's playing.
The disc with the title 'The Melancholic Bach' most definitely offers no reconstructions. Bach liked to play the viola, but he did not compose any solo concertos or sonatas for it. Its main role is that of playing an obbligato part in some cantatas and taking some of the main parts in the Brandenburg Concertos 3 and 6. The programme that Emilio Moreno and Aarón Zapico [4] have recorded, comprises mainly organ works, such as chorale arrangements from the Orgelbüchlein. In his chorale arrangements, Bach often used the form of a trio, and pieces for two manuals and pedal are often very suitable to be adapted to a combination of a harpsichord and a melody instrument. Bach himself arranged his organ works for several combinations of instruments, and from that perspective this approach is entirely legitimate. Whether the result is musically satisfying is an entirely different matter. In several cases, it is, but there are also pieces where the viola has little profile and is overshadowed by the harpsichord. This disc does not offer a really new perspective. It seems to me that it is mainly of interest for those who have a special liking of the viola (or play the instrument themselves). The quality of the playing of the two artists leaves nothing to be desired.
The next disc also features the viola, but here the word 'arrangement' strictly speaking misses the point; one could argue that a recording of Bach's sonatas for harpsichord and viola da gamba [5] on the viola should not be reviewed under the title 'Bach arranged'. All three sonatas are played in the original key; no transposition was needed. In 17th- century German music, parts for violas and for viole da gamba were often interchangeable, and composers of the generation after Bach mostly considered viola and viola da gamba as alternatives. Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, for instance, composed a sonata for viola or viola da gamba (Wq 88). As I mentioned before, Bach liked to play the viola himself, and as the first two of his 'gamba sonatas' are known in various versions, there is no objection whatsoever to a performance on the viola. And certainly even less so, when they are played so well as by Marie Stockmarr Becker, with Ilaria Macedonio as her congenial partner. Together they present outstanding accounts, which bring these sonatas into blossom. One probably has to get used to the different sound of the viola, and the balance between the two instruments, which seems to favour the viola a little. However, this disc is a valuable addition to the Bach discography. Lovers of Bach and lovers of the viola will both greatly enjoy this disc, which unfortunately is a little short in playing time (45').
The suites for cello solo have been arranged frequently, not only for harpsichord, but also for the viola da gamba and the violin, and Frans Brüggen once recorded three of them on the recorder. The catalogue also includes several recordings of transcriptions for the lute or the theorbo, among them those of Nigel North, Pascal Monteilhet and Hopkinson Smith. For this kind of arrangements one can also find justification in Bach's own oeuvre: he transcribed the fifth suite for the lute (BWV 995). Alberto Crugnola [6] has recorded the suites 1, 2 and 4, transcribing them to more appropriate keys (C major, a minor and B flat major respectively). He tried to imagine how Adam Falckenhagen, one of his favourite composers, may have done it. Whereas a transcription for harpsichord forces the arranger to add harmony, the lutenist can focus on things where his instrument requires adaptations, especially in the realm of phrasing, articulation and dynamics. After all, these suites should sound like true lute pieces. Crugnola does entirely succeed in this matter. He delivers a speech-like performance; the dynamics are nicely differentiated and the dance rhyrthms come off perfectly. With this disc he offers a very nice interpretation of these three suites. It is to be hoped that hen will have the opportunity to record the remaining three in due course.
The last disc includes arrangements which are probably most alien to the world of Bach. The Cellini Consort [7] is a consort of three viols - the kind of ensemble which was common in the 16th century, and held its ground only in a few regions in the 17th century, mainly England and the Habsburg court in Vienna. Elsewhere music for such an ensemble was sporadically written. However, although the viola da gamba was gradually overshadowed by the cello in the course of the 18th century, in the music by the likes of Bach and Telemann it plays quite a prominent role. That said, only in two pieces Bach included parts for two viole da gamba: the Actus Tragicus (BWV 106) and the Brandenburg Concerto No. 6. The Cellini Consort is certainly not the first of its kind to turn to Bach for an extension of its repertoire. Other viol consorts - and also recorder consorts, for that matter - have done the same, and often they turn to the organ works. Because of the importance of counterpoint in these works, and the many long lines included in them, they are perfectly suited to be performed by a consort of instruments of the same family. The line-up of such ensembles only emphasizes the equal importance of all the musical parts. The Cellini Consort plays five organ works, among them Wer nur den lieben Gott lässt walten (BWV 691), which closes this disc, just as the disc by Moreno and Zapico. In addition, the consort plays the French Suite No. 5 and the Italian Concerto, both originally intended for the harpsichord. These transcriptions are less convincing: the way the sound of the harpsichord is produced is much more different from that of a consort of viols than in the case of the organ. In the French Suite the performance on viols goes at the cost of transparency, whereas in the Italian Concerto I miss the 'attack' of the harpsichord. It may well be the fact that this piece is written in the Italian style which makes it a less suitable item for a performance by a consort of viols. Obviously, the 'gamba sonata' BWV 1028 comes off best, alongside the organ pieces. Whether one finds these arrangements convincing or not, the playing of the Cellini Consort is excellent, and lovers of the viola da gamba and of consort music will certainly enjoy this recording.
[1] "Violin Sonatas & Partitas, Cello Suites - Transcribed for harpsichord by Gustav Leonhardt"
Roberto Loreggian, harpsichord
Brilliant Classics 95757 (3 CDs) (© 2018) details
[2] "© J.S. Bach" (Arrangements for violin & organ)
Annegret Siedel, violin; Ute Gremmel-Geuchen, organ
Aeolus AE11281 (© 2020) details
[3] "Cross-dressing Bach - Chamber rarities and alternative versions"
Enrico Gatti, violin; Rinaldo Alessandrini, harpsichord
Glossa GCD 921210 (© 2018) details
[4] "The Melancholic Bach - Music for viola da braccio & harpsichord"
Emilio Moreno, viola; Aarón Zapico, harpsichord
Glossa GCD 920316 (© 2019) details
[5] "Sonatas for viola (da gamba) and harpsichord BWV 1027-1029"
Ilaria Macedonio, harpsichord; Marie Stockmarr Becker, viola
Channel Classics CCS 43721 (© 2021) details
[6] "Für die Prinzessin" (For the Princess) - Suites BWV 1007, 1008 & 1010
Alberto Crugnola, lute
NovAntiqua NA51 ([2020]) details
[7] "Wo soll ich fliehen hin - Transcriptions for Viol Trio"
Cellini Consort
Ramée RAM 1911 (© 2019) details
Saturday, May 29, 2021
Bach and the harpsichord
Every year sees the release of new recordings of keyboard music by Johann Sebastian Bach. The question is justified, whether any of them have something to offer that is different from what is already on the market. In the case of the French Suites, a new recording of which has been released by Brilliant Classics, that question is easy to answer. Wolfgang Rübsam [1] performs them on the lute-harpsichord, and although this instrument may have been used for these suites before, such an approach to these well-known pieces is anything but common. The instrument's sound is clearly different from that of the common harpsichord. One does not need to worry about the 'authenticity' of the use of a lute-harpsichord: it is documented that Bach owned two such instruments. It has a marked influence on Rübsam's interpretation, which I would define as 'poetic'. These suites are written in the French style, and bear the traces of the style brisé on 17th-century French lute music. On the lute-harpsichord these traces come off particularly well, and Rübsam emphasizes them by arpeggiating most of the chords. In addition, he has opted for rather quiet tempi, which explains why he needs two discs, whereas in most other performances one disc suffices. This also created some space for two additional works, the Prelude, fugue and allegro in E flat (BWV 998) and the Suite in e minor (BWV 996). What gave me considerable problems is the lack of synchronization of the two hands. This is part of historical performance practice of baroque keyboard music, but it is especially noticeable here, because on the lute-harpsichord the sound dissolves more quickly than on the common harpsichord. I found it hard to listen to these performances with my headphones, as I usually do with review discs. A little more distance to the instrument does make a difference, and listening through speakers was certainly helpful. Rübsam also makes extensive use of rubato, and that may not be to everyone's liking too. I had to get used to this recording, but after a while I somehow warmed to it, and in the end, I would not want to miss it, especially because of the lovely sound of the lute-harpsichord and the different perspective it offers.
The second disc has more to offer than just works by Bach. Under the title 'Little Books', Francesco Corti [2] has put together a programme of pieces that can be found in the various collections that circulated within the Bach family. These include the Andreas Bach Book, the Möller manuscript and the two Klavierbüchlein, for Wilhelm Friedemann and Anna Magdalena Bach respectively. The first two contain mainly pieces that Bach studied in his youth and some early works from his own pen. The latter two include pieces that were either used for teaching or for edification, and for music making in the Bach household. The result is a picture of a composer who studied music of earlier generations to hone his skills, and who, in his later years, had an open ear for the output of colleagues, be it from Germany (Telemann) or elsewhere (Couperin). In his programming Corti tries to link some pieces together, for instance the fourth French Suite (BWV 815) - preceded by the Prelude BWV 815a - and a piece by Couperin, thus emphasizing French influence in Bach's oeuvre. Corti also plays the fourth Biblical Sonata by Kuhnau, Bach's predecessor in Leipzig. His brother Johann Christoph included these sonatas in the Andreas Bach Book, and they undoubtedly inspired Bach to write the Capriccio sopra la lontananza del fratello dilettissimo, which Corti also included. The transcription of an orchestral suite by Telemann is also interesting. Unfortunately, we only get some of its movements; the other are only available as digital downloads. Corti is a brilliant harpsichordist who convincingly demonstrates his skills here. However, his choice of tempi is a bit undifferentiated. In the Capriccio, the Aria di Postiglione has the tempo indication allegro poco, but Corti seems to have overlooked the poco. His playing does not breathe enough, and often I wished for some relaxation. In Georg Böhm's Prelude, Fugue and Postlude, he seems to want to imitate the organ. However, it is not an organ piece, but a keyboard work that can be played either on the organ or on a strung keyboard. The sound here is a little too dense and too massive. Telemann's suite comes off best.
The Capriccio sopra la lontananza del fratello dilettissimo is also part of the programme that Luca Oberti [3] recorded under the title 'An Italian Journey'. One may question its inclusion, because, as I have already noted, this piece is modelled after Kuhnau's Biblical Sonatas. The connection with Italy is rather indirect. Incidentally, Oberti is more convincing than Corti in this work, mainly because of his more appropriate tempi. The other works can certainly be described as 'Italian', such as the two transcriptions of concertos by Vivaldi (BWV 972) and Alessandro Marcello (BWV 974) respectively. In both concertos, Oberti plays the left hand staccato in the slow movements, which is not required in the score and does not sound very nice either. The middle movement of the Concerto BWV 974 is played rather awkwardly, and the lyricism of this beautiful movement does not come off. The other pieces are much better: the Fantasy and Fugue BWV 904, the Aria variata alla maniera italiana and the Italian Concerto. Oberti plays a copy of a Taskin harpsichord, which might not be the most logical choice. Overall, I have mixed feelings about this recording. There are quite some beautiful moments, but also some things that are disappointing or even annoying.
The programme that Tilman Skowroneck [4] put together, looks pretty conventional. It opens with the sixth English Suite, continues with Prelude, fugue and allegro in E flat (BWV 998), and ends with a harpsichord transcription of the Partita in g minor (BWV 1004) for solo violin. It is mainly the latter piece which makes this CD interesting. Such transcriptions are not uncommon, but here we are dealing with a version made by Gustav Leonhardt. During his career he often played transcriptions of pieces that Bach composed for other instruments. In 2017 his former student, Siebe Henstra, published a collection of such transcriptions. The version played here is taken from this edition, with one exception. In the case of the Ciaccona, Skowroneck systematically compared several recordings of recitals. "The version of the Ciaccona presented here is an accumulation of the outcomes of these comparisons". The printed transcriptions only give an impression of the versions that Leonhardt has played over the years. He obviously viewed the transcription practice as a work in progress. It is not surprising that Skowroneck is strongly influenced by Leonhardt, because his development and career are closely linked to this pioneer of historical performance practice. He was one of his students and his father, the harpsichord maker Martin Skowroneck, worked closely with Leonhardt and built harpsichords for him. Tilman Skowroneck himself writes that his views are not identical with those of Leonhardt, but have not fundamentally departed from them. That is obvious in this recording, and there is nothing wrong with that, especially since Leonhardt is no longer with us. Rhythmic precision and subtle agogic are among the characteristics of his playing. The partita is the most interesting piece on this CD and is given an incisive performance. Lovers of Bach's harpsichord works should not hesitate to add this CD to their collection.
I don't see any pressing reasons for this in case of the next disc. It seems that the American harpsichordist Jory Vinikour [5] almost only performs in his own country and because of that he is probably not that well-known elsewhere. His programme is not original: the Italian Concerto, the Overture in the French Style and the Chromatic fantasy and fugue are some of Bach's best-known harpsichord works. The last piece, Prelude and fugue BWV 894, is a little less familiar. It belongs among a category of works in Bach's oeuvre that are not badly represented on CD, but are not really well-known either. A special feature - and this is where Vinikour stands out from the competition - is that the andante from the Sonata BWV 964 is inserted between the prelude and fugue. This sonata is Bach's own transcription of his Sonata in a minor (BWV 2003) for solo violin. However, does that really make sense? This sonata is available in several recordings, and I do not see why this one movement should be isolated from its original context. Be that as it may, Vinikour is a very good harpsichordist who delivers fine performances of the selected pieces. That said, I often longed for a more breathing style of playing.
Finally, I return to Wolfgang Rübsam [6]. He not only recorded the French suites on the lute-harpsichord, but a few years earlier also the Goldberg Variations for Naxos. Given the overwhelming number of recordings of this work available, it is not easy to offer something different. Like in his recording of the French Suites, Rübsam does so here by his choice of instrument, but also by his interpretation. What I noted with regard to his recording of the French Suites also goes for his performance of the Goldberg Variations. There is little differentiation in tempo, and overall his tempi are rather slow. Variation No. 25, taking almost 8 minutes, is probably the slowest I've ever heard. Since Rübsam needs only one disc, you may understand that he is rather economical in his repeats. Personally, I find the tempi problematic, but the bigger problem is the extreme lack of synchronization between the two hands. Every now and then they seem to move completely independently of one another. In case of the French Suites, where this is less extreme, the use of speakers instead of headphones partly solved the problem, but that does not make a substantial difference here. To be honest, I find it unbearable, especially in combination with the slow tempi, the extensive rubato and the many ornaments, as well as the frequent arpeggiation of chords. Whereas, after some time, I was able to get used to the French Suites and even came to appreciate them, I fail to like this interpretation of the Goldberg Variations. One is well advised to listen to some tracks on the internet before deciding to buy this CD.
[1] French Suites (BWV 812-817)
Wolfgang Rüsam, lute-harpsichord
Brilliant Classics 96227 (© 2020) details
[2] "Little Books"
Francesco Corti, harpsichord
Arcana A480 (© 2020) details
[3] "An Italian Journey"
Luca Oberti, harpsichord
Arcana A443 (© 2018) details
[4] Harpsichord works
Tilman Skowroneck, harpsichord
TYXart TXA19133 (© 2020) details
[5] "Harpsichord Works"
Jory Vinikour, harpsichord
Sono Luminus DSL-92239 (© 2020) details
[6] Goldberg Variations (BWV 988)
Wolfgang Rübsam, lute-harpsichord
Naxos 8.573921 (© 2018) details
The second disc has more to offer than just works by Bach. Under the title 'Little Books', Francesco Corti [2] has put together a programme of pieces that can be found in the various collections that circulated within the Bach family. These include the Andreas Bach Book, the Möller manuscript and the two Klavierbüchlein, for Wilhelm Friedemann and Anna Magdalena Bach respectively. The first two contain mainly pieces that Bach studied in his youth and some early works from his own pen. The latter two include pieces that were either used for teaching or for edification, and for music making in the Bach household. The result is a picture of a composer who studied music of earlier generations to hone his skills, and who, in his later years, had an open ear for the output of colleagues, be it from Germany (Telemann) or elsewhere (Couperin). In his programming Corti tries to link some pieces together, for instance the fourth French Suite (BWV 815) - preceded by the Prelude BWV 815a - and a piece by Couperin, thus emphasizing French influence in Bach's oeuvre. Corti also plays the fourth Biblical Sonata by Kuhnau, Bach's predecessor in Leipzig. His brother Johann Christoph included these sonatas in the Andreas Bach Book, and they undoubtedly inspired Bach to write the Capriccio sopra la lontananza del fratello dilettissimo, which Corti also included. The transcription of an orchestral suite by Telemann is also interesting. Unfortunately, we only get some of its movements; the other are only available as digital downloads. Corti is a brilliant harpsichordist who convincingly demonstrates his skills here. However, his choice of tempi is a bit undifferentiated. In the Capriccio, the Aria di Postiglione has the tempo indication allegro poco, but Corti seems to have overlooked the poco. His playing does not breathe enough, and often I wished for some relaxation. In Georg Böhm's Prelude, Fugue and Postlude, he seems to want to imitate the organ. However, it is not an organ piece, but a keyboard work that can be played either on the organ or on a strung keyboard. The sound here is a little too dense and too massive. Telemann's suite comes off best.
The Capriccio sopra la lontananza del fratello dilettissimo is also part of the programme that Luca Oberti [3] recorded under the title 'An Italian Journey'. One may question its inclusion, because, as I have already noted, this piece is modelled after Kuhnau's Biblical Sonatas. The connection with Italy is rather indirect. Incidentally, Oberti is more convincing than Corti in this work, mainly because of his more appropriate tempi. The other works can certainly be described as 'Italian', such as the two transcriptions of concertos by Vivaldi (BWV 972) and Alessandro Marcello (BWV 974) respectively. In both concertos, Oberti plays the left hand staccato in the slow movements, which is not required in the score and does not sound very nice either. The middle movement of the Concerto BWV 974 is played rather awkwardly, and the lyricism of this beautiful movement does not come off. The other pieces are much better: the Fantasy and Fugue BWV 904, the Aria variata alla maniera italiana and the Italian Concerto. Oberti plays a copy of a Taskin harpsichord, which might not be the most logical choice. Overall, I have mixed feelings about this recording. There are quite some beautiful moments, but also some things that are disappointing or even annoying.
The programme that Tilman Skowroneck [4] put together, looks pretty conventional. It opens with the sixth English Suite, continues with Prelude, fugue and allegro in E flat (BWV 998), and ends with a harpsichord transcription of the Partita in g minor (BWV 1004) for solo violin. It is mainly the latter piece which makes this CD interesting. Such transcriptions are not uncommon, but here we are dealing with a version made by Gustav Leonhardt. During his career he often played transcriptions of pieces that Bach composed for other instruments. In 2017 his former student, Siebe Henstra, published a collection of such transcriptions. The version played here is taken from this edition, with one exception. In the case of the Ciaccona, Skowroneck systematically compared several recordings of recitals. "The version of the Ciaccona presented here is an accumulation of the outcomes of these comparisons". The printed transcriptions only give an impression of the versions that Leonhardt has played over the years. He obviously viewed the transcription practice as a work in progress. It is not surprising that Skowroneck is strongly influenced by Leonhardt, because his development and career are closely linked to this pioneer of historical performance practice. He was one of his students and his father, the harpsichord maker Martin Skowroneck, worked closely with Leonhardt and built harpsichords for him. Tilman Skowroneck himself writes that his views are not identical with those of Leonhardt, but have not fundamentally departed from them. That is obvious in this recording, and there is nothing wrong with that, especially since Leonhardt is no longer with us. Rhythmic precision and subtle agogic are among the characteristics of his playing. The partita is the most interesting piece on this CD and is given an incisive performance. Lovers of Bach's harpsichord works should not hesitate to add this CD to their collection.
I don't see any pressing reasons for this in case of the next disc. It seems that the American harpsichordist Jory Vinikour [5] almost only performs in his own country and because of that he is probably not that well-known elsewhere. His programme is not original: the Italian Concerto, the Overture in the French Style and the Chromatic fantasy and fugue are some of Bach's best-known harpsichord works. The last piece, Prelude and fugue BWV 894, is a little less familiar. It belongs among a category of works in Bach's oeuvre that are not badly represented on CD, but are not really well-known either. A special feature - and this is where Vinikour stands out from the competition - is that the andante from the Sonata BWV 964 is inserted between the prelude and fugue. This sonata is Bach's own transcription of his Sonata in a minor (BWV 2003) for solo violin. However, does that really make sense? This sonata is available in several recordings, and I do not see why this one movement should be isolated from its original context. Be that as it may, Vinikour is a very good harpsichordist who delivers fine performances of the selected pieces. That said, I often longed for a more breathing style of playing.
Finally, I return to Wolfgang Rübsam [6]. He not only recorded the French suites on the lute-harpsichord, but a few years earlier also the Goldberg Variations for Naxos. Given the overwhelming number of recordings of this work available, it is not easy to offer something different. Like in his recording of the French Suites, Rübsam does so here by his choice of instrument, but also by his interpretation. What I noted with regard to his recording of the French Suites also goes for his performance of the Goldberg Variations. There is little differentiation in tempo, and overall his tempi are rather slow. Variation No. 25, taking almost 8 minutes, is probably the slowest I've ever heard. Since Rübsam needs only one disc, you may understand that he is rather economical in his repeats. Personally, I find the tempi problematic, but the bigger problem is the extreme lack of synchronization between the two hands. Every now and then they seem to move completely independently of one another. In case of the French Suites, where this is less extreme, the use of speakers instead of headphones partly solved the problem, but that does not make a substantial difference here. To be honest, I find it unbearable, especially in combination with the slow tempi, the extensive rubato and the many ornaments, as well as the frequent arpeggiation of chords. Whereas, after some time, I was able to get used to the French Suites and even came to appreciate them, I fail to like this interpretation of the Goldberg Variations. One is well advised to listen to some tracks on the internet before deciding to buy this CD.
[1] French Suites (BWV 812-817)
Wolfgang Rüsam, lute-harpsichord
Brilliant Classics 96227 (© 2020) details
[2] "Little Books"
Francesco Corti, harpsichord
Arcana A480 (© 2020) details
[3] "An Italian Journey"
Luca Oberti, harpsichord
Arcana A443 (© 2018) details
[4] Harpsichord works
Tilman Skowroneck, harpsichord
TYXart TXA19133 (© 2020) details
[5] "Harpsichord Works"
Jory Vinikour, harpsichord
Sono Luminus DSL-92239 (© 2020) details
[6] Goldberg Variations (BWV 988)
Wolfgang Rübsam, lute-harpsichord
Naxos 8.573921 (© 2018) details
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
