We come now to
G minor, and it is back to the serious business again. Member Brass-Band-Maestro will probably appreciate this
Prelude, because it was a brass band that Bach had in mind when he wrote it. We shall send him a personal message in case he does not regularly follow this thread (Mr. Maestro that is, not Bach). We know he has arranged other works for band so we shall ask whether this one might be worth a try. (
Rapid-share or
send-space.) It would sound very well on the Pier would not it? But we should
warn Members that these tones will lodge in the mind for days after each audition. We are especially fond of the tenor part at certain points, for example in bars ten and sixteen; the thing becomes entirely Elgarian with those massed euphoniums does not it. As for double dots, they are all very well in flighty France but they are simply out of place in a performance by Germans, or indeed by any manly and sober Englishman who does not hold with exaggeration. Single dots are amply sufficient for
our purposes thank you very much!
We hesitate to offer a comparison because - although an organ might manage something! - no harpsichord clavichord or piano-forte performance of this work can possibly amount to very much. But let us at least sample
Svyatozluff! What slow monotonous and wearisome stuff his interpretation is! We know Bach wrote
Largo over the piece but he did not mean it to be quite as
Largo as that! It sounds as though Svyatozluff has been told to concentrate on getting the double dots right to the exclusion of all else. (Svyatozluff's
G minor Fugue though, to be presented to-morrow, is considerably better.)
But we urge the Member (with great respect) to "think again" about his vision of this movement! We are certain (for sure) that when Bach deliberately imitated the
French style he wished for the French
ambience to be clear and unhindered. (He did this on a number of occasions.) He was quite a cosmopolitan composer we believe, and understood well the "Italian style" (from his numerous transcriptions of
concerti by Vivaldi, together with single movements from other Italians). He was also immersed thoroughly in the "French style", knowing well the pomposity of the dotted rhythms that characterised the French Overture. He must surely have studied (and played!) numerous works of the French
clavecinists both for his education and enlightenment. This movement we believe is just another essay indicative of his interest in French music, but in which (as even in those consciously of Italian influence) he asserts the German love of harmony and counterpoint.
Since (as we assert) this Prelude is a simple
morceau capturing the contemporary French liking for dotted rhythms, it seems obvious to us that the prevailing rhythm should indeed be allowed to be
the prevailing rhythm. Whether or not one wishes (as we believe one should) to "double dot" the dotted-semiquaver/demisemiquaver combinations, one must (we assert) at least ensure that on those occasions when the dotted-quaver/semiquaver pattern coexists with them (as for example in bar 3, beat 4) the short notes should be made to
coincide rhythmically! We say this not only out of deference to the actual style being imitated, but also because in Bach's autograph copy he indicated an actual
vertical alignment of these notes (i.e. following respective dots, one voice bearing the semiquaver symbol was placed in vertical alignment with another note bearing the demisemiquaver figure). We feel, therefore, that this aspect should be adhered to and fully respected (even though we should still have felt the same had they not been so visually aligned!).
When the Member impishly writes:
...no harpsichord clavichord or piano-forte performance of this work can possibly amount to very much.
...we are not regrettably in agreement (though we fully recognize that the Member is not being entirely serious!). So let us for the moment put our brass band aside and listen to a different rendition (and one that Bach would we think more easily recognise)...
CLICKBaz
