The source melody is again that used in the last of the longer Kyrie settings shown earlier in this thread...




...and the original engraving shows again the simplicity that characterises most of the 'shorter' settings found throughout this collection...



Mr Grew's crackpot version is just what we feel the composer intended interpretatively - even though an organ plain and simple was the goal. But what on earth are we to make of Matteo's truly crackpot effort?

We suppose that the totally unrhythmical playing stems from two possible infections: a) he suffers from the habitual 'organist's disease' of hearing what he sees on the written page rather than his performance of it; or b) the performance given to us represents exactly how he feels the movement should flow. Bearing in mind his status we are led to believe (however impossible this may seem) that the latter of the two options applies in this case (though it could easily have been the former with little difference of effect). It may be that, being of Latin stock, he imagines music as a series of recitatives in which the declamation is more or less freely rendered according to mood and circumstance. In this case we suppose that he must have in mind some kind of recitativo accompagnato in which a melody - as yet unclear to him - is freely accompanied by supporting harmonies. This might explain why (for instance) the opening 6 quavers are deliberately made to sound as though they in reality are quaver-semiquaver-semiquaver/quaver-semiquaver-semiquaver. But that only accounts for the first 6 notes in a performance wherein throughout the notated rhythms are deliberately distorted and obscured.

But we believe that Matteo has failed to understand the way in which Bach has provided a coloratus version of the above melody. Comparison of the opening of the plainsong melody (above) will show that its first 3 rising notes are decorated in the coloratus setting by slowly-delivered fully-notated mordents. So the second and third notes are decorative of the first note, and not the fourth. This method of written-out embellishment applies throughout the whole piece. So (taking the opening only as our example, even though this applies also to his entire performance) Matteo's lingering upon notes 1 and 4 actually distorts and misrepresents the composer's intention in having applied coloratus decorations at all.

Additionally, Matteo seems to have managed to find what we think is really the least appropriate registration for this simple piece. Instead of using soft and clear sounds he has given us harsh and unpleasant ones to which he has then added a 16' manual register. This gives an overall abrasive and muddy texture. We wonder again why Matteo wishes to do all this to the music of such a distinguished composer.

Baz

We thank the Member for posting two very uncrackpotty performances, both of which we enjoyed enormously since they each in their own way in our opinion fully realized the composer's vision in this piece. The pleasing things about Mr Grew's "ethereal" rendition were a) its clarity (especially in his manner of projecting the cantus firmus in the Alto voice), and b) its attention to the finest details of both rhythm and texture. Helmut's performance - here given with an organ sound we should die for! - also maintained this clarity and attention to the finest details. Like Mr Grew's effort it was without the slightest blemish. As it tinkled its way along with that wondrous ear-tickling sound, the melody sang through with beauty and clarity in a way that melded perfectly with its surroundings. Interestingly Bach does not prescribe "Manualiter" for this movement, and we thus infer (as did Helmut) that the Alto voice is to be played upon the pedals using an 8' solo stop (a practice that we note in other movements from this and other collections).

Helmut faces a basic question in an intelligent way: "What happens when a group of 2 semiquavers in one voice collides directly with a group of triplet semiquavers in another?". In the original engraving (below) there are some instances when the final notes of corresponding and simultaneous groups are aligned vertically (suggesting that at those times the duplet pairs should be performed as 2+1 rhythms); but equally there seem to be other instances when this alignment is not so clear. Both performances offered a different solution. Mr Grew decided to keep all the rhythms tight and literal, while Helmut decided that he should adopt the "2+1" solution - but only for those moments when the collision was direct. Either rendition is, we feel, perfectly acceptable.

Mr Grew's useful analytic overview of this piece did not mention one other important observation about the genesis of the material Bach uses: the accompanimental theme introduced at the beginning, and then used throughout, is itself a coloratus version of the opening phrase of the chorale melody (below).

The Lutheran liturgy did not differ radically from the Latin liturgy from which it grew but merely "vernacularised" and "communalised" most of the actions and utterances. So we are not surprised to find again that the melody of Allein Gott is a simplified version of one of the Latin Gloria melodies to which a suitable and new German text has been supplied. As in other instances Bach prefers to retain the melodic decorations found in the earlier Lutheran versions (as shown here in stave 1)...



The original engraving is accommodated perfectly upon 2 pages only, and gives a clear visual presentation of the chorale melody in the middle voice (which would have been performed upon the pedals)...




Baz

It was if we rightly understand what it says here once again the "Silbermann organ at the church of St. Peter the Younger in Strasbourg." We thank the member for his illuminating commentary and are gratified that Helmut's performance has been considerably more acceptable and enjoyable than yesterday's!

What a marvellous situation for a musical instrument! It looks almost as though the whole church were built around the organ although of course we are aware that that cannot actually have been so.


Here is a more or less literal translation of the Gloria hymn for those members who may stand in need of one:

    Only to God in the heights let there be veneration
    And gratitude for his Grace*,
    So that now and never more
    No* harm can come to us.
    God is well pleased with us;
    Now there is great peace without cessation,
    All contention has now come to an end.

1. Just as in the case of "Grace" in English, "Gnade" in German can signify either "divine favour/mercy" or "the state of the soul when freed from evil through being so favoured." Of course the word comes from the Greek and its root denotes both "favour" and "desire."
2. The interestingly semi-double negative stands thus in Decius's original 1539 German.

Thank you for those Mr Grew. While we enjoyed Wolfgang's tempo  (a little more relaxed than yours) we have to say that we enjoyed your "crackpot" fluency rather more than Wolfgang's tendency to unexpected (and in our view unnecessary) rubato. We have nothing at all against rhythmic flexibility (within reason) in pieces where it is appropriate - and we are thinking of slow movements that present correspondingly flexible renderings of the melodies) - it does not seem to us quite right in a lively "trio" movement such as this which we feel needs always to maintain its forward momentum.

But Wolfgang did present to us a most interesting way of ending the movement! It is a matter of disputation the extent to which, in approaching the end of a movement, the player should (if at all) slow down. We have long suspected that Bach was often careful actually to indicate this in his notation! Those who expect words like "rall" or "rit" will of course be in for a disappointment. But frequently Bach's final notes we believe indicate through their notation how much slowing down is needed in order to approach them, and then to hold them for the specified time.

In this case, the final note of this lively 6/8 movement is deliberately and carefully written as only a quaver, after which the remainder of the final bar is meticulously filled out with the required rests. Now only an idiot - we believe - would ever press to the end at full tempo and then cut off the final chord abruptly (as if in wallpapering a room the next run had reached the skirting!). So it seems to us that taste demands a) that a decision has to be made at the outset as to the appropriate minimum actual length of time  the final chord needs to be sustained in order to round off the movement, and then b) in approaching this chord a carefully-measured slowing down is mandatory in order that when the final chord is played it is a) in time with regard to the slowing down process, and b) it ends up as being (within that slowing down) the exact length that Bach's notation prescribes. Wolfgang we feel judges this to perfection, and we observe this type of notational exactitude at the ends of very many of Bach's movements. We are therefore disposed to infer that he did this for a practical and artistic reason.

The craftsmanship shown in this movement is immaculate! Even though (for example) the first phrase of the chorale needs to be repeated, Bach carefully inverts the upper two voices upon repeating it. The original engraving is so clear that one wonders why any person should need to play from an Edition (though playing from the original will require familiarity with the Soprano and Alto C clefs - a familiarity commonplace in Bach's time, but now wholly neglected we fear). A single tie was inadvertently omitted by the engraver on page 1, and we leave it to alert members to spot where this was!

Here is the original engraving - and it will be noted that the final page also contains the next piece - BWV 677, which is the Fughetta upon the same chorale. (If our luck holds, Mr Grew may well post performances of this tomorrow for our enjoyment.)









Baz

! ! It is rather pleasant - and it sounds like Martinu.

Actually it is Mr. Grew who is in luck having survived the night and being therefore at the present time well placed to introduce to Members this little fugue or "fughetta" as we believe Bach himself called it, rather along the lines of a "Lambretta" - which always of course reminds us of that pleasant little river Lambro:


It is the third of the three pieces Bach based upon the Gloria hymn "Allein Gott in der Höh' sei Ehr" ("Let there be Veneration only to God in the Heights"), the melody of which Mr. Baziron has been kind enough to post here.

Now it is clear that the counter-subject is an elaboration or decoration of the first line of the chorale tune, but where the subject itself comes from is not at once at all evident. If we look closely however we perceive that it is derived from the second line of the chorale tune. In fact as far as the soprano voice is concerned this subject returns only once and that is at the final cadence. Sydney Grew the Elder calls the work "a little double fugue."

The other notable feature of the work is the admirable chromatic side-slipping at bars thirteen and eighteen.

Here it is in a foolish and bizarre rendition by an anonymous crackpot (rapid-share / send-space); while here it is again, given by our organist of the day André. In fact André's interpretation is quite surprising; how very very reedy it is! - more reedy even than we have been led to expect by Mr. Baziron - whom we thank also for already posting the original engraving in message 624 above.