|
Baz
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #630 on: 09:46:51, 21-08-2008 » |
|
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. Thank you Mr Grew - we enjoyed your crackpot performance very much. Baz |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
autoharp
|
|
« Reply #631 on: 10:15:51, 21-08-2008 » |
|
We infer this 2-movement "Bagatelle" to be a product of the so-called "English Renaissance" masquerading under the guise of "Neo-Classicism".
Baz
Could be, unlikely though it may seem. By coincidence, I've just discovered that Cyril Scott wrote a harpsichord concerto in 1937. It will be performed for the first time in 70 years at St. John's Smith Square in London on September 15th. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #632 on: 09:41:23, 22-08-2008 » |
|
So far everything we have heard from the Third Clavier Übung has been ancillary to the main communion service. But to-day we have come at last to the first setting of the Catechism Hymns proper, " Dies sind die heil'gen zehn Gebot'" (" These are the Ten Numinous Commands"), treated by Bach as in the first instance a five-part chorale fantasia. According to Spitta the Cantus firmus brought in in canon on the octave "sheds a light on the poetic meaning." It suggests "the idea of bondage to the law," he says. Do members find that a little far-fetched? Certainly we cannot find anything which is played exactly ten times; Bach was above that kind of literality perhaps. Here ( rapid-share and send-space) this supremely beautiful work has been arranged by a consummate crackpot for Oboe, Clarinet, mostly Pizzicato Double Bass, Wordless Boy Alto, and one finger on the Organ, the Cantus firmus being assigned to the two latter parts. And as comparison, Matteo's turn has come round again! Here he is. But owing to the unfavourable reception he has in certain quarters already had it may be desirable to post later in the day a better rendition of this work by a second organist - Helmut for example but not necessarily him - so as to make members feel better. One oddity of Matteo's performance is that at least to our ears he plays the frequent figure of three semi-quavers - after a semi-quaver rest - as a quaver rest followed by a semi-quaver triplet. Do other members hear that the same way? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baz
Guest
|
|
« Reply #633 on: 09:55:16, 22-08-2008 » |
|
...According to Spitta the Cantus firmus brought in in canon on the octave "sheds a light on the poetic meaning." It suggests "the idea of bondage to the law," he says. Do members find that a little far-fetched? Certainly we cannot find anything which is played exactly ten times; Bach was above that kind of literality perhaps...
But he was not above it! It will be discovered tomorrow that the second setting (another Fugetta) deliberately fashions a peculiar "subject" from the chorale melody, and that the structural simplicity of that piece is one in which the resulting theme is stated - yes - exactly ten times! Baz |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baz
Guest
|
|
« Reply #634 on: 10:43:14, 22-08-2008 » |
|
So far everything we have heard from the Third Clavier Übung has been ancillary to the main communion service. But to-day we have come at last to the first setting of the Catechism Hymns proper, " Dies sind die heil'gen zehn Gebot'" (" These are the Ten Numinous Commands"), treated by Bach as in the first instance a five-part chorale fantasia. According to Spitta the Cantus firmus brought in in canon on the octave "sheds a light on the poetic meaning." It suggests "the idea of bondage to the law," he says. Do members find that a little far-fetched? Certainly we cannot find anything which is played exactly ten times; Bach was above that kind of literality perhaps. Here ( rapid-share and send-space) this supremely beautiful work has been arranged by a consummate crackpot for Oboe, Clarinet, mostly Pizzicato Double Bass, Wordless Boy Alto, and one finger on the Organ, the Cantus firmus being assigned to the two latter parts. And as comparison, Matteo's turn has come round again! Here he is. But owing to the unfavourable reception he has in certain quarters already had it may be desirable to post later in the day a better rendition of this work by a second organist - Helmut for example but not necessarily him - so as to make members feel better. One oddity of Matteo's performance is that at least to our ears he plays the frequent figure of three semi-quavers - after a semi-quaver rest - as a quaver rest followed by a semi-quaver triplet. Do other members hear that the same way? Matteo we feel at last reveals his true colours here. We now know (as we suspected previously) that he never has bothered to consult the original engraving. Instead we can tell that the only edition of the work he has ever seen is the wholly unreliable Die Neue Bach-Ausgabe (Vol. 4). We can tell this because in bar 50 he plays the final pedal note as a low C instead of Bach's low D (that absurd misprint having unbelievably been allowed to stand). Mr Grew's performance does not make this error, as one should expect in the case of a "musical" person. We also now know that Matteo is in reality what may be termed a "frustrated cinema organist" (possibly, for reasons unknown, having been denied his true vocation no doubt at an early age). Why else should he have laboured so hard to make a perfectly nice instrument sound only like a Wurlitzer? Here, not only content with nanny-goat tremolandi, he even treats us to tuned percussion! He may feel that the "church acoustic" excuses this, but we are not fooled! What we do not hear (but above all should) is the carefully-worked and immaculately-articulated canonic cantus firmus (being, for some reason, merely buried beyond audio receptivity by all the stupid clangs and wobbles). Bach we feel should not be "fiddled with" in this manner. As for his ubiquitous view of tempo and rhythm (the former of which is we feel too slow - if only a little, while the latter merely stutters along with the musical equivalent of a speech impediment) the less said the better. This tragedy is the more unfortunate because here, in the first of Bach's two extended canonic cantus firmus settings, we should have come away from the experience feeling elated and satisfied (rather than simply annoyed). The source melody - which appears through its initial 6 repeated notes to be especially unpromising as a cantus firmus melody - is shown here...  Who else we ask had the capability of turning this into a canonic melody surrounded by the most interesting counterpoint and the most expressive harmony other than Bach? The original engraving, meticulous in its clarity and attention to detail, gives an immediately clear visual presentation of the canonic cantus firmus displayed throughout in the LH of what (despite Harvey Grace's stupid assertion that this piece "is an interesting failure") we think is one of Bach's most impressive achievements.      Baz |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10:45:32, 22-08-2008 by Baz »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #635 on: 13:03:30, 22-08-2008 » |
|
. . . in bar 50 he plays the final pedal note as a low C instead of Bach's low D (that absurd misprint having unbelievably been allowed to stand). Mr Grew's performance does not make this error, as one should expect in the case of a "musical" person. . . . The source melody - which appears through its initial 6 repeated notes to be especially unpromising as a cantus firmus melody - is shown here... Who else we ask had the capability of turning this into a canonic melody surrounded by the most interesting counterpoint and the most expressive harmony other than Bach? No it was not we it was something the Novello edition got right. We note that the error does appear already in the 1875 Bach-Gesellschaft edition. We are grateful to the Member once again for posting the words and music, as well as the invaluable original engraving of Bach's work. Here for those without much German is a literal rendering of the lines: These are the numinous ten commands,
Which God our Lord gave us
By way of Moses, His true servant,
High on the Mount
Of Sinai.
Lord have mercy!Since again as anticipated Matteo has been found wanting members may be interested in contrast to hear how Helmut in Strasbourg manages it. . . . Unfortunately we find there to be a number - eight or so - "glitches" in this! If any one comes up with a better version we shall with pleasure at once "scrub" this one! |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 13:05:51, 22-08-2008 by Sydney Grew »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baz
Guest
|
|
« Reply #636 on: 13:24:47, 22-08-2008 » |
|
...Since again as anticipated Matteo has been found wanting members may be interested in contrast to hear how Helmut in Strasbourg manages it. . . . Unfortunately we find there to be a number - eight or so - "glitches" in this! If any one comes up with a better version we shall with pleasure at once "scrub" this one! Now that is more like what we expect! The only noticeable "glitches" were those that came from the file rather than the performance. We have pointed out to the Member before that all the performances he posts of Helmut begin not at the beginning but at some point thereafter! In this case we are denied the first two crotchets (and if the Member remains unconvinced we can post him back the file we have downloaded so that he can hear it for himself). That said, we must confess that we still have a lurking suspicion that even Helmut plays a low pedal C at the end of bar 50 - we shall subject this moment to further analysis! Baz |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baz
Guest
|
|
« Reply #637 on: 13:35:27, 22-08-2008 » |
|
I must offer Member Grew an apology! I have just saved Helmut's file to disc, and inserted it into an audio editing program. IT IS COMPLETE and lacks none of the opening. The problem seems always therefore to be when it is opened (directly from Sendspace) with Windows Media Player where (and seemingly only for Helmut!) the opening is omitted. So the Member is blameless, and I shall be contacting those wretched people at Microsoft forthwith to complain!
Baz
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #638 on: 16:11:20, 22-08-2008 » |
|
. . .I have just saved Helmut's file to disc, and inserted it into an audio editing program. IT IS COMPLETE and lacks none of the opening. . . . We are glad to hear that at least, but the real glitches begin at the thirty-second mark, then at the one minute four second mark, and so on. It is if the truth be told an inferior thing we picked up from some forgotten corner of the Inter-Net long long ago. Despite all that it is nevertheless possible to perceive that it is/was a performance of considerable distinction. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
increpatio
|
|
« Reply #639 on: 19:54:18, 22-08-2008 » |
|
This is a crackpot interpretation if ever we did hear one. That said, we do have something of a fondness for that sort of sonic interference and distortion ...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #640 on: 10:28:16, 23-08-2008 » |
|
The source melody - which appears through its initial 6 repeated notes to be especially unpromising as a cantus firmus melody - is shown here... Who else we ask had the capability of turning this into a canonic melody surrounded by the most interesting counterpoint and the most expressive harmony other than Bach? The original engraving, meticulous in its clarity and attention to detail, gives an immediately clear visual presentation of the canonic cantus firmus displayed throughout in the LH of what (despite Harvey Grace's stupid assertion that this piece "is an interesting failure") we think is one of Bach's most impressive achievements. The member's reference to Harvey Grace caught our eye and we discovered that his book " The Organ Works of Bach" is obtainable from the Inter-Net here. Much of the stuff he writes about BWV678 is indeed silly, but he does at least draw attention to the fact that Schweitzer understood the work to be - in part - programme music, the free parts representing "the moral disorder of the world," and the slow canon "the law." But that latter idea is the same as Spitta's reported yesterday is it not? And did it start with Spitta we wonder? Who or what is the best or earliest reference for Bach's "programmes"? We still feel it to be far-fetched, but the music is undeniably beautiful - not at all a "failure" - and a seeking out of its inspiration is sure to repay us. Those descending chromatic lines alone are a infallible indicator of quality in Bach's music are not they? To-day we turn to its companion " Fugetta," BWV679, which does indeed as Mr. Baziron writes play its subject appropriately ten times, and is as was yesterday's fantasia based upon the chorale " Dies sind die heil'gen zehn Gebot'" (" These are the Ten Numinous Commands"). Encouraged by John West's marking " Allegro Scherzando" in the Novello edition our anonymous crackpot decided to interpret this work in the style of a Beethoven symphony, such that the whole thing flashes by in the twinkling of an eye ( rapid-share / send-space). It is one of the silliest offerings in the whole series! As comparison a much more sober approach is demonstrated by Wolfgang. Probably it is very difficult for organists to play this work rapidly, because of all the repeated notes incorporated from the chorale melody into the subject of the fugue. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baz
Guest
|
|
« Reply #641 on: 11:05:46, 23-08-2008 » |
|
...To-day we turn to its companion " Fugetta," BWV679, which does indeed as Mr. Baziron writes play its subject appropriately ten times, and is as was yesterday's fantasia based upon the chorale " Dies sind die heil'gen zehn Gebot'" (" These are the Ten Numinous Commands"). Encouraged by John West's marking " Allegro Scherzando" in the Novello edition our anonymous crackpot decided to interpret this work in the style of a Beethoven symphony, such that the whole thing flashes by in the twinkling of an eye ( rapid-share / send-space). It is one of the silliest offerings in the whole series! The Member in his usually logical and sensible way offers a view with which again we can only agree. To be honest, the piece needed only a chromatically-contrived counter-melody (as in the previous setting) and we should surely have had a re-run of The flight of the bumblebee should not we? ...As comparison a much more sober approach is demonstrated by Wolfgang. Probably it is very difficult for organists to play this work rapidly, because of all the repeated notes incorporated from the chorale melody into the subject of the fugue. Yes - we feel that Wolfgang provides a compelling account here, although we should ourselves a) take it just a little less speedily, b) articulate the repeated notes of the theme so as to emphasise more strongly the main beats (as any string player would naturally do through the bowing), and c) resist the temptation of slowing down too early as the end is approached. We are not incidentally at all convinced by attempts to pin down Bach's instrumental works under the label "Programme music". But we do feel a more subtle artistic connection with the texts underlying the set melodies, and may be disposed to enlarge upon this in connection with the longer Vater unser setting when its turn arrives here.   Baz |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #642 on: 10:04:26, 24-08-2008 » |
|
We thank Mr. B. again for posting the original of the piece in 12/8. The second part of Bach's ideal service is the Credo, " Wir glauben all' an einen Gott, Schöpfer" (" All of us believe in one God, the Creator"). "All" meant "all those singing together" presumably, although it would certainly be possible for at least one singer NOT to believe, in which case he would be putting a lie into the mouths of all the others! That is the sort of philosophical trouble which so quickly arises once people start getting together and socializing. The first of Bach's pair of settings of the Credo, the Chorale Fugue BWV 680, has already appeared in this thread, but we give it here again in its allotted place in the sequence ( rapid-share / send-space). And we cannot do better than reproduce the commentary on the work by Sydney Grew the Elder, certainly the most astute among the throng of our English Bach scholars: "The subject is formed from the opening line of the tune, and it proceeds until towards the end (bar eighty-nine) the melody of the line appears in full. The fugue is for the manuals only. The pedals have an independent subject, which strikes in freely from time to time; though in one passage it yields its first notes for treatment by the manuals. This piece was nick-named by certain English organists in the nineteenth century the 'Giant's Fugue,' because, as they said, the pedal subject suggested a giant climbing the stairs and then tumbling down from the top to the bottom. The idea is typical of most realistic or pictorial interpretations of Bach, since it embodies, first a disregard of the positive subject of the piece, which is defined by the hymn, and secondly a metaphorizing of music that leads to very ambiguous issues indeed: thus the giant figures the believer, and if his experience is a 'here we go up and here we go down,' the moral is that the believer simply cannot remain believing."Of course he is absolutely right is not he! As comparison it is the turn of André again. But he is not very jolly and we find more fun in the crackpot interpretation, even. Lest members should feel short-changed by the repetition we intend if possible to present the second piece, the shorter Chorale Fugetta BWV 681, to-day at a later hour. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 11:10:46, 24-08-2008 by Sydney Grew »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Baz
Guest
|
|
« Reply #643 on: 11:12:13, 24-08-2008 » |
|
...The second part of Bach's ideal service is the Credo, "Wir glauben all' an einen Gott, Schöpfer" ("All of us believe in one God, the Creator"). "All" meant "all those singing together" presumably, although it would certainly be possible for at least one singer NOT to believe, in which case he would be putting a lie into the mouths of all the others! That is the sort of philosophical trouble which so quickly arises once people start getting together and socializing.
We do not think the problem lies with people socializing, but lies at the door of those religious autocrats (in this case Martin Luther) who appear on the scene from time to time and perpetrate a kind of "social engineering" whereby all their subjects are now declared to be religious "communists". By having altered the 'first person' from the singular ( Credo) to the plural ( We believe), those present have now become part of a 'system' in which as long as the majority believe, it is not a lie for all to profess this even if members present do not themselves believe! It is the system that is being satisfied, and not the wishes and feelings of the individual. The same has, of course, now been adopted both by the modern Anglicans and the modern Catholics. It is just another form of 'dumbing down' that we believe sums up the entire social philosophy of the later 20th century (and continues to be censured even on this MB upon other threads and within other contexts). The first of Bach's pair of settings of the Credo, the Choral Fugue BWV 680, has already appeared in this thread, but we give it here again in its allotted place in the sequence ( rapid-share / send-space). And we cannot do better than reproduce the commentary on the work by Sydney Grew the Elder, certainly the most astute among the throng of our English Bach scholars: "The subject is formed from the opening line of the tune, and it proceeds until towards the end (bar eighty-nine) the melody of the line appears in full. The fugue is for the manuals only. The pedals have an independent subject, which strikes in freely from time to time; though in one passage it yields its first notes for treatment by the manuals. This piece was nick-named by certain English organists in the nineteenth century the 'Giant's Fugue,' because, as they said, the pedal subject suggested a giant climbing the stairs and then tumbling down from the top to the bottom. The idea is typical of most realistic or pictorial interpretations of Bach, since it embodies, first a disregard of the positive subject of the piece, which is defined by the hymn, and secondly a metaphorizing of music that leads to very ambiguous issues indeed: thus the giant figures the believer, and if his experience is a 'here we go up and here we go down,' the moral is that the believer simply cannot remain believing."Of course he is absolutely right is not he! Well we do not believe him to be absolutely right! For one thing we do not consider it to be a Fugue. No fugue known to us provides the fugal development only within the upper parts, leaving the bass line as an ostinato in a way that makes it stand out in aggressive isolation. Fugues normally present a structure within which all the voices have an equal share in the material and its development. He is also not correct in prolonging the 'Giant' myth (though we do not suppose he himself believed it) instead of focussing upon the salient details of the piece itself (some of which, of course, he did speak of). The piece is of course (as Sydney Grew the Elder said) based largely upon the opening of the chorale melody, treated throughout in fugal style upon the manuals. But we ourselves should offer an explanation for the presence of the bass ostinato: it is we think Bach's way of conveying through his setting the 'solidity' and 'steadfastness' of the faith for which belief is being expressed and asserted through the text of the chorale. As comparison it is the turn of André again. But he is not very jolly and we find more fun in the crackpot interpretation, even. Lest members should feel short-changed by the repetition we intend if possible to present the second piece, the shorter Chorale Fugetta BWV 681, to-day at a later hour. The Lutheran source melody shows the opening phrase which Bach used as the basis for his fugato treatment...   The engraving below contains also the following shorter setting (BWV 681 which Member Grew will be posting later today), and it can be seen in both how Bach has used the opening chorale material - in the latter case as an elaborate cantus coloratus with profuse ornamentations...    Baz |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sydney Grew
Guest
|
|
« Reply #644 on: 14:35:42, 24-08-2008 » |
|
We do not think the problem lies with people socializing, but lies at the door of those religious autocrats (in this case Martin Luther) who appear on the scene from time to time and perpetrate a kind of "social engineering" whereby all their subjects are now declared to be religious "communists". By having altered the 'first person' from the singular (Credo) to the plural (We believe), those present have now become part of a 'system' in which as long as the majority believe, it is not a lie for all to profess this even if members present do not themselves believe! It is the system that is being satisfied, and not the wishes and feelings of the individual. The same has, of course, now been adopted both by the modern Anglicans and the modern Catholics. It is just another form of 'dumbing down' that we believe sums up the entire social philosophy of the later 20th century (and continues to be censured even on this MB upon other threads and within other contexts). Very wise words those we find about autocrats and the "system"! The Lutheran source melody shows the opening phrase which Bach used as the basis for his fugato treatment... And again thanks for the words and the wonderful engravings! Here is a rough and ready translation of the lines of the hymn: We believe
All of us in one God,
The Creator of Heaven and of the Earth,
Who gave Himself as Father,
So that we might become His children.
He will forever nourish us,
And preserve our body and soul;
He will defend us against all misfortune,
No harm shall come to us.
He provides for us,
Cares for us and watches over us,
And watches over us;
He is all-powerful.Philipp Spitta - a German despite his curious name - in his discussion of this collection writes that "Bach always deduced the emotional character of his organ chorales from the whole hymn, and not from its first verse alone. In this way he generally obtained from the poem some leading thought, which seemed to him of particular importance, and in accordance with which he gave to the composition a poetic and musical character of its own. We must follow out his method in detail in order to be sure that we have grasped his meaning." And he goes on to say about BWV680 in particular that "We feel the influence of Georg Böhm, Bach's favourite model during his 'apprenticeship' at Lüneburg; the Basso quasi ostinato in the organ chorale 'Wir glauben all' an einen Gott' points clearly to his style. The piece is a fugue on the first line of the melody, and has nothing whatever to do with the bass. And this makes the reference to Böhm quite clear; for it was not Bach's usual method to write fugues in which the pedal-part neither took any share in the working-out of the fugue nor brought out any Cantus firmus, but only repeated from time to time a short, independent phrase." Spitta concludes that in this work "two form-ideas are united, that of Böhm's chorale with that of the chorale prelude." Of course it was Spitta who insisted that the St. Luke Passion was authentic, although Brahms at once realised it was not, so it does not do to place too much trust in Spitta's opinions! As foreshadowed we go on now "round the bend" as it were to BWV 681, the Fugetta on " Wir glauben all' an einen Gott" ( rapid-share / send-space). It is Bach in his slow, meditative, almost improvisatory mood - rather like that renowned Air! According to Spitta that is " the French style." And it is - except for the final cadence - in three parts. Here in contrast is how Matteo manages it - a little too jerkily and French-like for us we must confess - but he has a nice organ. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
