Discussions in the Week of November 3, 2002

Aryeh Oron wrote (November 5, 2002):
BWV 139 - Introduction

The subject of this week’s discussion (November 3, 2002), according to Thomas Shepherd’s suggested list, is the Chorale Cantata BWV 139 ‘Wohl dem, der sich auf seinen Gott’ (Happy is the man, who to his God). This cantatas for the 23^rd Sunday after Trinity, by an unknown librettist, is based on Johann Christoph Rübe’s hymn of this title, but it has no allusion to either the Epistle or the Gospel for the day. He quoted stanzas one and five for the opening and the closing movements, and paraphrased the others. From Rübe’s chorale the librettists derived the thought of the poem: that we should seek God’s friendship to obtain comfort and help in resisting Satan’s sins.

Recordings

The details of the recordings of this cantata can be found at the following page of the Bach Cantatas Website: Cantata BWV 139 - Recordings

Of the six complete recordings of this cantata, three (Richter [1], Rilling [2], and Harnoncourt [3]) were recorded in the late 1979’s and early 1980’s, and the other three (Gardiner [4], Koopman [5], and Leusink [6]) in the late 1990’s.

You can listen to Harnoncourt’s recording [3] through David Zale Website: http://www.mymp3sonline.net/bach_cantatas/mp3.asp

Additional Information

In the page of recordings mentioned above you can also find links to:
The original German text (at Walter F. Bischof Website); English translations by Francis Browne and Z. Philip Ambrose; Hebrew translation by Aryeh Oron;
Score (Vocal & Piano version);
Commentary: in English by Simon Crouch (Listener’s Guide); in Spanish by Julio Sánchez Reyes.

The question what Bach might have given us if had composed an opera has been asked many times. An example for his dramatic powers is given in the aria for bass (Mvt. 4). Bach’s mastery at setting aria texts is really evident here. He creates a highly dramatic scene, as the soloist describes his misfortunes and how God helps him, by changing the tempo many times along the aria, thus illustrating the successive grief and joy motifs of the text.

I hope to see many of you participating in the discussion.

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 6, 2002):
BWV 139 - Provenance:

See: Cantata BWV 139 - Provenance

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 7, 2002):
BWV 139 - Reconstructions of Mvt. 2 (Tenor Aria) in the Available Recordings:

It is interesting to see how conductors have handled the problem of the missing obligato instrument part. Here are the results of my investigation into this matter:

[1] Richter (1977/8):
Richter usually plays the organ himself and it is very likely that he is the one who is gingerly attempting to plug the obvious lacunae left by the missing part. He does this by repeating only the opening motif in endless variations, but does not attempt to join the existing violin part in parallel thirds or sixths. Thus he deprives the accompaniment from supplying some of the “Toben” [‘turmoil’] that Bach very likely would have underscored musically in the accompaniment as well as in the voice (the coloraturas/melismas.) The repeated 8th notes in the bc (which the organ also plays) provide the only addition momentum in this version which is notable for having the slowest tempo of the seven recordings that I listened to.

[2] Rilling (1979/80):
Along with a very forward bc sound created by violoncello + stringbass combination, a sound that is very solid, if not a bit too loud, the harpsichord produces its usual background sound (I won’t mention here any of the pejorative descriptions that have been used to characterize its sound.) More recently this type of harpsichord bc has largely been abandoned in favor of an organ. In this cantata with its incomplete transmission, we note that Bach has designated only ‘Continuo’ and not ‘Organo’ as he frequently does in other cantatas. But then, we know that another ‘Continuo’ (or ‘Organo’) part was among the missing parts for this cantata.
Truly outstanding is the reconstruction here of the missing part as a second solo violin. This version not only has the violins repeating the opening motif in imitation of each other (this is the same motif that the tenor sings when it enters), but they also engage in a duet consisting of parallel thirds and sixths. There are mvts. elsewhere in the Bach cantatas (BWV 51/4 comes to mind as an example) that provide a similar feeling of excitement (‘Toben’) that is also captured in the fast mvts. of the Two-Violin Concerto BWV 1043. I consider this realization of the missing part to be so successful that, if listeners did not have recourse to the score or did not know beforehand that a part was missing, they would not notice any deficiency and would easily get caught up in the excitement of this mvt.

[3] Harnoncourt (1983):
It is difficult at first to consider that Herbert Tachezi, so well known for his excellent organ playing, would present such an uninspired version of this part. Perhaps Harnoncourt prevented him from achieving anything beyond mediocrity, by not allowing Tachezi to truly improvise the missing part with his right hand. Of course, there is probably no one alive who could improvise such a part properly at sight the way Bach himself is said to have done. Such a part would have to be worked out with considerable forethought and experimentation. Here, in the Harnoncourt recording, none of these precautions seem to have been taken, nor did Harnoncourt consider supplying the missing obligato part with another instrument. Poor Tachezi is left trying to provide chords for almost every 8th note in the bass. All these chords in quick succession, even if played softly, make it sound even more as if Bach had lost his inspiration. This effect is compounded when there is little or no development of any musical materials to replace the missing instrumental part. Perhaps Harnoncourt simply wanted this to be a trio sonata with Alice, his wife playing the single violin part, Harnoncourt himself playing the bc on the cello and Equiluz joining in, as if from a distance. Thus he (Harnoncourt) conveniently overlooked the problem of the missing part.

[4] Gardiner (1998):
The notes to this CD indicate that a 2^nd violin part was reconstructed by Robert Levin. This reconstruction is similar to the one used in the Rilling recording, but has differences as well. That should have made it just as excellent a presentation as Rilling’s, but this is not what happens. Gardiner, suffering from his usual penchant of taking the tempi too fast, decides to take this particular Mvt. 1 ½ minutes faster than Richter’s (and Richter’s tempo was by no means slow!) Something has to give under these circumstances and adjustments have to be made. The violins play soft and fast. A substantial portion of excitement is sacrificed in favor of a breathlessness that lacks any sense of foundation. Imagine the Oistrakhs playing BWV 1043, or perhaps David Oistrakh and Yehudi Menuhin playing this double concerto. Would they even consider cheating on most of the notes by allowing the notes to whisk by without drawing a full bow and allowing the sound to develop fully? What we are encountering in the HIP mvt. when such extremely fast tempi are taken is a subtraction from the original music rather than an enhancement of its beauty. Duly noting the difference between ‘period’ instruments that may have gut rather than wire or wire-woundstrings and are played a semi-tone lower than standard pitch, I would ask you to compare the Rilling version with Gardiner’s and other HIP versions. In which version are the violinists playing from their heart or soul in such a manner to move the listener? Related to this HIP factor is that of the numerous half voices that are only able to sing ‘sotto voce.’ This type of ‘markieren’ (when operatic singers go through a dress rehearsal, they usually do not produce all the sound and emotion that they normally would at a real performance) has become a general standard among most HIP instrumentalists and vocalists (there are always a few exceptions here, and for these we need to be forever grateful.)

[5] Koopman (1999):
The notes to this CD indicate that Koopman supplied his own reconstruction of the missing part, and this he does with a vengeance! He not only adds the missing part, he also adds a 3rd solo instrument! This is too much of a good thing! Talk about variety! Now the listener is treated not only to the original violin, but also two differing woodwinds, an oboe d’amore and a transverse flute. These parts jump about from one octave to another. At times the transverse flute in the low register can not be heard. Most bothersome is the fact that these parts do not always make musical sense as they jump about willy-nilly from octave to octave. Here it has become quite apparent that the two-violin version is much more coherent and logical in a musical sense. Koopman has pulled out all the stops here, but still fails (because of his 'lite' approach) to generate the intensity and excitement contained in the Rilling and, to some degree, the Richter versions.

[6] Leusink (1999):
Leusink has the chest organ join the violoncello in the bc. With the right hand, the organist seems to be playing the missing part that sounds very much like the missing part of the Rilling and Gardiner versions. The only problem is that this missing part lacks any special character and seems at times to recede too much into the background so that the main emphasis is on the 1st violin part alone.

[M-1] Biondi (2000):
Let me attempt a guess at what happened here: Biondi discovered late into the compilation of this CD that there was still room for something else.

Biondi: Ian, I just discovered that there is a Bach aria for violin and tenor voice. We could do that one quickly. I just received a copy of it. I have the solo violin part here. It looks easy and interesting enough. Let’s try it!

Bostridge: Sure, why not? Can we run through it right now?
[After trying a few bars]

Biondi: Wait! [not realizing that another violin or solo obligato part is needed] At that normal tempo, this aria sounds very boring. Let’s take it much faster [this is practically the same extremely fast tempo that Gardiner took], perhaps then it will sound better. Let’s try it once again!
[after going through the 1^st section] Yes, that’s much better because now, at this tempo, it sounds as if I am playing all the time and the listeners won’t notice the slight pauses [where the other solo instrument plays alone.]

[My comment: By taking this fast tempo and preserving only for himself the single solo part (much the same way that Alice Harnoncourt has the solo part all to herself,) Biondi puts himself into a stylistic bind. When Biondi plays the 1^st section (the da capo section) for the 2nd time, he knows that it is obligatory for a baroque artist to add additional embellishments. The notes are already moving much too fast, but now, by including required additional trills, turns, and runs, Biondi makes a spectacle of himself as he tries valiantly to extricate himself from this ‘cage’ of his own making. As the embellishments become faster and harder to play, they become very soft indeed, almost inaudible at times. This is the very escape that many HIP artists rely upon. The listener is then, once again, being cheated of the true, full emotional force of the music. Notes being played fast, soft and lightly do not equal notes played at a normal tempo with each note given a full value and volume, nor do they equal notes played from the heart with reverence and due consideration.]

Aryeh Oron wrote (November 9, 2002):
BWV 139 - Aria for Bass - Background

Mvt. 4 Aria for Bass
Oboe d'amore, Violino, Corno
Das Unglück schlägt auf allen Seiten
(From all sides misfortune wraps)

Albert Schweitzer (Johann Sebastian Bach, 1908; roughly translated from the Hebrew translation):
Three major motifs appear in the aria for bass consecutively. The first symbolises the winding of the heavy chains; the second describes the helping hand, throwing the falling man and raising him up; the third symbolises the blinking flame of the light from afar. This third motif appears already in the introductory ritornello of the aria. With it the movement is ending.

Alec Robertson (The Church Cantatas of J.S. Bach’, 1972):
Bach is wholly involved in this magnificent movement which should properly be described as dramatic scena. It makes one wonders, not for the first time, what he might have given us if he had turned to opera seria. The aria divides up into 11 sections, some very brief, involving many changes of tempo. It is one of those movements which can best be fully appreciated by following the score. A long prelude has the main material of the first section in which the upper instruments picture the unhappy state of the man. The fragmented vocal part, echoed by the dotted figure in the continuo, suggests his struggle to free himself. The second section (vivace) greets the appearance of a helping hand in smooth vocal lines. In the third (andante), with continuo only, consolation's light appears from afar. The opening section is repeated, the vivace also following it, and then both of these to the same words, the aria closing with a coda. (This description does not take account of very brief sections.)

Murray W. Young (The Cantatas of J.S. Bach - An Analytical Guide, 1989):
Bach's mastery at setting aria texts is really evident in this number, accompanied by the two oboi d'amore, a violin and organ continuo. Bach creates a highly dramatic scene, as the soloist describes his misfortunes and how God helps him, by changing the tempo from tristezza to vivace and finally to andante, thus illustrating the successive grief- and joy-motives of the text. The first theme symbolises his depression, the second (the third line) the helping hand of the lord, and the third God's consoling light. The interplay of these three themes, with the da capo of the first two, analyses his emotions in an impressive and picturesque style.

Gerhard Schuhmacher (liner notes to the Teldec’s recording, 1983):
Bach experts are convinced that two solo instruments a were used in the arias No. 2 "Gott ist mein Freund" (God Is my friend) and No.4 "Das Unglück schlägt auf allen Seiten" (The blows of fate come thick and thicker), which have been tentatively reconstructed. [snip] After a short recitative there follows the aria. Here the effect is derived from the dotted figures in the orchestra and the declamatory bass line which is interrupted by a vivace section at the words "doch plötzlich erscheinet die helfende Hand" (then sudden appeareth the Succoring Hand).

The Recordings

[1] Karl Richter with Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau (1977-1978) (5:10)
DFD has to use all his dramatic and vocal resources in order to bring out the multi-facets sections of this aria. And he does it better than any other singer. What is amazing about this performance is that it never sounds exaggerated or under-emphasised. Both the singer and the accompaniment give the impression that they always do the right thing!

[2] Helmuth Rilling with Philippe Huttenlocher (1979-1980) (5:51)
Huttenlocher starts well indeed, but as the movement progresses it seems that he has difficulties to keep up with the fast changes of the aria. It seems that Rilling chose slow tempo for this ain order to facilitate the technical demands for his singer. The accompaniment Rilling supplies is exemplary, colourful and descriptive as the text and the music call for.

[3] Nikolaus Harnoncourt with Robert Holl (1983) (5:08)
Holl has an impressive and deep voice. Yet, it seems to be a little bit heavy for the fast sections. Furthermore, his dramatic abilities are limited and he misses more than reveals. The accompaniment moves lightly ahead, but the singer seems to be in another planet.

[4] John Eliot Gardiner with Gotthold Schwarz (1998) (4:37)
Poor Schwarz. The break-neck tempo adopted by Gardiner for this aria puts an impassable technical obstacle in front of him, and does not leave him any room for meanigful expression. In addition, I find his timbre of voice as the least pleasant of all the six singers who recorded this cantata.

[5] Ton Koopman with Klaus Mertens (1999) (5:03)
In this aria Mertens comes closer to DFD than any other of the contemporary singers. He has the flexibility to cope up with the fast changes and the sense for drama to reveal the different moods. These aria calls for a deeper voice than he has, but it is still a very satisfying rendition. Unlike Gardiner, Koopman chose a ‘normal’ tempo for this aria and it also helps.

[6] Pieter Jan Leusink with Bas Ramselaar (1999) (5:22)
Ramselaar’s approach is very similar to that of Mertens, although his singing here seems to convey a lesser emotional weight. The instrumental playing is also less polished.

Conclusion

A movement to take away: The Aria for Bass with DFD/Richter [1]

As always, I would like to hear other opinions, regarding the above mentioned performances, or other recordings.

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 11, 2002):
BWV 139 - Commentaries: [From Eric Chafe’s “Tonal Allegory in J. S. Bach, Alfred Dürr]

See: Cantata BWV 139 - Commentary

The Recordings:

This week I listened to the following recordings:

Richter (1977-8) [1]; Rilling (1979-80) [2]; Harnoncourt (1983) [3]; Gardiner (1998) [4]; Koopman (1999) [5]; Leusink [6] (1999); Biondi [M-1] (2000)

Comparative timings from slowest to fastest:

Mvt. 1:
Harnoncourt [3] (5:28); Rilling [2] (5:10); Gardiner [4] (4:58); Richter (4:51) [1]; Leusink [6] (4:28); Koopman [5] (4:19)

Mvt. 2:
Richter (6:36) [1]; Leusink [6] (6:14); Harnoncourt [3] (5:55); Rilling [2] (5:32); Koopman [5] (5:31); Biondi [M-1] (5:04); Gardiner [4] (5:03)

Mvt. 4:
Rilling [2] (5:51); Leusink [6] (5:22); Richter [1] (5:10); Harnoncourt [3] (5:08); Koopman [5] (5:03); Gardiner [4] (4:37)

Mvt. 6:
Richter (1:01) [1]; Rilling [2] (0:59); Harnoncourt [3] (0:57); Leusink [6] (0:54); Koopman [5] (0:47); Gardiner [4] (0:47)

There are only two non-HIP performances: Richter [1] and Rilling [2]. All the rest are HIP and have the general characteristics of such a performance.

Mvt. 1:

[1] Richter:
Large orchestral forces along with the largest choir to be heard in all these different versions lend a more monumental sound to this cantata. This has its good, but also bad aspects: the good side is that the greater numbers of performers create a higher plateau of intensity than can be achieved by the smaller groups. The listener has the impression that singers and instrumentalists are ‘filling out’ a very large space and catching the attention of everyone in the audience. There is a wonderful combination of contrasts between the punctuated 8th notes in the accompanying voices, the bc, and the oboes at times, and the flowing cantabile treatment of the cantus firmus and 16th notes in the violins. Most important of all, the listener can perceive strength, the strength of conviction that is conveyed directly to the listener. This and the Rilling version have infectious qualities that make me want to sing or hum along with the music, something that rarely happens to me when listening to HIP recordings. There are enough singers on a given part so that the part never fails to come through properly; that is, if some singers have a weak lower range, others will not, or vice versa. As a result, there is better balance between the vocal sections throughout. The mood is one of joyful trust in the Lord. I do not understand why Richter insists on playing all the vocal parts on the organ with high stops 4’ and 2’ stops with mixtures. I have found no indications in any of the sources form Bach’s time that such a practice was ever used, on the contrary, the less obtrusive the organ is, the better.

[2] Rilling:
Rilling’s version is treated very much in a legato fashion, much more than even the legato aspects in Richter’s recording. All the voices, trained and operatic as they are, can be clearly heard. If a listener wants to hear all the parts all the time, this is the version to listen to. The greatest drawback, as always, is the lack of a stable and firm c. f. sung by the sopranos who have great difficulty controlling their vibratos. Once you have heard the cantus firmus sung clearly and strongly without a vibrato, you will not be quite as happy to return to this version, as good as it is in so many other ways. Once again, as with Richter, the general attitude is one of firm, childlike trust in the Lord. There is no need to emphasize or add expressivity to such a line as “und alle Teufel hassen” [“and all the devils hate.”] Actually, in repeating the Stollen in the bar form of such a chorale as this, Bach does not change anything in the music to make this phrase any different than the phrase “recht kindlich kann verlassen” [“{who} can depend {on God} in a childlike manner”.] Nothing but firm, joyful, childlike trust is to be expressed here. Both Richter and Rilling understand and convey this attitude.

[3] Harnoncourt:
From the 1^st wailing, insecure sounds of the oboi d’amore players and the reticent, subdued playing of the violins, we are immediately surrounded by the Harnoncourt HIP cantata sound, a sound that he had already spent a dozen years perfecting during the course of this series. An indication that not all is well with Harnoncourt's portrayal occurs with the opening notes sung by the altos. This is a very feeble, insecure entrance followed by some muffled singing by tenors and basses as well. In stark contrast, the boy sopranos sing with conviction and clarity as if they are the only ones who really know what they are singing about here. Somehow Harnoncourt is unable to inspire these singers and players to do any better than this. Harnonourt htaken the slowest tempo and at this tempo this mvt. definitely suffers from the very illness that he was attempting to correct: the slow, boring tempi often taken by the late romantic interpretations of Bach’s works. This type of performance of an opening mvt. of a chorale cantata is not an aberration on Harnoncourt’s part; on the contrary, it is the norm. It is not a question of whether the listener is inadequately prepared to accept an innovative interpretation by an artist who has spent some time acquainting himself with ‘period’ music, but rather the question is whether Harnoncourt has met the challenge posed by Bach’s cantatas. In my estimation, after listening to these cantata performances many times over a period of 5 or 6 years, Harnoncourt rarely meets this challenge in mvts. of this sort. The reasons for this are numerous and I have documented quite a few of them over the past year and a half.

[4] Gardiner:
Gardiner takes this mvt. at a good tempo. The sounds created by his HIP instruments are a noticeable improvement over Harnoncourt’s. There is nothing shaky or insecure here about their manner of playing. With the choir we are back to a clear and balanced sound, much clearer (less vibrato) than Rilling’s choir sound, and, most importantly of all, the cantus firmus is loud and clear as it should be. Aside from the women who sing the c. f., there is the vocal quality of men in the Monteverdi Choir that I would characterize as rather thin, narrow, and constricted as if the voices are being forced more than usual. At times, this is a slightly unpleasant sound, but certainly not as disturbing as some of the voices in Rilling’s choirs. What I do find truly disturbing, however, is Gardiner’s attempts at an interpretation which microscopically isolates phrases for special treatment. We all know that this is how Bach frequently tries to relate the words to the music. Here, with Gardiner, however, Bach’s method of musical illustration is completely misunderstood. It is one thing for Bach to include this type of word painting in the music, but it is another very different thing to presume to extrapolate this type of interpretation from the score if it simply does not make sense. Gardiner treats, “recht kindlich” [“very childlike”] as if this were an open invitation to demonstrate the childish actions of a child that is trying to take its first steps. As explained above, here the text speaks of a firm, childlike trust, which is actually a very strong trust that does not call for tiny, staccato-like notes in the accompanying voices in imitation of a baby’s first footsteps. This is a cute device that should never have been seriously considered for inclusion here. Even more striking, and this is perhaps exactly what Gardiner is after: to shock the listener with very unusual expressive details, is Gardiner’s interpretation of “und alle Teufel hassen” [“{whom} all the devils hate”] where he exaggerates the words for ‘devils’ and ‘hate.’ The controlling, overall thought, however, is just the opposite: that of not having to worry about these things and feeling secure in the Lord. There are many other instances where Bach enjoys illustrating such things as the devils’ hatred or the fear of the devil, but here the emphasis is trust. Notice the feeling created by this mvt. in the key of E major. The key choice matches the text.

[5] Koopman:
This is the fastest version and it definitely sounds rushed. I can even feel Koopman pushing the tempo when the choir enters. What’s the rush? Notice how everything has become subdued, being played and sung at half volume without much conviction. The emphasis is on lightness. How does that fit with firm faith and dependence on the Lord? It doesn’t really! This is an innocuous version meant to provide 'lite' entertainment for those who wish to gain easy access to Bach, perhaps even as background music for going to sleep. Despite the occasional use of the French trill in the vocal parts, this is a non-disturbing, rather ho-hum version of this cantata mvt. The voices sing clear lines, but the emotional commitment is missing. This is partly due to the fact that the voices sing mainly sotto voce.

[6] Leusink:
The orchestral sound is even more muffled here than with Koopman and the bc is simply too loud. The cantus firmus is clear but lax as if it is singing with the last energy at its disposal. The 1^st entrance by the Buwalda-type voices in the alto is a real ‘turn-off’ (for who wants to hear this type of voice in a choir?) and the sopranos, on the higher notes launch into their characteristic ‘chirping.’ The lower voices are weak and generally uninteresting to listen to. Perhaps this is all that can be hoped for when so little time is spent in preparing the music for performance.

I did not have time to write up my reviews on the arias, but here is my order of preference from top to bottom:

Mvt. 2:

[1] Schreier (if the missing obligato part had been properly done, this would have been the best version of all)

[2] Kraus (here the instrumental accompaniment is the best, but the voice is not always pleasing)

[5] Prégardien (if you can put up with Koopman’s shenanigans in the accompaniment)

[3] Equiluz (very loud accompaniment and Equiluz has to force his voice as he jumps about, hence this is not up to his usual high standard of performance)

[4] Podger (at this extreme tempo, almost no tenor would survive and this one also barely survives with some ludicrous moments at times)

[6] van der Meel (nothing really outstanding here)

[M-1] Bostridge (in singing songs by Noel Coward, Bostridge really excels, but with Bach he still as a lot to learn - his German pronunciation leaves much to be desired - Gardiner's breakneck speed makes Bostridge sound ridiculous as well)

Mvt. 4:

Did not finish this, but DFD [1] would, without a doubt, have to be my favorite.

Mvt. 6:

[1] Richter:
With the organ ‘blaring’ in the background and with his definite fermati (much longer than they would have to be), Richter seeks to enhance the strong, affirmative feeling expressed in this chorale. Certainly one might question these techniques as not being entirely authentic, but there is no denying that this type of chorale singing is intended to move the listener by having the choir sing enthusiastically. How can the listener not want to sing along (even though this was not done when Bach performed these cantatas?)

[2] Rilling:
This is a good example of the flowing, legato style of chorale singing which still allows for the separation of a key word such as “Trotz.” There does not have to be a dead stop after this word as heard in many of the HIP versions of this chorale. One thing Rilling does very well to bring an interrupted phrase (“Mich kann nicht mehr {fermata} ihr Pochen…” to the point of the fermata, recognize the fermata causing a stop, but this stop is not a dead stop. The listener can feel that the choir is poised to attack the next word (“ihr.”) The listener can feel the tension in this momentary pause, a tension that will immediately propel the voices to attack the next word/note directly. This type of 'vocal magic' is missing in many of the HIP versions of this chorale.

[3] Harnoncourt:
With some unnecessary, heavy accents (on “Rache” for instance), Harnoncourt somehow manages not to let this chorale fall apart under his dissection of the music despite his usual non-legato treatment of chorales generally. In this chorale many of the stops are necessary because of the numerous exclamation marks and words like “Trotz.” Yet is still unable to endow this chorale with the strong conviction found in some of the other versions. But as Harnoncourt’s renditions of the chorales go, this one is definitely above average.

[4] Gardiner:
This HIP version with smaller forces at its disposal (fewer voices) demonstrates the necessary strength of conviction that a choir should express in a final chorale. Gardiner gives the listener a fitting conclusion to the cantata, one that sends the listener away with a true sense of fulfillment.

[5] Koopman:
This is a very intimate portrayal of the chorale. In addition to being very cleanly executed, Koopman, like Gardiner, includes some interpretative insights not available in all the other versions: on the repeat of the Stollen, he makes no break at the fermata, but rather continues without breathing into next line. This enjambement is very fitting indeed in this context. The numerous three-note phrases on “Gott ist mein Schutz, mein Hilf und Rat” in the accompanying voices indicate a gesture of uplifting as if God continues again and again to lift us up. This is very appropriate as an interpretative insight. In general, however, I would have wanted even more conviction expressed by the choir.

[6] Leusink:
Aside from the usual shortening of the fermati at the end of the chorale lines, this is one of Leusink’s better efforts. There are no individual voices standing out here. This is actually the sound of a good choir in a 4-pt. chorale. What is lacking here is a stronger feeling of conviction. In 4 instances of the text, there are exclamation marks. There certainly ought to be a way to bring this out without overdoing it.

Aryeh Oron wrote (November 30, 2002):
[M-1] Bostridge and the aria for tenor from Cantata BWV 139

Teri Noel Towe sent me the following message:
” I had the pleasure of meeting and talking at some length with Ian Bostridge this past Friday night, and he shared with me an interesting bit of information about one of the arias on that wonderful Virgin Classics disc that he made with Fabio Biondi (a fabulous disc, by the way, to which I awarded 5 stars in Goldberg).

As you well know, BWV 139 has an aria for tenor, two violins, and continuo, for which one of the violin parts is missing. In the course of our conversation, Mr. Bostridge confirmed that, as I had suspected while listening to it, in the recording that he made with Fabio Biondi, no reconstruction for the missing part was used. The second violin was omitted altogether, and Biondi plays the instrumental obbligato all by himself.

I have not as yet had a chance to revisit the recording since learning this, but I hope soon to do so, and with a score in front of me, to see if I can figure out exactly what is going on.”

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 30, 2002):
[M-1] [To Aryeh Oron, regarding the message from Teri Noel Towe]
I sincerely hope that Teri Noel Towe will read carefully the discussion of Cantata BWV 139 on Aryeh's site. Then, if he does some proper research and has access to the NBA with its KB, he will discover that the missing part is not necessarily another violin part. It might have been another solo instrument in the high range. In any case, this missing part is crucial to the success of a very good performance.

Omitting the part altogether may seem like a virtue to Fabio Biondi, who, under time constraints imposed by the recording process and a lack of time to provide any kind of meaningful substitute for the missing part, decides in favor of an extremely fast tempo where, by playing "instrumental obbligato all by himself", he hopes, the missing part will be less likely noticeable to a listener unfamiliar with this aria. Only by comparison with numerous other recordings do the failings of the Biondi approach become quite apparent.

While others may consider Bostridge's singing of this Bach aria an example of his artistry scoring a victory realm of Bach cantatas, a comparison with other great tenors who have recorded this aria makes clear how much Bostridge will still need to achieve. IMHO he still has a long way to go. To classify this production as 'wonderful' and 'fabulous' will only serve keep him from achieving true greatness in the singing of Bach arias. He has demonstrated his vocal technique, but has he really plumbed the depths of the aria the way some other tenors before him have? Has he really adjusted and trained his voice to sing Bach arias with a voice devoid of other influences: the singing of Noel Coward songs, Britten, etc.? He will also need a very good German language coach to correct the imperfections in German diction that always seem to appear in his singing of these arias.

Teri Noel Towe wrote (December 16, 2002):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
[M-1] < I sincerely hope that Teri Noel Towe will read carefully the discussion of Cantata BWV 139 on Aryeh's site. Then, if he does some proper research and has access to the NBA with its KB, he will discover that the missing part is not necessarily another violin part. It might have been another solo instrument in the high range. In any case, this missing part is crucial to the success of a very good performance. >
I have done what I consider to be "proper research", and I am fully familiar with the score. I also am familiar with the arguments and suggestions to be found in the NBA KB, which I perhaps have read even more carefully than Mr. Braatz would give me credit for. I continue to agree, and to agree completely, with the distinguished Bach scholar and founder of the Bach Aria Group, William H. Scheide, who not only firmly maintains that the missing part was a violin part but also has prepared a most successful, but alas unpublished, reconstruction of the missing part. I have heard this part in performance, and, believe me, not only does it "work", but also it is absolutely convincing.

Mr. Braatz and I shall have to agree to disagree.

Thomas Braatz wrote (December 15, 2002):
[M-1] In regard to BWV 139/2, Teri Noel Towe stated:
< I continue to agree, and to agree completely, with the distinguished Bach scholar and founder of the Bach Aria Group, William H. Scheide, who not only firmly maintains that the missing part was a violin part but also has prepared a most successful, but alas unpublished, reconstruction of the missing part. I have heard this part in performance, and, believe me, not only does it "work", but also it is absolutely convincing.

Mr. Braatz and I shall have to agree to disagree. >
We may be closer to agreement than you think. This is what I stated in my discussion of BWV 139:

"Mvt. 2 – a missing obligato part
Both Alfred Dürr and William H. Scheide have come to the conclusion that Mvt. 2 is incomplete: a 2nd obligato part is necessary for presenting completely the themes contained in the ritornello of this aria. That this missing part would call for another violin could not be substantiated by these two Bach scholars.

Since the cover page which normally indicates the instrumentation used in the cantata is not by Bach but rather was a copy of a title page made by Johann Christoph Altnickol in 1750, there is no reason to lend much credence to the information given there. Since the information on the cover page is incomplete (which happens from time to time), it is possible to assume that a 2nd obligato violin is not absolutely necessary and that a transverse flute or oboe might also have been intended.

The Reconstructions of the Missing Parts:

Winfried Radeke provided a reconstruction for the missing obligato part in Mvt. 2. It appeared 1972 among the parts printed by Breitkopf & Härtel. Another reconstruction of this part was undertaken by William H. Scheide. This part appeared in “Bach-Studien” 5, Leipzig, 1975, p. 136ff. "

From what I wrote, it is clear that Sche's 'most successful...reconstruction of the missing part' has been published. It is even very likely that the best version of this aria that I heard on the recordings that I reviewed might have used his reconstruction, but I have no way to confirm this.

Here is what I stated about the Rilling performance [2] with the missing part played by another violin:

"Truly outstanding is the reconstruction here of the missing part as a second solo violin. This version not only has the violins repeating the opening motif in imitation of each other (this is the same motif that the tenor sings when it enters), but they also engage in a duet consisting of parallel thirds and sixths. There are mvts. elsewhere in the Bach cantatas (BWV 51/4 comes to mind as an example) that provide a similar feeling of excitement (‘Toben’) that is also captured in the fast mvts. of the Two-Violin Concerto BWV 1043. I consider this realization of the missing part to be so successful that, if listeners did not have recourse to the score or did not know beforehand that a part was missing, they would not notice any deficiency and would easily get caught up in the excitement of this mvt."

The only problem here is that I am unable 'to connect the dots' between Scheide's reconstruction and the one that Rilling [2] uses. It could well be the same one to which we are both referring. Do you have any definitive information to confirm my suspicions?

Teri Noel Towe wrote (December 15, 2002):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
[M-1] < Winfried Radeke provided a reconstruction for the missing obligato part in Mvt. 2. It appeared 1972 among the parts printed by Breitkopf &Härtel. Another reconstruction of this part was undertaken by William H. Scheide. This part appeared in “Bach-Studien” 5, Leipzig, 1975, p. 136ff. "

From what I wrote, it is clear that Scheide's 'most successful...reconstruction of the missing part' has been published. It is even very likely that the best version of this aria that I heard on the recordings that I reviewed might have used his reconstruction, but I have no way to confirm this. >
Under the circumstances, my choice of the word "published" was artless.

I should have been more precise. I meant that the second violin part that has been reconstructed so effectively by Bill Scheide has never been readily and easily available to those who might want to use it in a performance. The Scheide reconstruction, as you so rightly pointed out, "appears", to use your verb, in Bach Studien 5, but, as you surely have discovered, and, in fact, as you confirm by implication later in your response to my first posting about the tenor aria in BWV 139, obtaining a copy of Bach Studien 5, which was published in the DDR in 1975, is a herculean undertaking.

It is, of course, impossible to prove a negative, and, precisely because the second solo part is missing and not identified on the evidently defective wrapper, it is impossible to prove that the second obbligato part was not a flute part or an oboe part, as you contend that it might have been. Personally, however, I think that a strong argument in favor of the aria having required a second solo violin, rather than a flute or an oboe, is the tenor aria from BWV 7. "Des Vaters Stimme" (ironically, another aria that Ian Bostridge sings to great effect on that spectacular Virgin CD) is somewhat different in character from "Gott ist mein Freund", I admit, but, like "Gott ist mein Freund", it is an aria that calls for two solo violins, and the obbligato parts require players who are equal in calibre. BWV 7 and BWV 139 are both part of the second Jahrgang, and they were first performed within five months of one another. It is well within the realm of probability, and certainly within the realm of possibility, that these two arias were intended for the same tenor and the same two violinists. That Ian Bostridge happened to chose both for his Virgin CD confirms that both arias lie gratefully for the same tenor voice. (While a member of the Bach Aria Group, Jan Peerce sang both arias with equal effectiveness, too, as the private recordings prove.)

Discussions in the Week of October 29, 2006

Alain Bruguières wrote (October 29, 2006):
Introduction to BWV 139, "Wohl dem, der sich auf seinen Gott"

Week of October 29, 2006
---------------------------
Cantata BWV 139, Wohl dem, der sich auf seinen Gott

Second Annual Cantata Cycle, 1723-24 (Jahrgang II)
23^rd Sunday after Trinity
1^st performance: November 12, 1724 - Leipzig
---------------------------
Bach Cantatas resources
Previous Discussions: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV139-D.htm
Main Cantata page: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV139.htm
Text:
German http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~wfb/cantatas/139.html
English http://www.uvm.edu/~classics/faculty/bach/BWV139.html
French http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Texts/BWV139-Fre4.htm
Score Vocal & Piano: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV139-V&P.pdf
Recordings: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV139.htm#RC
Listen to Leusink recording [6] (free streaming download):
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Stream/BWV139-Leusink.ram
---------------------------
Librettist : unknown
Reading:
EPISTLE Philippians 3: 17-21: Our citizenship is in heaven.
GOSPEL Matthew 22: 15-22: The Pharizees' trick question to Jesus: is it right to pay tribute to Caesar?

This is a chorale cantata, based upon the chorale of the same name.
Five-verse hymn by Johann Christoph Rube.
For more details on this chorale melody see:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/CM/Machs-mit-mir.htm
--------------------------------------------------------
Structure
1. Choral SATB ob d'am I,II str bc
2. Aria T vln conc I,II bc
3. Recit. A bc
4. Aria B ob d'am I+II vln bc
5. Recit. S str bc
6. Choral SATB bc (+ instrs)

(Same structure C-A-R-A-R-C as the previous cantata)
--------------------------------------------------------

Comment (mostly based on Dürr):

In this Chorale cantata the unknown librettist uses the five verses of the hymn in the following way:
Mvt. 1 (Choral) = verse 1
Mvt. 2 (Aria T) = free paraphrase of verse 2
Mvt. 3 (Recit. A) = free insertion related to the sunday Gospel
Mvt. 4 (Aria B) = free paraphrase of verse 3
Mvt. 5 (Recit. S) = free paraphrase of verse 4
Mvt. 6 (Choral) = verse 5.

If we trust in God, we may obtain God's friendship which protects against all evils (Mvt. 1); against envy, hatred and mockery (Mvt. 2). The Saviour protects us from the world through his wise pronouncement in answer to the cunning of the wicked (Mvt. 3, in reference to the Gospel). God, our best friend, protects us from all misfortune (Mvt. 4), from the heavy burden of our iniquities (Mvt. 5) and from the fear of death (Mvt. 6).

The first movement is a chorale fantasia with cantus firmus in the soprano, written in style concertante. chorale melody is all-pervading in this piece: the theme of instrumental ritornello is based on the incipit of the chorale melody; each line of the chorale is sung by the soprano in minims , accompanied by the other voices, the oboes d'amore and the bc in an imitative texture based on the same melody diminished to quavers, the strings joining in towards the end of the chorale line.

The second movement, a tenor aria, was transmitted in incomplete form, lacking the second obbligato part (presumably for a second solo violin). The vocal part and the instrument use the same thematic material, based on a contrast between tumultuous sections evocative of the 'raging enemies' and quieter passages referring to 'confidence'.

A brief secco recitative leads to the basso aria, which, according to Dürr, probably featured a second obbligato instrument other than a violin, probably a violoncello piccolo. This aria is characterized by a complex structure and striking changes in rythm and character reflecting the various ideas presented by the text.
Dürr analyses the structure as a form abccab'a'b", with

a: 'Das Unglück schlägt...' ('Misfortune throws...'), poco allegro, dotted rythm.

b: 'Doch plötzlich erscheinet...' ('Yet suddenly appears'), vivace, triadic melody, compound duple time.

c: 'Mir scheint des Trostes Licht...' ('Comfort's Light shines for me...') andante, flowing cantabile, continuo texture (without the obbligato instruments).

Even where the libretto borrows two lines from the hymn, no reference is made to the chorale melody.

The soprano recitative, accompanied by the strings, leads to the usual concluding 4-part harmonized choral.

N. B. A very interesting discussion took place on the list about the missing parts and attempted reconstructions, see: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV139-D.htm
--------------------------------------------------------
A more personal comment:

The most strikink movement in this cantata is - to me - the basso aria, with its strong rhythmic contrasts and unusual structure. The beginning of the aria sounds a bit like a french ouverture, with a prelude in pointed rhythm (a) followed by a flowing 'fugato' section (b). The words 'helfende Hand', 'Trostes Licht', being central in the message of this cantata, apparently called for a special treatment. In any case here's a piece I can easily listen to many times over!

I would gladly read more on this aria during this week's discussions.

Neil Halliday wrote (October 29, 2006):
Alain Bruguieres wrote:
< N. B. A very interesting discussion took place on the list about the missing parts and attempted reconstructions. >
The Rilling booklet [2] answers the question, raised by Mr. Braatz and Mr.Towe in their communication on this matter, in the affirmative, ie, the violin II part (in Rilling's recording) is the reconstruction by William H. Scheide, founder of the Bach Aria Group. This is very likely the most successful of the reconstructions of the missing part.

Julian Mincham wrote (October 29, 2006):
Thanks to Alain for another stimulating introduction to a cantata which displays many interesting features, one of which is the choice of keys. No movement is in less than three sharps--a unique feature I think. Secondly the use of E major for the chorale and fantasia. This is only the second time Bach has used this key for an opening fantasia in this cycle---he first being in no 8--the musings upon when I might die. Bach did not use this key often but he used it for a wide range of expressive effect:- as well as these two examples one might note a keyboard and and violin concerto, a violin partita and a French suite.

For the missing obligato part for the second movement Koopman has realised a violin part most successfully in box 11 of his recordings. Following discussions of Bach's 'poor' declamation in no 38 it is interesting to note the care of word setting in this aria--the plain and direct opening phrase for 'God is my friend' contrasting with more complex articulation representing the raging foes. The contrast between these two different settings is marked and very effective.

The bass aria shows Bach at his structurally most innovative.There are three ideas encapsulated here, disasters and trials that enslave us, God's rescuing hand and (the main theme of the work) God as my true friend. There is a musical section for each but what is interesting is the way bach inter-relates the ideas; the initial misfortunes return not once, but twice but then, so does the hand of God. The final statement of the trials is very short and suggestive of the fact that they may have been overcome (although they di not disappear entirely) and it is significant that the movement ends with suggestion of both God's helping hand and the earlier flickering light of hope (see Schweitzer). This is the barest of descriptions of this fascinating movement about which much more could be said--but its better if interested individuals do the discovery work for themselves following a few basic clues.

For those interested in discovering more about Bach's immense sensitivity to complex (and often contradictory) ideas embedded within the text and his willingness to stretch structural conventions of the time to their limits in order to express them, this aria will repay much close scrutiny.

Thomas Braatz wrote (October 29, 2006):
BWV 139 and E major

Eric Chafe, in his "Tonal Allegory in the Vocal Music of J. S. Bach" University of California Press, 1991, footnote at the bottom of pp. 152-153, observes:

>>Bach associates E major in the cantatas with positive qualities - completely contradicting the interpretation for E major given by Mattheson ("Das neu-eröffnete Orchestre" p. 250) - among which blessedness (BWV 8, BWV 60, BWV 124,) salvation (BWV 9, BWV 17, BWV 49, BWV 86, BWV 116, BWV 139,) resurrection (BWV 66, BWV 67, BWV 80, BWV 94, BWV 145,) and trust (BWV 3, BWV 29, BWV 34a, BWV 107, BWV 139, BWV 171, BWV 200) are the most characteristic.<<
[This quote has been modified to include the 'BWV' to support future searches on the BCW.]

Why is there this complete contradiction between Mattheson's 1713 assertion regarding the main qualities of the key of E major and the reality concerning the connections that Bach had with the same key as outlined and described by Eric Chafe?

Let's examine the evidence:

1. Mattheson

Johann Mattheson's "Das Neu=Eröffnete Orchestre" Hamburg, 1713, Part III, Chapter II, § 21, p. 250.

>>'E. dur. (14.) drucket eine *Verzweiflungs=volle oder gantz tödliche Traurigkeit* unvergleichlich wol aus ; ist vor ,extrem'-verliebten Hülff= und Hoffnungslosen Sachen am bequemsten / und hat bey gewissen Umständen so was *schneidendes / scheidendes / leidendes* und *durchdringendes* / daß es mit nichts als einer ,fatal'en Trennung Leibes und der Seelen vergleichen werden mag.<<

("E major expresses well, in an incomparable manner, a sadness full of despair and one which can be completely fatal; it is best suited for compositions that describe situations of extremely helpless or hopeless love and under certain circumstances it has a quality which is so shrill/piercing, divisive (causing separation), and penetrating that it can only be compared with the fatal separation of body and soul.")

Even earlier Marc-Antoine Charpentier, in his "Règles de composition" circa 1692, referred to E major as being "quarrelsome and clamorous" while Jean-Philippe Rameau, in his "Traité de l'harmonie", 1722, already described it as having "grandeur and magnificence" and being suitable for "tender and gay songs".

What is possibly going on here? Why is there such a divergence of opinion in such a relatively short period of time regarding the quality of a specific tonality? It is the advent of equal temperament which was beginning to take hold, particularly among certain musicians and composers who could see and hear how their musical palette was being improved through a temperament that no longer caused listeners to cringe when a composition was set in E major or modulated inother remote keys. The terrible onus caused by mean-tone and even 'well-tempered' but not equal temperaments had been removed, thus allowing a great composer like Bach, who could easily have made his acquaintance with equal temperament anytime after 1703, to relish using this key without the burdensome associations that it carried in the past. Certainly by June, 1722, when Mattheson published the specifications for equal temperament in his rather widely circulated music magazine, "Critica musica", Bach might already have been experimenting with this temperament while composing substantial parts of the "Well-Tempered Clavier" Part 1. In Leipzig, using this 'new' tuning, Bach was able to employ E-major effectively in his sacred compositions without all the dire associations which it had previously carried (and Mattheson, after 1713, never again brought up this description of E major although he had ample opportunity to do so ("Der vollkommene Capellmeister", 1739 - by 1720 Mattheson began ascribing any tonal differences to pitch, but not to temperament.)

Neil Halliday wrote (October 31, 2006):
BWV 139: tenor aria

The recordings of the lively and interesting tenor aria can be arranged into three groups:

(a) those with two obbligato violins, as in Rilling [2], Suzuki [7], and Gardiner [4]; these all apparently follow the W.H.Scheide reconstruction, more or less.
(b) those with obbligato organ and violin, as in Richter [1], Harnoncourt [3] and Leusink [6];
(c) on its own, Koopman [5], who has arranged the obbligato parts for violin, oboe and flute.

Group (a) have the most satisfactory, Bachian, reconstruction of the aria, IMO; and of these I would rank Rilling [2] in first place, for its vigour and rhythmic vitality. Suzuki [7] is most like Rilling, but is a tad leisurely by comparison. Gardiner [4] is frankly too fast.

The problem of employing an organ as both continuo and obligato instrument (or as one of two obbligato instruments)is manifest in group (b). Richter, with the subtle tonal palette available from the large hall organ, is most successful in this regard. Leusink's organist [6] playing a tiny instrument seems to miniaturise the music. Harnoncourt's performance [3], with a prominent, developed part for organ, sounds better than Leusink, but the combination of obbligato organ and obbligato violin does sound somewhat artificial in the context of this aria.

Koopman [5] brings an over-variegated obbligato instrumentation to the aria, thereby detracting, or distracting, from the strength and purpose of the vocal line, IMO.

The Rilling sample [2] does not appear at the BCW: this might work (click on the fifth quaver-pair from the end of the lower line of orange quavers): CD-Universe

Suzuki [7]: BIS-Naxos

The other samples (except Richter [1]; anyone find Richter samples on the net?) are available at the BCW.

An attractive feature of this aria is the parallel 12ths and 6ths between the voice and instruments in the coloraturas on the words "Toben" and "Spötter", and we have Bach's rhythmically driven continuo line, as usual in this type of aria.

Bradley Lehman wrote (October 31, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< An attractive feature of this aria is the parallel 12ths and 6ths between the voice and instruments in the coloraturas on the words "Toben" and "Spötter", and we have Bach's rhythmically driven continuo line, as usual in this type of aria. >
Small point here: it's parallel 10ths and 6ths, not 12ths. Nice observation about it being an attractive feature of the piece....

Parallel 12ths (not here) make an exotic sound, operating the same way as a Quint stop on an organ. A couple of familiar examples in later repertoire: some of the iterations of the melody in Ravel's "Bolero" (two instruments moving in long parallel at the 12th/Quint to make a blend sounding like some newly invented instrument)...or the piano part in the second movement of Saint-Saens's fifth piano concerto, evoking the exoticism of Egypt.

Ed Myskowski wrote (November 1, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< The recordings of the lively and interesting tenor aria can be arranged into three groups: >
Neil, I think this is a cool idea, to introduce a detail for discussion, and especially providing links so that anyone who wants can listen and participate. I have overlapped the space by running late with BWV 115 and BWV 80b, but I will be on with some thoughts, including Koopman, within a couple days.

Ed Myskowski wrote (November 4, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< The recordings of the lively and interesting tenor aria can be arranged into three groups:
(a) those with two obbligato violins, as in Rilling [2], Suzuki [7], and Gardiner [4]; these all apparently follow the W.H.Scheide reconstruction, more or less.
(b) those with obbligato organ and violin, as in Richter [1], Harnoncourt [3] and Leusink [6];
(c) on its own, Koopman [5], who has arranged the obbligato parts for violin, oboe and flute. >
No matter what, I am going to post a few words tonight re this week's cantata, BWV 139. A few days ago, I first listened to Koopman [5] and Gardiner [4]. I have not had the opportunity before to make comparisons between these two sets, and I have been looking forward to it. My strongest impression was the flute line with Koopman, but not there with Gardiner. I listened to Richter [1], and by that time thought I had simply misjudged the Koopman recording, and hadn't listened carefully at all to Gardiner. Mind you, I was not focussing on the tenor aria, just trying to get an impression of the entire performance. Time to read.

About the time of Neil's post, I had independently realized that the flute line with Koopman [5] was not Bach extending the new traverso writing for another week, but I had not gotten much further than that. After listening to these recordings plus Leusink [6] while pursuing other discussions for a few days, I am now spending some peaceful moments focussed on the cantata of the week, and writing to get on schedule.

My first impression of Koopman [5] in general, and especially in the Mvt. 2 tenor aria, was very positive. I am very reluctant to let go of that impression just because there is a reconstruction which is not by Bach, and with questionable instrumentation. If I read Julian Mincham's comment correctly, he also enjoys Koopman's reconstruction using flute and oboe for the missing line.

My first impression of Gardiner [4] was that it is clean, balanced, consistent. I did not notice quickness in the T aria, but I was distracted by looking for the flute. On a comparative listening side by side with Koopman [5], Gardiner is fast. Too fast? Or did Robert Levin try to provide a violin obbligato reconstruction to support the tempo? Gardiner is quick overall: I gather from other that is typical of his performances. Perhaps he is seeking that edge of almost too fast, to get us to discuss it.

I am a fan of Richter's soloists [1], no other way to put it. In Mvt. 2, the organ obbligato comes in over continuo, followed by violin, and it just sounds weird. Pretty soon, Peter Schreier begins to sing, and all else is forgotten. The transition to Mvt. 3 is perfection, with alto Trudeliese Schmidt over sustained continuo. The B aria with DFDieskau follows. Julian Mincham has suggested that we figure this one out for ourselves. I did, with satisfaction.

Not to shortchange Leusink [6]. With instrumentation similar to Richter [1], Mvt. 2 is a more delicate, but well balanced alternative. The recit, Mvt. 3, is problematic for me, especially in comparison to Richter. Buwalda is not the issue, it is the intermittent continuo. This is a good place to pause and listen. Forget the theory and previous discussion. If you have the opportunity, listen to Richter Mvts 2 and 3 in comparison to Leusink, and decide for yourself which sounds better. For that matter, listen to Ruth Holton in Leusink, Mvt. 5, and compare the continuo with Mvt. 3. Nevertheless, a decent recording overall, and I continue (or at least the occasional plunk) to emphasize that Leusink has accomplished his stated objective: solid, professional, performances at prices anyone can afford. Power to the people!

Neil Halliday wrote (November 4, 2006):
BWV 139 bass aria: some comments

The bass aria is in F# minor; for those interested in key tonalities, we have notable modulations in the `andante' continuo only sections, on "weiten" ("afar") - first time from F# minor to B minor, second time from B minor to C# minor. (The short ritornello preceding all this is in the relative major, A major - the only appearance of the major key in the aria, although the lovely, dancing 6/8 time sections ("helping hand") also sound as if in the major tonality). BTW, I find the continuo's notes at the start of the first "weiten", namely F# F#, BB, EE, to be intriguing; notice F#,B,E represent intervals of a 5th when viewed in descending order, but the octave swings in the score disguise this somewhat.

Once again (as you can see), the author of the BCW piano reduction score has, at the words "to me appears comfort's light from afar", rather cleverly woven the first phrase of the chorale melody into his realisation - an intellectual curiosity, more than a practical performance consideration; for once I find the recordings adequately convey these two continuo only sections in a more or less satisfying manner, without the harmonisation shown in the piano reduction score, probably because the rich, full timbre of a good bass voice (such as DFD's) is most attractive in this section, regardless of the continuo realisation.

In the opening dotted rhythm section, I would like a more uniformly audible violin part - not only the high notes - from the period ensembles, where the oboe definitely steals the limelight in some of them (except Harnoncourt [3], who does give a distinctive emphasis to this violin part).

BTW, Ed, I agree with your comments on Richter's recitative [1], Mvt. 3. In this recording, can you hear a note beating on "tut" - a slightly out of tune organ pipe, perhaps?

Peter Smaill wrote (November 4, 2006):
Those interested in the Chorales will know the significance of "Machs mit mir, Gott, nach deiner Güt", verse 5 of which concludes this Cantata. It is also the central chorale of the SJP, BWV 245/22, there exquisitely harmonised in four sharps and with, as we recently discussed, an inverted passus duriusculus in the closing line. The origin and affekt of the Chorale and thus Schein's melody, as pointed out by Thomas Braatz, are poignant :

"The title translated is "A little song of comfort set for 5 voices. On the occasion of the ‘blessed stepping onward out of life into death’ of Mrs. Margarita Werner, the lawfully wedded housewife of Mr. Caspar Werner.” "

Thus it was the death of an otherwise anoymous Christian woman which led to the central meditiation of the chiastic St John Passion.

The setting in BWV 139 is plainer, as for the stray Chorale BWV 377. Schein's melody occurs in the organ prelude BWV 957 and also integrated into the aria of BWV 156/2. As Thomas points out, it occurs twice in the New English Hymnal, in two metres, likely a favourite also therefore of the editor Ralph Vaughan Williams . But there is, for me at any rate, the mystery. The fine setting in the NEH , with its lovely suspensions - where is its source? It is none of the above, nor is it in Reimenschneider.

The penultimate bar of the NEH setting has an unusual modulation , resolving E/D over A in the lower octave, via (IMO) the subdominant of Fsharp minor, then to the subdominant of G major. Bach's ability to slide into proximate keys, not I understand a normal harmonic progression, is one of the remarkable features of the Chorale harmonisations. Perhaps the best example is in BWV 56, "Ich will das Kreuzstab gerne tragen", where in the Chorale BWV 56/5, "Komm, O Tod, du Schlafes Bruder", between the first and second lines, the move is from G major to A flat major, as if illustrating the brotherhood of death and sleep by adjacent keys.

If anyone knows -it may be quite obvious- the origin of the New English Hymnal setting of "Machs mit mir, Gott, nach deiner Güt", I would be grateful to know.

Peter Smaill wrote (November 4, 2006):
Chorale in BWV 139, "Mach's mir mit Gott"

With some prompting from Thomas Braatz on the compilation of this chorale setting for the New English Hymnal, there is now a thesis as to why the setting (also known as "Eisenach" ) cannot be traced back to a known Bach origin.

This is because the musical editor of the NEH, Ralph Vaughan Williams, while prepared to have one elaborate setting of the "Passion Chorale" from the SMP, could not envision the complex harmony of BWV 245/222, the verse in the St John Passion "Durch dein Gefaegnis", being brought off successfully by amateur choirs.

So, with very minor alterations to Bach' s actual harmonies, he bridled together setting 44 and 310 in Reimenschneider, the latter being the beginning of the hymn setting (i.e.taken from the SJP), the latter being an end taken from a lost cantata.

There's a clue supporting this suggestion- the NEH describes the settings as not "by" Bach, but "from".On scrutiny,the most interesting harmonic moments remain by Bach.

In the Preface to the NEH RVW says:

"It has been thought advisable occassionally to introduce harmonisations (especially those of J.S. Bach) rather more elaborate than usual. These will no doubt add greatly to the beauty and popularity of the tunes....Choirs would be much better occupied in learning these beautiful settings of Bach (which are not hard if practised a little) than in rehearsing vulgar anthems by indifferent composers".

In conclusion, it would appear that nevertheless RVW found the the intricacy of SJP BWV 245/22 too complex, and the other settings too simple; and therefore contrived a hybrid which I suspect over the years not unreasonably was assumed to be pure Bach. But, strictly speaking, it ain't so!

Douglas Cowling wrote (November 5, 2006):
Peter Smaill wrote:
< "It has been thought advisable occassionally to introduce harmonisations (especially those of J.S. Bach) rather more elaborate than usual. These will no doubt add greatly to the beauty and popularity of the tunes....Choirs would be much better occupied in leathese beautiful settings of Bach (which are not hard if practised a little) than in rehearsing vulgar anthems by indifferent composers". >
The Bach Revival in the 19^th century brought about an increased desire to include Lutheran chorales in non-Lutheran hymnbooks. For many churches, this was a novelty.

The Anglican/Episcopal church expressly forbade Lutheran hymns, an aversion which goes back to Henry VIII's pre-Reformation attack on Luther. It was only in the late 19^th century that the prohibition was lifted. I can remember older Anglican organists and clergy who would not allow "A Mighty Fortress" (Ein feste Burg) because of it was the Lutheran theme song (the Lutheran abolition of the episcopate is the heart of the historic conflict).

A huge musical mistake was made at the time of the compilation of the new hymn books in that the editors wrongly assumed that Bach's congregations sang the harmonizatons in the cantatas and the Passions (try the final chorale of the SJP as a congregational hymn!). You still encounter this misreading of history in amateur performances of the SMP (BWV 244) where the audience is asked to "sing along" in the "Passion Chorale".

The result is that Bach's exquisite harmonizations and complex part-writing is obliterated. At least Vaughan Williams instinctly knew that these settings were too difficult for most choirs and all but iimpossible for congregations. And yet organists persist in using Bach settings for congregational singing. Perhaps the single greatest affront to Bach is perpetrated every December by thousands of churches who sing the final chorale of Cantata BWV 140, "Wachet Auf", transposed down a THIRD from E flat to C Major! Bach's vision of heaven comes crashing down to earth.

The Episcopal Hymn Book of 1982 made a valiant attempt to introduce the 16^th and 17^th century versions of the chorales which WERE sung by Bach's congregations, but most modern musicians were very sniffy, especially about the older isometric versions, and refused to use them. I would rather listen to a banjo playing the "Air on the G String" than 500 people belting out a Bach chorale with full organ not once, but over and over for four or five verses.

Desecration!

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 5, 2006):
BWV 139 Score Samples

Aryeh Oron has kindly placed some score samples pertaining to BWV 139 at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV139-Sco.htm
[to enlarge image click on the image again]

At the top is a slightly simplified version of the main chorale for this cantata, "Machs mit mir, Gott, nach deiner Güt" but with the 1^st verse of the text for this cantata, "Wohl dem, der sich auf seinen Gott".

1. an often repeated figure in the continuo is derived from the first 5 notes (the incipit) of the chorale melody.

2. the first 4 measures/bars of the violino 1 part (a rather extensive passage) demonstrate how far Bach manages to continue his reference to the chorale melody as he goes beyond the Stollen even into an additional 5 notes of the Abgesang.

3. the oboe d'amore 1 part picks up this incomplete beginning of the Abgesang at measure/bar 8 and brings it to its conclusion (the end of that particular line of verse). Bach even indulges in some word-painting with the word "bleibt" which in the regular chorale melody simply moves with similar note values as the surrounding notes. Here, however, "bleibt" is extended for almost a measure before an interesting cascade of notes begins moving the melody forward relentlessly at regular time intervals (on the beat) until the slight ritardando on the penultimate note. The indication of staccato here is remarkable. It is as if Bach wants to ensure that at least some of his listeners will be able to recall the same sequence of notes that are heard in the chorale melody and make the proper association with his 'hidden' chorale melody reference which might otherwise be too easily overheard (or overlooked even if you happen to have the score in hand).

Ed Myskowski wrote (November 6, 2006):
A few additional comments on BWV 139. Following Neil's suggestion, I accessed the Rilling [2] sample of Mvt. 2 on line. The two obbligato violins sound preferable instrumentally to any of the recordings I have, but that is not sufficient for me to make it a better choice than Peter Schreier with Richter [1]. Add the consideration that DFDieskau in Mvt. 4 was Aryeh's choice of a movement to take away (I agree), and the strength of Edith Mathis and Trudeliese Schmidt in the recits, and Richter is my performance of choice.

I read the first round of discussions again, and realized that it is not the flute or oboe which is questionable in Mvt. 2, but only the use of both in combination. To me, the two make a fine sound with Koopman [5], and contribute to my preference for his performance among the HIP choices I have.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2006):
< http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV139-Sco.htm >
It's mildly believable, until all the pick-and-choose stuff that happens after the word "verlassen". [It's as if Bach wanted this disintegration of the chorale to start on that prominent word (= abandoned!!!!!!), and be so chopped up thereafter that it ceases to exist; being brilliant text-painting in that regard. The chorale, and sense, forsake us at that point: as the thematic notes get grabbed-at between the beats, like a choking person, and as we have to ignore all the other inconvenient notes that come between them. YOWSA!!!]

To be clear: everything I've put into [brackets] in the above paragraph of commentary, I don't believe myself; it's deliberately over-the-top nonsense, reductio ad absurdum.

At least the stuff during the words "Wohl dem, der sich auf seinen Gott" is the type of material (Vorimitation, etc etc) that happens during organ chorale settings: playing around with a quotation of the first phrase (only) of the chorale to set up a cantus firmus presentation of that phrase. It's a technique that pops up regularly in Pachelbel, and in J Mike Bach (JSB's future father-in-law, Maria Barbara's dad), and done by scads of other composers before JSB did likewise.

But, that useful and formulaic compositional technique doesn't generally go on to grab other little bits and pieces from other phrases, ahead of their time, to stuff them between the beats. Nor does it here, beyond that first phrase. The treatment of the word "bleibt" here is particularly ludicrous, the way it's assigned to the highlighted red notes (N.B. NOT HIGHLIGHTED BY BACH!), squeaked out in passing and off the beats. Nor would any competent composer set the word "verlassen" itself with "-sen" as shown here, hitting an accented downbeat. Nor did Bach. Those are just scalar notes going up and then down, and leading into a typical bit of violinistic figuration for the remainder of that phrase.

Try this experiment: (1) Throw a couple spoonfuls of cottage cheese at a wall, and (2) go through the mess selectively, looking for individual curds whose positions spell out the notes shaping a phrase of any chorale of your choice. Ignore all the other inconveniently-placed curds that don't serve the foregone conclusion; dab them out of the way, or move them, if they're too pesky. (3) Don't forget to wipe the wall later.

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 6, 2006):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
>>But, that useful and formulaic compositional technique doesn't generally go on to grab other little bits and pieces from other phrases, ahead of their time, to stuff them between the beats. Nor does it here, beyond that first phrase. The treatment of the word "bleibt" here is particularly ludicrous, the way it's assigned to the highlighted red notes (N.B. NOT HIGHLIGHTED BY BACH!), squeaked out in passing off the beats.<<
The combination of facetious comments and analogies intermixed with ignorance regarding Bach's various techniques for treating/embellishing a melody is definitely a sign of haughty behavior based unfortunately not upon solid scholarship and intimate knowledge of material which could shed light on this matter but rather upon a lack of study and understanding of these techniques, some examples of which were given recently but not heeded. The so-called 'rules' given by Brad Lehman do not reflect the reality of Bach's compositions. These 'rules' invented after the fact by those who have not studied the sources sufficiently to see what Bach really does are perhaps rules established for beginners who need to understand the basic essentials in order not to become confused. They do not, however, reflect reality except for those who close their eyes/ears to these possibilities which Bach employed and prefer a simple, lifelessly 'logical', formulaic explanation over the much more complicated and diverse nature of embellishment, an art in which Bach certainly excelled.

Perhaps the cottage cheese on the wall is in reality this rigid method of analysis imposed upon Bach's entire arsenal of embellishment techniques. By wiping away the cottage cheese which some academically trained individuals have thrwon against it, the real Bach underneath will amazingly be revealed. A clean wall is certainly best in revealing all there is to see.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2006):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
< Perhaps the cottage cheese on the wall is in reality > this rigid method of analysis imposed upon Bach's entire arsenal of embellishment techniques. By wiping away the cottage cheese which some academically trained individuals have thrwon against it, the real Bach underneath will amazingly be revealed. A clean wall is certainly best in revealing all there is to see. >
Well, thank you for a good chuckle. If interested in presenting a "clean wall" and "the real Bach underneath" whatever-whatever-whatever, why not just put up scores without color-coding and without made-up analysis in them? Especially, without analysis that deliberately goes AGAINST "academically trained individuals" and insights thereof?

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2006):
BWV 139 Score Samples; music theory

Somebody wrote:
< The combination of facetious comments and analogies intermixed with ignorance regarding Bach's various techniques for treating/embellishing a melody is definitely a sign of haughty behavior based unfortunately not upon solid scholarship and intimate knowledge of material which could shed light on this matter but rather upon a lack of study and understanding of these techniques, some examples of which were given recently but not heeded. >
A brief reaction to that unbelievably long and run-on sentence:

How does this gentleman have ANY idea whatsoever as to my alleged "ignorance", my lack of "solid scholarship", my lack of "intimate knowledge" of music theory (historical and modern), and yadda yadda yadda?

In case it matters: I was one of the students in grad school whose test paper in music theory placement was filed in the library (by my permission at their request), on reserve, for the next year's students to study as they prepared for theirs. I would tend to trust the judgment of those professors who nominated the work for that honor, above the judgment of [expletives deleted]. My earned credentials suggest that I'm qualified to teach this material at a university level. And, my published recordings suggest that I can actually play this repertoire (German chorale preludes of the 17th/18th C) at a level that's at least suitable for parish services. Have a listen:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bpl/larips/cd1002.html
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bpl/larips/cd1001.html

So, please leave the unbelievably patronizing and mistaken moral judgments (like those above) in the deleted (i.e. unsent) portions of postings: if there ever is such a layer of self-control and proofreading in the first place, before they get sent. The use of run-on sentences suggests that there isn't much of such self-control, in either the writing or the thinking that generates it. If there's no respect for academia, behind such comments, well--leave it at home anyway. Those of us who have put in years of hard-earned work in this field didn't do it for nothin'. The point is to understand the material, and to be able to use it, reliably.

By the way, in case anyone would actually like to study historical music theory and take this material seriously: Joel Lester's book Compositional Theory in the Eighteenth Century is excellent in that regard. I wish it had existed at the time I took my music theory exams! But, its first edition was as late as 1992.

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 6, 2006):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
>>...why not just put up scores without color-coding and without made-up analysis in them?<<
because there are individuals who may examine these color-coded analyses without a bias which already exludes the possibility that Bach may have intended what is indicated. These examples are offered as suggestions, some of which may be quite certain while others simply hint at possibilities that may exist.

BL: >>Especially, without analysis that deliberately goes AGAINST "academically trained individuals" and insights thereof?<<
It is unfortunate that some of these "academically-trained individuals" display a very rigid attitude toward certain rules when it suits their search for and understanding of basic beginner rules that they would like to impose upon Bach's genius as being valid in all instances where embellishment of a theme/chorale melody is involved.

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 6, 2006):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
>>And, my published recordings suggest that I can actually play this repertoire (German chorale preludes of the 17th/18th C) at a level that's at least suitable for parish services.<<
Many performers have played chorale preludes without noting precisely where the key notes of the chorale melody are in the midst of all the embellishments. Certain editions attempt to place the words/syllables of the chorale text as close as possible to the appearance of the notes of the chorale melody (naturally without being able to mark precisely the notes with color-coding). Nevertheless, it takes an additional effort to analyze and locate precisely where the melody is found as it is stretched or pulled together in varying places with some notes falling on unaccented, off-the-beat notes or even in the middle of a passage of 16^th or 32^nd notes.

BL: >>If there's no respect for academia, behind such comments, well--leave it at home anyway. Those of us who have put in years of hard-earned work in this field didn't do it for nothin'.<<
Since when is well-founded criticism considered showing no respect for academia? This is no time to rest on one's laurels, but to continue striving to uncover facts and evidence, to suggest theories that might lead to a better understanding, and to advance speculations that appear to be reasonable in the light of evidence provided by serious scholarship. To denigrate and make to appear ridiculous insights, ideas, and speculations offered by others without being able to offer significant counter-evidence or solid reasoning not based upon personal bias is simply to obfuscate and confuse other readers who may still have an open mind and an ability to approach an idea without prejudice. Adding a litany of academic achievements which appear hollow because they are already dated does little to improve the understanding of a difficult matter.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2006):
< Adding a litany of academic achievements which appear hollow because they are already dated does little to improve the understanding of a difficult matter. >
Appearing "hollow" to whom?

And, the understanding of a "difficult" matter, difficult to whom? To people who have actually passed music theory courses and exams, and who haveread expert materials in that field with understanding, grasping how musical embellishment works?

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2006):
< It is unfortunate that some of these "academically-trained individuals" display a very rigid attitude toward certain rules when it suits their search for and understanding of basic beginner rules that they would like to impose upon Bach's genius as being valid in all instances where embellishment of a theme/chorale melody is involved. >
Take an ordinary phrase such as this one from the St Matthew Passion (BWV 244): "Erbarme dich, mein Gott, um meiner Zähren willen". Cross out all the letters you don't like (i.e. highlight in colors the ones you want to keep, and leave all the unwanted letters in black). It is quite easy to cross things out in such a way that the phrase is revealed to have both the "hidden" words "Erde" and "himmel" in it. Astounding, isn't it? Assign a bunch of pious-sounding theological implications to those coincidences. Don't forget that the words "breit(e)" and "eier" are also in there, not to mention a host of non-German words as well; and whatever's convenient should be compelled to mean something important, wherever it fits the preconceived theory. If wide eggs falling from heaven and hitting the earth have a theological meaning to be divined here, use it!

Now, issue the claim that Bach (and/or his librettist) was necessarily thinking of all this stuff, and the further claim that no other interpretation is as plausible as this. Put it up onto a web page, and then personally belittle anyone who happens to disagree, or who happens to present an argument for simpler interpretations. Never admit that the interpretation was arbitrarily chosen to begin with, and for no particularly solid reasons. The phrase "Erbarme dich, mein Gott, um meiner Zähren willen" is apparently a brilliant elaboration of those hidden words, and everyone who disagrees is obviously too blinded by academic understanding (or whatever or whatever or whatever) to see what's plainly there. The true Bach is of course revealed by pointing these things out.

Well, this same absurdly one-sided procedure is being foisted upon us, in color-coded notes.

See the problem yet?

Tom Hens wrote (November 7, 2006):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
< Take an ordinary phrase such as this one from the St Matthew Passion (BWV 244): "Erbarme dich, mein Gott, um meiner Zähren willen". Cross out all the letters you don't like (i.e. highlight in colors the ones you want to keep, and leave all the unwanted letters in black). >
The English parts of this sentence quite clearly contain a hidden message: my name.

_T_ake an ordinary phrase such as this one fr_om_ the St Matt_he_w Passio_n_: [German deleted]. Cro_s_s [no need to go on].

See, it says "Tom Hens" right there. How clever of Brad!

I'm sorry this is just email, so I can't do highlighting in colours. The use of colours would of course make it even more true.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 7, 2006):
Tom Hens wpote:
< _T_ake an ordinary phrase such as this one fr_om_ the St Matt_he_w Passio_n_: [German deleted]. Cro_s_s [no need to go on].
See, it says "Tom Hens" right there. How clever of Brad! >
"Tom Braatz" could also be found in the original German phrase, there, if we were allowed to do anagrams with the letters selected out.

"But that would be going a bit too far, don't you think?" - Mary Poppins (on the syllabic anagramming of "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious"...)

I trust that you already noticed the straightforward presentation of Bach's name, right there within the first two words, and omitting only seven other letters?

< I'm sorry this is just email, so I can't do highlighting in colours. The use of colours would of course make it even more true. >
Well, that would depend which colors you picked for it. Some of the colors have different truth values, especially when dealing with light instead of paint. And, "indigo" isn't even a discrete color within the rainbow, anymore, according to some people. But, we'd really need a definitive presentation about chakras and auras to be sure; I'm not worthy.

Ed Myskowski wrote (November 13, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< BTW, Ed, I agree with your comments on Richter's recitative [1], Mvt. 3. In this recording, can you hear a note beating on "tut" - a slightly out of tune organ pipe, perhaps? >
I did not notice this on my own. I returned for another listen, and did not hear it, but I am limited to a portable CD player for the time being, perhaps lacking in detail. More likely, you have a more discriminating ear. BTW, my faithful CD player (ca. 1989) quit moments after I gave it a compliment in public. There is probably a lesson in there somewhere

I normally do hear the details you point out, so keep trying. One which we have both noticed is the raspy organ sound in some Koopman recits., which shows up in the higher notes toward the end of BWV 26/5. Not so much objectionable as curious, what is it?

On list, by intent. What the heck, its about the music!

Cantata BWV 139: Complete Recordings | Recordings of Individual Movements | Discussions

Recordings & Discussions of Cantatas: Cantatas BWV 1-50 | Cantatas BWV 51-100 | Cantatas BWV 101-150 | Cantatas BWV 151-200 | Cantatas BWV 201-224 | Cantatas BWV Anh | Order of Discussion

Introduction | Cantatas | Other Vocal | Non-Vocal | Performers | General Topics | Articles | Books | Movies
Biographies | Texts & Translations | Scores | References | Commentary | Music | Concerts | Bach Tour | Memorabilia
Chorale Texts | Chorale Melodies | Lutheran Church Year | Readings | Poets & Composers | Transcriptions
Search Website | Search Works/Movements | Terms & Abbreviations | Copyright Notice | How to contribute | Links