Recordings/Discussions
Background Information
Performer Bios

Poet/Composer Bios

Additional Information

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

Cantata BWV 16
Herr Gott, dich loben wir
Discussions - Part 2

Continue from Part 1

Discussions in the Week of September 2, 2007

Russell Telfer wrote (September 1, 2007):
Introduction to BWV 16

Topic for discussion from 2nd September 2007:

Cantata BWV 16
Herr Gott, dich loben wir
Lord God, we praise you

BWV 16 is a choral cantata which was probably first heard on New Year's Day 1726. Thomas Braatz reports that this is the most likely date, based on the watermark in the paper. He has also provided the provenance: Cantata BWV 16 - Provenance.

This cantata is also the last of ten to which I have offered an introduction. Preparing this study has been a new beginning for me. I hope I have provided the odd insight to add to the other received material which we have been reading.

Robin Leaver (in the Oxford Composers' Companion) tells us that the cantata BWV 16 was used again in 1731, 1745 and 1749.

It was last discussed in February 2003. The previous discussion offers many useful facts such as the timings for each movement for recordings by Gardiner [3], Leusink [4], Rilling [2] and Leonhardt [1].
Thanks also to Tom for this information.

Anyway, to the music:

Mvt. 1. A very powerful short chorus: We praise thee, Lord God. Corno di caccia with sopranos on the cantus firmus, oboes and strings on the other parts. It's a short electrifying movement with taxing parts for the singers.

Mvt. 2. A short bass aria. The theme concerns reverence for the Saviour, love and loyalty, blessing and redemption.

Mvt. 3. This is followed by another Aria - actually a chorus - (Let us celebrate, let us rejoice) with similar instrumental disposition except that now the soprano and horn have separate parts: the horn is let loose on a bravura display at the top of its range. The movement, about three and a half minutes long, is a show-stopper, commanding attention with the elemental directness of its rhythm and the remorseless power of its harmonic progress.

Mvt. 4. Recit for alto which begins in E minor and, like many other recits, ends in another key, this time, C major.

. faithful treasure, protect also your precious Word,
protect church and school .

Mvt. 5. Aria for tenor with oboe da caccia and violetta. The theme of this piece:

Beloved Jesus, You alone shall be the kingdom of my soul.

I have sung this, for study purposes, with others in my group. What I particularly liked was the interesting continuo part - without this superb background, we would have been (I felt) adrift in run-of-the-mill eighteenth century waters. Our local soloist(s) weren't up to much.

Perhaps I should rewrite that and say that if your forces are below par, you cannot do full justice to the music. Some other thoughts on this are quickly available on the BCML website: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV16-D.htm

Mvt. 6. A lovely six line (16 bar) Choral concludes the cantata with corno da caccia colla parte with oboe and soprano. The theme of praise continues:

We praise all manner of Your goodness,
Father on the throne of heaven.

A personal comment:

You might think that I was fortunate to have been introduced to Bach's music before I was of school age. It was then, and always has been, a central part of my life. When people talk about the child being father to the man, this may be what they mean. Listening to this cantata (the horn passages in particular) has brought back some of the emotions - mainly pure joy - which I experienced in those early days.

Julian Mincham wrote (September 1, 2007):
What particularly interests me about this work is the tonal planning. It is worthy of particular attention and appears to demonstrate the composer’s developing interest in progressive tonality. The opening of the first chorus (Mvt. 1) is ambiguous; is it A minor or C major? The ending does not help us because it closes on a G major chord. This is, however the dominant chord of C major which takes us naturally to the first chord of the C major recitative, which also ends on a G chord, thus leading to the C key of the second chorus (Mvt. 3). It does seem that Bach may well have used harmonic processes in order to present the first three movements as a cognate, integrated group, conjoined by the subtle tonal connections. He had done something similar with the opening movements of Cantata BWV 79 although there the three opening movements are more connected by theme and motive and less by tonal means.

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 1, 2007):
Julian Mincham wrote:
< What particularly interests me about this work is the tonal planning. It is worthy of particular attention and appears to demonstrate the composer¹s developing interest in progressive tonality. The opening of the first chorus (Mvt. 1) is ambiguous; is it A minor or C major? The ending does not help us because it closes on a G major chord. This is, however the dominant chord of C major which takes us naturally to the first chord of the C major recitative, which also ends on a G chord, thus leading to the C key of the second chorus (Mvt. 3). It does seem that Bach may well have used harmonic processes in order to present the first three movements as a cognate, integrated group, conjoined by the subtle tonal connections. >
I think you're right that the first three movements are conceived as a single tripartite movement.

The opening chorus (Mvt. 1) is based on the ancient Gregorian chant of the Te Deum which even before Luther was sung as a measured but irregular chorale. The melody is formed from two Mode Five melodies (E to E on the white notes of the piano) one of which ends on G and the other on E (the "final" or tonic of the mode). This mode was a problem for emerging diatonic harmony as early as the 16th century when, as you point out, it doesn't seem to fit into a major or minor key mold.

In his organ-prelude, "Herr Gott Dich Loben Wr", Bach sets the whole Te Deum chant as an extended harmonized chorale -- its performance was a tradtion on New Year's Day. Bach struggles with the modal implications of the melody and ends some verses on G major when the chant falls on that note. But most of the verses end on the "final" of E. Bach dodges the modal inevitabity by resolving to C major with E as the mediant, but in the end, he has to conclude the whoie prelude in E major which simply sounds unfinished to modern ears. It's a classic example of a popular melody which couldn't be harmonized.

Bach's brilliant solution in this cantata is to use the chord of G major at the end of the chorus, which sounds inclusive to modern 18th century ears, as a pivot to the C major of the recitative and into the "modern" C major of "Lass Uns Jauchzen". Many commentators mention the jittery, ambivalent affect of the opening chorus (Mvt. 1). This is undoubtedly due to our inability to accommodate the old modality. A contrasting example would be the First Mode (D-D) melody of the "Dies Irae" which, despite its flat seventh and sharp sixth degrees, can be "heard" in D minor even in the 19th century.

Leusink [4] performs the three movements with very little connection. There is the standard Grand Pause after the opening chorus which is all but pervasive in modern Bach performances. Strangely, the recitative is allowed to stand alone with no sense of moving inthe chorus. This transition makes for an interesting OVPP question. Even if the choral parts are sung tutti, the music seems to call for a bass solo for the two opening flourishes of "Lasst Uns Jauchzen" and indeed throughout the moevemnt. From the Provenance description of earlier BCML discussions, the "solo" and "tutti" markings would appear to be modern editorial additions. OVPP?

Jean Laaninen wrote (September 2, 2007):
[To Julian Mincham & Douglas Cowling] Thanks to both of you for the technical enlightenment on the layout of this cantata. In the cantus firmus movement I find the independence of the continuo to be quite charming and adding much richness to the short opening. Doug's comment as to the modal aspects is also helpful. It's so great that we have people on this forum who can open up the great dimensions of the music in this manner.

Julian Mincham wrote (September 2, 2007):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
< of which ends on G and the other on E (the "final" or tonic of the mode). This mode was a problem for emerging diatonic harmony as early as the 16th century when, as you point out, it doesn't seem to fit into a major or minor key mold. >
Another fascinating example of Bach's dealing with the problems of harmonising modal melodies comes from the second cycle where he uses Luther's baptism hymn to close both cantatas BWV 7 and BWV 176 and also as the basis for the fantasia of BWV 7. In the chorales Bach bows to the inevitable and concludes each in the dominant (not the tonic) key as is suggested (at least within a ma/min key system).

But in the fantasia for BWV 7 (where, unusually the tenors have the chorale melody) he uses the tenor's final long note as a dominant chord to get him back to the tonic of E minor where the ritornello completes the movement in the key in which it began.

For those for whom this may be a bit technical---he finishes the chorales in keys other than that in which they began because that seems to be demanded by the shape of the archaic melody, but in the longer fantasia he uses a contemporary structural principle in order to finish in the original key.

No concepts of 'authenticity' here of course, but a fascinating insight into the ways in which Bach dealt with musical solecisms of his time.

Bradley Lehman wrote (September 2, 2007):
< of which ends on G and the other on E (the "final" or tonic of the mode). This mode was a problem for emerging diatonic harmony as early as the 16th century when, as you point out, it doesn't seem to fit into a major or minor key mold.
(...)
For those for whom this may be a bit technical---he finishes the chorales in keys other than that in which they began because that seems to be demanded by the shape of the archaic melody, but in the longer fantasia he uses a contemporary structural principle in order to finish in the original key. >
Another good example: the big "Kyrie" organ setting, BWV 671, in the German Organ Mass (Clavieruebung book 3). The tune is in Phrygian, which is an especially problematic mode to try to force into tonal harmony. At the beginning, G-Ab-Bb, it sounds as if it's in E-flat major...but at the end of the piece we're on a G major chord.

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 2, 2007):
Julian Mincham wrote:
< Another fascinating example of Bach's dealing with the problems of harmonising modal melodies comes from the second cycle where he uses Luther's baptism hymn to close both cantatas BWV 7 and BWV 176 and also as the basis for the fantasia of BWV 7. In the chorales Bach bows to the inevitable and concludes each in the dominant (not the tonic) key as is suggested (at least within a ma/min key system). >
We see modal diffculties as well in "Christ Lag in Todesbanden" which is a reworking of the Gregorian Mode 1 melody, "Victimae Paschali" which starts on the "final" tonic of E and has the characteristic flattened seventh as its second note (interestingly, the chant avoids the sharp sixth degree and question of whether to flatten it) All through the 16 and 17th centuries, composers try to deal with the conundrum of how to harmonize the modal
melody: the melody itself is varied, so that the openng note is treated as the dominant. Bach uses a more diatonic variant of the chant so that first two notes are a semiitone. The persistence of these problems as late as Bach's time is testimony that the melodies were still so well-known in their modal form that composers had find creative solutions to accommodate modality when it had long passed from currency.

Examples at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/CM/Christ-lag-in-Todesbanden.htm#ScoSourceLuther

Neil Halliday wrote (September 4, 2007):
Knowing the metre of the somewhat meandering modal chorale melody (or rather, the position of the long notes in relation to the bar lines) increases the enjoyment of this fine movement. The harmonisation of the CM (whose modal character has already been mentioned in previous posts) via the instrumental and lower vocal parts is indeed most impressive; and the music has a soaring aspect on the extended phrases on "Ewigkeit".

Rilling [2] is a tad slow, and the continuo organ at the start is unattractive (raspy timbre), but his choir and upper instruments are otherwise excellent.
-----------
In the joyful 2nd chorus (Mvt. 3), Rilling [2] may well have the best recording. The accuracy and brilliance of the virtuosic modern horn are noteworthy in this recording. Of the period ensembles, Koopman [7] (BCW sample) seems to come closest to Rilling's performance. In other examples, the horn part is partly hidden, or somewhat raucous in the lower octave.
-----------
The tenor aria's ritornello features what must be one of Bach's longest obbligato melodies. It's 16 bars long and may be divided into two sections, of 6 bars and 10 bars respectively. Bars 5 and 6 are repeated (transposed) in bars 14 and 15; in these bars (and also in bars 3 and 4) the melody seems to curl around and repeat itself in a
certain manner that is already hinted at in bars 1 and 2.

I much prefer the slower tempos of the period ensembles; especially Koopman [7], Harnoncourt and Gardiner [3] (Koopman is equal slowest with Harnoncourt). These three have excellent introductory ritornellos; the latter two have excellent, unobtrusive organ realisations, and Koopman (in his second version shown in the amazon list of movements) has come up with an exquisite realisation of the ritornello for obbligato `cello piccolo (I think) and continuo lute (plus cello). The oboes da caccia (in the other two mentioned above) are most expressive. (The samples cease just as the singer enters; I trust they maintain the interest).

-----------

It's interesting that Bach should have used the same text and CM for the final chorales ("plain" 4 part harmonisations) of BWV 28 and BWV 16, especially since the former was apparently followed by the latter on the very next day (if I understand the original performance dates correctly). The major difference in harmonisation is to be found on the word "Leid" (sorrow); in BWV 28 it's a plain C major chord, while in BWV 16 it's a diminished 7th chord.

Lex Schelvis wrote (September 4, 2007):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< Koopman [7] (in his second version shown in the amazon list of movements) has come up with an exquisite realisation of the ritornello for obbligato `cello piccolo (I think) and continuo lute (plus cello). >
I totally agree with Neil here. Koopman's [7] realisation of this aria made it one of my favourites while I never regarded it as avery special one before, in comparison with other compositions of Bach of course.

Julian Mincham wrote (September 4, 2007):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< It's interesting that Bach should have used the same text and CM for the final chorales ("plain" 4 part harmonisations) of BWV 28 and BWV 16, especially since the former was apparently followed by the latter on the very next day (if I understand the original performance dates correctly). The major difference in harmonisation is to be found on the word "Leid" (sorrow); in BWV 28 it's a plain C major chord, while in BWV 16 it's a diminished 7th chord. >
Well spotted Neil.

This is indeed curious. Without a thorough search I don't know of any other examples of Bach doing this on successive days--or even in successive weeks. In fact there are a number of small details of harmonisation--not least in the harmonisations of the first phrase. I think I made a point on list some time ago to the effect that Bach seemed to reharmonise the chorales not bnecessarily ecause he thought he could improve upon the original but because the different texts suggested different progressions.

But here the texts are the same and still he alters a number of details? Does he feel that he needs to give the chorale a different 'feel' simply because it is performed and heard on successive days? But if so, might he have not bothered to produce a more radical harmonisation as he has done on other occasions?

Strange.

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 4, 2007):
Julian Mincham wrote:
< But here the texts are the same and still he alters a number of details? Does he feel that he needs to give the chorale a different 'feel' simply because it is performed and heard on successive days? >
The most famous examples of repeated chorales is the so-called "Passion Chorale" which is given three succesive symbolic reharmonizations in the Matthew Passion. The same chorale also appears as the first and last chorales of the "Christmas Oratorio" (BWV 248) in breathtakingly different settings.

Jean Laaninen wrote (September 4, 2007):
[To Julian Mincham] I find the comment that Bach may have reharmonized the chorales due to different texts suggesting different progressions very interesting. This is an angle I had not previously considered. If you happen to have an analysis of a few measures in terms of Roman Numeral Analysis, compiled with a few texts I would be interested in seeing that kind of analysis, simply for the fact that such an idea is new for me. I wonder if anyone has prepared anything of this nature that is in a textbook.

Julian Mincham wrote (September 5, 2007):
Jean Laaninen wrote:
< I find the comment that Bach may have reharmonized the chorales due to different texts suggesting different progressions very interesting. >
I am not aware of any exhausitive comparative study of the different chorale harmonisations and how they relate to text but I have noticed it on a few occasions. I guess that Bach sometimes reharmonised because he thought he had a better idea or perhaps he just felt like it. Sometimes he even altered the phrases structures. But I feel pretty sure that at times he reharmonised to accommodate a different text..

A good example is the chorale which begins BWV 153 and ends BWV 2. In the latter cantata the text is about the wicked and ungodly who 'do not mix amongst us'. Note the Ab chord which begins phrase 2---it's a very odd chord in this context, it stands out significantly from the rest of the harmony and is not found in the earlier BWV 153. I suggest that the textual idea of those 'standing outside of the normal community' may well have suggested this weird effect and striking image.

A few other examples of where Bach used the same chorale which you may care to glance at may be found in BWV 87, BWV 66 and BWV 8--------BWV 7 and BWV 176-------BWV 48 and BWV 113------BWV 103, BWV 65, BWV 3, BWV 111 and SMP (BWV 244) (phrase alterations to be found here)---- BWV 3, BWV 58 and BWV 153 (last is converted into triple time)---

I'd be interested in what you might come up with.

Jean Laaninen wrote (September 5, 2007):
[To Julian Mincham] I have copied this email to my computer. I will get to looking at the details a bit later, but I will come back to it though right now I can't tell you when (forgive me for saying so-it's my schedule again this week). But I appreciate that you were able to point out some parallel circumstances in the various works. I'm sure this will be an interesting exploration and I won't attempt to answer until I've had adequate time to really take a good look.

Ed Myskowski wrote (September 5, 2007):
Julian Mincham wrote:
< A good example is the chorale which begins BWV 153 and ends BWV 2. In the latter cantata the text is about the wicked and ungodly who 'do not mix amongst us'. Note the Ab chord which begins phrase 2---it's a very odd chord in this context, it stands out significantly from the rest of the harmony and is not found in the earlier BWV 153. I suggest that the textual idea of those 'standing outside of the normal community' may well have suggested this weird effect and striking image. >
Like Jean, I have not tracked down the details, but I find the premise intriguing. Perhaps by this stage of his career, Bach found himself 'standing outside the normal community', but not necessarily 'wicked and ungodly', and he was exploring the unusual, striking, beauty of weird effects?

Julian Mincham wrote (September 5, 2007):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
< and he was exploring the unusual, striking, beauty of weird effects? >
Hi Ed how's it going?

I sort of feel that his whole life was a restless pattern of searching, not only for unusual and weird effects, but for new and sometimes bizarre harmonies, textures, instrumental combinations etc etc. His mind seemed to be one of continual restless enquiry.

Guess he would have made a great scientist had he elected to go in that direction---fortunate, perhaps, for us that he did not!

Ed Myskowski wrote (September 6, 2007):
Julian Mincham wrote:
< Guess he would have made a great scientist had he elected to go in that direction---fortunate, perhaps, for us that he did not! >
Not to overlook that he was an accepted master of organ inspection.... The church organ was the ultimate engineering achievement, in that pre-industrial age, and Bach was an acknowledged expert at project approval (and management?).

I don't know if that makes him a great scientist, but perhaps a distinguished engineer, in addition to his composing genius? I like the phrase 'continual restless enquiry'.

My spell-checker suggests 'inquiry', but I referred to a printed dictionary, and 'enquiry' is perfectly fine as an alternate in American English. How confusing can a language get?

Julian Mincham wrote (September 6, 2007):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
< My spell-checker suggests 'inquiry', but I referred to a printed dictionary, and 'enquiry' is perfectly fine as an alternate in American English. How confusing can a language get? >
Yep--I reckon it's all the fault of the Yanks tinkering about with words that have been around for years!

Caution--turf war warning!!!!

Harry W. Crosby wrote (September 6, 2007):
When Julian Mincham wrote:
< I sort of feel that his whole life was a restless pattern of searching, not only for unusual and weird effects, but for new and sometimes bizarre harmonies, textures, instrumental combinations etc etc. His mind seemed to be one of continual restless enquiry.
Guess he would have made a great scientist hahe elected to go in that direction---fortunate, perhaps, for us that he did not! >
All I could think was, first, "Amen to that!", and then to remind myself what a marvelous model was the great Johann Sebastian, what a harmony of nature and nurture --- born into the most [documentedly] musical family of all time, equipped with their genes and raised in their envelopingly musical tradition in the presence of their daily musical expressions. And with all that, still and supremely, his very own man.

Yes, Julian, we are fortunate indeed --- We All, Forever.

Nicholas Johnson wrote (September 6, 2007):
<>

Julian Mincham wrote (September 6, 2007):
Harry W. Ceosby wrote:
< what a marvelous model was the great Johann Sebastian, what a harmony of nature and nurture >
Like your words Harry.

I am sure we all benefit greatly from Hooke's law and Faraday's principles--but are we spiritually uplifted by them on a daily basis as with JSB's music??

I guess that was part of what I was trying.

Ed Myskowski wrote (September 7, 2007):
[To Julian Mincham] I take daily inspiration from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (dare I say HUP?), as well as from listening to Bach.

Are those inspirations incompatible? Perhaps Bach's weirdest, most 'inharmonious' harmonies, were pointing toward uncertainty. Or as Doug suggests, they were ongoing modal accommodations, in transition for a long time.

I can join in support for 'harmony of nature and nurture'. A question of balance.

Julian Mincham wrote (September 7, 2007):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
< I can join in support for 'harmony of nature and nurture'. A question of balance. >
can't disagree with that.My point was about the different ways in which we receive, value and respond to artistic and scientific discovery and innovation--they are certainly not exclusive.

Wolff in fact has a few interesting words of comparison of JSb and Isaac Newton (PP6/7, 338/9 and 462 of the paperback edition).

Bradley Lehman wrote (September 7, 2007):
Bach's "weird" harmonizations

< I take daily inspiration from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (dare I say HUP?), as well as from listening to Bach.
Are those inspirations incompatible? Perhaps Bach's weirdest, most 'inharmonious' harmonies, were pointing toward uncertainty. Or as Doug suggests, they were ongoing modal accommodations, in transition for a long time.
I can join in support for 'harmony of nature and nurture'. A question of balance. >
I'm fascinated by the way Bach's "weird" or "inharmonious" harmonizations turn out to have excellent melodic voice-leading among the parts. Each line has its own melodic integrity, and if they rub against another occasionally in transit, so be it. Things don't always have to be recognizable (or harmonically-analyzable) chords according to typical principles. The balance is between counterpoint and harmony.

Continue of this part of the discussion, see: Harmony [General Topics]

Ed Myskowski wrote (September 12, 2007):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< It's interesting that Bach should have used the same text and CM for the final chorales ("plain" 4 part harmonisations) of BWV 28 and BWV 16, especially since the former was apparently followed by the latter on the very next day (if I understand the original performance dates correctly). The major difference in harmonisation is to be found on the word "Leid" (sorrow); in BWV 28 it's a plain C major chord, while in BWV 16 it's a diminished 7th chord. >
Dürr's formulaic references to 'plain four part harmonisations' are certainly, well, formulaic.

I enjoyed Neil pointing out this detail of the CM repetition, as well as Julian's question as to why. As best I can tell, the CM is not an exact repetition, although the text is. From the BWV incipits, consistent with Leusink recordings [4], BWV 16 opens AABCCB, while BWV 28 opens AABCDB.

This distinction is not indicated in the BCW archive of chorale melodies. Perhaps it has been superseded by NBA scholarship, and BWV and Leusink [4] are now considered incorrect, or I have made an error?

One (or at least me) has to wonder if Bach would not have thoroughly enjoyed running this distinction by, on consecutive performances, two days apart, to see who noticed, to point it out, or some other motive. One (or at least me) might suspect there are some interesting undercurrents here. A microscopic point, for sure, but it is relevant to the weekly music. Not that I don't enjoy OT gossip.

In addition to recordings already discussed, the ongoing Kuijken [8] series is worthy of mention. The OVPP style is probably not to everyone's taste, and I wonder if it is not 'one microphone per part' as well. That, coupled with the ambient (or engineered?) resonance, results in the cumulative effect I previously described as 'edgy'. Is all this part of the SACD experience (even on conventional CD pickup)? Or is it a reasonable presentation of small forces, properly placed, in a resonant church environment . As Doug has pointed out from time to time, we almost never get to hear that.

Beyond the technical details, the vocalists and textural balances are superb. Kuijken [8] makes a point of noting that the obbligato instrument in Mvt. 5 is a 'violetta', while 'viola' suffices for Leusink [4]. Distinction between the instruments seems less important to me than the transparency which Kuijken manages.

Perhaps more important than that comparison is Leonhardt's [1] use of oboe da caccia, the instrument specified for the 1726 performance. That makes it appropriate in the chronologic context of our discussion, and the performance is a joy to hear, as noted in the first round. I expect anyone on this list would enjoy comparing these three versions. I also think it is worth pointing out from time to time that Leusink [4] provides thoroughly professional and enjoyable performances, not to be minimized, for those who don't have the opportunity or desire to hear a variety.

Neil Halliday wrote (September 13, 2007):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
>the CM is not an exact repetition, although the text is. From the BWV incipits, consistent with Leusink recordings [4], BWV 16 opens AABCCB, while BWV 28 opens AABCDB.<
Thanks Ed: yes, there are subtle differences in the CM itself, which I had not noticed, as well as the differences in harmonisation.

Comparing the vocal piano reduction scores of BWV 16 and BWV 28, I can see at least 6 differences (not important musically) in the CM (soprano line). There are also a couple of minor differences in the text.

The 6th line of text "give us a peaceful year" suggests a New Year's Day performance; and while I suppose the text remains appropriate for a New Year's Eve performance, the question as to why Bach used this chorale to conclude these two successive cantatas will no doubt have to remained unanswered.

Neil Halliday wrote (September 13, 2007):
Neil Halliday wrote:
> Comparing the vocal piano reduction scores of BWV 16 and BWV 28, I can see at least 6 differences (not important musically) in the CM (soprano line).<
Or rather five - I included a variation in the bass by mistake.

 

Continue on Part 3

Cantata BWV 16: Complete Recordings | Recordings of Individual Movements | Discussions: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

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 | Instrumental | Performers | General Topics | Articles | Books | Movies | New
Biographies | Texts & Translations | Scores | References | Commentaries | Music | Concerts | Festivals | Tour | Art & Memorabilia
Chorale Texts | Chorale Melodies | Lutheran Church Year | Readings | Poets & Composers | Arrangements & Transcriptions
Search Website | Search Works/Movements | Terms & Abbreviations | Copyright | How to contribute | Sitemap | Links



 

Back to the Top


Last update: ıMarch 26, 2010 ı10:07:51