Cantata BWV 166 - Discussions

Discussions in the Week of May 21, 2000

Aryeh Oron wrote (May 23, 2000):
Background

This is the week of cantata BWV 166, according to Jane Newble's suggestion. This is really rarely performed cantata. I do not understand why, because it has 3 attractive Arias for Bass, Tenor and Alto, one Chorale to be sung by Soprano, a concluding Chorale and only one Recitative. It is felt that all the movements were composed with high level of inspiration, especially the Aria for Tenor. This cantata has nothing to be shamed of when standing besides its more familiar sisters.

As a reference I will use W. Murray young book - 'The Cantatas of J.S. Bach - An Analytical Guide'. First, the introduction and afterwards as a preface before comparisons of the recordings of each movement.

"This interesting cantata for the fourth Sunday after Easter is presumed to have been written by Christian Weiss, Sr., about 1725. It is unusual because it has no Chorus and the 3^rd number, a Chorale, is sung only by the solo Soprano voice. The final Choral, however, has a four-part choir. The Gospel is John 16: 5-15 - Jesus speaks to the disciples of His return to the Father. Verse 5 is partly quoted for the opening Aria."

Personal Viewpoint

The material to the Aria for Tenor (No.2) of BWV 166 is adapted from a Trio in G Minor for Organ (BWV 584), published by G.W. Korner in 1842 in a collection of pieces by various composers. He attributed it to Bach. It was an opportunity for me to compare some versions of this Trio that I have. It was also an opportunity to examine the relations between the source (Organ) and its adaptation (Aria for Tenor). I do not have a place to do it here, and I intend to do it in a later date. I shall send it to the Bach Cantatas List, and maybe also to the Bach Recordings List, to get some feedback from the members who have more experience in the organ field.

The Recordings

I heard only 4 recordings of BWV 166. From the modern interpreters I have heard only Koopman. AFAIK, Suzuki, Jan Leusink and Herreweghe have not recorded this cantata yet. Neither was it recorded by famous heroes from the past, like Karl Richter or Günther Ramin. Helmut Barbe did the only recording from the past that I have. This is an opportunity to hear and compare a recording from somebody, whose name has not been popped up in this discussion group before. See: Cantata BWV 166 - Recording.

(1) Helmut Barbe (Mid 1960’s?)
[3] Gustav Leonhardt (1987)
[2] Helmuth Rilling (1978)
[4] Ton Koopman (1998)

Review of the Recordings

Mvt. 1 Aria for Bass
"To just four words as given in the Scriptural verse, Bach interprets Jesus' gentle chiding of His disciples, because none of them had asked Him where He would be going. The step-motif in the oboe and string accompaniment implies also where our own wandering steps are leading us. "Wo gehest du hin?" (Whither goest Thou?) seems a scant text on which to compose an Aria, yet Bach brings out all the uncertainty in the question. He begins with an orchestral prelude and follows this with the entry of the questioning bass voice with its repeated of "wo" and "wohin". "

Wonderful rendering from Kunz (with Barbe) (1). He has pleasant voice and gives sensitive interpretation. Every turn of the words "Wo gehest du hin?" is getting different treatment - consideration, questioning, wandering, sorrow, despair. Kunz is the master of the nuance. Van Egmond (with Leonhardt) [3] proved himself many times as a very satisfying Bach interpreter, but here the stiff and metronomic conducting stands on his way of more expression. Schöne (with Rilling) [2] is authoritative, but his voice lacks any flexibility. He sounds the same through all the variants of the repeating words. His interpretation is simply uninteresting. The accompaniment he gets from Rilling is too thick. Mertens (4) is one the best Bass singers of Bach cantatas today. But comparing him with some of the best Bass singers from the past does not necessarily act to his favor. Here, Kunz outdoes everything Mertens has to offer, and Mertens is doing his best in the gentle but fast accompaniment that Koopman is giving him.

Mvt. 2 Aria for Tenor
"The melody for this Aria comes from Bach's Trio in G Minor for Organ (BWV 584), which he must have composed prior to this Aria. The thought expressed is that the singer asks himself where he is going, whether he moves or stands. The step-motif is continues here. His doubts concerning his destiny are reflected in t5he wavering tone of his singing. As a believer, he wants to think about heaven and not give his heart to the world, but he still fells like a ship without a rudder."

Hearing Krebs (with Barbe) (1), one could think that Young's words above describe exactly what Krebs is doing. You may very well think so, because Barbe's recording was done before Young wrote his book, and at that time this was the only available recording of BWV 166. Krebs touches so deeply your heart, that I cannot imagine anybody does it more convincingly. This can be a model for good Bach singing - sensitivity to the words and sensitivity to the music. Equiluz (with Leonhardt) [3] has a lot of credibility as a Bach Tenor singer. But his abilities almost do not find expression here. The reason is the stiff conducting that stops the flow of the music. When he is trying to sing 'Denn ich gehe oder stehe' (For whether I depart or stay), the accompaniment holds him, as if saying to him 'Stay, stay'. Only when the Aria almost comes to an end, and Equiluz is left alone, he expresses very convincingly the despair of the situation. Baldin (with Rilling) [2] has a very unique timbre of voice, tremendous flexibility and a lot of expressive powers. However, he uses these qualities to over interpretation. Instead of let the music speaking for itself and flowing with it, he compels his approach on the Aria and consequently causes inconvenient feeling. His accompaniment is very very heavy. Pregardien (with Koopman) (4) does not need to improve anything regarding his beauty of voice or ability of expression. What he needed here was more space to express himself and more time to think about his interpretation. Comparison of his performance to that of Krebs puts Pregardien in the shade. However, the accompaniment Pregardien gets from Koopman is very clear, precise and lovely.

Mvt. 3 Chorale for Soprano
"This magnificent number, based on stanza three of B. Ringealdt's "Herr Jesu Christ, ich weiss gat wohl" (Lord Jesus Christ, I know Quite Well) (1582), has the effect of a personal prayer. The string accompaniment lends an emotionally mystical background to her appeal to Christ for spiritual guidance. This Chorale setting is a masterpiece, superior to any of Bach's Chorale compositions thus far in his cantatas. It would be difficult for any listener to be unmoved by it."

There are some potential different solutions to performing the Soprano part of this Chorale - solo woman, solo boy, boys choir, women choir, combined choir, etc. Barbe, Rilling and Koopman use the Chorus Sopranos, and Leonhardt - a boy Soprano. For me, Barbe's solution (1) achieves the best results. The female voices sound hear like a choir of angels. His Sopranos sound very young. Rilling's Sopranos [2] sound very mature in comparison. Koopman's Sopranos (4) do not caress their part but almost shouting it. The boy Leonhardt [3] uses here is insecure and in the upper register he sounds shrill. The optimal solution seems to be using Choir of boys Sopranos. Leonhardt hthis option to his disposal, but he had other preference. The accompaniment in Barbe's rendering is the best balanced with the voices. Regarding the other accompaniments of this Chorale - Rilling continues to be heavy, Leonhardt continues his stiffness, and Koopman continues to be pleasant.

Mvt. 4 Recitative for Bass
"His secco declamation is very picturesque, as he denounces the transitory joys of the world: they are like rainwater, which vanishes or colors that fade. Many people prize worldly fortune but do not realize that it will disappear when their last hour strikes unexpectedly. This idea leads into the next number."

Mvt. 5 Aria for Alto
"This has a dance-like rhythm, which may symbolize the carefree laughter of those who enjoy their good fortune. The swinging tune, played by all the instruments, gives this impression. Long runs on the verb "lacht" (laughs) in coloratura trills show Bach's ability to paint in sound an idea that even one word evokes. In the last half of the Aria, the concept that all happiness can change suddenly from morning smiles to evening sorrows does not alter the gay rhythm of the first part. Instead of the gloomy warning indicated in the text, Bach continues to paint the joy-motif. It almost seems as though he were obsessed with the verb "lacht" and wished to carry it on to the end of the Aria, ignoring the meaning of the text he was setting."

Wolf-Matthaus (with Barbe) (1) has small, pleasant, tender and sensitive voice. She lacks something in intensity, but her singing is compensated by the considered accompaniment, which follows her in every turn and carries on the flow of the Aria. You do not feel that you miss something. Esswood (with Leonhardt) [3] makes the best out of his task, despite the insensitive accompaniment. Helen Watts (with Rilling) [2] is a very capable Bach Alto singer, and she has proved it numerous times in Rilling's cycle, as well as in her participation in many other recordings of Bach's vocal works. However, the tempo Rilling supplies to her accompaniment in this Aria does not leave her any room for expression. The rhythm is so fast, that most of the potential of this Aria is getting lost - no laugh, no joy, no sorrow. Landauer (with Koopman) (4) has very special, almost feminine voice. But he uses the same approach to every phrase he sings. His laugh is gentle but convincing, a humble laugh. This is the only movement of this cantata, where somebody is doing better than Barbe's forces do. But this conclusion relates only to the expression of the Alto singer, and not to any other aspect of the performance.

Mvt. 6 Chorale
"This first verse of Countess Amilia von Scharzburg-Rudolstadt's hymn restores the serious theme of keeping in mind one's death and to prepare for it: "Wer weiss, wie nahe, men Ende, / Hin geht die Zwit, her kommt der Tod, " (Who knows how near my end (is)? / Away goes time, hither comes death.)"

Barbe's choir (1) is a model for singing a Chorale - clear, warm, simple, sincere and unpretending. Rilling's choir [2] is too big and their singing is somewhat muddy. Leonhardt's choir [3] is shouting and not really singing. This is not of their best moments (well almost a moment, it lasts 52 seconds). Koopman choir (4) sings simply and beautifully.

Conclusion

I would like you to notice that each recording of this BWV 166 is faster than its predecessors are. IMHO, the gradual tendency to velocity causes the cantata to lose most of its soul. As I have said in the opening paragraph, I do not know Helmut Barbe (1) from any other cantatas' records. I do not know why he chose these 2 specific cantatas (BWV 166 & BWV 13) for his only record of Bach cantatas. But I am glad that he did, because he worked on his mission to perfection. This is natural, simple and straightforward performance. And I believe that this is the right approach with every bach cantata. Over sophistication may corrupt the hidden beauties of the cantata. Nothing in the other renderings of BWV 166 comes even close to Barbe's achievement in this cantata. Two of the others (Rilling [2] and Leonhardt [3]) sound so uninspired, tired and distorted in relation to him. These performances cannot claim to be included in the high picks of each cycle. And, as we can hear from Barbe's recording, this cantata has much to offer, it includes highly inspired movements and a lot of potential for high level performance. Barbe's recording belongs to that league. Leonhardt and Rilling's recordings do not. And Koopman (4) is almost there. I hope that Suzuki, Jan Leusink, and maybe Herreweghe, will come even closer to Barbe's achievement. It is quite a challenging task, because every time I hear Barbe's recording, it seems to be improving, and the difference between him and the other seems to be growing. And the wonderful, memorable and touching Aria for Tenor in Helmut Krebs singing - I cannot take it out of my head!

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

Marie Jensen wrote (May 23, 2000):
When I saw that Jane's schedule included BWV 166, I thought: I don't have it. I have never heard it. Is it one of those I shall save for my old age?

(4) But then Koopman came to town and his CD's on discount. So now I have BWV 166 and the tenor Aria on my mind, as if it was latest HIT! The pop groups nowadays produce a new hit every second month or so, not to be forgotten, and yet they soon are. Bach produced a new one every week AND THEY LAST! (Anyway in the minds of the members of this little group)

The Arias of BWV 166 are so catchy. I wonder why the cantata is so unknown.

As many of the "between Easter and Whit" cantatas it has no opening choir, but starts quoting Jesus and the gospel of St. John.

But to turn to the Koopman (Landauer, Pregardien, Mertens) (Erato Vol. 9) version [4]:

"Ich will an den Himmel denken" the tenor Aria - my new Bach hit: When Bach thinks of Heaven, it is with joy and often incense light elegance. (Try, for example, to compare with "Ihr Gedanken und Ihr Sinnen" from BWV 110). Pregardien is great here. Until Sunday morning I had nothing to compare my new acquaintance with. Then the radio played a concert version with Capella Savaria, IMHO a second-rate ensemble. They had a slower pace, which gave the same Aria a more dreaming and lyric character, which I also like. Wish they at least could have performed it faultless.

Back to Koopman [4]:
Though my knowledge of English and German certainly could be much better, I have to admit that I'm not satisfied with the translation of BWV166 into English. The English version is reproduced so that meter and rhymes are the same as the original, instead of concentrating on translating the exact meaning. That meter and rhymes fit, is only needed if the cantata is supposed to be performed in a new language (and please don't!). Bach's word painting fits the text exactly. In the Chorale for soprano the soul is compared with a bird lying in its nest ready to fly to Heaven when time comes. In the English version this beautiful image is gone. Sad, because just there the music flaps its wings and flies up.

This Chorale is simply so moving. We have the joyful, allegro, flying strings combined with the heavenly sounding sopranos, which at the same time express their strong faith in the steady Chorale rhythm. (Verharren fest). I'm sure sopranos are used, because they are closest to Heaven.

The cantata clearly makes a distinction between the joys of Heaven and Earth. From the Bass recitativo (Vox Christi) the mood changes, about the earthly pleasures so quickly fading and vanishing.

In the alto Aria beautifully sung by Landauer, "Das Geluecke lacht", the earthly one. Though the music laughs and in the end of the phrase a virtuoso coloratura is performed, joy has already culminated (like watching a ball in slow motion at the top of its parabola through the air) The harmonies are not heavenly. The sky is no longer quite so blue. Try, for example, to compare with BWV 51 "Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen" where joy takes off without risking being shot down when it pleases destiny and nothing prevents its free ascension, or with the hearty joy in the opening choir of BWV 110. In BWV 166 it is like the joy stops at a level and can't fly higher. It also comes from the way the phrases are constructed: slow steady notes (Man nehme sich in Acht!) balanced with the quickly flying ones (wenn das Gelucke lacht) The more I listen to this Aria, the more I realize what a genius Bach is! It really takes a master to express this. In the hands of a mediocre composer these words so easily could have ended as another "twelve one the dozen" laughs in Italian opera style.

The textbook talks about chaff on "Man nehme sich in Acht". I understand the symbol, but again, this is not an exact translation, and gone is the balance mentioned above.

"Wer weiss, wie nahe mir mein Ende" always make me tremble. Also this time with a new hit on my mind.

Ryan Michero wrote (May 23, 2000):
[To Marie Jensen] EXACTLY! You've hit on a big pet peeve of mine regarding the translations of the German texts in the Koopman (4) AND Harnoncourt/Leonhardt [3] sets (they use the same translations, which Warner music apparently has the rights to). In my opinion, the English texts should be literal translations of the German--and that's all! No changing of words or meanings or symbols just to fit the meter or make a rhyme. I mean, we can read and hear the German texts with rhyme and meter intact and sounding much more natural--why should a translator try in vain to do this in English? It would be different if the text was SUNG in English, but neither Koopman nor H&L do this.

Here is another reason to collect Suzuki's cantata series--their notes offer clear, faithful, literal translations of the German text into English. Really, the quality of the liner notes should not be ignored when judging the merits of a recording.

You give a perfect example of the kinds of distortions this kind of translation causes. I remember another cantata ("Schauet doch"?) (BWV 46) from Suzuki's Vol.11 where the word "Küchlein" ("little chicks") (in the Aria for Alto - No. 5) was translated correctly in the Suzuki notes and ignored in the Koopman/H&L notes. And Bach uses two soprano recorders to score this aria, representing the chicks! I would've never caught this brilliant pictorial image were it not for the Suzuki translations.

Aryeh Oron wrote (May 27, 2000):
The problem of translation of Bach cantatas' texts from German into English has a very long history, since the second half of the 19^th century. In general, I agree that it is much more important to understand the meaning of the words through good literal translation, rather than have a singable translation, which will miss the point. Because I do not read German, I try to understand the meaning of the original text through as many English translations I can put my hands on. As I have shown in the review of BWV 12, no translation into English is perfect. Lately I found a new book named 'J.S. Bach - The Complete Cantatas - in German-English translation' by Richard Stokes. The translations are literal in good simple Modern English and they are very readable. I took for example the Aria for Alto (No.5) from BWV 46, which Ryan mentioned.

Original German text:
"Er sammelt sie als seine Schafe,
Als sene Küchlein liebreich ein"

Koopman/L&H cycles translation:
"He gathers us as does a shepherd,
To keep and ever safe defend"

Rilling cycle translation (by Z. Philip Ambrose):
"He gathers them as his own sheep now,
As his own chicks, so dear, to him"

Suzuki cycle translation:
"He gathers all his sheep,
As well as his little chicks"

Richard Stokes translation:
"He gathers them together most lovingly,
As his own sheep and chickens"

Conclusion? I agree with Ryan that the Koopman/L&H translation misses a point here. However, I cannot say that Suzuki cycle translation is always my preferred one. Even here, Rilling cycle translation seems to me a little bit better. And I remember cases in the past where the Koopman/L&H translation seemed to me the best. Like in the comparisons of the recordings, there is not a definite translation, which is always the best regarding the true meaning of the original German text.

At least, the English readers have some options to choose from. We, the Hebrew readers, have none!

BTW, what will be about the poor BWV 166? Are Marie and I the only ones in the group, who have listened to this sublime cantata (with more than a single hit in it)?

Marie Jensen wrote (May 27, 2000):
< Cantata translations - At least, the English readers have some options to choose from. We, the Hebrew readers, have none! >
You can't avoid it. You have to learn some German to listen to a Bach cantata with full profit. Grammatically German is much more complicated than English, but so long you only have to understand the meaning and not express yourself it is not so difficult. Both languages are members of the Germanic family of languages. I must however admit, that my mother tongue Danish is a member too, and that gives me an advantage.

If this discussion had been going on in German, I would never have contributed, though I would understand most of it. I learned German in school for 3 years, many many years ago, but that is enough to understand most of the meaning of the cantata texts. And while reading them I learn more, the same way as writing to this list I learn more and more English.

Understanding texts while listening without reading a translation at the same time gives me concentration and energy to flow and be caught immediately, when Bach begins his word painting. Off course there often are details I have check with the textbook or even have to look on the English texts or use a dictionary, but not knowing one word while listening would be awful. Perhaps that's why I'm not caught by Bach's Italian cantatas BWV 203 and BWV 209. I have learned a little Latin. Without that the b-minor Mass would not be the same.

(Translation of BWV 46) The Stokes and Ambrose translations of BWV 46 are IMO best. They catch all the words, while Suzuki's translator forgets "liebreich".

The worst Bach translation I have ever heard, was the Coffee cantata sung in Swedish!!!. After five seconds I turned off the radio (sorry Patrik!).

PS Like Aryeh I would also like to hear other opinions about BWV166. But I think I have found out, why so few members write in: If you write to the Recordings List you often do it because you are excited about a BWV after own choice. Here a certain cantata is discussed a certain week! From outside that looks much more demanding, but fellow list members give it a try! It is Bach we write about! That fact should immediately make every one excited! Please forget, that Aryeh probably already have written it all... Following your own heads you will soon experience, he hasn't! Cantata worlds are endless! This cold and rainy afternoon (at least here) what would be better than to wrap yourself in blankets and listen to Bach?

Matthew Westphal wrote (May 28, 2000):
Marie Jensen wrote:
< PS Like Aryeh I would also like to hear other opinions about BWV166. But I think I have found out, why so few members write in: If you write to the Recordings List you often do it because you are excited about a BWV after own choice. Here a certain cantata is dia certain week! From outside that look much more demanding, but fellow list members give it a try! It is Bach we write about! That fact should immediately make every one excited! >
I for one would love to be able to write something about BWV 166. But I don't have any of the recordings. I'll just have to be content with the comments Aryeh and Marie provide.

Ryan Michero wrote (May 28, 2000):
Sorry for the late response to this thread. It has been a very busy week for me.

At first, I thought the question that opens this cantata was a very apt title for the work--for all the wrong reasons. After I first heard it, I couldn't really figure out how all of the movements tied in together. A question asked by Jesus, followed by a seemingly indirect reply, followed by a chorale expressing love for Jesus and the wish to go to heaven. Then a recitative warning about the fleeting pleasures of the world, followed by a musically delightful alto aria with an admonitory text, concluded by another chorale, fearful and wishing for a "gentle death". Huh? I thought the themes of the different movements seemed to be unrelated, and I was confused that the text sometimes contradicted the music. Bach, where goest thou?

Another couple of listens supplemented by a few lines from Albert Schweitzer helped me understand BWV 166 much better. As many of you know, Schweitzer devotes much of his discussion of Bach's cantatas into the analysis of musical figures used to represent certain ideas. Some of this strikes me as well-informed conjecture, but some of it is very convincing. He says that the disjointed, staccato orchestral lines of the first movement represent Jesus' light steps after the resurrection. He asks as He leaves His followers, "Now that I am leaving, will you follow me on the path to heaven or will you succumb to the fleeting pleasures of this world?" Schweitzer says the tenor aria is built on a step motif, as if the tenor is proceeding on with his life, looking for the right path, hoping he follows the path to heaven. The canonic imitation in the obbligato instruments reinforces this idea of following--the first instrument representing Jesus and the second the soul, or the first representing the soul/mind and the second the body. The wonderful chorale, assured in its unisono strings, supports the idea that the path of heaven is the correct path. The bass recitative warns of the transitory pleasures of the earth. In the context of the recitative, the gorgeous, operatic alto aria seems to represent the pleasures of this world. They are inviting, but beware when fortune laughs! The final chorale, meditating on death, again illustrates the uncertainty of the believers and the hopes that they follow the right path and are allowed into heaven.

So there is no transfiguration here, no apotheosis. There is just uncertainty, fear, and warning, yet also hope and assurance that the way of Jesus is the right way. This is quite an appropriate subject for a cantata after Easter--the believers, separated from

Jesus, must now decide what to do with their lives without him. They hope to follow His path in His absence and in the face of beckoning worldly pleasures.

I have two recordings of this cantata:

[3] This is not one of Leonhardt's finer recordings. In fact, every movement leaves something to be desired. Van Egmond sounds somewhat uninterested in the bass aria, and Leonhardt's accompaniment should be more light-footed. I like Leonhardt's reconstruction of the tenor aria, with an oboe and violin playing the obbligato lines. However, the tempo seems too slow to be "walking", and Equiluz sings with a very tragic voice a text that emphasizes uncertainty over sadness. In the next soprano chorale setting, the boy soprano seems stretched to his limits, is insecure in his intonation, and seems too young to express the meaning of the text. The bass Arioso goes alright, but Esswood sings the alto aria way too straight, with none of the devilish mischievousness in his voice implied by the text and music. Overall, this is not a satisfying recording.

(4) Koopman's performance is overall much better than Leonhardt's, even if some of his tempi seem a bit fast. Koopman's accompaniment in the opening aria is irresistibly light-footed, but Mertens is not in his highest form. He makes little attempt to vary the tone color in his voice or inject much expression into his singing. Compare with his wonderfully dramatic singing in the bass recitative here--it sounds like a different singer! Pregardien's singing in the tenor aria is great--musical, beautiful, and expressing just the right amounts of uncertainty and pain. Koopman reconstructed the tenor aria's missing obbligato part himself, substituting an oboe da caccia in place of the more accepted violin. This solution makes sense from the point of view of an organist used to hearing this music on pipes, but I'm not sure how historically justified it is. At any rate, it is musically satisfying and sounds lovely. The concerto-like chorale setting sounds wonderful here, though I might prefer a solo soprano to soprano chorus here. As I said before, the bass recitative is tautly dramatic.

But the real treasure of this cantata performance IMHO is the great alto aria sung by Landauer. I agree with Marie and Aryeh that Landauer is a remarkable singer, combining a boy-alto-like tone with the impeccable technique and warmth of Robin Blaze. He makes the most of his virtuoso laughing aria, seeming to have a lot of fun singing it. I'm not sure how historically justified his elaborate ornamentation in the da capo repeat is, but it is very impressive and makes sense in this context. A lovely chorale tops off a fine performance.

In the light of our recent discussion of English translations of Bach's cantata texts, I would like to mention a great online resource for all of us. Aryeh's comparison of different translations of BWV 46, No. 5 was very instructive. I agree with Marie that Ambrose's translation is probably the best for making sense of the German text. Luckily for those of us without Rilling's cantata set, Prof. Ambrose has made all of his superb translations of Bach's vocal music available online: http://www.uvm.edu/~classics/faculty/bach/

Here is a quote from his site:
"Some of my translations originally appeared in The Texts to Johann Sebastian Bach's Church Cantatas (Hänssler-Verlag: Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1984). To these are added now the remaining works. The translations are unrhymed but follow the meter and word-division of the originals exactly so that they match their musical placement. While this means that they could be sung, they are not meant primarily for singing but as an aid to performers and listeners for interpreting the original texts."

This is exactly what I want out of an English translation. I am guilty of forgetting about this site while discussing cantata texts in the past, but I will be sure to visit it with every new cantata discussion now. He does not include the German texts, but this is hardly a problem as these are readily available in every cantata set. I urge everyone to check his site out.

Discussions in the Week of April 16, 2006

Douglas Cowling wrote (April 16, 2006):
Week of April 16 - Cantata 166

Week of April 16, 2006

Cantata BWV 166, “Wo gehest du hin?”

Leipzig, 1724 | 1^st performance: May 7, 1724 - Leipzig

First Annual Cantata Cycle, 1723-24 (Jahrgang I)

Previous Sunday in 1724 (Jubilate Sunday)
Cantata BWV 12, “Weinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen”
Next Sunday in 1724: (Rogate Sunday):
Cantata BWV 86, “Wahrlich, wahrlich, ice sage euch”
Week from Thursday: (Ascension Day)
Cantata BWV 37, “Wer da gläubet”

Libretto:
(Mvt. 1) John 16: 5
(Mvt. 3) Bartholomäus Ringwaldt
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Lib/Ringwaldt.htm
(. 6) Ämilie Juliane von Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt
See http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Lib/Schwarzburg.htm
(Mvts. 2, 4-5) Anon

Text:
See http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~wfb/cantatas/166.html
Translations:
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV166.htm

Movements & Scoring:

Mvt. 1; Aria
"Wo gehest du hin?"
Soloists: Bass
Instruments:
Ob, 2 Vn, Va, Bc

Mvt. 2: Aria
“Ich will an den Himmel denken"
Soloists: Tenor
Instruments: Ob, B

Mvt. 3: Chorale
“Ich bitte dich, Herr Jesu Christ”
Soloists: Soprano
Instruments: 2 Vn, Va, Bc

Mvt. 4: Recitative
“Gleichwie die Regenwasser bald verfließen”
Soloists: Bass
Instruments: Bc

Mvt. 5: Aria
“Man nehme sich in acht”
Soloists: Alto
Instruments: Ob, 2 Vn, Va, Bc

Mvt. 6: Chorale
“Wer weiß, wie nahe mir mein Ende!”
Choir: SATB
Instruments: Ob, 2 Vn, Va, Bc

Liturgical Comments:

Written for the Fourth Sunday after Easter. The name “Cantate” Sunday comes from the opening words of the Latin introit, “Cantate Domino canticum novum”. Ascension Day, when a cantata was required, falls on the Thursday after the next Sunday.

Other Cantatas written for Cantate Sunday:
BWV 108 Es ist euch gut, dass ich hingehe (Leipzig, 1725)

The orders for Mass and Vespers can be found in an appendix at the end of this posting. Extracted from Wolff.

Texts of Readings:
Readings: Epistle: Jas. 1: 17-21; Gospel: John 16: 5-15
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Read/Cantate.htm

Introduction to Lutheran Church Year:
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Lutheran.htm

Piano Vocal Score: (free PDF download)
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV166.htm

Recordings:
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV166.htm#RC

Music (free streaming download):
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Mus/BWV166-Mus.htm

Chorales:
Wer nur den lieben Gott läßt walten
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/CM/Wer-nur-den-lieben-Gott.htm
Herr Jesu Christ, du höchstes Gut
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/CM/Herr-Jesu-Christ-du-hochstes.htm

Commentaries:
http://www.classical.net/music/comp.lst/works/bachjs/cantatas/166.html
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=42:4057~T1
http://www.emmanuelmusic.org/notes_trans/notes_cantata/bwv166.htm

Previous Discussion:
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV166-D.htm

Performances of Bach Cantatas:
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Concert-2006.htm

Order of Discusssion (2006)
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Order-2006.htm

Appendix:

ORDER OF SUNDAY & HOLYDAY MASS (Amt) - 7:00 -10:00 am

1. Choir: Hymn in figural or polyphonic setting
2. Organ: Prelude introducing Introit
3. Choir: Introit Motet in figural or polyphomic setting

4. Organ: Prelude introducing Kyrie
5. Choir: Kyrie in figural setting
6. Choir: Gloria in figural setting (minister sings intonation from altar)

7. Minister & Altar Singers (lower form boys):
Salutation & Collect (Prayer of Day) sung from altar
8. Minister: Epistle sung from altar steps

9. Organ: Prelude introduing Hymn
10. Congregation: Hymn of Season (de tempore)
11. Minister & Altar Singers: Gospel with responses sung from altar steps

12. Organ: Prelude introducing cantata
13. Choir: First Cantata

14. Choir:: Credo sung in chorale setting, minister intones from altar steps
15. Organ: Prelude introducing Wir Glauben
16. Congregation: Wir Glauben All (German Credo)

17. Minister: Spoken annoucement of Sermon from altar
18. Organ: Prelude introducing hymn
19. Congregation: Hymn
20. Minister: Text of Sermon & Lord’s Prayer from pulpit
21. Minister: Sermon (8:00 a.m., 1 hour)
22. Minister: Prayers, Announcments & Benediction from pulpit

23. Organ: Prelude introducing hymn
24. Congregation Hymn
25. Mnister & Altar Singers: Preface in Latin from altar
26. Choir: Sanctus in figural setting (without Osanna or Benedictus)
27. Minister: spoken Communion admoniton, Words of Institution
28. Congregation: Distribution of Communion at altar steps

29. Organ: Prelude introducting Communion Cantata
30. Choir: Second Cantata

31. Organ: Prelude introducing hymn
32. Congregation: Hymn during Communion
33. Minister & Altar Singers: Collect with responses sung from altar
34. Minister: spoken Benediction

35. Organ: Prelude introducing Hymn
36. Congregation: Hymn
or
36. Choir: Hymn in figural setting (festal days)

ORDER OF AFTERNOON VESPERS 1:30 pm

1. Organ: Prelude introducing Hymn
2. Choir: Hymn in figural setting

3. Choir: Cantata (repeated from morning)

4. Organ: Prelude introducing Hymn
5. Congregation: Hymn
6. Minister & Altar Singers: Psalm
7. Minister: Lord’s Prayer from altar steps

8. Organ: Prelude introducing hymn
9. Congregation: Hymn

10. Minister: Annoucement of Sermon from pulpit
11. Congregation: Hymn
12. Minister: Sermon from pulpit
[13. Choir: Passion or narrativer oratorio, no cantata]
14. Minister: spoken Prayers, Collect & Benediction from pulpit

15. Organ: Prelude introducing Magnificat
16. Choir: LatinMagnificat in figural setting
17. Congregation: German Magnificat Hymn (Meine Seele)

18. Minister: spoken Responsary, Collect & Benediction from altar
19. Congregation: Hymn Nun Danket Alle Gott

Neil Halliday wrote (April 20, 2006):
The alto aria (BWV 166/5) is noteworthy for the striking, unsettled tonality in the middle section that speaks of the fickle nature of fortune. This section begins, as expected, in the relative minor (G minor); but the first statement of the three lines of text (in this middle section) modulates and ends on A minor, while the second statement of these same three lines of text modulates from A minor and ends on a very unexpected C minor, before returning to the confident B flat major of the `da capo'.

This aria also features Bach's thick-textured instrumental writing, with at least one and sometimes many of the five lines (v.1 plus oboe, v.2, viola, alto, continuo) nearly always having the 4-note `slow trill' figure. This is well captured in Rilling's recording [2].

[Rilling [2] does have his characteristically undifferentiated phrasing in the continuo, in the tenor aria and soprano chorale, detracting from the charm of these movements. The soprano chorale, especially, begins to sound mechanical].

The lovely tenor (BWV 166/2) aria shows Bach's ability to effortlessly weave another line into pre-existing material, with the tenor line engaging in the imitative/canonical counterpoint of the oboe and violin lines.

BTW, is BWV 584, an organ trio on which this movement is based, by Bach? The Rilling booklet [2] says " the transcription which supplied us with the knowledge of this beautiful cantata movement is not by Bach
himself."

Neil Halliday.

PS, notice this comment from Aryeh, in the earlier discussions:
<"I would like you to notice that each recording of this BWV 166 is faster than its predecessors are. IMHO, the gradual tendency to velocity causes the cantata to lose most of its soul">. (Suzuki [7] has come back a bit from Koopman's fastest time for the cantata [4], after this remark made).

While this may be the subjective impression of an older generation of Bach listeners (to which I belong), this was certainly my experience of Veldhoven's brisk "Mache dich" SMP (BWV 244|) radio performance, heard during easter.

Thomas Braatz wrote (April 20, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
>>BTW, is BWV 584, an organ trio on which this movement is based, by Bach? The Rilling booklet [2] says "the transcription which supplied us with the knowledge of this beautiful cantata movement is not by Bach himself." <<
The NBA has not included BWV 584 among Bach's compositions or transcriptions for organ. However, there are almost 10 pages devoted to a detailed discussion of BWV 584 (now regarded as a work of doubtful authenticity in the most recent BWV Verzeichnis). The discussion centers upon refuting the arguments presented in the BJ at the beginning of the 20^th century, arguments which were directed at claiming that this organ trio was the precursor upon which the tenor aria in this cantata was based. In very detailed and persuasive arguments presented by Alfred Dürr, the editor of the volume containing this cantata NBA KB I/12, the conclusion is reached that Bach would never have even authorized let alone composed this trio as it stands. It is, however, possible that both BWV 584 and BWV 166/2 are based on a yet older source which has not been located.

Thomas Braatz wrote (April 20, 2006):
BWV 166/2 and BWV 584

As a response to Neil Halliday's inquiry, I have scanned and asked Aryeh Oron to post BWV 584 on the BCW where it is available now for viewing at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV584-Sco.htm

Thanks to Aryeh for quickly assisting in making this possible.

Thomas Braatz wrote (April 21, 2006):
Here is a summary translation of points mentioned by Alfred Dürr in his discussion of the historical aspects of this cantata BWV 166 with particular attention to BWV 166/2 (NBA KB I/12 pp. 18-22).

There is no autograph score available, only a simple set of original parts with doublets and the usual 3^rd continuo part missing. It is not unusual for this to happen, but unfortunately a switch occurred in this instance where the original 1^st violin part instead of the doublet was given away as well. Thus it becomes necessary to reconstruct the missing 1st violin part for the Aria during which the doublet parts have a tacet. Since the original score is missing, there is no way to ascertain the history of development of this cantata as such a score offers clues as to whether this was an original conception from 1724 or whether Bach had a clean/clear copy score for this 1724 performance which would point to an earlier origin of parts or even the entire cantata.

Only by virtue of the existence of BWV 584, a trio for organ, is it possible to find further assistance in reconstructing the missing violin part for BWV 166/2. But first it will be necessary to revisit the observations and conclusions given by Reinhard Oppel in the BJ 1909, pp. 27-40, where this source was thoroughly analyzed. These are his observations and arguments:

This trio corresponds to mm 1-30, essentially the main part/section of the cantata aria. There is no correspondence with the middle section. The upper/treble part of the trio is almost identical with the oboe part in the aria, but, from time to time, it seems to fall more in line with the tenor part. The same is true for the organ pedal part as compared to the bc. The middle voice/part of the trio seems to derive some of its material (once again from time to time) from the tenor part (mm. 13-14, 16, 17, 27-28), but otherwise offers material in the manner in which the voice-leading takes place, material for which there is no analogy anywhere in the cantata aria. Despite this fact, this voice-leading is not arbitrary nor can it be considered as material added as an afterthought because it makes use of the same thematic material as the upper/treble part does:

Trio: Aria:

mm 1-7 11-17 28-30 mm 1-7 11-17 28-30
Upper a b a Oboe a b a

Middle b a' b Tenor - x -
Pedal c c c bc c c c

[mm 28-30 in both Trio and Aria are shortened]

Oppel concluded that the plan Bach used for construction of this mvt. in the Trio represents the composer's first conception and not a transcription of an already existing Aria. Oppel argues as follows:

1. mm 11-17 are a transposed repetition of mm 1-7 with simply a switch in the manuals used - it is inconceivable that Bach would have composed the counterpoints in a and b without relating them to each other (in the Aria) and then only later used this possibility in the organ trio.

2. the identity/sameness of the notes on the 2^nd and 3^rd beat of mm 1 & 3 of the Aria does not appear to be very favorable and only later do their purpose become clear by means of the middle part/voice (in m 3 the upper part/voice is only the imitation of the middle voice/part which lies higher. The proof that this trio is Bach's earlier version lies in the inconsequentiality with which Bach treats the transposed repetition (mm11-17) and does not maintain the counterpoint a (of the middle part/voice).

3. mm 9-11 constitute a transition/bridge which is obtained by the transposition to d-minor of mm 7-8. Evidence for the transitional character is seen in the repetition of this section (mm 9-10) in mm 20-21 as well as in the reuse of the opening motif (last beat of m9 to 1st beat of m 10 in the upper voice/part, the same in mm 19-20.

4. mm 23-25 are obtained by imitation of previous material (mm 23-24 of the middle voice/part correspond to mm 24-25 of the upper voice/part

5. the use of the motif with 16th notes, mm 21-23, in the trio makes more sense musically in the trio than in the Aria where a part of this motif is sacrificed for the purpose of declamation

6. the ending of the Aria (Tenor mm 26-28) is derived from the middle voice/part of the Trio

7. the 16th-note rest after "ich" in the Aria is a later change - if Bach had composed this mvt. with the vocal part in mind, he would have maintained this rest elsewhere in this mvt.

Dürr now continues:

The power of these arguments varies considerably from item to item. It will become clear as we investigate further that particular items 3 through 6 can be explained with an entirely different interpretation. Item 7 speaks more for the prior existence of instruments in either the aria or the trio, but not for the trio itself/alone.

Oppel has overlooked one important argument, but this argument, using the same logical approach, also speaks against the theory that the Trio came first. Here is a comparison of the questionable parts:

Trio: Arie:
mm 7-9 19-21 mm 7-9 19-21
Upper d d' Oboe d d'
Middle e e' Tenor a a
Pedal c c bc c c

It seems inconceivable here that the Trio version would have preceded the Aria, specifically that both places (7-9, 19-21) of the Trio have been arbitrarily so conceived that the main theme a in the entire mvt. could have been so easily inserted without any changes necessary into the Tenor part of the Aria. It is all the more improbable that the accidental counterpoint d and e in mm 19-21, would not reappear completely unchanged (but still close enough so that a connection between them can be recognized) and still be able nevertheless to make possible a note-for-note repetition of the melody in the vocal part.

The solution to this riddle appears immediately if you begin trying to combine the Trio and the Aria with each other. The result will be that the Tenor and the middle (left-hand, lower-manual) part fit together with little difficulty so that an Aria with 2 (!) obbligato instruments will appear in which the 2^nd obbligato part should be thought of as pausing while the middle part of the Trio is playing along with the Tenor part. From the resulting score (the reconstruction given in the NBA) it will become evident that not only the main section, but also the middle section was planned in such a way to include both obbligato parts (an observation already given by Oppel, who, however, thought thatBach wanted to have this 2nd obbligato part played on the organ). The only difference being that the middle section was not as easy to reconstruct since the Trio did not include this section at all.

A summary of the entire problem is as follows:

1. Neither the Trio BWV 584 nor the Aria BWV 166/2 in their present forms were the original version of this mvt. but rather the original must have been an aria for voice, 2 obbligato instruments and bc.

2. The Trio BWV 584 is an arrangement of this original Aria for organ, an arrangement which dropped the vocal part and in only a few places, where there was insufficient material to be derived from the 2 obbligato instruments, it [the missing vocal part] was inserted as the middle part. It is entirely improbable that Bach would have authorized this arrangement: Bach would not have simply omitted theme a in mm 7-9 and mm 19-21!

3. The Aria BWV 166/2, in the form in which it has been transmitted to us, is incomplete. Of the two possible explanations for this:

1. Bach wanted to reuse a work that he had composed earlier and, in the process, boldly dropped one of the obbligato parts

2. the part for BWV 166 which contained the 2^nd obbligato part for this mvt. was lost the first one (no. 1) is not convincing based upon the gap left by the missing part. It can only be due to the few performances of this cantata which have been recorded that musicians have not complained about sections like mm 4-5 or m 31 and m 41. Certainly, no one could honestly claim that they were doing Bach justice with this type of performance.

Let's assume that this mvt. BWV 166/2 has been published previously only in this incomplete state because the 2nd obbligato part was missing. What type of part would this lost obbligato part have been? We know from descriptions of the existing parts from other sources such as the cover page and this agrees with what we have before us. Although it is conceivable that there was a single part for only this mvt. for possibly a Violoncello piccolo, Viola d'amore, Traversa, or some similar instrument (these parts do not always appear on the title pages or covers of cantatas) since such an instrument would have been played by one of the instrumentalists already listed in the ensemble, there is still possible another explanation/interpretation which may be closer to the truth and will applied for providing a practical solution for performing this music. As described earlier, the fact that the 1^st Violin part was not copied by the main copyist allows us to conclude that the surviving part is a doublet copy while the original first copy was probably included in the score when the score was given away and eventually lost. Normally there are no differences between the 1st copy and the 2^nd (doublet) and for this reason, when the doublets are removed from the original set of parts, not much attention is focused upon which of these two parts gets separated from the other. The situation is very different, however, when mvts. containing Solo Violin parts are involved. No extra doublet part is prepared for these and the solo parts in the doublets simply have a 'tacet' marked since they will not be playing this part. It really makes sense to think that the solo obbligato part was lost in this fashion, or, to put this another way, 'if the lost obbligato part was supposed to be played by the Solo Violin I, then that is the reason why it does not exist now.' This seems to be the most reasonable interpretation/solution for the circumstances surrounding the missing part.

The publication of this reconstruction of BWV 166/2 by the NBA is based upon the supposition that states: It is a fact that one part for the Aria "Ich will an den Himmel denken" is missing/not extant and that this part must have been a part composed for the Solo Violin 1.

The NBA offers a score for the Trio BWV 584 for study and in the musical score for BWV 166/2 the notes that have been added for the missing violin part are indicated with tiny rather than full-sized notes. No attempt was made to correct the numerous errors in BWV 584.

The reconstruction of the Aria involved:

1. The oboe and continuo parts were taken from the original set of parts, several phrasing marks from BWV
584 were used to complete the missing ones in the oboe part (they appear as dotted)

2. The violin part of the main section was primarily reconstructed from the middle part of the Trio. (A long list of corrections and phrasing marks used or added is given)

3. Another aid in the reconstruction of the violin part is derived from the figured bass on the existing bc part, but this is available only for the main part/section of the Aria since the middle section was left 'unfigured'. Where there was any doubt involved (some figures were incorrect), BWV 584 was used instead.

4. In the reconstruction of the violin part in the middle section, the following was done:

a) the violin part could be extracted from the exchange of parts between oboe and violin (mm 31-32, 34, 41-42, 43-44

b) mm 38-40 were derived from the combination of themes already present in mm 1-3. Since the oboe part in mm 38-40 repeats the violin part from mm1-3, it is easy to reconstruct the violin part as a repetition of mm 1-3 of the oboe part

c) only for mm 44-48 is there no parallel that can be extracted from earlier material. What is given here is completely conjecture.

Neil Halliday wrote (April 21, 2006):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
<"Here is a summary translation of points mentioned by Alfred Dürr in his discussion of the historical aspects of this cantata BWV 166 with particular attention to BWV 166/2 (NBA KB I/12 pp. 18-22)".>
Thanks for this summary of Oppel's and Dürr's arguments, and the score of BWV 584, which makes it possible to easily follow the violin line (in the outer sections at least), which is missing in the BGA score of BWV 166/2.

When I first heard the ritornello in the Rilling version [2] (with violin, oboe and continuo; note that Koopman [4] has two oboes, giving quite a different effect), my impression was of writing similar to the imitative writing for the upper instruments (flute, oboe, violin) in the slow movement of the 2^nd Brandenburg, so my own theory is that Bach had written an original instrumental trio (now lost) for oboe, violin, and continuo, and simply added a part for tenor later to create 166/2, which he has of course done, in an `effortless' manner, with several other cantata movements (he would have newly composed the middle section). This would mean (if this is the case) that the organ trio BWV 584, whether an authentic transcription by Bach or some-one else, would itself be a transcription of an original (lost) trio for oboe, violin and continuo, which may have been written - it does not matter - before or after BWV 166/2. This seems to me a better solution than postulating either an earlier lost aria, or earlier organ trio of doubtful authenticity.

As far as I can see, neither Oppel nor Dürr seem to have considered this straightforward possibility, although I must admit I find their considerations somewhat complex, making it by no means simple to draw all the threads of their arguments together.

Neil Halliday wrote (April 21, 2006):
I wrote:
<"....so my own theory is that Bach had written an original instrumental trio (now lost)..".>
but the the fact that the tenor part comes in (an octave lower) after the cadence in bar 6, with an almost exact imitation of the oboe part heard at the start, complicates this theory, even if the instrumental (or organ) trio does sound complete in itself. Back to the drawing boards...

Thomas Braatz wrote (April 21, 2006):
BWV 166/2 NBA Reconstruction Study Score

In order to make all the materials available for study, I have asked Aryeh Oron to create a page for the inclusion of the NBA score of BWV 166/2 for study purposes only. He has kindly and quickly made this possible. The results can be viewed at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV166-M2.htm

For comparison BWV 584 is found at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV584-Sco.htm

Ed Myskowski wrote (April 28, 2006):
I have only the Cantate LP that Aryeh commented on extensively in the first round of discussion [1]. I heartily agree with his positive opinions of the performance. If you can play it, the LP is certainly worth tracking down. Perhaps it will eventually be reissued in digital format.

Neil Halliday wrote (April 29, 2006):
<>
Aryeh's report on the 60's recording of BWV 166 [1] makes one hope that it is eventually transferred to CD, since I found none of the available recordings to be entirely satisfying.

Cantata BWV 166: Complete Recordings | Recordings of Individual Movements | Discussions

Back to the Top

Last update: ýApril 30, 2006 ý16:08:06