Cantata BWV 195Dem Gerechten muß das Licht immer wieder aufgehen
Discussions - Part 1
Discussions in the Week of February 17, 2002
Francis Browne wrote (February 19, 2002):
Text of BWV 195
 On the Leusink recording of this cantata only one verse of the chorale is printed in the notes but the choir sing a second verse on the CD. German texts on the internet give only one verse. Neither is the choir's diction sufficiently clear nor is my German suficiently fluent for me to be confident I have understood exactly what is being sung. I would therefore be very grateful if anyone could supply the missing text.
In the soprano recitative the available texts print Scheitel = parting of the hair, so head (as presumably in the expression vom Scheitel bis zur Sohle) but the soprano seems to sing Schritte - steps. It hardly makes any difference to the cantata but I would again be grateful if anyone could indicate the correct reading.
(Apologies for this dull pedantry after the high passions of flamewars !)
Dick Wursten wrote (February 20, 2002):
Trying to be faster than Aryeh and Thomas... (curious whether I succeed)
1. Alfred Dürr also gives 'Scheitel' (he follows the NBA). Why Marjon Strijk  sings 'Schritte' > Thomas will know.
2. The second verse of the hymn (Mvt. 6) is the second verse of the German hymn (Gesangbuch ELK, 231).
Here's the text:
Ermuntert euch und singt mit Schall
Gott unserm hoechsten Gut
der seine Wunder ueberall,
und grosse Dinge tut
Why they sing it ... ??
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 20, 2002):
Francis Browne (congratulations on your very excellent interlinear translations - I have read the text of only two cantatas so far) stated:
< On the Leusink recording of this cantata  only one verse of the chorale is printed in the notes but the choir sing a second verse on the CD. German texts on the internet give only one verse. Neither is the choir's diction sufficiently clear nor is my German sufficiently fluent for me to be confident I have understood exactly what is being sung. I would therefore be very grateful if anyone could supply the missing text.
In the soprano recitative the available texts print Scheitel = parting of the hair, so head( as presumably in the expression vom Scheitel bis zur Sohle) but the soprano seems to sing Schritte - steps. It hardly makes any difference to the cantata but I would again be grateful if anyone could indicate the correct reading. >
< (Apologies for this dull pedantry after the high passions of flamewars!) >
It appears that in the past this cantata has aroused much contention and still will arouse "the high passions of flamewars." A very appropriate choice for this week! Its history is extremely complicated. We have both the original score and original set of parts, but would you believe that as many as 20 copiers were used in copying out the parts (Bach included), that the original text of the cantata also exists, this time with only 5 different handwriting styles detected (including Bach's?)
Re: the finale chorale (Mvt. 6)
The chorale is, as is often the case in many other Bach cantatas, the last element that Bach would personally add to the score. He personally copied out the chorale to all the separate part forms. He did not allow any of the other 20 copiers to help him with this task in any way. According to his usual custom, he would indicate only the beginning of the first line of the chorale to be sung (even if this was not the first verse of the chorale, this is all that was needed in those days, since everyone knew all the verses of the important chorales by heart.) This is what Bach indicated for BWV 195:
"Nun danket all und bringet Ehr"
This means that he did not have the choir sing other verses as well. If he had wanted that, he would have clearly indicated this.
Dick Wursten stated:
< In Flanders we say: <haast en spoed is zelden goed > hurry and speed is very seldom good >
Eile macht Weile!
< 1. Alfred Dürr also gives 'Scheitel' (he follows the NBA). Why Marjon Strijk sings 'Schritte' > ? >
Here's an educated guess (I do not have access to the BG to confirm this): Rust, the editor in charge of printing this cantata for the BG, very likely had "Schritte." The NBA I/33 was published very early in this series (1958) and perhaps perpetuated the error despite the fact that they included the entire cantata text in the Critical Report. Dürr (1971) prints the cantata text, as Dick Wursten indicated, as "Scheitel." Very likely this constitutes the latest scholarly opinion on this matter. The original text (separate from the words copied under the notes) has "Scheitel."
< 2. The second verse of the hymn (nr. 6) is the second verse of the German hymn (Gesangbuch ELK, 231).
Here's the text:
Ermuntert euch und singt mit Schall
Gott unserm hoechsten Gut
der seine Wunder ueberall,
und grosse Dinge tut
Why they sing it ... ?? >
Perhaps they had fun singing it?
My opinion on both questions: 1. "Scheitel" is the best choice, because it is in the original cantata text and because it has received Dürr's blessing. (Aren't blessings given at wedding ceremonies usually given with raised hands above the heads of the couple? "Schritte" would only make sense, if it meant that the blessing was bestowed in a more general sense upon all the future steps that the couple would take.) 2. The second verse should not be sung here.
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 20, 2002):
BWV 195 Original Complete Text
This is the complete cantata text (NBA I,33 KB) from which Bach (re)worked existing music, or composed new music (the recitatives.) The orthography is given directly as it appeared on the two sheets that have come down to us (only the long line above the ‘n’s’ and ‘m’s’ to indicate duplication of the consonants has not been maintained.) Notice that Bach did not finish this composition, but brought it to an abrupt conclusion at the end of part one with the chorale which he included at the last moment.
Dem Gerechten muß das Licht immer wieder aufgehen,
und Freude den Frommen Hertzen. Ihr Gerichten freuet
euch des Herrn und dancket ihm, und preiset seine Heilig-
Dem Freuden Licht gerechter Frommen.
Muß stets ein neuer Zuwachs kommen,
Der Wohl und Glück bey ihnen mehrt.
Auch Dir, Hochedles Paar,
An dem man so Gerechtigkeit
Als Tugend ehrt,
Ist heut ein Freuden Licht bereit,
Das stellt dir neues Wohlseyn dar.
O! ein erwünscht Verbinden! [originally erwünschtes]
So können Zwey ihr Glück, eins an dem andern finden.
Rühmet Gottes Güt und Treu!
Rühmet ihn mit reger Freude,
Preiset Gott, verlobten Beyde,
Denn Eur heutiges Verbinden
Läst Euch lauter Seegen finden.
Licht und freude werden neu.
Wohlan, so knüpffet denn ein band
Das so viel Wohlseyn prophezeyhet.
Des Priesters hand
Wird itzt den Seegen
Auf Euren Ehestand
Auf eure Scheitel legen.
Und wenn des Seegens Krafft hinfort an Euch gedeyhet,
So rühmt des Höchsten Vater=Hand.
Er knüpfte selbst Eur Liebes Band,
Und ließ das, was er angefangen,
Auch ein erwünschtes End erlangen.
Wir kommen deine Heiligkeit
Unendlich großer Gott zu preisen
Der Anfang rührt von deinen Händen,
Durch Allmacht kanst du es vollenden.
Und deinen Seegen kräfftig weisen.
Auf und rühmt des Höchsten Güte,
Mit erkäntlichen Gemüthe,
Angenehm vereintes Paar.
Denn eur Wünschen, denn eur Hoffen [dein crossed out]
Ist nun völlig eingetroffen
Und eur Glück ist offenbahr.
Hoch Edles Paar, du bist nunmehr verbunden,
Itzt warten schon die Seegens vollen Stunden,
Auf dich und dein erhabnes Hauß.
Der Höchste sprach durch seines Dieners Mund
Itzt über Dich den Seegen aus. [Euch was crossed out]
Er wird gewiß bekleiben
Und edle Früchte treiben.
So geht nun hin im Frieden
Euch ist ein solches Wohl
Ein daurhafft Wohl beschieden
Das keine Zeit vermindern soll.
Du aber Herr laß itzt Gebeth und Flehen,
Das noch ein mahl zu deinem Throne steigt,
Doch die Erhörung sehen;
Daß deine Gnade sich zu den Verlobten neigt.
Höchster schencke diesem Paar
Freude die dein Seegen schencket. [giebet was crossed out]
Gieb daß deine Gnaden hand
Stets in ihrem Ehestand
Glück und Heyl zu ihnen lencket.
Francis Browne wrote (February 20, 2002):
[To Thomas Braatz] Thank you, Tom, for your very informative reply. When it is possible to have such queries answered so swiftly by you and Dick, this list seems to be a marvellous resource - despite current problems.
I was fascinated also to read the complete text. The cantata as it stands has given me such delight that I find it hard to imagine how it could be different or be added to. I wonder whether Bach did not finish the composition because of practical constraints - he ran out of time etc. Or was it an artistic judgement that the choruses and aria he had already written formed an artistic whole and celebrated the wedding adequately ( which they do -surely ,magnificently, triumphantly).
It is of course idle and unanswerable speculation , but I often wonder how many details of the cantatas which are now the subject of scholarly discussion and debate may have depended on particular circumstances of one week in Leipzig or Weimar - the ability or availabilty of musicians and singers, how busy or well Bach - or his family- were etc. What now we read in a score or listen to on CD and regard as a cornerstone of our civilisation was once part of his weekly work and what to us seems so fixed, so right and so inevitable could have been unimaginably different.
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 20, 2002):
Francis Browne commented:
< It is of course idle and unanswerable speculation , but I often wonder how many details of the cantatas which are now the subject of scholarly discussion and debate may have depended on particular circumstances of one week in Leipzig or Weimar - the ability or availability of musicians and singers, how busy or well Bach - or his family- were etc. What now we read in a score or listen to on CD and regard as a cornerstone of our civilisation was once part of his weekly work and what to us seems so fixed, so right and so inevitable could have been unimaginably different.. >
I still can not get over the fact that 20 different copiers were used to copy out the parts from the score. In many other cantatas we know the names of almost all of the copiers involved, but here all of these can only be identified by numbers. It is as though Bach told a class of students, "Today we will practice notation by copying out the parts of the score which contains the music you will hear on Sunday. Make sure that you copy legibly and correctly. I will check your work when you have finished." The results vary greatly. Some of the copiers made many more mistakes than the others. Bach patiently corrected all of the parts. The tasks assigned vary greatly. Here are some examples: Copier 7 did the Soprano in Ripieno part in Mvt. 1 from measure 42 to 71, and then from ms. 100 to the end. Copier 8 did the portion of the same mvt. from ms. 72 to 99.
Harry J. Steinman wrote (February 20, 2002):
There's a lot of 'ordinarily' that doesn't apply to this cantata for me...
Ordinarily, I prefer the sacred to the secular cantatas; something strikes me as more uplifting about the music of Bach's sacred cantatas. (This is difficult to explain as I do not find sacred texts more appealing than secular ones; if anything, it would be the other way around). But I find this music magnificent. Then, too, if one reads the libretto, the text is closer to 'Sunday-go-to-church' than to, say, the Coffee Cantata (BWV 211)...
 Ordinarily, I do not much care for recitatives. But I really enjoy the work of Ms. Strijk in the 4th movement. Her singing is so clear. And listen to the interplay of the recorders in the accompaniment. Having read the text, I would have expected something heavier, to represent the priest's hand and God's hand. Maybe the accompaniment is meant to represent the blessing transmitted by the hands of priest, as it's flourishing in the wedding couple.
Ordinarily, I don't connect as well with bass arias as I do with soprano arias. But I enjoy Ramselaar's work in the 3rd movement. It is light (as is most cantata work conducted by Leusink) and airy, and I find that most accessible.
I notice a consistent theme when reading through the translation given as "English 1" at the Bach Cantata website: the theme of praise.
* In the opening chorus, "praise him for his holiness"
* In the bass recitative, "for these newly weds, In whom we so much righteousness And virtue praise"
* In the bass aria, "Praise ye God's good will" etc.
* In the soprano recitative, "praise your God's paternal hand"
* In the SATB chorus, "We come here...to honor...."
* In the final chorus, "thank ye all and bring your praise" and "praise the angel hosts"
I was trying to find a musical theme that has this kind of textual consistency, but alas, my ears are too uneducated to hear such a thing, if it exists at all. Perhaps the theme of 'praise' is too generic, like an article of speech...
I am also enthralled by the SATB chorus (Mvt. 5), especially the way that the movement begins with a series of ascending 6-note figures which I hear as being recapitulated when the singers enter. I love the way that the soprano seems to lift away from her compatriots and soar (although remember, I am partial to bell-toned sopranos, so I hear 'em better and worship 'em more). This movement is the heart of the cantata for me.
Well, that's it for now. I'm especially attracted to this wedding cantata in anticipation of my own nuptials come this May. I have not been overwhelmed by the Wedding Cantata, BWV 202 but I really enjoy BWV 195. (I have only listened to the Rilling version of BWV 202, today I shall listen to the Leusink, and to Leusink's BWV 210, also, apparently a wedding piece).
Finally, a postscript to last week's study of BWV 159. Sorry I didn't send in my two cent's worth; there was too much static on the line, if you catch my drift. But quite some time ago, I asked about duets, seeking music that I could play at my wedding. BWV 78 and others were suggested. I find the Soprano/Alto duet from BWV 159 just wonderful and shall add it in somewhere.
Well, that's it for now! Plant you now and dig you later!
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 21, 2002):
BWV 195 - Provenance:
See: Cantata BWV 195 - Provenance
Dick Wursten wrote (February 21, 2002):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
< Notice Bach’s misspelling of ‘Fiauti’ which should read ‘Flauti’ >
Of course: Flauti. But why call it a misspelling ?
So many more obvious causes that the > l < appeared as an > i <, f.i.
paper had a bubble
almost ran out of ink
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 21, 2002):
[To Dick Wursten] In the commentary that accompanied the printing of BG 13, Rust, the editor, stated that the cover of the score on which Bach inscribed the title of the cantata along with its orchestration, was of yet an earlier vintage [This has been confirmed by the NBA I/33 KB along with the fact that the watermark is also of an earlier paper - of course, Bach may have used some blank paper that he had still lying about for 10 or 20 years -- also his handwriting style changed -- notice the comment that I quoted regarding this fact as related by the NBA.] Rust's explanation of this anachronistic anomaly was that a good possibility existed that Bach, in the original version (no longer existing) of this cantata, intended to include recorders instead of flauti traverse. These recorders would have been used in alternating fashion with the oboes. Further confirmation of this possibility is found on the cover for the set of parts where a copier wrote “2 Hautb. e ” [Flauti in Bach’s language always means ‘recorders.’] But then this designation may have simply been copied from the title on the score, except that this time the word was correctly spelled – no ‘goosefeather jump.’ A further complication is that for mvt. 4 the designation on the parts reads ‘2 Trav.’ And so this matter seems to continue unresolved. The NBA comments, as you have already indicated, that perhaps ‘Fiauti’ was after all just a slip of the pen.
Joost wrote (February 21, 2002):
[To Dick Wursten & Thomas Braatz] Maybe there is another explanation.
The Italian language has a couple of words starting with 'fia', where the English, and German, and Dutch equivalents start with 'fla'.
Fiamma - Flame - Flamme - Vlam
Fiandra - Flanders - Flandern - Vlaanderen
Fianco - Flank - Flanke - Flank
(chess players will recognise the word 'fianchetto'=little flank).
It is easy to imagine an analogous construction 'Fiauto'. This may be incorrect, but it's very a understandable mistake. By the way 'Fiati' means 'Wind instruments'.
Aryeh Oron wrote (February 21, 2002):
After the high hills of Cantatas BWV 18 and BWV 159, which touch the deepest feelings of human heart, the subject of this week (February 17, 2002) and next week discussions are two Wedding Cantatas, according to Vicente Vida's proposed list. Cantata BWV 195 ‘Dem Gerechten muß das Licht immer wieder aufgehen’, is a relatively late cantata. Although on the face of it, this cantata is less attractive than the cantatas of the two previous weeks, I found after intensive listening to it, that it contains much to enjoy, especially the two choruses (Mvts. 1 & 5) and the aria for bass (Mvt. 3).
In order to allow the members of the BCML preparing themselves for the discussion, I compiled a list of the recordings of this cantata. I put the details of the recordings in the following page of the Bach Cantatas Website: Cantata BWV 195 - Recordings
In the same page there is also a link to an English translation of the German text of this cantata (English-3) by a new member of the BCML – Francis Browne. Thanks, Francis, for your contribution!
BWV 195 is a rarely recorded cantata, and besides the recordings from the three complete Bach Cantata cycles (Rilling, Leonhardt, and Leusink), there is one additional recording from Karl-Friedrich Beringer , a conductor whom we rarely meet in the weekly cantata discussions.
I hope to see many of you participating in the discussion.
The background below was written completely by Alfred Dürr and is included in the liner notes to Beringer’s recording of this cantata for Rondeau Produktion. The English translation of the text, by A. Philip Ambrose, is also taken from the same source.
See: Cantata BWV 195 - Commentary
Review of the recordings
All four recordings use solo voices combined with the choir in both choruses (Mvts. 1 & 5).
 Helmuth Rilling (1984)
Rilling’s recording is characterised by exuberant joy and full voices. The effect he succeeds to get is of spontaneity and vividness. All four singers are in good form. The young Andreas Schmidt particularly excels in the aria for bass and succeeds in making it very attractive. His voice is rich and he sings with compelling simplicity, as the aria calls for.
 Karl-Friedrich Beringer (1986)
Beringer’s rendition, recorded not long after Rilling’s, follows his route, but on lower profile. The atmosphere is softened; the joy is less overt. I like Beringer’s singers less than Rilling’s. Stephen Varcoe sounds somewhat dry and stiff after Schmidt.
 Gustav Leonhardt (1989)
Leonhardt ‘succeeds’ with his dogmatic conducting to dry out most of the joy of this cantata. IMO, it is also unacceptable to use a boy soprano, rather than a woman soprano, when the subject is of a happy marriage. Harry van der Kamp is not the kind of singer who can do justice to the aria for bass. His singing here is simply lifeless.
 Pieter Jan Leusink (1999)
Freshness, spontaneity, rhythm, and lightness are the characteristics of this rendition. The young voices of the singers suit very well the occasion. Ramselaar is fine and tasteful in the aria for bass. The choir singing is not clean, but if we think of them as the audience in the ceremony, than we can conclude that in this cantata this approach is preferable to the smoother singing of Rilling’s choir.
Personal priorities: Leusink , Rilling , Beringer , Leonhardt .
And as always, I would like to hear other opinions, regarding the above mentioned performances, or other recordings.
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 22, 2002):
BWV 195 - Review of the Recordings
This week I listened to Rilling (1984) ; Leonhardt (1989) ; Leusink (2000) 
This time I want to concentrate only on the choral mvts. which comprise the more substantial parts of this cantata.
 Rilling provides the best musical representation of the notes in Bach’s score. What this means is that you actually can hear everything in the score performed with an exuberance that is coupled with good balance between the individual vocal parts, soloists vs. the ripieno choir, and the choir and the orchestra. A solid vocal technique allows the singers to sing all the notes and yet be heard as part of the soloist ensemble or the ripieno choir. Unfortunately, these trained voices tend to be rather operatic, which may be slightly disturbing at times. Rilling’s tempi are quite appropriate, being not too fast or too slow. The orchestra gives a solid backing for the choir without being overpowering. The jubilant trumpets are preferable here to the overemphasis on the timpani (see below). In the final chorale each voice part can be heard and the tempo allows for all the faster moving parts (passing notes) to be heard. Something is wrong with the soprano line on my recording of the chorale. There is an odd distortion that is compounded by the usual problem with Rilling: the sopranos are unable to sing solidly and clearly without a vibrato.
 Leonhardt’s performance at the end of the Harnoncourt/Leonhardt series on Teldec demonstrates quite clearly the worst aspects of the Harnoncourt legacy: the excessively strong accents (in Mvt. 1 on the 1st and 3rd beats of each measure; in Mvt. 5 only on the 1st beat) that only serve to underline the amateurish aspects of this performance. Listen to the middle fugue section in Mvt. 1 to realize that something is very wrong here. It is as if the conductor needs these strong accents as a crutch, otherwise the performance will fall apart. As a result, the musical line becomes very bumpy as the flowing melody is distorted in this fashion. In the middle of Mvt. 1, the choir sound becomes very muddy and indistinct, while throughout the entire mvt., the noise made by the timpani (they are too loud) provides yet another angular edge to a performance that threatens to collapse under the weight of its heavy accents. René Jacobs is ‘in over his head.’ There are passages in this mvt. and in Mvt. 5 where his singing is simply not audible on the recording. I see all the notes in the score, but nothing of his part comes through the speakers! In Mvt. 5 the extreme weakness in the tenor and bass parts should have caused Herreweghe some concern. There is very sloppy singing by the choir as a w. The soprano boy soloist is weak, insecure and has considerable intonation problems. (What’s new here?) The chorale (Mvt. 6) is a typical “bang, bang, bang” version made worse by the fact that alto, tenor, and bass parts are almost inaudible throughout. You may think you are hearing the parts, because the instruments are playing as well, but if you looked at the score to determine what these parts are doing, you would be surprised to find out that they are doing nothing at all! This is supposed to be an ‘authentic’ version of Bach’s intentions?
 Leusink, unfortunately, allowed himself as usual to be influenced by the Leonhardt/Harnoncourt approach with a few additional complications to make matters even worse: the heavy accents are present, and the timpani and bc are much too loud (as in Leonhardt’s performance), but now the trumpets are too soft. Listen to the wonderful 1st trumpet entry in the fugal section of the middle of Mvt. 1. It is reminiscent of Beethoven’s ‘Fidelio’ trumpet call from a distant balcony or off stage. But this fugal entry should be a glorious sound towering above the voices after they have presented the fugal subject. What a let-down! Buwalda’s half-voice is unable to contend with the notes that Bach set in the lower portion of the alto range (ms. 18-21 in Mvt. 1.) Strijk has a trumpet-like sound without the volume of a trumpet, particularly when she also needs to sing in the lower range. Her tendency is to sing sharp at times (particularly in Mvt. 5.) What should Leusink do about the yodelers? Do not let them jump vigorously to a high note nor attack the notes too forcefully (which happens when the strong accents are applied.) But then the resulting sound might be too boring to listen to. The way the voices are forced to perform beyond their abilities to produce musical sounds causes the unpleasantness that can be heard in these performances. Something went terribly wrong in the upper voices in ms. 34-35. In Mvt. 5, when the soloists enter for the first time, their entrances are very weak. The low range of the entire choir is rather weak in ms. 129. There are passages where the basses are extremely weak in ms. 47-49 and 91-93. The chorale (Mvt. 6) is a complete disaster, though it may not appear to be this upon first hearing. Here are the problems, some of which appear in almost all of Leusink’s chorale renditions: the final fermati at the end of each line are much too short, causing the final syllables of words to be abruptly truncated. There is not much respect for the German language here. This is compounded by the fact that the tempo that Leusink has chosen is much too fast. How can this be determined? With score in hand, you will see and hear that Bach’s passing notes (with shorter note values) are no longer audible, because the singers are unable to sing them that fast. This causes the sopranos, whose musical line is the strongest here, to chirp and yodel. This should not happen. Listen to the alto line and you will note that it is completely absent! Either no one is singing it, or they are pretending to sing it with their mouths wide open, but without sound emanating from them. The only way to detect that the tenor is singing, is to listen for the raspy sound that is sometimes connected to a given note in this part (and also connected to a certain singer, whose voice always stands out.) The basses are fortunate to have the bc backing them up. With Leusink the bc is always too loud. Despite all the negative factors that I have detected in the Leusink version of all three choral mvts., it is still preferable to the aggravating performance given by Leonhardt.
Rilling , Leusink , Leonhardt .
Thomas Braatz wrote (February 24, 2002):
< Maybe there is another explanation. The Italian language has a couple of words starting with 'fia', where the English, and German, and Dutch equivalents start with 'fla'. Fiamma - Flame - Flamme - Vlam Fiandra - Flanders - Flandern - Vlaanderen Fianco - Flank - Flanke - Flank (chess players will recognise the word 'fianchetto'=little flank). It is easy to imagine an analogous construction 'Fiauto'. This may be incorrect, but it's very a understandable mistake. By the way 'Fiati' means 'Wind instruments'. >
Thanks for the correction. It took me a while to get back to this and discover this connection confirmed in the New Grove Dictionary of Music & Musicians and also in the Oxford Composer Companions: J.S. Bach [Malcolm] where David Lasocki has an entire article devoted to fiauto and fiauto d'echo on pp. 169-170. For the 4th Brandenburg BWV 1049, Bach had indicated on the title page of the autograph score "due Fiauti d'Echo", but at the beginning of the 1st mvt. "Fiauto 1mo" and "Fiauto 2do" In cantatas BWV 8 and BWV 96 "Fiauto piccolo" means a sopranino recorder. In cantata BWV 103 it designates a descant recorder in D. It is quite clear from this that Joost's explanation is absolutely correct: Bach did not mistakenly write "fiauti", hence the indication is that he did at one time have an earlier version of BWV 195 with recorders and not the transverse flutes as they appear in the latest transformation of this cantata.
Continue on Part 2
Cantata BWV 195: Details & Complete Recordings | Recordings of Individual Movements | Discussions: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3