Cantata BWV 50 - Discussions

Cantata BWV 50
Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft
Discussions

Previous Messages

Simon Bewer wrote:
Hello, I've been able to hear all the Bach cantatas except this one. The official JS Bach page said it wasn't spurious but was incomplete. Has there been a recording of it or is it too 'incomplete'.

Jxhg wrote (December 25, 1999):
No kidding! I've always wanted to hear the complete Cantata BWV 50 "Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft”, but according to what I once read somewhere, all but the first movement was lost. I honestly haven't been keeping up lately-- has the rest of it been found since then? Is there some way I could order or hear the complete BWV 50? Or is there still just that one movement?

Simon Bewer (wrote: December 25, 1999):
As far as I know there haven't been any new discoveries of cantatas whole or part recently. I knew the 50^th from the Teldec performance - an excellent Chorus.

Johann Sebastian wrote (January 4, 2000):
BWV 50 is a single movement that is preserved only in a "primary source" copy not in JSB’s handwriting or the handwriting of anyone known to have been a member of his immediate circle.

It is a movement for double Chorus, and many have argued that it is an arrangement of a single chorus movement. (A reconstruction of that putative "original" version is included in Koopman's on-going cantata cycle on Erato [16].)

Whatever the movement is or was a part of remains uncertain. I might add that there are those who secretly are convinced (The powers that be in Bach scholarship would consider this heretical, you see), that the movement, fine though it is, is not the work of Sebastian Bach, in any form.

John Polifronio wrote (January 4, 2000):
[16] I'm delighted to hear that Koopman is engaged in recording all the Bach cantatas. I'm going to go and check to see if he's already recorded BWV 34.

Johann Sebastian wrote (January 4, 2000):
[16] You are most welcome. I believe that Koopman is up to Vol. 8. Since I do not share your enthusiasm for Koopman's approach to this music, I have not been keeping up with the on-going project and therefore I cannot tell you if he has gotten to BWV 34. I do happen to have Vol. 6, which happens to contain BWV 50. The reconstruction is by Jan Kleinbussink, who also is the organ continuo player in the recordings. Christoph Wolff's annotation hints at the elusive nature of this movement. Since the "primary" source is a posthumous copy, everything has to be, essentially, purely a speculative conclusion. According to the notes, the performance includes both the surviving text and Kleinbussink's reconstruction of the putative original.

John Polifronio wrote (January 6, 2000):
[16] My enthusiasm for Koopman varies quite a bit. But my love for the Bach Cantatas is at the highest level. My enthusiasm was more for the cantata BWV 34 than for Koopman; but I'm interested in any BWV 34 (or most other of the cantatas) that appears in a new recording. I'm not much of a fan of Harnoncourt either, but his BWV 34 on Teldec was quite good. Do you have a favorite BWV 4 I should know about? There are about 50 of the cantatas for which I have a special liking, and am constantly listening to whatever comes my way; but I can't hear all the available recordings of these unequaled masterpieces so any recommendations you might have would be appreciated.

Discussions in the Week of March 16, 2003

Aryeh Oron wrote (March 17, 2003):
BWV 50 - Introduction

The subject of this week’s discussion (March 16, 2003) is the remains of a Cantata for Micaelmas ‘Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft’ (Now is the salvation and the strength). This movement is a double chorus, the only eight-part chorus in any of Bach’s sacred cantatas. It is very difficult to imagine what the remainder of the cantata could have been like after this stupendous chorus. It’s text is quoted from the Epistle for St. Michael’s Day, Revelations 12: 10.

Recordings
The details of the 13 recordings of this cantata movement can be found at the following page of the Bach Cantatas Website: Cantata BWV 50 - Recordings

The first recording of BWV 50 was done by Carl Schuricht, back in 1938 [2]. Along the way we can find five from the recorded cantata cycles (Harnoncourt [7], Rilling [12], Koopman [16], Suzuki [17] and Leusink [18]), as well as less regulars but well-respected authorities in the field of recorded Bach Cantatas, as the veterans Prohaska [4], Werner [6] and Rotzsch [11] and the Englishmen Gardiner [10], Parrott [13] and Christophers [14].

Additional Information
In the page of recordings mentioned above you can also find links to the original German text and various translations, four of which have been contributed by members of the BCML: English (Francis Browne), French (Jean-Pierre Grivois), Hebrew (Aryeh Oron) and Portuguese (Rodrigo Maffei Libonati).
There are also links to the Score (Vocal & Piano version) and to commentary: in English by Simon Crouch (Listener’s Guide, short) and “Blue Gene” Tyranny (AMG, extensive), in French by Christophe Chazot (Personal Website), and in Spanish by Julio Sánchez Reyes (CantatasDeBach).

This movement is quite short (less than 4 minutes in most of the recordings) but thrilling. So it is not so difficult to listen carefully to it and write something about your impressions. I hope to see this week more members participating in the discussion than we have seen in the last couple of weeks. There was a short discussion of this work about 3 years ago, as you can see in the page: Cantata BWV 50 - Discussions

Thomas Braatz wrote (March 18, 2003):
BWV 50 - Provenance:

See: Cantata BWV 50 - Provenance

Neil Halliday wrote (March 18, 2003):
This is another brilliant chorus by Bach expressing praise, joy and strength.

[7] Harnoncourt captures these elemnts well, despite some flat notes on a trumpet (3/4 of the way through), and some indistinctness in the recording - I suppose a double-chorus with timpani, brass and strings is always going to challenge the available recording technology.

His timpani and trumpets remind me of those of Karl Richter in the B minor mass (BWV 232) - over the top, perhaps, but thrilling nonetheless. The two choirs sing with enthusiasm and gusto, with the lower voices generally being heard.

He sets up a powerful rhythmn, which is at the upper speed limit; I would not want to hear the 16th notes any faster than this. (movement time: 3mins 37secs.)

I will be keeping an eye out for other performances.

Thomas Braatz wrote (March 18, 2003):
BWV 50 - Commentaries: [Spitta, Voigt, Schweitzer, Whittaker, Dürr]

See: Cantata BWV 50 – Commentary

Alexander Vassiliadis wrote (March 19, 2003):
I could not answer for a long time but now I will take part in the discussion again.

Concerning Cantata BWV 50 I just remeber Gardiner´s Concert with the 4 Cantatas for Michaelmas on his BCP in 2000. I heard them in the Mariendom in Neviges, which is a huge building and the church was really full of people. He ended the concert with number 50 and I think I will never forget that. Compared with Gardiner´s old recording [10] this one was played just with fire. You cou´t hardly sit on your chair! I´ve never heard that Cantata with so much rhythmical energy (it was much faster than in his recording and the choir sang it with such a fantastic diction, that really every detail could be heard).

What a great piece!!

After that the Singers and players got standing ovations and during the final applause Gardiner started again with that cantata as an extra piece. I got some extra Adrenalin when hearing it in the concert.

I hope that some of you also were there and could enjoy one of the best BCP Concerts.

Thomas Braatz wrote (March 23, 2003):
BWV 50 - The Recordings:

This week I listened to the following recordings:

Harnoncourt (1968) [7]; Rotzsch (1980-81) [11]; Rilling (1984) [12]; Parrott (1989) [13]; Koopman (1997) [16]; Suzuki (1999) [17]; Leusink (2000) [18]

Timings are very similar with Koopman (3:24) [16], the fastest, which is about ½ minute faster than the slowest by Rotzsch (3:53) [11].

With only 1 mvt. under discussion and a mvt. that, most likely has been expanded by someone else, I want to compare the above recordings based upon certain criteria of my choosing.

Part of the problem with this cantata mvt. is that it most likely is not in its original form.

The Koopman recording [16], with notes by Christoph Wolff, promises to record this probable original version: “The present recording proposes two versions of this mvt., first the traditional version for double chorus and, second, a reconstruction for single chorus by Jan Kleinbussink.” Does anyone know whether this is still being planned?

My Criteria Checklist:

Instrumental:

1. The quality and sound of the trumpets. Do they enhance the call to battle with the sense of impending victory? Or do they bashfully stay in the background while almost not being audible?

2. When the fugal subject is stated by the 1st trumpet (the 1st trumpet alone has these important entrances) beginning in ms. 28 and 111, is it clearly heard or does it simply become part of the background?

3. Is the inverted fugal subject played only by the 1st oboe beginning in ms. 36 or the regular fugal subject played only by the 1st violin beginning in ms. 50 clearly heard?

4. Is the bc, when duplicating the vocal bass part, louder than the voice part? In other words, is the balance between bc and the rest of the ensemble reasonably good?

Choral:

5. Is OVPP used? Is a concertisti (soloists) vs ripieni setup used [I use the designation ‘mod’ for this]? Does each part have more than 1 or 2 voices per part throughout [I use the word ‘full’ for this]?

6. Are the two choirs in balance with each other? Can all of the parts of each choir be adequately heard?

7. Is the fugal subject treated in a staccato or legato fashion [S or L will be used]?

8. With the 2-note, 3-note and 4-note phrases on the words “Tag und Nacht,” are the final notes of each phrase actually audible?

9. When both choirs are singing 8 separate parts beginning in ms. 43, can the fugal subject in the soprano voice be clearly heard?

10. When the fragment phrases, “weil der verworfen ist” and “der sie verklagete” are thrown back and forth between both choirs, can a distinction be made between both choirs and is the pronunciation of German sufficiently clean and clear?

11. When the inverted fugal subject occurs in the voices (ms. 29 & 111 in the soprano; ms. 83 in the alto; ms. 90 in the tenor; and ms. 97 in the bass, is it clearly represented each time?

Results of my investigation

Here are the results of my investigation from the best to the worst:

[I used the following letters: G = good; F = fair (mediocre); P = poor in order to make my assessments]

Rotzsch [11], Rilling [12], Parrott [13], Koopman [16], Harnoncourt [7], Suzuki [17], Leusink [18]

Using the 1^st letter of the last name of the conductor (except for Ro=Rotzsch and Ri=Rilling), the details are as follows:

Instrumental Aspects:

Trumpet sound: G = Ro, Ri, K; F = H, P, S, L
1st trumpet ms. 28 ff.: G = Ro, Ri, K; F = H, P; P = S, L
1st trumpet ms. 111 ff.: G = Ro, Ri; F = P, K; P = H, S, L
1st oboe ms. 35 ff. (inverted): P = H, Ro, Ri, P, K, S, L
1st violin ms. 50 ff.: G = H, Ri, P, K; F = Ro; P = S, L
Bc balance: G = H, Ri, P, K, S; P = Ro, L

Choral Aspects:

Staccato vs. Legato S = H, P, K, S, L; L = Ro, Ri
OVPP/Mod/Full: Full = H, Ro, Ri, K; Mod = S, L; OVPP = P
Balance: G = Ro, Ri, P; F = H, K, S; P = L
Short Phrases: G = Ro, Ri, K; F = P; P = H, S, L
German: G = Ro, Ri; F = H, K, S; P = P, L
Soprano ms. 29 ff. (inverted): G = Ro; F = H, P, S; P = Ri, K, L
Soprano ms. 43 ff.: G = Ro, Ri; F = P; P = H, K, S, L
Soprano ms. 111 ff. (inverted): G = Ro, Ri; F = H; P = P, K, S, L
Alto ms. 83 ff. (inverted): G = H, Ro, P, K; P = Ri, S, L
Tenor ms. 90 ff. (inverted): G = P, S; F = H, Ro, K; P = Ri, L
Bass ms. 97 ff. (inverted): G = Ro; F = P; P = H, Ri, K, S, L

Aryeh Oron wrote (March 23, 2003):
BWV 50 - Background

The background below is based on some of the commentaries and something of my own.

The work opens with a strong declaration in unharmonized octaves between the bass voices of Choir I and the lower strings. Creating a feeling of rising excitement, the important words are emphasized on strong beats, each one higher in pitch than the previous. We can easily imagine ourselves walking up the stairs until we reach a higher plane of calm and peace. A joy-motif is combined with a motif of strength in the rhythm, which represents the defeat of Satan. The sopranos and the basses of Choir I begin the fugal theme, imitated by the other voices. Choir II bursts in with a great force upon their fugue. In the second section, the fugue is altered by the two choirs tossing fragments of their declamation back and forth between their sections. The two choirs unite finally to bring the movement to an impressive climax.

This is masterpiece of Bach’s mature chorale writhing in motet style. There is a feeling of mystic power that makes it more than a hymn of triumph over the force of evil. It seems to be Bach’s personal faith in God’s supremacy. This is one of those pieces, which actually plays itself, reminding works like Ravel’s Boléro. All the components that convey power and triumph and keep its momentum are already embedded in the work, even before the first note is played. Therefore it carries easily the message in every performance, almost never fails to sweep the listeners and uplift their spirit.

The Recordings – Main Characteristics

Last week I have been listening to 11 recordings of Cantata BWV 50. Instead of detailed review, I shall try to summerize their main characteristics.

[2] Carl Schuricht (1938)
Slow and heavy; romantic rather than Bachian approach.

[4] Felix Prohaska (1957)
Energetic, vivid and sweeping; big-scale choir, but clear vocal lines.

[7] Nikolaus Harnoncourt (1975)
Less fragmented than usual, but still mechanical and lifeless; fine singing.

[10] John Eliot Gardiner (1980)
Uncharacteristically lacking some internal pulse and momentum; missing a real Gardinerian spirit and enthusiasm.

[11] Hans-Joachim Rotzsch (1980-1981)
Fine singing, but unfocused; problems in balance and some imprecisions.

[12] Helmuth Rilling (1984)
Colourful and enthusiastic; excellent choir singing; tension is being built gradually in a very arresting way.

[13] Andrew Parrott (1989)
Transparedue to the small forces used; apparently lacking some power, but very captivating in its charm and tenderness.

[14] Harry Christophers (1990)
Somewhat dry and restrained; excellent singing and clear lines.

[16] Ton Koopman (1997, 1^st track)
Gentle and first-rate singing and playing; lacking somewhat in power and sounds rushed.

[17] Masaaki Suzuki (1999)
Precise, bold, powerful, with strong internal pulse; first rate singing and playing with excellent balance and clarity; approach similar to Rilling’s.

[18] Pieter Jan Leusink (2000)
Lightweight and unbalanced; has some enthusiasm.

Conclusion

The most satisfying renditions: Prohaska [4], Rilling [12], Parrott [13], Suzuki [17].
A recording to take away: Suzuki [17].

Bradley Lehman wrote (March 24, 2003):
[To Thomas Braatz] An interesting approach! Sounds like we need an awards category for Most Closely Micro-managed Engineering. :)

That is, let's hear it for one small aspect of the production values (cheering on the mixing-board guy and the fanciest multi-miking techniques). We could call it the Ludwig Mies van der Rohe Award, after his famous "God is in the details" pronouncement.

To balance that, we could have the Ovid Award: y'know, "True art conceals the means by which it is achieved." There could be some value assigned to the overall musical effect of natural-sounding and spiritually-uplifting performance...did the music move us?

No, I didn't watch the Oscars. (Did Polanski win something for the way he brings out all the varied occurrences of the letters H and W in his scripts?) Instead, I spent the evening listening to CDs with a friend who doesn't read music, but who is nevertheless one of the most perceptive listeners and music enthusiasts I know.

Bradley Lehman wrote (March 24, 2003):
< Aryeh Oron wrote: BWV 50 - Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft
(...)
Conclusion
The most satisfying renditions: Prohaska, Rilling, Parrott, Suzuki.
A recording to take away: Suzuki. >
A perhaps amusing story, from a practical side of performing this piece about 20 years ago: because it is for double choir, and we were performing it in a church, we set up the two choirs on both sides of the organ in the balcony. I was the organist accompanying this. The conductor, to be able to direct both choirs at once, used the available bit of space (less than a meter) immediately behind me, standing on a chair; his feet were approximately at the same level as the top rail of the balcony, and there was NOTHING behind him. And he had his music stand between my organ bench and himself. We had a mirror set up on the organ so I could see him.

For the whole performance I was terrified: if I had rocked backward too much on the bench, or done anything sudden with my elbows, I could have sent the conductor plummeting to his death. He was not afraid of heights, but I was! I wouldn't have stood in his position, even with both feet on the floor, for any amount of money...let alone standing there on a somewhat shaky chair. Some of the choir members were afraid for him, too, but he simply took a look down and then grinned back at them.

Jim Morrison wrote (March 24, 2003):
[To Bradley Lehman] So how did the performence come off? On edge? ;-)

Thomas Braatz wrote (March 24, 2003):
Bradley Lehman stated: >>An interesting approach! Sounds like we need an awards category for Most Closely Micro-managed Engineering. :)<<
As a primary candidate for such an award, you may have to consider Harnoncourt/Leonhardt :) The only problem there is that the emphasis is on 2-note, 3-note, and 4-note phrases with the final, unaccented notes barely audible or inaudible.

Brad, you forget that these are recordings and not a performance such as yours – a one-time-only, live performance. The moment Bach is recorded and generally available to the public, the criteria need to be expanded because the listeners, once they have found a good recording, will want to listen to it again and again, discovering more with each new listening.

>>There could be some value assigned to the overall musical effect of natural-sounding and spiritually-uplifting performance...did the music move us?<<
Again, upon the initial impression of a first (and perhaps only hearing in the case of a live performance), the listener will be swayed by an enthusiastic, generally natural-sounding performance. This is a good impression ‘to come away with;’ however, a truly good recording will stand up to close scrutiny and reveal with what care the conductor was able to bring out important details in the score. Or do you subscribe to the idea that a recording needs to fulfill only some of the details that Bach put into the score? Only those that the conductor chooses to make apparent? Shouldn’t the conductor attempt to render as much important detail as possible? Why, for instance, were all of the conductors in the recordings that I listened to unable to make audible the inversion of the fugal subject in the 1st oboe which is the only instrument or voice that has this musical element at this point in the mvt.? After hearing these recorded versions quite a number of times, also going back a few years as well, it would be a refreshingly glorious moment for a listener to realize that some conductor had paid some attention to this detail as well, a detail which reveals another level of depth that Bach had already accounted for and which was just waiting for someone (an astute conductor who is not only interested in ‘the overall musical effect,” but also is attuned to Bach’s complex musical mind) to discover and reveal to the listening audience.

We need to be careful not to overemphasize the emotional, impressionistic aspects of a performance to the detriment of details that are relatively important (not, of course, the micro-managing of Harnoncourt/Leonhardt) in a composition by Bach. A truly excellent recording will pay attention to both aspects: individualistic expression which tries to convey feeling + close attention to details in Bach’s scores which provide evidence of Bach’s complete mastery of musical form and language.

>>The conductor, to be able to direct both choirs at once, used the available bit of space (less than a meter) immediately behind me, standing on a chair; his feet were approximately at the same level as the top rail of the balcony, and there was NOTHING behind him. And he had his music stand between my organ bench and himself. We had a mirror set up on the organ so I could see him.
For the whole performance I was terrified: if I had rocked backward too much on the bench, or done anything sudden with my elbows, I could have sent the conductor plummeting to his death. He was not afraid of heights, but I was! I wouldn't have stood in his position, even with both feet on the floor, for any amount of money...let alone standing there on a somewhat shaky chair. Some of the choir members were afraid for him, too, but he simply took a look down and then grinned back at them.<<
This is a wonderful anecdote in which the falling motifs at the end of each section (and the text “weil der verworfen ist”) in the music being performed are paralleled in the actual situation that prevailed at the performance. A case of synchronicity?

Continue of this part of the discussion, see: Performance of Bach’s Vocal Works - General Discussions

Discussions in the Week of October 30, 2005

Thomas Braatz wrote (October 30, 2005):
BWV 50 - Intro to Weekly Discussion

BWV 50 "Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft"

Identification:

The cantata which has been selected, based upon the chronological sequence of Bach's performances, for this week's discussion is BWV 50, "Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft" which possibly had its first performance in Leipzig on September 29, 1723. This is one of 4 cantatas which Baccomposed for Michaelmas which occurs on September 29th of each year. Unfortunately only the 1st mvt. of this cantata has survived.

Provenance:

Not a single note of this cantata mvt. is autograph, nor do we have access to the original set of parts which Bach would have corrected. All we have are copies and copies of copies.

All of these copies have in common that they show the use of a double choir. It is noteworthy, however, that the oldest copy carries the designation "Concerto;" while the later copies include the word "Chor." In this context, we need to be reminded by analogy of another cantata for the same feast day: "Es erhub sich ein Streit" (BWV 19) of which there are early copies from the 18^th century and these also had only the 1^st mvt. of the cantata with the superscript "Chor." Had we lost the original sources from the latter cantata, we would also know this cantata (BWV 19) as having only a single, introductory mvt. for choir. Another cantata for Michaelmas, "Herr Gott, dich loben alle wir" (BWV 130) also exists only by virtue of an early copy, in which Bach's arias and recitatives were replaced with or exchanged with other contemporary compositions. Here we can observe again the tendency to isolate the 1st mvt. from the remainder of the composition (cantata) and then separate it entirely from the remainder of its contents. Is it possible, then, that "Nun ist das Heil" with the designation "Concerto" is also simply the 1st mvt. of what once was a complete cantata?" The NBA editors think so, even though they are unable to provide hard evidence to support this contention.

There are 8 copies of BWV 50 (Mvt. 1) of which the oldest, most likely of 18th-century origin, does not even mention the name of the composer. This is copy A. Copy B is a copy of copy A; and copy C was copied from copy B; and copy D is a copy of A. Copies E and F point back to D. Copy G seems to be a copy of E or F. Copy H is a copy of the BG. This copy by the copyist Hlavacek in the 2nd half of the 19th century was probably commissioned by Johannes Brahms who performed the cantata (1^st mvt.) in Vienna on December 7, 1873. The copyist had originally planned to include as additional instruments: 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons and organ which, for the most part, doubled already existing parts.

General Background:

The text is taken from the Epistle for Michaelmas (Revelations 12: 10) [NLT] Then I heard a loud voice shouting across the heavens, "It has happened at last-- the salvation and power and kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ! For the Accuser has been thrown down to earth-- the one who accused our brothers and sisters before our God day and night."

Spitta was the first to point out that Johann Christoph Bach (1642-1703) had composed a church cantata "Es erhub sich ein Streit im Himmel" in the second part of which the text "Nun ist das Heil and die Kraft" was set as a double choir composition. This certainly must have influenced J. S. Bach in setting the same text and using a double choir.

Dürr wonders whether this was an introductory or a final chorus for a cantata. He also wonders about the special circumstances that existed so that Bach would have enough singers to perform this cantata properly. Dürr mentions a conjecture by William H. Scheide that this mvt. may have originally existed as a single 5-pt. choir mvt. with the altos divided into separate parts and that the 1^st performance would have taken place on Michaelmas 1723 (because of Bach's preference at that time for the permutation fugue) and perhaps this mvt. was an inclusion/insertion into another earlier cantata (BWV Anh. 5?) This would mean that someone other than Bach undertook the expansion into a double choir. Closer examination of the double-choir version reveals an atypical chord-like 'thickening' of the thematic material. Reducing the piece to the 5-pt. single choir version removes nothing of its fascination.

Commentary:

"The Oxford Composer Companions: J. S. Bach" [Oxford University Press, 1999] has no commentary on BWV 50. This could be either a glaring omission or an editorial choice that this work needs no further discussion other than that it does exist.

As a replacement I translated Konrad Küster's commentary as found on pp. 341-342 of the "Bach Handbuch" [Bärenreiter/Metzler, 1999]:

>>There is an unclear history behind this large-scale choral work that is based on a biblical citation which definitely relates to the Feast of St. Michael and has come down to us as a single-mvt. work for 5-part chorus, trumpets, timpani, oboes, strings as well as a 8-voiced double choir which is connected to this with one half of the choir serving as a ripieno ensemble as support behind the main choir. The mvt. is entirely fugal in nature, using the principle of the permutation fugue. In addition to the fugal subject, both motivic complex structures, designed to carry out the continuation of the text are used as a constant counterpoint ("weil der verworfen ist" and "der sie verklagete") and two other motifs are developed as obbligato parts. However, not only do the 4 vocal parts of the concertato choir present entries of the theme, but also, in two instances, the soprano of the ripieno choir and the 1st trumpet and even on one occasion the 1st violin announce the theme. According to this method of presentation of themes there are 8 entries in the 1st half and 7 in the 2nd half. To be sure, by adding these ripieno parts, the fugal principle is undermined, but the effect of the entire mvt. is doubtlessly enhanced thereby.

The oldest source for this composition is traced back to the time after Bach's death. This copy was written by Carl Gotthelf Gerlach who had worked together with Bach in various capacities throughout Bach's tenure in Leipzig; hence, this transmission is creditable. However, it is astonishing that the parts for the ripieno choir are notated at the very bottom of the score, even under the continuo part and its musical structure, with the exception of the soprano part, shows only a minimum of independent part writing. The possibility can not be excluded that this mvt. may have originally been composed for a 5-part choir (Scheide), or is it possible that the unusual appearance of the score was caused by the fact that Gerlach copied his score from a set of parts and only after having begun setting up the first page of the score did he discover that he needed additional space for including the parts for the 2nd choir?

William H. Scheide suspects that the fugue is a leftover mvt. of another cantata for Michaelmas 1723 which perhaps had already been a revised version of another even older cantata. Opposing this view is the formal structure of this mvt: none of Bach's permutation fugues from this early period apply the principle of an aria-like dual structure with such a clear break in the very middle as this choral piece does. The permutation fugues from this period always have a straightforward/straight-lined fugal development. Also, the fugue is set up in such a way that the caesura in the middle of the mvt. ends in a minor key. Bach, in his vocal fugues up to 1726, as a general rule, set them up in such a way that the subject entries would not change to another mode (from minor to major or vice versa.) For these stylistic reasons it seems improbable that an early date before 1726 would be likely.

The fugue is based upon a very unusual theme: the shape of this melody, the most conspicuous element of which is the continual return to the initial note/tone which serves as the initial note and its repetition thereafter, approaches, in its combination of breadth and yet conciseness (almost to the point of being considered 'meager') what seems to be more like the musical constructions which Bach created around 1730. The fact that this fugue theme is countered by an extremely simple ripieno setting is not in anway astonishing. And thus the riddles which surround the history of this work still remain. It is simply impossible to go beyond that which has been sketched out here. The questions are: Was the orchestration of the original conception of this composition on a much smaller scale that what has come down to us? Is it a fragment of a cantata or did it exist as an independent composition? When considering these matters it becomes clear how limited the prospect is for attaining some clear results when it is a matter of focusing upon Bach's unusual conceptions regarding the structure of any given mvt. such as this or any others that are known: anything extraordinary or highly unusual can always be traced back to Bach's pen. Normally the combination of double choir with tutti-solo exchanges and strict fugal principles is mutually exclusive, but nearly every such grouping can be reduced to a single choir version, particularly when obbligato instruments are also involved, instruments which also, when necessary, have independent entries of the fugue subject. It is not really entirely decisive matter here whether all the material in the form as we have it now can be reduced to a reasonable torso form, but rather it is just as important to determine whether Bach gives us reasons that we can attach to why he created this highly experimental format. One thing is clear that in this cantata fragment there is a Bach fugue which could not have come from his early years in Leipzig.<<

Additional commentaries by Spitta, Voigt, Schweitzer, Whittaker, and Dürr can be found at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Guide/BWV50-Guide.htm

Also on Aryeh's main recordings page for this (and every other cantata), you will find important links conveniently organized, links that will take you to information you may be seeking.

If you still wish to read other commentaries, check out

1. Crouch (Simon Crouch has a very short commentary on each cantata)

2. AMG (different commentators - "Blue Jean" Tyranny in this instance, gives an account of the experience of hearing this music as if listening to a sports cast on the radio)

3. French (Christophe Chazot has a detailed discussion of the numerology/gematria aspects revealed in this choral mvt.)

4. Spanish (Julio Sanchez Reyes) has a commentary in Spanish)

For more in depth understanding of the liturgical readings that provide the background and even the text of the mvt., click (under Events) on Revelations 12: 7-12 and both the original German text and English translation will appear side-by-side.

Under Text (the cantata text based upon Revelations 12: 10), you will find 2 English, 3 French, Hebrew, Indonesian, Portuguese, and Spanish translations of the cantata text.

Under Scoring you will find a Vocal & Piano score in PDF format, if you are interested in following a printed version of the music with the instrumental accompaniment reduced to a typical piano score.

Under Music there are Music Examples that include recordings by both Harnoncourt and Leusink.

Recordings:

The list of complete recordings given on Aryeh's main page include those by Carl Schuricht (1938) [2], Felix Prohaska (1957) [4], Fritz Werner (1964) [6], Nikolaus Harnoncourt (1968) [7], Kurt Bauer (late 60s - early 70s) [8], Istvan Zambo (1978) [9], John Eliot Gardiner (1980) [10], Hans-Joachim Rotzsch (late 1980 or early 1981) [11], Helmuth Rilling (1984) [12], Andrew Parrott (1989) [13], Harry Christophers (1990) [14], Jeffrey Thomas (1994) [15], Ton Koopman (1997) [16], Masaaki Suzuki (1999) [17], Pieter Jan Leusink (2000) [18].

Under the box on Aryeh's main recordings page for this cantata, you will find a link entitled "Discussions." Clicking on this you will land on the page where you can view previous discussions, mainly about the recorded performances of this work.

There you will find previous checklist that I used in listening and comparing the various recordings of the work which I had in my possession. I will repeat this list of criteria here and hope that they will be helpful as part of your listening experience:

My Criteria Checklist:

Instrumental:

1. The quality and sound of the trumpets. Do they enhance the call to battle with the sense of impending victory? Or do they bashfully stay in the background while almost not being audible?

2. When the fugal subject is stated by the 1st trumpet (the 1st trumpet alone has these important entrances) beginning in ms. 28 and 111, is it clearly heard or does it simply become part of the background?

3. Is the inverted fugal subject played only by the 1st oboe beginning in ms. 36 or the regular fugal subject played only by the 1st violin beginning in ms. 50 clearly heard?

4. Is the bc, when duplicating the vocal bass part, louder than the voice part? In other words, is the balance between bc and the rest of the ensemble reasonably good?

Choral:

5. Is OVPP used? Is a concertisti (soloists) vs ripieni setup used? Does each part have more than 1 or 2 voices per part throughout?

6. Are the two choirs in balance with each other? Can all of the parts of each choir be adequately heard?

7. Is the fugal subject treated in a staccato or legato fashion?

8. With the 2-note, 3-note and 4-note phrases on the words "Tag und Nacht," are the final notes of each phrase actually audible?

9. When both choirs are singing 8 separate parts beginning in ms. 43, can the fugal subject in the soprano voice be clearly heard?

10. When the fragment phrases, "weil der verworfen ist" and "der sie verklagete" are thrown back and forth between both choirs, can a distinction be made between both choirs and is the pronunciation of German sufficiently clean and clear?

11. When the inverted fugal subject occurs in the voices (ms. 29 & 111 in the soprano; ms. 83 in the alto; ms. 90 in the tenor; and ms. 97 in the bass, is it clearly represented each time?

I invite all readers, listeners, and particularly all list members, no matter which recording or recordings they might own or listen to with the help of internet sources listed above, to share their thoughts and opinions regarding the recordings or other specific aspects of this composition and its background.

Thomas Braatz wrote (October 30, 2005):
BWV 50 Structure & Number Symbolism

Alfred Dürr's Structural Analysis of BWV 50

This mvt. contains an expansive fugue conceived on a large scale. The fugal subjects and counterpoint fixed according to the principle of permutation are constantly exchanged. The development of this mvt. is divided into two precisely equal parts consisting of 68 mm each. Each half consists of an extended fugal section and a short non-fugal epilogue. Throughout all of this development the individual elements of counterpoint appear frequently in thicker texture with non-linear, chordal blocks. Schematically sketched out, it appears as follows:

A Fugue (8 Permutation Phases)
Attachment at the end of the exposition:
(Both chorus exchange material with each other in an imitative style.)

A' Fugue (7 Permutation Phases)
Attachment (same as above)

In this impressive array of various techniques artistically applied, one is certainly worth mentioning here. It is the appearance of a kind of 'pseudo-inversion' of the main theme. By combining this with the original theme/subject within the permutation phase of the fugal exposition, the listener obtains the impression of a tremendous,
outwardly expanding space/breadth and splendor. Werner Neumann has stated about this mvt. that it "stellt erschöpfende Verwirklichung aller im Permutationsprinzip beschlossenen Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten dar und wird so zum Gipfelpunkt der Formgattung" ['represents the exhaustive realization of the form/shaping possibilities inherent in the principle of permutation and as such can be considered the culmination of this musical form.']

The following is based in part on Chazot's (see the French commentary) observations:

Measures

1-68 Caesura 69-136

Length of Fugal Subject 7 mm.

Number of Entrances: There are 8 entrances: 5 regular and then 3 additional entrances.

In sequence they are: B, T (+Viola), A (+2^nd Violin), S (+ 1^st Violin), 1^st Tromba then B(+Continuo), S (2^nd Chorus all previous entries were Chorus 1 only), then 1^st Violin to measure 57

The cadence before the Caesura ends with a minor chord

After the Caesura

There are 7 entrances (5 regular and 2 additional) S (divided between the sopranos of both Chorus 1 & 2), S (Chorus 1 + 1^st Oboe), A (+2^nd Oboe), T (+3^rd Oboe), B (+Continuo), S (Chorus 2), 1^st Tromba,

The final cadence ends with a major chord.

Summary: the numbers 5 and 7 are important but 8 is less so.

Orchestration (as it appears in the score from the top down)

3 Trombas, 1 Timpani, 3 Oboes, 3 Strings (Violino 1&2, Viola)
8 Choral Parts, Continuo

This makes a total of 19 parts

The grouping of instruments in 3s, although not unusual, is conspicuous and somewhat remarkable. Particularly the use of 3 trumpets (as in other sacred choral works) may symbolize the Trinity, as the trumpets are positioned at the very top of the score.

There is a coda consisting of 19 mm from mm 50-68 and mm 118-136 [Chazot pointed this out, but the first coda before the caesura does include the fugal subject announced by the 1st violins, an entry that frequently is barely heard in recordings or sometimes not at all.]

The longest held notes:

12 beats on 'Gott' ['God'] B (mm 22-25), T (+Viola) (mm 29-32), A (+2^nd Violin) (mm 36-39), S (+1^st Oboe) (mm 43-46), T (mm 50-53),

10 beats on 'kla-' ['complain'] S (+1st Oboe) (mm 62-65),

After the caesura:

12 beats on 'Gott' S (2^nd Chorus) (+1st Violin) (mm 90-93), S (both Choruses) mm 97-100), A (1^st Chorus) (mm 104-107)

12 beats on 'wor-' ['have become'] B (2nd Chorus) (mm 111-114)

10 beats on 'kla-' S (2nd Chorus)

Summary

The number 12 is conspicuous, 10 less so.
10 is associated with complaining
12 is clearly associated with 'Gott' ['God']

Total Summary

The numbers which stand out and might have symbolicsignificance (not all of them do, but perhaps some readers might come up with something for the ones for which I found nothing):

3 (instrumental groupings, particularly the 3 Trombas)

5 (regular entrances of the fugal subject)

7 (length of main fugal subject in measures)

(8) (entrances of fugal subject in 1st half)

10 (beats on one, held note - 'kla')

12 (beats on one, held note - 'Gott' and 'wor')

15 (total number of entrances of fugue subject)

19 (parts/staves on the score)

68 (measure in each half)

136 (total number of measures)

Some of the 'sacred' numbers based on the Bible and upon transmission by the Christian church are:

3 - The Trinity, God
5 - Satan, Devil, das Böse
7 - Totality, the Holy Spirit with its 7 Gifts
8 - Eternity
10 - God's Law
12 - Christ, the Apostles, the Church, the Eternal City
19 - God's Throne/Chair of Judgment

Relating these numbers generally to Revelations, we find connections with the text for this choral mvt.: The Seven Seals, the 7 letters to the 7 churches in Asia, etc.

Douglas Cowling wrote (October 30, 2005):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
< The grouping of instruments in 3s, although not unusual, is conspicuous and somewhat remarkable. Particularly the use of 3 trumpets (as in other sacred choral works) may symbolize the Trinity, as the trumpets are positioned at the very top of the score. >
The same symbolism is used in the Sanctus of the B Minor Mass (BWV 232) with the three groups of three augmented by the 6 voice (3x2) choir.

This chorus, like the other Michelmas cantata, "Es erhub sich ein Streit", begins without an orchestral introduction. Is there any evidence that an orchestral or organ sinfonia (as in #12, "Wir Danken dir") was played to introduce the cantata, as was suggested for "Gott Ist Mein König"?

Peter Smaill wrote (October 30, 2005):
Thomas has supplied a superlative introduction to this astounding tour de force of contrapuntal choral setting whose provenance has long been doubted, but magnificence of structure and effect never disputed. My own intro was to hear it played by John Eliot Gardiner at the Proms in London in the early 1980's and the Erato recording of that time remains a favourite; anything slower in tempo misses the martial clash achieved by the antiphony of the forces.

It is hard to find much more in the literature to add to this setting of Revelations 12: 7-12 and 20; 1-3,7-10. (Bach often excels in setting Revelations: BWV 49/5, BWV 61/4; BWV 21/11, BWV 60/4 and BWV 106/2 are the other settings per Unger.) However, some detail I think worthy of exploration is touched on by Daniel Melamed who I quote;

"The cantata movement "Nun ist das heil und die Kraft" BWV 50, long considered a fragment of Bach's only double choir cantata, is most likely an arrangement of a lost five-voice model. the double-choir version may have been the work of Bach's student Carl Gotthelf Gerlach, music director of the Leipzig Neukirche. Bach himself was probably responsible for the conversion of the first section of the pastiche motet, "Jauchet den Herrn, Alle Welt" (BWV Anh. 160 into a double choir piece. In both these works, the arrangements bare presumed to have had the same texts as their models, both of which were originally compositions for chorus."

Melamed further doubts the direct influence of Johann Christoph Bach's double-choir "Es erhubt sich ein Streit" for other reasons:

"The available evidence does not permit us to say with any authority that the older composition influenced Bach's cantatas for the day. The martial style used both in Johann Christoph Bach's cantata and in J. S. Bach's compositions for St. Michael's day was, if not a convention, then an almost inevitable consequence of the biblical texts for the feast, and so does not necessarily show direct influence. Further William Scheide has demonstrated that [BWV 50], whose eight - voice disposition has been interpreted as a response to "Es erhub sich ein Streit," does not reflect Bach's original scoring-if the work is Bach's at all."

Melamed, writing in 1995, is concerned to deny direct influence from the Altbachisches Archiv ("ABA"), in which we find the earlier work. However, since Bach appears from recent studies to have transposed or selected, late in life, the double-choir motet "Lieber Herr Gott, wecke uns auf," also by Johann Christoph Bach, the weight of argument may be swinging back to establishing a connection.

The best approach - is to listen to both settings ("Nun ist der heil" BWV 50 by J.S. Bach/ "Es erhubt sich ein Streit" by J C Bach) (Harmonia Mundi/Cantus Coelln under Junghaenel provides 2 CDs of the ABA, including "Es erhubt sich ein Streit).

The more radical question , "Is BWV 50 by Bach at all?" can maybe best be answered by the question : "If not by J.S. Bach , who else could have possibly created such an intensity of contrapuntal activity?"

Thomas Braatz wrote (October 31, 2005):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
>>The same symbolism is used in the Sanctus of the B Minor Mass (BWV 232) with the three groups of three augmented by the 6 voice (3x2) choir.
This chorus, like the other Michelmas cantata, "Es erhub sich ein Streit", begins without an orchestral introduction. Is there any evidence that an orchestral or organ sinfonia (as in #12, "Wir Danken dir") was played to introthe cantata, as was
suggested for "Gott Ist Mein König"?<<
Due to the extremely poor transmission of this work with even the possibility that it might have been a free-standing work (not impossible but less likely than the opening choral mvt. for a Michaelmas cantata), there is really no firm evidence to indicate that BWV 50 had to be the first mvt. of Michaelmas cantata. With all those instrumentalists assembled for its performance, it certainly would make sense to have an introductory sinfonia much in the same way that the Easter Oratorio has with all the instrumentalists having a chance to 'warm up' their instruments and 'get their fingers going' before the double chorus joins them in the next mvt.

Douglas Cowling wrote (October 31, 2005):
Orchestral Introductions

Thomas Braatz wrote:
< Due to the extremely poor transmission of this work with even the possibility that it might have been a free-standing work (not impossible but less likely than the opening choral mvt. for a Michaelmas cantata), there is really no firm evidence to indicate that BWV 50 had to be the first mvt. of Michaelmas cantata. With all those instrumentalists assembled for its performance, it certainly would make sense to have an introductory sinfonia much in the same way that the Easter Oratorio has with all the instrumentalists having a chance to 'warm up' their instruments and 'get their fingers going' before the double chorus joins them in the next mvt. >
We have the same situation in Cantata BWV 80, Ein Feste Burg" which also begins ex nihilo without an orchestral introduction. The "Osanna" of the B Minor Mass (BWV 232) of course presumes "attacca" performance after the "Sanctus"

Mike Mannix wrote (October 31, 2005):
I have a vague recollection of BBC Radio 3 discussion saying BWV 50 was not by Bach at all, because of 'parallel parts' which were an indication of a weaker composer.

Unfortunately I am insufficiently erudite to comment further.

Douglas Cowling wrote (October 31, 2005):
BWV 50 - Bach and his contemporaries

Mike Mannix wrote:
< I have a vague recollection of BBC Radio 3 discussion saying BWV 50 was not by Bach at all, because of 'parallel parts' which were an indication of a weaker composer.
Unfortunately I am insufficiently erudite to comment further. >
It's almost worth having Cantata BWV 50 as the work of another to demonstrate that Bach had worthy contemporaries. Cantata BWV 53, "Schlage Doch" was long thought to be by Bach precisely because it is a superb composition. Hoffmann's music deserves greater appreciation even if he like Zelinka does stand in the shadow of Bach.

Peter Smaill wrote (October 30, 2005):
[To Doug Cowling] John Eliot Gardiner is in agreement regarding the quality of BWV 53, "Schlage doch", even though it is by Melchior Hoffman. It was performed by him on 28 July 2000, the 250^th anniversary of Bach's death, at Iona; as was Bach's putative reworking of (attrib). Kuhnau's motet, "Tristis est anima mea," which we know as "Der Gerechte kommt um." The latter is a translation of "Ecce, quomodo moritur justus," the motet by Jakob Handl which followed immediately the singing of the Passion in Holy Week.

Mark Padmore, in his Aldeburgh and London productions of the SJP (BWV 245) (without conductor) followed this practice and the Handl motet is a most affecting way to contrast the intensity of the final chorale "Ach Herr, lass dein leib Engelein" with the meditative a capella quality of the older work.

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 2, 2005):
Aryeh Oron has kindly placed a page from the NBA complete score on his website where it is available for viewing. Not only is this a good example of 'Ohrenmusik' = ['music for the ears'], it is also 'Augenmusik' = ['music for the eyes'] as well.

Here is the link: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV50-Sco.htm

John Pike wrote (November 3, 2005):
This week's cantata may be only one movement and it may not be by Bach at all but I still think it's a real beauty and have done ever since I used to listen to my father's copy of Richter's recording on DG Archiv.

I have listened to Harnoncourt [7], Rilling [12] and Leusink [18] and enjoyed them all very much.

I have disagreed with Thomas many times in the past and still hold the views I did then, but I believe in giving credit where it is due, and I have to confess that his weekly introductions to the cantatas have all been really excellent...very comprehensive and very interesting to read. They are an excellent blend of information on sources, links to religious issues, other works etc. He will indeed be an impossible act to follow when I take on this task next month. Indeed, it will be impossible for me to follow any of my predecessors in this task with the same comprehensiveness since I just don't have that time to give. The message, therefore, is: enjoy these introductions from Thomas while they last; from Christmas you will see a very rudimentary introduction each week.

Neil Halliday wrote (November 4, 2005):
BWV 50: double choir?

Suzuki's recording (the BIS example) [17] is one of the few that seems to capture the magnificent double choir effect very well. Rilling's performance [12] is lively, with clarity of instrumental and choral lines; but despite the booklet affirming the use of the NBA edition for double choir, the recording sounds as if he employs only one choir. Werner [6] has two choirs, but the tempo is too slow for complete enjoyment. (Koopman [16], at the other extreme of tempo, also suffers through unsatisfactory choice of tempo). Prohaska [4], in 1957, has a lively, impressive performance, but the mono recording (amazon sample) precludes double choir antiphonal effects.

Leusink [18] has plenty of impact, as do Gardiner [10] and Harnoncourt [7]. Parrott [13] (OVPP) sounds `skinny' at the start, but when the eight voices enter with the trumpets, the music is more impressive. These recordings don't appear to convey much of the antiphonal effect. (This might be due to the poor quality of the amazon samples).

Did Richter record this cantata? It's not in the Archiv set I have.

Richard wrote (November 4, 2005):
[To Neil Halliday] Richter never recorded this "Cantata". Prohaska recording [4] was one of the first Vanguard stereo tape, and it sounds remarkably well, despite the vibrato of the viennese sopranos and poor playing of first trumpet who doesn't give higher notes; though on modern Bach trumpet... Hans-Joachim Rotzsch recording with Thomanerchor [11] is very impressive. But most of recorded performances are very confused.

John Pike wrote (November 4, 2005):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< Did Richter record this cantata? It's not in the Archiv set I have. >
Good question, Neil. I don't have access to my father's recording on DG Archiv. I assumed it was Richter, like many of the other DG Archiv records of bach he had, but I may well be wrong. Who is doing it on your DG Archiv recording?

When does the Gardiner recording date from?

Teri Noel Towe wrote (November 4, 2005):
BWV 50 - Authenticity?

I am not near my run of the "Bach Jahrbuch," but I have the recollection that within the last 20 years, Joshua Rifkin published an article in BJ in which he set forth the reasons why BWV 50 cannot have been composed by J. S. Bach.

Douglas Cowling wrote (November 4, 2005):
[To Teri Noel Towe] Is it a stand-along chorus or the opening of a lost cantata?

Thomas Braatz wrote (November 5, 2005):
[To Teri Noel Towe] The article is "Siegesjubel und Satzfehler. ZumProblem von "Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft" (BWV 50)" Bach Jahrbuch Vol. 86 (2000), pp. 67-86.

If anyone is able to share further information about this article, I am certain readers of this list would be interested in knowing more about Rifkin's arguments.

His title is "The Jubilation of Victory and Mistakes in the Musical Compositional Structure. On the Problems Surrounding 'Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft' (BWV 50)"

Neil Halliday wrote (November 6, 2005):
John Pike asks:
<"Who is doing it on your DG Archiv recording? When does the Gardiner recording [10] date from?">
I should have made clear that it's the Richter Archiv cantata set I have; and that BWV (?) 50 does not appear in this set.

According to the information at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV50.htm
the Gardiner [10] was produced in 1980, obviously not part of his Bach Pilgrimage set.

Richard's comment - that most of the recordings of this work are confused (in relation to the spatial separation of the choirs) - is interesting, and suggests a lack of attention by directors and recording engineers to this aspect of the work.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2005):
< Parrott (OVPP) [13] sounds `skinny' at the start, but when the eight voices enter with the trumpets, the music is more impressive. These recordings don't appear to convey much of the antiphonal effect. (This might be due to the poor quality of the amazon samples). >
Parrott's recording [13] has excellent clarity and Kraft. The antiphonal effects are pretty decent on stereo speakers, and even better with headphones: it's easy to pick out where each musician is within the spread, with musical lines happening everywhere. The two vocal groups are separated left to right. No idea how many microphones they used, but they got an effective result. Personally I find that performance impressive all the way through....

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2005):
< Parrott's recording [13] has excellent clarity and Kraft. The antiphonal effects are pretty decent on stereo speakers, and even better with headphones: it's easy to pick out where each musician is within the spread, with musical lines happening everywhere. The two vocal groups are separated left to right. No idea how many microphones they used, but they got an effective result. Personally I find that performance impressive all the way through.... >
Another one I like is the lively recording by Christophers [14], 1990, with 18 singers listed. Good enthusiasm from all the musicians. The overall texture isn't halfway as clear as Parrott's [13], though: this one makes more block-like effects. An oddity is having the organ very far to the right channel only...I'd rather hear it in the middle. The opening phrase is given to two basses, far left, and they don't quite blend with one another in their vibratos. (That's a general danger with vocal ensembles or string ensembles: it's harder to make a convincing blend with exactly two musicians in unison on a part, than to use three or more...or one.)

This disc also has two of my other favorite cantatas: BWV 34 and BWV 147. BWV 34 is especially boisterous here. And there are short organ preludes played by Paul Nicholson between the cantatas.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 6, 2005):
Teri Noel Towe wrote:
< I am not near my run of the "Bach Jahrbuch," but I have the recollection that within the last 20 years, Joshua Rifkin published an article in BJ in which he set forth the reasons why BWV 50 cannot have been composed by J. S. Bach. >
This is that Rifkin article from 2000 (I haven't read it yet): http://homepages.bw.edu/bachbib/script/bach2.pl?22=16594

The piece has also been discussed in BJ at least three other times, too: Kobayashi and Schulze (1978), Scheide (1982), and Hofmann (1994). [Citations in the BWV 1998 edition...]

Richard wrote (November 6, 2005):
[To Teri Noel Towe] Any Bach's Music lover feels that this music is Bach's... However, there is some strange writing, exactly like in The C Sanctus, probably not by Bach but so "Bachian...". Bach could have improved some contemporary works, add trumpets and counterpoint, like he did for his own music (Gloria of b minor Mass (BWV 232), probably come from an earlier concerto grosso).

Introducing Myself / BWV 50

Nils Lid Hjort wrote (November 17, 2005):
I'm new here, and now respond to the official instructions, even to the point of Capitalising "Myself" in the subject line. I'm an occasionally eager amateur musician (playing the piano & a couple of other instruments less well, and singing in various choirs) who finds the Bach Cantatas wonderfully interesting (i) since they happen to be wonderfully interesting but also (ii) since they are somehow "non-mainstream", even in well-educated musical circles. "Everyone" knows the Branderburgers and the Suites and the Wohltemperierte and the Matthäus (BWV 244) und Johannes (BWV 245) and some of the chamber music, but I'd venture that far too few of the Cantatas have reached common music-educated consciousness. (But you may disagree, and we might speculate that "the Cantatas are coming", becoming gradually better known to a broader public, decade by decade.)

In my free time I'm a professor at the Department of Mathematics at the University of Oslo, specialising in mathematical statistics and probability theory.

Then a question re BWV 50: I've not had time to scrutinise all of the 15,828 contributions since December 2000, but I've been browsing the past couple of hundred messages -- and must describe myself as "moderately shocked" by the claim that BWV 50 (Nun ist das Heil und die Kraft und das Reich und die Macht) is not by Bach. How firm is this claim?

There's a reference to an article by Rifkin in Bach Jahrbuch 2000, that I cannot access, so I haven't seen his arguments. Can someone give a brief outline of his reasons why BWV 50 cannot have been composed by Bach? And have there been counter-claims and counter-arguments, in BJ or elsewhere, scholarly of musical, saying that Yes!, it must be by Bach? And has Rifkin (or others) put up an Alternative Candidate (who should, if found to be the Real Composer, be admired for this splendid piece)? Do nine of ten Bach Cantata scholars still believe that Heil Kraft Reich Macht is Bach?

Alain Bruguires wrote (November 18, 2005):
[To Nils Lid Hjort] Welcome to the list! I agree that the Cantatas are not well-known. Often, discovering the Cantatas comes as a revelation. Most people seem to consider vaguely that there are so many of them that probably, apart from the two or three everybody's heard about (BWV 140, BWV 147 ?) they must be substandard Bach. When I try to convey my enthusiasm, I very often hear remarks such as 'come on, old fellow, surely at least some of them aren't as good as all that'.

I must be considered a Bach Ayatollah, I'm afraid! At lunch today a colleague of mine suggested that mathematicians are all obsessive (by the way, I'm a mathematician, too!). Can one assimilate an excessive taste for Bach Cantatas to a form of obsession?

John Pike wrote (November 18, 2005):
[To Nils Lid Hjort & Alain Bruguieres] Indeed. Welcome to the list, Nils!

I think one can easily assimilate an excessive taste for Bach Canatatas to a form of obsession. I have listened to all of them at least twice and I know several of them almost by heart. I have three "complete" sets....Rilling, Harnoncourt/Leonhardt, Leusink and am building up 3 more...Gardiner, Suzuki and Herreweghe (probably not intended to be complete). I think the last 3 are particularly recordings. I agree with John Eliot Gardiner that the music in them is of an unbelievably consistently high quality....I cannot think of a weak one in the entire set and some are truly divine....very far indeed from being "sub-standard". I think they just don't get heard so much because there are so many of them and people tend to perform the very best ones so often at the expense of the lesser known (but very fine) ones.

Time to go out and hear Suzuki's recording of BWV 50 [17]...I don't really care who wrote it...it's a great piece whatever.

Cantata BWV 50: Recordings | Discussions

Back to the Top

Last update: ýApril 16, 2008 ý07:23:36