Cantata BWV 59 - Discussions

Cantata BWV 59
Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten [I]
Discussions

Discussions in the Week of May 19, 2002

Thomas Braatz wrote (May 25, 2002):
BWV 59 - Provenance:

See: Cantata BWV 59 - Provenance

Aryeh Oron wrote (May 25, 2002):
Introduction

The subject of this week’s discussion (May 19, 2002), according to Francis Browne’s suggested list, is Solo Cantata for Soprano and Bass, for Whit Sunday (1^st Day of Pentecost) BWV 59 ‘Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten’. This cantata includes chorus for the Chorale, which is Bach’s first version of this work. The second version BWV 74, which had been composed about 1735, was discussed in the BCML a year ago. Some Bach scholars have questioned the date of the first performance, which was thought to be 1716, delaying it until 1723, when it was presented at the Leipzig University Chapel for the Whitsunday service, and stating that Bach had previously composed it while he was in Cöthen. However, Whittaker says that it was performed at the Weimar castle chapel on May 31, 1716. The last scholar in the line, Christoph Wolff, wrote in the liner notes of the Koopman’s recording for Erato [6] that the cantata was first heard in one or other of the Leipzig’s two principal churches on May 28, 1724, presumably after the sermon. Before the sermon Bach performed his Weimar cantata BWV 172 (I assume that this is based on the NBA). Neumeister was the librettist for the richly orchestrated BWV 59. The work is peculiar because there is no final chorale and there are only four movements. The Gospel, John 14: 23, provides the text for the duet which opens the cantata.

In order to allow the members of the BCML being prepared for the discussion, I compiled a list of the recordings of this cantata, the details of which can be found in the following page of the Bach Cantatas Website: Cantata BWV 59 - Recordings
You should note that the list of soprano soloists in the eight complete recordings of this cantata seems like the best in the crop: Agnes Giebel (with Kurt Thomas), Rotraud Hansmann (with Jaap Schröder), Arleen Augér (with Rilling), Peter Jelosits (with Harnoncourt, perhaps the best boy soprano that the H&L cycle have ever had), Mária Zádori (with Pál Németh), Ruth Ziesak (with Koopman), Magdalena Kožená (with Gardiner), and Ruth Holton (with Leusink).

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

Background

The background below is taken from the following sources:
Alec Robertson: ‘The Church Cantatas of J.S. Bach’ (1972)
W. Murray Young: ‘The Cantatas of J.S. Bach – An Analytical Guide’ (1989)
The English translations are by Francis Browne, a member of the BCML.

See: Cantata BWV 59 - Commentary

Review of the Recordings

[1] Kurt Thomas (1959)
The couple of Giebel and Adam was made in heaven. The voices of both were in their prime when they did this recording, and intelligence has always characterised their interpretations. This is a lesson not only of voice production, but also of mutual listening. The main fault here is the heavy-handed conducting and the stiff accompaniment. The choir is unsatisfactory, to say the least.

[2] Schröder (1966-1967)
I hold this LP in my hand, but I cannot listen to it, because I have not given it to my friend in due time to burn it on CD. All the other cantatas on this charming LP (BWV 27, BWV 118, and BWV 158) have already been transferred by Teldec to CD form, but not this one. Based on Warner affair with Koopman, it seems unlikely that it will happen soon.

[3] Harnoncourt (1976)
Although I would not give up any of the female soprano interpretations of this cantata, I have to admit that Bach must have had somebody like Peter Jelosits in his mind when he wrote this cantata. Jelosits has beautiful voice along all the registers and he seems that he has no technical difficulties. What is more important is the maturity of his performance, rarely to be found with boy sopranos. Ruud van der Meer has an equal part in the success of the opening duet. In the aria for bass he has all the room for himself, to prove what a sensitive and authoritative singer he is. Harnoncourt takes the opening movement very slow, and manages to sound heavy-handed, as much as Kurt Thomas is. Once again the weakest part of this rendition are the fragmented chorales. What a waste of a good choir!

[4] Rilling (1976-1977)
The playing of the orchestra in the opening duet is somewhat too loud, but this does not prevent the two excellent singers, Auger and Tüller to make the outmost of the vocal parts. Both combine beauty of voice, intelligence and emotion to a performance which is hard to match. Augér is tearing your heart apart in the ensuing recitative and Tüller is doing the same in the aria for bass.

[5] Néméth (1988)
Last year I heard Mária Zádori singing Psalm 51 BWV 1083 in Israel. She was past her prime and the voice was sometimes unpleasant to hear. Here, 13 years younger, she is doing much better. She can stand proudly with the best of them. Her voice has a unique bright and her singing is flowing ahead smoothly and easily. She also conveys emotion, but some of the other soprano singers are more expressive than she is. The match between her and Polgár is good, both regarding the blending of voices and the way they follow each other in the canon, as two who are enjoying singing with each other. The accompaniment is humble and attentive and does not standing in the way of the singers. Polgár is convincing in the aria for bass with his pleasant low baritone voice. The choir is not bad either.

[6] Koopman (1997)
The soft playing of the trumpets in the opening duet goes well with charming voices and nice interpretation of Ziesak and Mertens. Their voices are splendidly matched. Ruth Ziesak shows in the ensuing recitative that she has also dramatic sense and her singing is simply heart-rending. The warm singing of choir continues the intimate atmosphere. In the aria for bass Mertens keeps the high standard we are accustomed to hear from him

[7] Gardiner (1999)
In the opening duet Gardiner takes a brisker tempo than most other conductors do. As could be expected in advance his trumpets glow, and both soloists have high challenge with such circumstances. They pass the test relatively well, but with such fine singers, the movement could benefit from a slower tempo and quieter trumpets. I believe that the beauty of Magdalena Kožená’s voice is already well-known with the members of the BCML. Nevertheless, I feel that she does not reach the depths of emotion that singers such as Augér and Ziesak do in this cantata. Similar things could be said about Harvey in the aria for bass. The choir’s singing is energetic and smooth, yet lacks some warmth.

[8] Leusink (2000)
Leusink's tempo in the opening duet is faster even than Gardiner’s! I have heard Holton and Ramselaar doing better in other duet movements than they do here. They are trying hard to cope with the accompaniment and with each other, not always with satisfactory results. The ensuing recitative is also done too fast to give Holton enough room for convincing interpretation. The choir here follows Harnoncourt’s path, and I do not like it at all. Furthermore, the singing is not clean and cohesive. Ramselaar’s aria for bass is the most satisfactory movement, although I miss the inner depths that singers like Adam and Tüller gives to this aria. It seems that the whole rendition lacks from preparation.

Conclusion

Personal preferences:
Despite some reservations here and there, I like them all. But if I have to choose…
Preferred soprano singers: Augér [4] and Ziesak [6]
Preferred bass singers: Adam [1] & Tüller [4]
Preferred choir: Koopman [6]

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

Thomas Braatz wrote (May 26, 2002):
Review of the Recordings

BWV 59 Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten.

This week I listened to the following 6 versions of BWV 59:

Thomas (1959) [1]; Harnoncourt (1976) [3]; Rilling (1976-1977) [4]; Koopman (1997) [6]; Gardiner (1999) [7]; Leusink (2000) [8]

Of these Thomas [1] and Rilling [4] are non-HIP and the remainder HIP.

In general the non-HIP recordings are characterized by a larger number of instrumentalists who are playing modern instruments (or some old instruments modified as most of them were to be louder in volume) that are generally louder than the HIP variety, by a larger number of voices singing in the choir, by fully trained voices that have substantial volume as needed, but also vibratos that can become excessive, by a more legato playing and singing style, while

the HIP recordings attempt to use modified versions or copies of instruments used during Bach’s lifetime. Their recordings are characterized by a generally lighter and faster non-legato style of playing and singing, a non-legato, heavily accented style that causes a general feeling of breathlessness and a lack of continuity. The number of singers in the choir is smaller, usually at least two to three singers per part, but not many more than that. The soloists tend to have very small voices that have received a little extra training, but usually lack the ability and range to project all the notes to an audience in a church. They tend to sound more like instruments, use less vibrato than their full-voice counterparts in the non-HIP group and generally lack the ability to add expression to the voice without forcing it and creating an uncomfortable sound to listen to. The HIP vocal soloists include countertenors and high falsettists that are only found in this type of period ensemble.

Comparison of times for the 1st mvt.:

[1] Thomas (3:38) (Tempo seems just right)
[3] Harnoncourt (4:15) (Everything threatens to fall apart at this slow tempo without legato)
[4] Rilling (3:53) (Slower than Thomas and also less joyful)
[6] Koopman (3:34) (almost the same as Thomas, but a very lite treatment)
[7] Gardiner (3:14) (a hurried and a light-weight treatment)
[8] Leusink (3:07) (“Let’s not prolong the agony if we have little to say”)

General Impression of All Recordings:

The Thomas recording seems to be the only one that shows a true understanding of the text by presenting the music in such a way that an exuberant and infectious joy can be felt by the listener. There is a distinct feeling that these musicians truly believe what they are singing, such is the strong affirmation that can be felt in their singing and playing. The other recordings, particularly, those in the HIP category, do not seem to understand the great joy of Pentecost as they either poke around looking for melodies or are more interested in hurrying through these mvts. in a light-weight fashion more conducive to background listening than for seriously engaging the listener. Pardon the oxymoron, but there is a serious, substantial joy that needs to be expressed here, a joy that does not allow the chorales to sound like those extracted from one of Bach’s Passions, nor does this type of joy rush in a dainty, skipping fashion through the duet and the chorales. This is the joy that Christ’s disciples and the rest of humanity experienced with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the great comforter. All of this at a point where the disciples had almost given up hope because Christ had been removed from them (the Ascension.) Now that which Christ had promised was actually happening. Listen to the sound of the trumpets and timpani in the Thomas recording as well as the fervor with which the Thomaner Chor sings the words of the chorale. None of the other recordings even come close to matching the feeling they impart to the listener.

Does anyone know why some groups sing ‘Alleluja’ as ‘Halleluja?’ Was this done this way in Bach’s day: you see the word ‘Alleluja’ but you sing it with an added aspiration?

Specific Recordings:

[1] Thomas:
Mvt. 1: Partially due to the well-paced tempo, this festive performance is very joyful, but dignified. Sometimes Adam is somewhat difficult to hear in the low range, despite the fact that he has a large and powerful voice. This is perhaps due to the strong emphasis on the bc and also due to the organ being too loud and distracting with some 4’ and 2’ stops having been drawn. Giebel has a pleasant fully-trained voice that has the power to project the music into a large space with expression. Mvt. 2: Giebel does some modernization of the German (vor=für, alles=allen) which was frequently done in the non-HIP era. Otherwise her pronunciation of German is impeccable. This is normally difficult for sopranos singing in a high range. Her expression of the words is excellent. Mvts. 3 & 5: There is a sustained joy that rests upon the strong conviction that the singers feel and express. Nothing is cut short. Mvt. 4: Adam definitely has an operatic voice, but here it is not yet as objectionable as it became later on. The solo violin has a very wiry sound. Is this due to the recording technique, the slightly excessive vibrato, or both?

[3] Harnoncourt:
Mvt. 1: The extremely slow tempo (perhaps in deference to the boy soprano) brings this mvt. close to the breaking point, threatening to have the entire mvt. fall apart at any moment. This problem is made worse by separating each quarter note from the next one when the strings are playing, thus causing many extra ‘breath’ or ‘separation’ marks in the melody lines. Ruud van der Meer is a would-be Huttenlocher, except for the fact that Huttenlocher has a more powerful voice than Meer. Meer has the same ingenuous quality of singing that, with a fast vibrato, tends to sound ‘funny’ when it needs to sing loud. Jelosits, on the other hand, has a clear, trumpet-like sound in the middle and upper registers, but at the point of this recording had little or nothing in the low range, a common failing of boy sopranos. Jelosits is one of the very few boy sopranos in the Harnoncourt/Leonhardt series whose performances can give us a reasonable approximation of what a boy soprano in Bach’s day might have sounded like. In ms. 43, Jelosits loses some of the low notes. There is some slight blaring of the trumpets who give the impression that they are glad to have made it through without any major mishaps. The slightly out-of-tune quality lends, according to Harnoncourt, credence to believing that this is an ‘authentic’ sound. Some notes in a passage are definitely louder than others. Mvt. 2: Harnoncourt now has the strings play successive half notes with slight pauses between each. This is Harnoncourt’s way of fracturing the accompaniment. He simply can not tolerate the notion that these notes might be connected. Jelosits pronunciation of German is excellent here. Mvt. 3 & 5 The muddy choral sound is complicated by the additional thrusting on individual notes. Instead of holding notes for their full value, Harnoallows them to die out prematurely, as if the voice were also handicapped by the bowing techniques the Harnoncourt claims cause Bach’s string instruments not to be able to play legato. There is a feeling of uncertainty and apprehensiveness among the singers. Their pronunciation is fair. Mvt. 4: Alice Harnoncourt’s violin playing makes this instrument sound very tentative with many notes shortened in value. Her playing sounds thin and squeaky. Here Meer, with his half-voice sings mainly sotto voce with a fast vibrato that makes it impossible to tell the difference between a trilled note and an untrilled one.

[4] Rilling:
Mvt. 1: Rilling’s tempo here is more measured than Thomas, and perhaps, as a result, the mvt. begins to lack some of the exciting joy felt in the Thomas recording. Augér, with her fully-trained voice definitely holds her own against the larger instrumental ensemble, but poor Tüller is mainly too weak. This weakness may in part be due to his fast vibrato that makes his voice sound unclear or even raspy without any round tone to compensate for this. He may be forcing his voice way beyond its natural capabilities. Rilling’s bc is too heavy and the trumpets are less interesting compared to the previous recording. Mvt. 2: Augér has very good diction for a non-native speaker of German. Just listen to her enunciation of the consonants. Compared to Giebel, Augér’s voice is less round and she occasionally gives the impression that she is forcing the voice to overcome some difficult notes (difficult for her to sing). At least the extra effort becomes apparent. Mvt. 3: There is less excitement and joy in this rendition compared to Thomas. There is a soprano voice (or two) which is almost always distracting because it is unsteady and detracts from the firm line that the chorale melody demands. Mvt. 4: Tüller’s disturbing vibrato subtracts from his overall volume in the middle and low ranges. Because of this excessive vibrato, there is no way to tell the difference between a normal quarter note and one with a trill marked on it (ms. 31). They both sound the same to me. This is bad!

[6] Koopman:
Mvt. 1: With Ziesak and Mertens we have two half-voices struggling to be heard even with the light orchestral period instrument sound and the very soft trumpets. Perhaps this is the reason why Koopman holds them back so much. Mertens, for instance, in his middle range coloraturas (ms. 50) drops the ending syllable of a word and also the word, “und.” They can not be heard at all. Mvt. 2: Ziesak has a few pronunciation problems: the beginning of the word, “Vater,” (ms. 4) sounds more like English ‘faw’ and in ms. 11 the ‘s’ at the end of “alles” is dropped. Mvts. 3 & 5: This joyful chorale sounds more like a soft, intimate prayer where one is afraid of being overheard. This subdued approach is completely out of place in a chorale that sings of “brünstig Lieb” which has obviously not yet been “entzünd” [“ignited”] by this conductor. Someone needs to light a fire under Koopman to put him in the proper state of mind and feeling, so that this chorale receives a worthy treatment. For the second chorale at the end of the cantata, Koopman chose to present the chorale that Bach omitted. Mvt. 4: There is excellent balance that is achieved between Mertens and the rest of the ensemble. With his gentle and pleasant-sounding half voice, Mertens is unable to give much expression to the words because he sings mainly sotto voce. The bc is extremely light. If you listen carefully, you might even hear the lute! That gives you an indication of what volume level we are operating at here. In a large church with a full congregation present, there would be very little of this that you could really hear. The solo violinist ‘spices thing up a bit’ by attempting some interesting variation/embellishments when the ritornello reappears exactly as it was in the introduction.

[7] Gardiner:
Mvt. 1: With one of the fastest tempi in this set of recordings, Gardiner is no longer able to extract an element of dignity from this music. Now things have to move along more quickly, which implies automatically less of a firm foundation. Kožená would qualify as a full voice, but because of the tempo, she is unable to develop certain vocal sounds more fully. There simply is not time and as a result, she lapses into some sotto voce singing. What a shame, when she could really do much more here if she had been allowed the opportunity. Harvey, her partner in this duet, is unable to hold up his end because he only has a half voice to begin with. Now add speed to the notes and he has even less of a chance to produce significant sounds and expression. He is the weakest link in this mvt. Mvt. 2: Kožená has serious problems with the German language. Now that she is on her own in this recitative, many of her faults become much more apparent. She lisps! She is unable to pronounce the ‘s’ sound properly, a sound that occurs very frequently here. Listen carefully to the phrases, „was sind das”; „worzu uns”; „Jesus der uns“; „so würdig schätzt“; „daß er verheißt“ etc. In this recitative she drops off into nothingness for supposed expression of the words. There are many “Mogeltöne” [“cheating notes”] where she produces almost nothing that carries sound and meaning. She also engages in some of that final thrusting upon the release of a note, a characteristic left over from her native language. In ms. 18 “Ach, daß doch” she sings “noch” in place of “doch.” Without the text or score in front of me, there are stretches in this recitative where I can not understand what she is singing. Mvts. 3 & 5: Gardiner has a nice legato sound, but the chorale is much too subdued for such a festive occasion as Pentecost. In mvt. 5 Gardiner has the choir sing another verse of the same chorale. Mvt. 4: Harvey’s singing is mainly sotto voce and with his funny, fast vibrato, there is simply no way to tell the difference between a note with a trill over it and another note which does not have the trill.

[8] Leusink:
Mvt. 1: At this fast tempo, Leusink can only come up with a lite entertainment version of this mvt. There is separation between all the eighth notes. The double bass in the bc is much too loud for the rest of the ensemble, in particularly for the two half voices singing the duet. Mvt. 2: Holton’s voice is able to produce a few trumpet-like tones (on “O”) that resemble the quality that a boy soprano can achieve. Sometimes her voice is almost not present at all because the sound production capability simply is not there for her. She mispronounced “allerhöchste” by substituting an ‘sh’ for ‘s.’ Mvt. 3: The usual warbling and forced voices stick out of the choir sound at various times. The bass voice does a disappearing act in ms. 19, 20 in the low range, and if the bc were not duplicating these notes, the entire bass foundation for this chorale would be missing. Mvt. 4: Ramselaar has even less voice to produce sound with than Mertens. It sounds as if he is singing sotto voce all the way through the aria.

My Preferences:

Mvt. 1 (Duet for Soprano & Bass)
Thomas (Giebel/Adam) [1]; Rilling (Augér/Tüller) [4]; Gardiner (Kožená, Harvey) [7]; Harnoncourt (Jelosits, Meer) [3]; Koopman (Ziesak, Mertens) [6]; Leusink (Holton, Ramselaar) [8]

Mvt. 2 (Recitative for Soprano)

Thomas (Giebel) [1]; Harnoncourt (Jelosits) [3]; Rilling (Augér) [4]; Koopman (Ziesak) [6]; Gardiner (Kožená) [7]; Leusink (Holton) [8]

Mvts. 3 (and 5, if attempted) Chorale

Thomas (Thomaner Chor) [1]; Rilling (Gächinger Kantorei Stuttgart) [4]; Gardiner (Monteverdi Choir) [7]; Koopman (Amsterdam Baroque Choir) [6]; Leusink (Holland Boys Choir) [8]; Harnoncourt (Tölzer Knabenchor) [3]

Mvt. 4 (Bass Aria)

Thomas (Adam) [1]; Koopman (Mertens) [6]; Gardiner (Harvey) [7]; Rilling (Tüller) [4]; Leusink (Ramselaar) [8]; Harnoncourt (van der Meer) [3]

Dick Wursten wrote (May 28, 2002):
[To Aryeh Oron] [7] In sheer enthusiasm for Magdalena's beautiful voice Aryeh’s computer started to hebraize. At least on my screen the 'beth' appeared in her name.... "Kožená’s"... I don't know whether other computers with different language character sets also tried to nationalize her.. After Pentecost everything in every tongue is possible.

Aryeh Oron wrote (May 30, 2002):
[To Dick Wursten] Altough I naturally read Hebrew, the Hebrewization of Magdalena's last name was done undelibararely. I sent my review late on Saturday night, a minute before the week's end. To save time I sent the mesasage directly from Word instead of using the long procedure I usually do. One would expect a compatabilty between two Microsoft programs: Word and Outlook Express. In future reviews I shall try to get back to the usual procedure. Nevethless, you can read the review on the Bach Cantatas Website in the page:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV59-D.htm

And regarding La Kozena, I recommend to you looking at the pages:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Bio/Kozena-Magdalena.htm
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Bio/Kozena-Magdalena-2.htm

Discussions in the Week of May 7, 2006

Eric Bergerud wrote (May 7, 2006):
Introduction BWV 59

For the next couple of months I'll be writing the introduction for the weekly cantata selected for list discussion. (Much thanks to Doug Cowling for his wonderful work the past ten weeks.) Aryeh suggested that I explain how I became a small part of Kantatenwelt. The short answer is that my turn-table broke. I've been a serious classical music fan (fan, not musician) since the late 60's and developed a large vinyl collection. It was, however, overwhelmingly instrumental. Although I tried and failed to become a Wagnerian in the early 70's, I only had a three or four operas. I had a lot of Bach, but only the XO (BWV 248), Mass in B (BWV 232) and Mauersberger's BWV 80/BWV 140 among choral works. The problem, simply put, was that I still hadn't understood the vocal idiom employed in classical music. To my ears, Joan Baez was a great vocalist, not Beverly Sills. Luckily my son gave me a spare Sony portable CD player and I slowly began to rebuild my collection on CD. For reasons that I can't possibly explain, my ear had changed. I bought Cecilia Bartoli recitals and found them lovely. I tried Bel Canto, Mozart & Gluck operas and liked them a lot. And then I replaced BWV 80 with Herreweghe's version and heard beautiful things that I hadn't before. After that, the dam was breached (smashed is more like it) and I could not listen to enough of Bach's choral works. This all happened about eight back, but there's no end in sight. I might add that although I get paid for teaching and writing history, I've been a historian much longer than a cantata fan. My interest in the past, however, has certainly influenced my strong preference for period performances. Anyway, that's my excuse.

Introduction - BWV 59: Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten

I've been told that "good things come in small packages." That could well be true if we're considering emeralds or Faberge eggs. The cliché may not work for cantatas however. BWV 59 weighs in at about 10 minutes - a slight work measured in kilobytes. Simon Crouch gives it the back of his hand. The nine versions in print during the first set of discussions has shrunk to five and one requires buying a Koopman volume [6]: not exactly "Habe genug". The experts seem mostly interested in when the work was first performed and one them, Gillies Whittaker takes Bach to task for using a soprano instead of a tenor and faults Bach for ending with an aria. And during the 2002 list discussion the work elicited only three posts in addition to the introduction - no flame wars over BWV 59. So, ladies and gentlemen, did Bach write a clunker? (He had a good excuse after all. This was the first Leipzig cycle and Pentecost required three cantatas in as many days. Lots of work for everyone concerned.)

Maybe I'm not the one to ask because I haven't heard a cantata that I didn't like. That said, I consider BWV 59 very agreeable and wish I had more versions of it. I find the duet and aria lovely and the chorus very moving. One thing striking is the absence of a movement highlighting an alto. So this is a good work for soprano and bass fans. To my ears it vindicates the Harnoncourt approach [3]. Peter Jelosits, his boy soprano, teams up beautifully with van der Meer. Maybe today's opinion finds fault somewhere but it certainly proves to me that, at bare minimum, someone else should give it a try with a boy soprano. And, with without Sytse Bulwalda to kick around, this work shows Leusink's forces at advantage [8]. I am a big Ruth Holton fan and thinks she sounds great here. (Judge for yourself: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Mus/BWV59-Mus.htm )

I do hope to hear the opinions of list members on this work. It would be very nice for a Suzuki fan to post as the BCJ version [10] was not out during the first discussion.

BWV 59 Details:

BWV 59: Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten ('Who loves me will keep my word')
Whitsunday (First Day of Pentecost)
First Performance: Leipzig May 28, 1724 (Paired with BWV 172.) Perhaps played May 16, 1723 at Leipzig University Chapel.
Readings: Epistle: Acts 2: 1-13; Gospel: John 14: 23-31
Libretto: Erdmann Neumeister, Mvts 2, 4.
BWV 59
Provenance: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Ref/BWV59-Ref.htm
BWV 59 Discussions from 2002: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV59-D.htm
German - English text: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Texts/BWV59-Eng3.htm

Excerpt by Dingeman van Wijnen from liner notes accompanying Leusink performance [8]:

BWV 59 (16 May 1723) is a short Pentecost cantata, the music of which was later reused by Bach for BWV 74. Here the text is sung by soprano and bass in a fine duet. The musical figure on the words "Wer mich liebet" permeates the whole movement: only towards the end do the two voices sing it together. An accompanied soprano recitative is followed by a chorale with a lot of movement and speed. The cantata ends with a bass aria in which the violin plays an attractive melody which is taken over by the bass.

Structure and Timing

1. Aria (Duetto) [Soprano, Bass] (3'10 - Leusink)
Tromba I/II, Timpani, Violino I/II, Viola, Continuo

2. Recitative [Soprano] (1'49 - Leusink)
Violino I/II, Viola, Continuo

3. Chorale [S, A, T, B] (1'28 - Leusink)
ViolinoI/II, Viola, Continuo

4. Aria [Bass] (3'17 Leusink)
Violino solo, Continuo

Aphilla the Hun wrote (May 8, 2006):
Introduction BWV 59 - Gardiner recordings

[To Eric Bergerud] This is a nice summary, thanks, and thanks for your background which is also interesting.

I also arrived late to the Bach Cantatas, in fact discovering for myself their beauty only this year. (I posted a similar query to a classical recording newsgroup a week or so ago and got what seemed to me a strange variety of responses, but here goes again). So having found out about these treasures I subscribed to the Gardiner series
that he is releasing on the Soli Deo Gloria label. I contacted them via email but received limited response. I was wondering how regularly and then how frequently these are coming out? I also understand they are releasing works that they already released on DG/Archiv, but maybe not the same performances. Does anyone here have details about this?

I'm attaching it to the thread on BWV 59 because the latest package I received is 4 cantatas for Whitsun (BWV 172, BWV 59, BWV 74, and BWV 34) [9] and one of the DG/Archiv discs [7] has the same set.

Thanks,

Eric Bergerud wrote (May 8, 2006):
[To Aphilla the Hun] Archive produced about 12 cantata CDs under Gardiner. Except for a wonderful pairing of BWV 140/BWV 147 with Ruth Holton at her best, all appear to be Pilgrimage CDs. Only four or five actually are. Most were done in studio a few years earlier. The real deal are marked by a very small notation "live recording" on the back. Pretty ugly marketing in my view, but I doubt Gardiner and DG were thinking kindly of each other toward the end.

We all wish SDG the best I'm sure, but I have no plans of throwing my Archive CDs away. They're pure Gardiner - whether that's good or bad is up to the listener - and well recorded. And, if such mundane things matter, are widely available used and hence an economical alternative to the SDG CDs. As for the new SDG volumes, I'm not sure if there's a set schedule or not. The works are already recorded obviously, so I should think the SDG are putting them out in a pace not to fast to overwhelm the market but not too slow that buyers will forget about them. Others are subscribers to the series and should have more detail.

Continue of this part of the discussion, see: John Eliot Gardiner - Bach Cantatas & Other Vocal Works - General Discussions Part 11

Neil Halliday wrote (May 10, 2006):
In the opening duet, the tonality at first seems to shift between C major and G major; and this is reflected in the entry of the soprano and bass in canon, where the soprano appears to begin in G major, but the bass re-establishes C major. This is a richly textured movement (sounding almost symphonic in Rilling's recording [4]) in which various motives are swapped and imitated, in Bach's manner, in the instrumental and vocal lines of the three main groups: brass and tympani, strings, and voices. The text is sung through five times, the first four times in canonical fashion, and the final time soprano and bass sing together (ie, not in canon).

The accompanied recitative sounds strongly emotional, especially with Rilling's rich string sound and Auger [4]; and I think Rilling has a trumpet doubling the soprano and 1st violin line in the following chorale, for extra colour.

The final bass aria with solo violin is pleasant and tuneful, if not having any especially memorable features.

The usual comments apply to the recordings: Rilling's continuo [4], relatively un-phrased/unshaped, may sound thick, while certain instrumental (and vocal) parts, of some period ensembles can sound delicate to the point of daintiness. Others have enlarged on such details in previous discussions.

Peter Smaill wrote (May 10, 2006):
A question which was triggered by Thomas Braatz' review of the Ascension Cantata for 1724, BWV 37 "Wer da glaubet und Getauft Wird" is also relevant to BWV 59, for Whitsun, which falls two weeks later.

In the Western church it was traditional to prepare neophytes for confirmation at Whitsun, and in BWV 37 Thomas, following Duerr, identifies one of the hidden chorales introduced as a countersubject, as the catechism chorale, "Dies sind die heiligen zehn Gebot."

Was Whitsun also the traditional time for confirmation in the Lutheran church?

Also known as Pentecost, i.e. fifty days after Passover and a feast of Hebraic origin as well as commemorating the founding of the Church. The choice of a duet perhaps representing the "cloven tongues" and the rare combination of these two voices with trumpets-unusually also two in BWV 59 - representing the "rushing wind?"

3^rd trumpet in BWV 59

Continue of discussion from: Instrumentation [General Topics]

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 23, 2009):
Evan Cortens wrote:
< The only cantata with two trumpets and timpani is BWV 59 "Wer mich liebet, der wird mein Wort halten", a cantata from the first Leipzig cycle. >
Surely the third trumpet part is missing: I could improvise one as I read along in the score. Alas, the full score didn't survive.

Evan Cortens wrote (September 23, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
< Surely the third trumpet part is missing: I could improvise one as I read along in the score. Alas, the full score didn't survive. >
Fair enough. I knew pulling this information from a database without actually examining it critically would get me eventually!

Speculation as to missing parts certainly leads one down a very interesting path. I was recently listening to one of my favorite cantatas, BWV 192 (another cantata for which no score survives), and put on the Ton Koopman recording which I hadn't heard before and was quite surprised to hear two (rather virtuosic!) horn parts! A little checking of the liner notes reveals this to be based on Christoph Wolff's speculative conclusion that the work may once have contained horn parts. The first time this crops up in the literature is in the Bach-Compendium entry on this cantata (again, written by Prof. Wolff [and Hans-Joachim Schulze]). In the sections on sources, we see: "NB Stimme T nicht erhalten; denkbar erscheint darüber hinaus, der Verlust von Blechbläserstimmen (Cr 1, 2 in G?)". Roughly translated: "NB The T[enor] part is not extant; furthermore, the loss of brass parts appears to be possible (C[o]r[no] 1, 2 in G?)". Absolutely no justification is given for this, and perhaps a thematic catalogue is not the place for it. It would seem then, that in looking at the music Wolff felt something to be missing. (I've conferred with Joshua Rifkin on this point, and he notes a number of points where the chord-tone doublings are unusual, to say the least.) Why horns? Why not, I guess! Short of a score turning up in some church basement, we'll never know for sure, either with BWV 192 or with BWV 59.

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 23, 2009):
Evan Cortens wrote:
< Short of a score turning up in some church basement, we'll never know for sure, either with BWV 192 or with BWV 59. >
It can happen! Edmund Fellowes, the great editor of the works of William Byrd at the beginning of the 20^th century, was editing a motet which had a missing part. Unwilling to let the work languish unpublished, he wrote a part based on his considerable knowledge of Byrd's technique. There was much tsk-tsking among musicologists about his presumption. Decades after his death, a new source was found for the motet which was complete. Fello' conjectural part turned out to be remarkably similar.

William Hoffman wrote (September 23, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
Evan Cortens wrote:
<< Short of a score turning up in some church basement, we'll never know for sure, either with BWV 192 or with BWV 59. >>
William Hoffman replies: Here is a case of something that probably never existed. Pentecost Cantata BWV 59 probably was Bach's first work composed in Leipzig in May 1723, before he officially assumed office on the First Sunday After Trinity, beginning his first cycle with BWV 75 and BWV 76 with just one high trumpet. It appears that he was invited to compose the Pentecost piece for the University Church and was content to secure two trumpets. The work was reperformed a year later at Pentecost 1724 as the penultimate church piece in the first cycle. Bach certainly could have added another trumpet if he chose and even had it played by his forgotten daughter, Brunhilde Wilhelmena Victoria. Incidentally, in late September 1723 Bach should have presented a St. Michael's Feast Day cantata for the Fall Leipzig Fair, the first great opportunity for the new Cantor to really show his stuff. What's left may be remnants known as BWV 50, with three trumpets. Also, I am personally convinced that Bach finally did full justice to Pentecost with a festive parodied oratorio in 1735, now lost by Friedemann. Just imagine the trumpets in such a work!

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 23, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
< Also, I am personally convinced that Bach finally did full justice to Pentecost with a festive parodied oratorio in 1735, now lost by Friedemann. Just imagine the trumpets in such a work! >
Oy! Fridemann, such a disappointment :(
How could he have lost such an important document? Any hunches?

Ed Myskowski wrote (September 23, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
< Bach certainly could have added another trumpet if he chose and even had it played by his forgotten daughter, Brunhilde Wilhelmena Victoria. >
If she was a member of the brass players guild?

WH:
< Also, I am personally convinced that Bach finally did full justice to Pentecost with a festive >parodied oratorio in 1735, now lost by Friedemann. Just imagine the trumpets in such a work! >
EM:
Parodied? Not reworked (not to say contrafactum)? Imagine the trumpets? Are we not imagining the entire work? Is this too many question marks in a single paragraph?

Peter Smaill wrote (September 23, 2009):
Evan Cortens wrote to Kim Patrick Clow:
<< I would note here though that when Telemann moved to Hamburg in 1721 (or was it 22? I always forget...), this situation changed. He now had a standing brass ensemble available whenever he needed it. This ensemble had been around since the middle ages, I believe (considerably longer than the choral organization and the rest of the orchestral players, incidentally), and continued at least until C.P.E. Bach's death in 1788. >>
Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
< Righto, but in Hamburg, Telemann still had issues with instrumentalists other than brass players. Telemann had constant fights with the city fathers (sound familiar?) about other things as well. >
<< I wonder if someone has done an extensive study of surviving pay records and membership rolls for brass/timpani guilds in Germany in the eighteenth century... Certainly that'd be a fascinating read! >>
< I'm sure that would be in Edward Tarr's book(s). >
Doug has raised the interesting observation that this Cantata uniquely features two trumpets, every other with the instrument being scored for one , three or (on two occasions) four.

Triple trumpets correlate strongly with Cantatas which feature reference to or events concerned with the Holy Trinity; to which one has to add the feast of St Michael and All Angels. In the case of BWV 59 my thesis, though it is by no means certain, is that Bach is illustrating the unity of Father and Son in the incipit, just as he does in the canonic writing in the "Et in unum..." in the BMM. A ?reference to the Holy spirit comes later in the Neumeister text, which is consistent with Bach's acceptance of, and illustration of, ?the third person proceeding from the first two.

This order of referring to the Persons( Father and Son first, then the Holy Spirit later on )?does not occur in van Ziegler's text to BWV 74 and so Bach sets the Trinitarian triple trumpets throughout.

William Hoffman wrote (September 24, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
<< Also, I am personally convinced that Bach finally did full justice to Pentecost with a festive parodied oratorio in 1735, now lost by Friedemann. Just imagine the trumpets in such a work! >>
Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
< Oy! Fridemann, such a disappointment :(
How could he have lost such an important document? Any hunches? >
IMVHO, Friedemann was responsible for the loss of many Bach sacred, well-regulated church works. Fortunately most were early versions, parodies, or apocryphal works so that most of the material survives. Friedemann and C.P.E. shared the manuscripts of Sebastian's sacred music. Christoph Wolf in JSB:TLM believes that Bach designated the overall distribution of his vocal works among Bach Family members shortly before his death. Friedemann did the actual selection. CPEB and Agricola did the basic listing in the Obituary.

Also fortunately, the oldest sons split the church cantatas, taking either parts sets or scores with doublets (at Dad's behest?) so that in most cases where Fredemann's were lost, the corresponding parts or scores survived. The Chorale Cantata parts sets went to Anna Magdalena (possibly as CPEB's gift) and were donated to the Thomas School in exchange for her and the minor kids staying in the Cantor's residence for, I think, six months. The motets were kept at the Thomas School. CPEB got the third, hybrid cantata cycle which included 18 of cousin Johann Ludwig Bach.

For the major works, which were stored separately, CPEB got the bulk and the best works
-- B-Minor Mass (BWV 232) Magnificant in D (BWV 243), John (BWV 245) and Matthew Passions (BWV 244), and the three surviving oratorios for Christmas, Easter, and Ascension Day. Freiedemann apparently got the parodied St. Mark Passion and apocryphal St. Luke Passion which were bought by Breitkopf a decade later and listed in their catalogues for manuscript copies to be purchased. What about other works? I think early versions of Oratorios, Passions, Masses, and other Latin music probably went to Friedemann. This could have included the lost Weimar Passion, Weimar Funeral Music and Cöthen Funeral Music, BWV 244a (later listed in Forkel's 1820 estate), and the lost Pentecost Oratotrio, first suggested by Alfred Deurr.

It is documented that Friedemann tried to sell the Chorale Cantata cycle scores to Forkel, who couldn't afford the price and only could pfor copying two cantatas. The cycle was divided into seasonal segments and sold off. A portion were lost but fortunately, most of the corresponding parts sets were safe in the Thomas School.

I think that Bach's sacred manuscripts were stored in segments of church pieces (Kirchen-stuecke) in his work room: the three extant church year cantata cycles by dates, from Advent to Trinity+27 (divided between Friedemann and CPE); the Christological Cycle of Passions, Oratorios and Masses (mostly to CPE); and miscellaneous late cantatas as well as the original scores of the some 20-something Weimar cantatas revised in Leipzig (mostly to Friedemann), as well as the secular cantatas (to CPE). I don't think Bach the Borrower threw away anything! Most of my evidence is collateral or circumstantial.

Until recently, only two Bach scholars, Gerhard Herz and William Scheide, looked systematically in their dissertations into the transmission and reception of Bach, 1750-1800. Only now are Bach scholars looking into the Polish, Bohemian, and other non-German connections.

Friedemann & Handel:

Young Freidemann met Handel in 1729 in Halle when the later was visiting the European Continent and staying at his hometown. Sebastian was unable to go and sent his first-born instead. In the fall of 1750, following Sebastian's death and the division of his estate, Handel coincidentally made his final visit to the continent and Halle, where Friedemann was the Music Director. Could Friedemann have shown some of his father's manuscripts to Handel? Maybe he gave a score or two to Handel, who was going blind and couldn't copy them! The plot thickens.

As for a possible Bach-Handel connection, that's another story that is in my unfinished novel, "Sebastian." Maybe fiction is stranger than truth!

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 24, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
< As for a possible Bach-Handel connection, that's another story that is in my unfinished novel, "Sebastian." Maybe fiction is stranger than truth! >
Tell us more!

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 24, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
< Friedemann & Handel:
Young Freidemann met Handel in 1729 in Halle when the later was visiting the European Continent and staying at his hometown. Sebastian was unable to go and sent his first-born instead. In the fall of 1750, following Sebastian's death and the division of his estate, Handel coincidentally made his final visit to the continent and Halle, where Friedemann was the Music Director. Could Friedemann have shown some of his father's manuscripts to Handel? Maybe he gave a score or two to Handel, who was going blind and couldn't copy them! The plot thickens.
As for a possible Bach-Handel connection, that's another story that is in my unfinished novel, "Sebastian." Maybe fiction is stranger than truth! >
This could be VERY plausible. Dr. Ian Payne has written several monographs about Handel and his borrowings of Telemann's music. The issue seems to be-- where are the Telemann sources that Handel obviously knew and was quoting from. Dr. Payne believes there were definitely manuscript exchanges between these two closest of friends. It makes sense, Handel was sending Telemann rare plants and other goodies. Why wouldn't have Telemann sent him music ?

I can't believe that Handel would have passed up the chance of buying J.S. Bach manuscripts if he had the opportunity.

William Hoffman wrote (September 24, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
<< As for a possible Bach-Handel connection, that's another story that is in my unfinished novel, "Sebastian." Maybe fiction is stranger than truth! >>
Douglas Cowling wrote:
< Tell us more! >
William Hoffman: Just a taste: In late 1705 Bach was in North German to attend Buxtehude's Abendmusik. It is just a coincidence that at Hamburg Handel was introducing his first opera Almira and Keiser had just introduced his first two Passions which were to have a great deal of influence on Bach and Handel and other German composers and lyricists. Bach overstayed his one-month visit by two months. Subsequently, Bach composed church cantatas in Mühlhausen while Handel was composing sacred Italian cantatas, Vespers, and the Resurrection Oratorio in Italy, as well as operas. Bach beat Handel to publication with BWV 71 in 1707, his only published vocal work.

The parallels and coincidences go on throughout their lives. Who is the father of the keyboard concerto and the best keyboardist? Who composed the best dramatic Passions? Who wrote the first systematic oratorios? Who wrote the best orchestral suites? It's the stuff of engaging historical fiction, like "Amadeus."

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 24, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
< The parallels and coincidences go on throughout their lives. Who is the father of the keyboard concerto and the best keyboardist? Who composed the best dramatic Passions? Who wrote the first systematic oratorios? Who wrote the best orchestral suites? It's the stuff of engaging historical fiction, like "Amadeus." >
"Who wrote the best orchestral suites?"

Hands down, Telemann I'm afraid.

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 24, 2009):
Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
< "Who wrote the best orchestral suites?"
Hands down, Telemann I'm afraid. >
I try and try to make Telemann stick, but I can't whistle a single tune.

Why is there not a single Telemann work which has caught the popular imagination?

William Hoffman wrote (September 24, 2009):
Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
< "Who wrote the best orchestral suites?"
Hands down, Telemann I'm afraid. >
Best Water Music: Maybe Bach's BWV 129/1, BWV 206, or lost BWV Anh. 13 (maybe Friedemann also got that one!). I really put Telemann's first! Thanks, Will

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 24, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
< I try and try to make Telemann stick, but I can't whistle a single tune. >
That's nice to know. And most folks can't whistle a single Palestrina or Monteverdi tune either, so what bearing would that have on Palestrina and Monteverdi's musical contributions?

< Why is there not a single Telemann work which has caught the populimagination? >
Define popular? Is the bar of "popular imagination" CD sales and concert performances? The A & R director for Naxos America told me that Telemann was one of their best selling composers, and at that time, Naxos was rushing several CDs into release. I see plenty of Telemann scheduled in concert performances, to great reviews.

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 24, 2009):
William Hoffman wrote:
< Best Water Music: Maybe Bach's BWV 129/1, BWV 206, or lost BWV Anh. 13 (maybe Friedemann also got that one!). I really put Telemann's first! Thanks, Will >
Thank you Will ;)

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 24, 2009):
Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
< And most folks can't whistle a single Palestrina or Monteverdi tune either, so what bearing would that have on Palestrina and Monteverdi's musical contributions? >
You should hear me hum the Stabat Mater! I did a quick rumination and I could come up with at least 12 Palestrina Top Hits of 1570 and about 10 Monteverdi-Town Golden Oldies

Telemann is always a delight but I thought those audio samples of Kuhnau cantatas were much more memorable.

Popularity in the 21st century, of course, tells us nothing about Telemann's stature in his time or his artistic achievement. It always strikes me odd that Vivaldi, who is often mind-numbingly formulaic, struck a popular chord which Telemann can't touch.

Taste is a funny thing.

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 24, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
< You should hear me hum the Stabat Mater! I did a quick rumination and I could come up with at least 12 Palestrina Top Hits of 1570 and about 10 Monteverdi-Town Golden Oldies >
Well, remember I said most people. Let's face it, you're in the top 1 percentile of the public that knows anything about classical music, you're a trained singer etc, etc, etc. I mean, I get it Doug, you haven't drank the Telemann Kool-Aid ;)

If you ever whistle the theme to the middle movement of BWV 1056 (it was used in Barry Lyndon), then you've whistled a Telemann tune (Bach borrowed the theme from an early Telemann oboe/flute concerto).

< Telemann is always a delight but I thought those audio samples of Kuhnau cantatas were much more memorable. >
and
< Taste is a funny thing. >
And Bach threw out all of Kuhnau's music (or well he passed on the option to buy the manuscripts from Frau Kuhnau after he became Kantor at Leipzig). And Bach copied and performed several Telemann cantatas we know about, and potentially many more.

< Popularity in the 21^st century, of course, tells us nothing about Telemann's stature in his time or his artistic achievement. It always strikes me odd that Vivaldi, who is often mind-numbingly formulaic, struck a popular chord which Telemann can't touch. >
I suppose. The manager of a Public Radio once told me he thought most Baroque music (and Vivaldi in particular) was "sewing machine music." The NERVE!! ;)

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 24, 2009):
Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
< If you ever whistle the theme to the middle movement of BWV 1056 (it was used in Barry Lyndon) >
Hmmm ...wasn't that the D Minor Sarabande by Handel?

Let me try whistling it ...

Neil Halliday wrote (September 24, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
>Surely the third trumpet part is missing: I could improvise one as I read along in the score. Alas, the full score didn't survive.<
Listening to Rilling's BWV 59 [4] (following this week's BWV 58), I like the 'soloistic' effect of the two trumpets. Some considerations against three trumpets:
1. The piece is a duet for S and B; the two trumpet texture is a satisfying foil to the vocal texture;
2. There are long sections where the 2^nd trumpet is silent, with only widely spaced, short entries of the 1st trumpet, emphasing the 'soloist' effect;
3. If there were three trumpets, the first note on the 2nd trumpet would likely be a B (with 3 trumpets making a GBD chord), but the lower note (G) is already assigned to the 2nd trumpet, or rather, a third trumpet is superfluous to the harmony at the start; also notice the octave drop to middle C on the second trumpet in the fourth last bar, not likely if there were a third trumpet.
4. Compare the trumpet parts with BWV 175/6, an aria for two trumpets and (vocal) bass.

Ed Myskowski wrote (September 24, 2009):
Neil Halliday wrote:
>Listening to Rilling's BWV 59 [4] (following this week's BWV 58), I like the 'soloistic' effect of the two trumpets. Some considerations against three trumpets: <
I find Neils points both thoughtful and convincing.

In a more general sense, attempts to force Bach's instrumentation into a formulaic mold strike me as out-of-character. As I have pointed out with a few examples, just the opposite is the case: he strives for originality and uniqueness at every opportunity. This comes out frequently in our discussions of the vocal works, and was also especially noticed in the recent discussion of the Brandenburgs on BRML. Incidentally, Brandenburg No. 5, BWV 1050, is a supportable candidate, not yet specifically mentioned, for Bachs most popular work.

The old saw about Bach as consolidator of Baroque musical practices, something of a backward-looking figure, can be put to rest. While he certainly consolidated and used prior work, his own and others, his innovations are ongoing discoveries as well (at least for me). His striving to make each work unique is one of the hallmarks of the greatest and most creative artists.

Julian Mincham wrote (September 24, 2009):
[To Neil Halliday] Bach reused the first movement of BWV 59 a year later expanding it into a four part chorus (BWV 74).In this version 3 oboes and a third trumpet are scored. The oboes mostly only double other parts or take part of the string writing for antiphonal effects e.g. bars 1-2

Dürr quotes some confusion about this work and its performing parts so i wonder if there was an original third trumpet part which was lost (it would only be a few lines long) It it possible that Bach added the part when he added the oboes--equally possible that it existed all along.

or could it be that originally there were also three oboe parts doubling and these have also gone astray? (I can't think offhand of another example of a layout where Bach wrote for more than one trumpet, 2 or 3, with only strings and no other wind.)

It's quite an interesting little puzzle.

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (September 24, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
< Hmmm ...wasn't that the D Minor Sarabande by Handel? >
I wasn't talking about the Sarabande, BWV 1056 was used as well ;)

Neil Halliday wrote (September 25, 2009):
Julian Mincham wrote:
> Bach reused the first movement of BWV59 a year later expanding it into a four part chorus (BWV 74).In this version 3 oboes and a third trumpet are scored.<
Thanks for reminding us of this.

This is another example of Bach reworking and considerably changing (in this case expanding) an earlier composition.

Inin the expanded SATB version, the third trumpet virtually doubles the timpani all the way through. Only briefly (for two bars at the beginning of the closing ritornello) is there independent writing for this third trumpet.

The fourth to last bar confirms that BWV 59/1 was likely scored with two trumpets: in BWV 74 the octave leap down to middle C, which occurs on the 2nd trumpet in BWV 59, is indeed carried by the third trumpet in BWV 74.

Douglas Cowling wrote (September 25, 2009):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< Interestingly in the expanded SATB version, the third trumpet virtually doubles the timpani all the way through. Only briefly (for two bars at the beginning of the closing ritornello) is there independent writing for this third trumpet.
The fourth to last bar confirms that BWV 59/1 was likely scored with two trumpets: in BWV 74 the octave leap down to middle C, which occurs on the 2^nd trumpet in BWV 59, is indeed carried by the third trumpet in BWV 74. >
Fascinating to speculate if Bach was echoing the duet in the voices with a duet in the trumpet. If so, why do the trumpets not have more euphonious harmony? It's only in final dozen bars that trumpets have a real duet. The reason I though there was a missing 3rd trumpet is that a conventional Bach trumpet "choir" would have a third trumpet playing the notes g-e to complete the C major chords in the second bar.

Neil Halliday wrote (September 25, 2009):
Douglas Cowling wrote:
>The reason I though there was a missing 3^rd trumpet is that a conventional Bach trumpet "choir" would have a third trumpet playing the notes g-e to complete the C major chords in the second bar.<
Good observation, I now see your reasoning; and in fact this is what Bach does in BWV 74.

However, in BWV 59 the harmony of those g-e notes is already supplied by the string parts (v1 and v2) in BWV 59, so two trumpets are sufficient if Bach indeed originally conceived of the duet with two trumpets.

<Fascinating to speculate if Bach was echoing the duet in the voices with a duet in the trumpet.<

I wouldn't go as far as suggesting that Bach was actually echoing the vocal duet in the trumpet parts (in BWV 59), rather that we have an interesting, largish and unique scoring for a duet - with strings, two trumpets and timpani - but not as large as the more usual scoring with 3 trumpets plus 3 oboes and strings that we have in the expanded SATB version.

Cantata BWV 59: Complete Recordings | Recordings of Individual Movements | Discussions

Back to the Top

Last update: ýOctober 3, 2009 ý06:41:40