Discussions in the Week of July 23, 2000

Aryeh Oron wrote (July 25, 2000):
Background

This is the week of cantata BWV 93 according to Ryan Michero's suggestion. As a background I shall use this time the simple and clear linear notes of the Vanguard LP (see details below) by anonymous writer:

"The two cantatas here (the other is BWV 117) are typical of the 'chorale cantatas' that Bach composed in Leipzig, in which the foundation of the entire cantata structure is a traditional hymn or chorale, the musical presence of which is felt in each movement. These two are otherwise, however, strikingly different in form."

"Cantata BWV 93, Wer nur den lieben Gott läßt walten, composed in the late 1720's, is shaped more like a usual 'chorale cantata', opening with a splendid chorale fantasia, in which the chorale appears both in straight harmonized form and in polyphonic elaboration, and closing with a simple four-part setting of the chorale. The opening movement, with its ritornello for oboes and strings, and the interplay of solo vocal lines with the full chorus, has a splendid concerto-like character. In the second movement' lines of the chorale are answered by bas recitative phrases, and then, in the tenor aria, comes a blithe variant of the chorale melody, turned into major and dance-like in rhythm. The 'centrepiece' is the soprano-alto duet, weaving gracefully over the chorale melody on unison strings. (Bach arranged this movement for organ, as one of the six 'Schübler chorale-preludes). In the next movement, tenor recitatives phrases comment on successive lines of the chorale, and the last two phrases of the chorale appear impressively in the following soprano aria".

Personal Viewpoint

The most important event of year 2000 is going to happen later this week. The date is July 28, 2000, and the event is - 250 years to the death of Johann Sebastian Bach.

Review of complete Recordings

The couple Koopman/Suzuki have not reached yet BWV 93. But we have 6 other recordings to enjoy and discuss, from different periods and schools, starting in probably mid 1950's and finishing in late 1990's. Three of them are HIP and three are non-HIP. The structure of this chorale cantata, the music, and also the text, are so strong, that every performance can please. Especially, where most if not all of them are on very high level. There are some small drawbacks here and there, but they are minor regarding the overall satisfaction this cantata is giving with every hearing. This cantata reminds me the popular BWV 4. The melody (and the relevant verse) of the original choral is set in its original form in 4 movements (Mvts. 1, 4, 5, and 7) and appears in modified form in the three other movements. Every lover of BWV 4 must give BWV 93 also a try. I shall keep my notes very short this time and let the cantata speaks for itself.

[2] Ludwig Doormann (1967)
General atmosphere: Honest, vigorous, dramatic, and flowing.
Good points: The opening chorus (No.1) can stand endless hearings. The pain and heaviness of Hudemann in the 2^nd movement; the anxiety expressed in the singing of Feyerabend in the aria for tenor (No.3); the delight and mysterious magic of the duet for soprano and alto (Mvt. 4); the evangelist quality of the tenor in the 5^th movement; the lovely oboe playing against the eager singing of Reichelt in the aria for soprano (No.6); the warmth and conciliation of the concluding chorale.
Drawbacks: This is non-HIP, but I do not find it as a real drawback.

[3] Karl Richter (1974-1975)
General atmosphere: Powerful, dignified, slow, and large-scale.
Good points: The dulcet voices and tasteful singing of Fischer-Dieskau (Mvt. 2) and Schreier (Mvts. 3+5).
Drawbacks: The choir singing lacks inspiration. Unclean playing of the instruments in some parts. The instrumental playing in some of the movements is somewhat heavy and dull. The separation between the parts in the opening chorus is not clear. The duet of Mathis and Reynolds (No.4) lacks tension, although their voices match nicely.

[4] Helmuth Rilling (Mid 1970’s?)
General atmosphere: Soft, round, sensitive, and lively.
Good points: Augér happiness in the aria for soprano (Mvt. 6) and Kraus sadness and worry in the aria for tenor (Mvt. 3) and the recitative and chorale (Mvt. 5). He has nothing to be ashamed of in comparison to Schreier (with Richter). Murray contributes her part the guaranteed share of Augér in the successful rendering of the duet for soprano and alto (Mvt. 4).
Drawbacks: The opening choral fantasia is performed in somewhat hurried way, although the separation between the various parts is clear. The singing of Heldwein (No.2) lacks variety and emotion. The accompaniments in some parts are played beautifully, but lack something in sensitivity to the vocal parts.

[5] Nikolaus Harnoncourt (1979)
General atmosphere: Fragmented, quick, dancing, and jumping.
Good points: The tranquillity and sorrow expressed by Meer in the recitative and chorale for bass (Mvt. 2); The delightful singing of Equiluz in the aria for tenor (Mvt. 3), although he is not helped by the fragmented accompaniment; the colourful and exciting singing of Equiluz in the recitative and chorale for tenor (Mvt. 5), where he is supported only by organ continuo, which does not disturb him.
Drawbacks: The opening chorus is unbalanced and unorganized and sounds like a chaos; The mismatch in terms of timbre of voice and ability to express between the boy soprano and the alto (Esswood) in the duet (Mvt. 4); The aria for soprano (Mvt. 6), emphasis the fact that the boy is not capable of giving this aria the right emotional depth; the lack of flow, warmth and expression in the concluding chorale.

[6] Philippe Herreweghe (1991)
General atmosphere: Tender, clear, sensitive, and honest.
Good points: The delightful and transparent rendering of the opening chorus, where every voice can be clearly heard; Kooy authority in the 2^nd movement, where he succeeds in transferring the feeling that he has to carry with him all the sorrow in the world; The crisp accompaniment to the grief and patience expressed by the singing of Crook in the aria for tenor (No.3); The concluding chorale, which is beautifully sung; The playing of the instruments along the whole cantata.
Drawbacks: The voices of Mellon and Brett in the duet for soprano and alto (No.4) are pleasant, but their singing is simply not interesting enough; the same applies also to the aria for soprano (No.6). The whole performance would have been improved with some more dramatic approach.

[7] Pieter Jan Leusink (1999)
General impression: Light, happy, fresh, and spontaneous.
Good points: The clarity of all the voices and the delightful singing and playing in the opening chorus (No.1); the impressive voice and the slow singing Ramselaar (No.2), who has a very heavy weight to carry; the rendering of the 3^rd movement by Schoch, which is very similar to that of Crook (with Herreweghe [6]); the astonishingly beautiful combination of the voices of Holton and Buwalda in the duet (No.4); the duet fascinating dialogue between the oboe and Holton in the aria for soprano (No.6); the enthusiastic singing of the choir in the concluding chorale (No.7). So many good points with so little rehearsal and preparation time. I wonder if the other groups have not worked too hard and lost some spontaneity in the way.
Drawbacks: Some more deepness and weight would probably have helped to perfect this performance, although it sounds very convincing and justified in its way.

Recordings of individual Movements

(M-1) Helmuth Rilling (1965; concluding choral (Mvt. 7) only).
Big choir, but clean and warm singing.

(M-4) Elly Amrling (soprano) with Hans de Vries (oboe) (1983; aria for soprano (Mvt. 6) only)
This is aproblematic record. I wrote something about it in the review of BWV 75.

(M-7) Nienke Oostenrijk;(soprano) with Pauline Oostenrijk (oboe) (1998; aria for soprano (Mvt. 6) only)
I do not have this recording.

Conclusion

Regarding my overall satisfaction from the above reviewed recordings, I would rate them as follows:

1. Doormann [2]
2. Leusink [7]
3. Herreweghe [6]
4. Rilling [4]
5. Richter [3]
6. Harnoncourt [5]

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

Andrew Oliver wrote (July 24, 2000):
This is one of my favourite cantatas, though that may have more to do with the text than the music. The text is basically a message of comfort and encouragement, not only for the suicidal and despairing but also for every person in any form of distress or need. Its meaning may be summed up by one phrase from the fifth movement, "nach Regen gibt er Sonnenschein", and this movement, for me, contains the soul of the whole work in its text, though not in its music. The text of the cantata either quotes directly from Neumark's hymn or else enlarges on it. We met two stanzas of the hymn two weeks ago (in BWV 21) and the closing chorale also occurs in BWV 88. Musically, Bach has made use of the melody of the chorale throughout the cantata, and this melody was also composed by Neumark for his hymn. The cantata is, in effect, a set of variations on the melody, and I suspect that Bach has written it so deliberately in order to illustrate the variety of persons included in the title. (Wer nur = whoever).

In the opening chorus, Bach introduces each phrase of the chorale melody with a freely composed fugal exposition for two or four voices of the phrase, which is about to follow, and, again, he illustrates the inclusiveness of the variety by the voices he uses. For the six phrases, the voices are:
1 Soprano followed by Alto
2 Alto then Soprano
3 Tenor then Bass
4 Bass then Tenor
5 Alto then Tenor then Bass then Soprano
6 Tenor then Alto then Soprano then Bass

It is interesting that, although Bach used a key signature of 3 flats for the tenor aria in E flat major, he only uses a signature of 2 flats for numbers 1,4 and 7 which are set in C minor, preferring to write all the A flats as accidentals. (Incidentally, the tenor aria being set in triple time reminds me that Neumark originally wrote the melody in a similar way.)

Continuing the theme of inclusive variety, the fifth movement, Recitativo e Chorale, is quite remarkable in its modulation from one key to another. The six phrases of the chorale melody are all there, adorned in different ways, and separated from each other by phrases of narrative. Bach uses these sections of recitative as a means of modulating from one key to another, because each of the six phrases of chorale melody is in a different key. He needs to arrive at G minor, to introduce the following Soprano aria in that key, but the first five phrases are all above G minor by different intervals, as if the chorale had been written in:
Phrase 1 E flat minor
2 F minor
3 B flat minor
4 C minor
5 A minor
6 G minor

In the Cantus Firmus sections of the opening chorus, Bach treats the final note of each phrase of the chorale melody as if it were a sustained pedal note on the organ, building and developing the harmonic progression of the other parts below it. This is very similar to the way he treats the chorale in the chorus 'O Mensch, bewein dein Sünde gross' in the SMP (BWV 244), and as that is perhaps my favorite of all Bach's choruses, this is probably another reason why I like this particular cantata.

The theme of this work is to do with compassion, as referred to in the Epistle for the day, 1 Peter 3, and potential compensation for all misfortunes, as illustrated by the fishing story in the Gospel for the day, Luke 1.

BWV 93 Textual Problem

Francis Browne wrote (March 10, 2002):
(This is philological pedantry. Please ignore if it is of no interest to you - but I would appreciate advice from the many members of the list who know both German and Bach far better than I do)

The text of BWV 93 Wer nur den lieben Gott läßt walten is based on a hymn by Georg Neumark. Some verses are quoted entire, others are quoted line by line and expanded with paraphrases. In the fitfh movement, the tenor recitative and chorale, paraphrase is used . The German texts available to me on the internet, the text printed with the Leusink version [7] and the singers on the Leusink and Herreweghe [6] performances all have the following:

Du darfst nicht meinen,
Daß dieser Gott im Schoße sitze,
Der täglich wie der reiche Mann,
In Lust und Freuden leben kann.

The text underlined is the problem. When I translated this very recently for the Bach Cantata website I took it to mean:

Du darfst nicht meinen,
You should not think
Daß dieser Gott im Schoße sitze,
that this God just sits back
Der täglich wie der reiche Mann,
like a rich man who every day
In Lust und Freuden leben kann.
can live in pleasure and joy.

This assumed that the phrase im Schoße sitzen is like die Hände in den ~ legen, to put one's hands in one's lap, to sit back (and take it easy); das ist ihm nicht in den ~ gefallen, it wasn't handed (to) him on a plate, it didn't just fall into his lap;

The sense is a little surprising but seems to fit in with the general argument of what precedes, although not so well with what follows. In Whittaker's The Cantatas of Johann Sebastian Bach (Vol 1, p495) he clearly interprets dieser Gott etc in this way. (Whittaker also has a general comment on such recitatives that I cannot resist quoting:

In spite of Bach's boundless ingenuity and illimitable invention, such recitatives with chorale are rarely satisfactory. The poetaster has to force his muse, the sermonettes are often farfetched and the language involved frequently chaotic. From the musical point of view they are too patchy; the alternations of strict tempo with free, of sustained phrases with recitative style, do not cohere. One can imagine the master dealing with them in despair, throwing into their composition all his wealth of idea and resource, but groaning under the burden of an uncongenial task.)

When however I checked Philip Ambrose's translation, (always worthwhile) he had:

Thou may'st not think then
That this man is in God's lap sitting
Who daily, like the wealthy man,
In joy and rapture life can lead.

This did make better sense but I could not see how this translated the German text. A quick search on the internet found that the text generally sung in the hymn is:

5. Denk nicht in deiner Drangsalshitze,
daß du von Gott verlassen seist
und daß ihm der im Schoße sitze,
der sich in stetem Glücke preist.

This is clearly what Philip Ambrose translated and it does make better sense. But what is in the score, what words did Bach set ? What is sung in the other recordings ? More generally how reliable are the libretti of the cantatas, how much do different texts vary .? My intention is to translate the texts suplpied with the Leusink cycle [7]- but is there a better ,easily accessible text of which I should be aware. Any assistance would be very welcome.

Klaus Langrock wrote (March 10, 2002):
Francis Browne wrote:
< When however I checked Philip Ambrose's translation, (always wort) he had :

Thou may'st not think then
That this man is in God's lap sitting
Who daily, like the wealthy man,
In joy and rapture life can lead. >

This did make better sense but I could not see how this translated the German text. A quick search on the internet found that the text generally sung in the hymn is: >

5. Denk nicht in deiner Drangsalshitze,
wenn Blitz und Donner kracht
und dir ein schwüles Wetter macht
daß du von Gott verlassen seist.
Gott bleibt auch in der größten Not,
ja gar bis in den Tod.
Du darfst nicht meinen
und daß ihm der im Schoße sitze, (Choral), in the score: daß dieser Gott im
Schoße sitze
der täglich, wie der reiche Mann,
in Lust und Freuden leben kann
der sich in stetem Glücke preist. ...

So far the score, it`s Recitativo and Choral. As far as I can see (due to my poor English) Philip Ambrose's translation is quite correct, for "dieser" is to be seen not in connection to "Gott" but to "reicher Mann"

Hope this is helpful.

Thomas Braatz wrote (March 10, 2002):
Francis Browne inquired about the text of Mvt 5 (Recit) in BWV 93:

Du darfst nicht meinen,
Daß dieser Gott im Schoße sitze,
Der täglich wie der reiche Mann,
In Lust und Freuden leben kann.

The text given is the one printed in the NBA I/17.2

A shift from a free recitativo to adagio (arioso style) occurs with the words, "Daß dieser Gott im Schoße sitze" after which Bach changes back to the recitativo. Bach puts very special emphasis on this line by not only changing the tempo and style, but also allowing the bc to continue stepwise in a downward direction as these words are sung.

The editors and scholars, after consulting all other variations contained in the hymnals of the period, have decided to stay with Bach's version as included in the original set of parts.

Here are the other variations that they note:
Line 1: Wagner 1697: Trübsalshitze
Line 2: Wagner 1697: von ihm
Line 3: St. Georg 1721: Und daß dem; St. Georg 1730, Wagner 1697, Vopelische Gesangbücher 1729, 1730, 1737, Dresden 1725, 1728, 1738 and Schemelli 1736: Und daß der; Weimar 1713: Und daß Gott der; Vopelisches Gesangbuch: 1682: Und daß Gott dem.

Lines 5 and 6 show variations of folgende Zeit; and jeglichen and setzt einm.

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16, 19)

Luther uses Schoß to mean a state of blessedness, happiness: ach müssen diese leute nicht gott mitten im schosze sitzen and was vor ein glückseliger mensch daher tritt, wie tief er gott im schosze sitzen musz.

Hope this helps!

Thomas Gebhardt [Collegium Cantorum Köln] wrote (March 10, 2002):
< Du darfst nicht meinen,
Daß dieser Gott im Schoße sitze,
Der täglich wie der reiche Mann,
In Lust und Freuden leben kann.
...
When however I checked Philip Ambrose's translation, (always worthwhile) he had :

Thou may'st not think then
That this man is in God's lap sitting
Who daily, like the wealthy man,
In joy and rapture life can lead.
...
So far the score, it`s Recitativo and Choral. As far as I can see (due to my poor English) Philip Ambrose's translation is quite correct, for "dieser" is to be seen not in connection to "Gott" but to "reicher Mann"

Hope this is helpful >
Essentially this is right... Ambros's translation gives it the right way - but "dieser" is neither referring to "Gott" nor to the rich man ("reicher Mann") but to a third person, who is compared to the rich man from the story of poor Lazarus (Luke 16,19-31) - in fact addressing the listener/reader - so exactly what Ambros gives in his translation.

Or - not respecting the order of lines:

You may not think that this one who can live in joy and pleasure every day might be sitting in God's lap. (Or "in God's bosom" as "in the bosom of Abraham"?)

Dick Wursten wrote (March 11, 2002):
Thomas Braatz says:
< Luther uses 'Schoß' to mean a state of blessedness, happiness >
It 's not Luther who invented this image of blessedness, but - as Thomas already pointed out - the 'key' to open the door of understanding this image lies in the text of Luke 16:19-31, the parable of the rich man and the poor Lazarus... When Lazarus dies, the angels come and he is 'carried into Abrahams bossom' (Abrahams Schoß, 16:22). In those days this was a general image for 'heaven', a common way of referring to eternal bliss.

Cultural exursion: Go to France, visit the church of St Foi in Conques, look at the tympan and notice the two boys in Abrahams bossom on the right side of the Judge: Christ (for viewers: left)

Andrew Oliver wrote (March 11, 2002):
The closing chorus of the first part of the Matthäus Passion (BWV 244) begins:

O Mensch, bewein dein Sünde groß,
Darum Christus sein's Vater's Schoß äussert, und kam auf Erden.

Thomas Braatz wrote (March 11, 2002):
Francis Browne asked regarding:

Du darfst nicht meinen,
Daß dieser Gott im Schoße sitze,
Der täglich wie der reiche Mann,
In Lust und Freuden leben kann.

< This is clearly what Philip Ambrose translated and it does make better sense. But what is in the score, what words did Bach set ? What is sung in the other recordings ? More generally how reliable are the libretti of the cantatas, how much do different texts vary .? My intention is to translate the texts supplied with the Leusink cycle [7] - but is there a better ,easily accessible text of which I should be aware. Any assistance would be very welcome >

Klaus correctly stated:
< As far as I can see (due to my poor English) Philip Ambrose's translation is quite correct, for "dieser" is to be seen not in connection to "Gott" but to "reicher Mann" >

Thomas Gebhardt also stated:
< Essentially this is right... Ambrose's translation gives it the right way - but "dieser" is neither referring to "Gott" nor to the rich man ("reicher Mann") but to a third person, who is compared to the rich man from the story of poor Lazarus (Luke 16,19-31) - in fact addressing the listener/reader - so exactly what Ambros gives in his translation.

Or - not respecting the order of lines:

You may not think that this one who can live in joy and pleasure every day might be sitting in God's lap. (Or "in God's bosom" as "in the bosom of Abraham"?) >

What Thomas Gebhardt indicated is essentially correct, but I would render the modal auxiliary differently (more like the English 'must' or 'should' rather than 'may') and read the line freely as follows:

The opening line could be: "You must not think, or You should not think"

Don't think that this person (the one referred to previously) is sitting in God's lap (experiencing happiness and a blessed state of existence) if he (this person) is able to live like the rich man in the parable, experiencing pleasure and joy every day.

< But what is in the score, what words did Bach set? >
I already answered this question.

< What is sung in the other recordings? >
Does it matter at all, what the other recordings sing? Discrepancies abound in the Bach cantata recordings. Sometimes the choir will sing different words than those printed in the accompanying booklet. There is also a tradition of long standing that goes back over a century that allowed singers and conductors to change the text if it appeared that other words might be understood better, or provided better vowel sounds, or even avoided words that someone might find objectionable because of other associations that might lead the congregation to think impure thoughts. As a result certain portions of cantata texts have been tampered with more than others for the reasons given. I have found variant texts with the Richter cantatas (the printed version in the booklet not the same as the words being sung), but also with the so-called authentic cantata recordings by Harnoncourt which exhibit an occasional glitch of this sort. I suspect that there is no truly reliable cantata series where everything will be correct. The only reliable source here is the NBA.

< but is there a better, easily accessible text of which I should be aware. >
Check out Aryeh's site. Additional Information on the right. Links to other sites. Links to other sites about Bcantatas. Sites about Bach Cantatas. Texts of the cantatas. The Bach Cantatas - original text - Walter F. Bischof.

I have not checked out the accuracy of the German text that Bischof gives, but this might be a good place to start.

Francis Browne wrote (March 11, 2002):
Many thanks to Klaus, Thomas Gebhardt, Dick Wursten, Andrew and Tom Braatz for their various responses. I almost regard my ignorance as an asset when it elicits such generous and informative help !

Discussions in the Week of July 2, 2006

Eric Bergerud wrote (July 1, 2006):
July 2: Introduction BWV 93

Introduction to BWV 93: Wer nur den lieben Gott lässt walten

BWV 93 is another of the lovely chorale cantatas composed by Bach during the second Leipzig cycle. If Christopher Wolff is correct this work and others like it were perhaps the most popular with the original audience. Although there were no “top 40” charts in the 18^th century, Wolff points out that Anna sold the chorale cantatas to St. Thomas School after Bach’s death. More telling is that evidence suggests that many of these chorale cantatas (and only chorale cantatas), including BWV 93, were played in the years after Bach’s death. Thus, 93 may have been one of the last Bach cantatas played in Baroque Germany.

Wolff suggests the genre was popular because it revolved around familiar hymns. If so, there may have been some happy parishioners when BWV 93 premiered. The popular hymn that inspired Bach and gave BWV 93 its name was composed by Georg Neumark in 1657. One can understand the appeal. Neumark’s work is lovely and contains a moving and benign text with a simple but comforting message - those that trust in God will not be abandoned regardless of worldly woe. Movements 1, 4 and 7 are taken directly from the hymn. Several other lines are dispersed throughout the remainder of the work.

The intricate and powerful introductory chorus and the moving concluding chorale are the musical bookends. In between is brief but splendid tenor aria. A soprano-alto duet and soprano aria are also good Bach. There are good number of versions available that encompass every style from Richter [3] to the new OVPP works by Kuijken and the Petite Band [12]. (This series doesn’t seem to be available in the US: has anyone heard one?) I have four performances and find something to like in three. I like Harnoncourt’s boys in the chorus [5], although I can sympathize if one found the boy soprano lacking in mvts 4&6. Equiluz is in very good form as is Paul Agnew with Koopman. If male altos aren’t to your taste, Koopman’s polished performance offers a very nice soprano-mezzo duet. If you share my liking for Ruth Holton, check Leusink’s performance [7].

That leaves Richter [3]. I am sure that if someone cut their teeth on grand style of Bach found in the 50’s and 60’s Richter’s performance would have great appeal. The soloists are fine singers and Fischer-Dieskau a legend, although more or less mute in this work. My progress was the opposite. I had at least 100 period performance cantata CDs before I bought my first Richter. I step back from the work and can appreciate the technical skills possessed and the sincerity of the Munich Bach Choir. That said, I find the work terribly ponderous. I’m not used to a 120 person choir in a cantata and can’t think of a single good reason to use one. I didn’t find any of the other performances rushed in the least and yet Richter’s work is 3-4 minutes longer than the competition. Perhaps Richter understood Bach’s spirituality at a very high level: in my view, he’s simply too slow. Although I have a genuine respect for Bach lovers of the past, listening to Richter is a clear reminder of why the period performance movement has triumphed so completely in the baroque and early classical genres, and, unless I miss my guess, unalterably. Comments?

Details:

BWV 93: Wer nur den lieben Gott lässt walten (If you but permit God to prevail)
Chorale Cantata for the 5th Sunday after Trinity
Readings: Epistle: 1 Peter 3: 8-15; Gospel: Luke 5: 1-11
Text : Georg Neumark (Mvts. 1, 4, 7); Anon (Mvts. 2, 3, 5, 6)
First Performance Leipzig July 9, 1724
German-English Text: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Texts/BWV93-Eng3.htm
BWV 93 Discussion from 2002: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV93-D.htm
Complete Leusink Performance [7]: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Mus/BWV93-Mus.htm

Excerpt from liner notes by Clemens Romijin accompanying Leusink performance [7]:

Cantata 93 is a chorale cantata for the 5^th Sunday after Trinity, 9 July 1724. The work is for four soloists, four-part choir, two oboes and basso continuo, but it survives only in a later version as performed by Bach in Leipzig in about 1732/33. It is not known to what extent Bach then adapted the earlier piece. As is customary the
opening chorus and final chorale are based on the chorale melody. Surprisingly, Bach also employed this melody in the slow introduction to the bass recitative no. 2. In the tenor aria no. 3 the chorale is heard in the voice, and in the soprano and alto duet no. 4 in the violins, while the tenor movement no. 5 again combines chorale and recitative with wonderful text depiction at the words 'wenn Blitz und Donner kracht'. After an aria for soprano with oboe accompaniment the cantata closes with a four part chorale.

Structure and Timings (from Leusink [7])

1. Chorus [S, A, T, B] (5' 26)
Oboe I/II, Violino I/II, Viola, Continuo

2. Chorale and Recitative [Bass] (1' 49)
Continuo

3. Aria [Tenor] (2' 41)
Violino I/II, Viola, Continuo

4. Aria (Duetto) [Soprano, Alto] (2' 39)
Violino I/II e Viola all' unisono, Continuo

5. Chorale and Recitative [Tenor] (2'16)
Continuo

6. Aria [Soprano] (2 '29)
Oboe I, Continuo

7. Chorale [S, A, T, B] (1 '03)
Oboe I/II e Violino I col Soprano, Violino II coll'Alto, Viola col Tenore, Continuo

Julian Mincham wrote (July 1, 2006):
It is constructive to consider 93 alongside107 the cantata for the following week. Without wishing to pre-empt discussion of the latter, the point is that these two cantatas represent two different approaches to the unifying of complete works----clearly an issue which was very much on Bach's mind in these early works from the second cycle.

By this I mean that the unification of BWV 93 comes from the fact that the chorale tune, or phrases of it, were used in every one of the movements. Even the oft repeated 5 note motive which begins BWV 93/3 is the first 5 notes of the chorale, transposed into a major key and re-rhythmatised (I think I may have invented a word here!) This is the first time in this cycle that Bach has used the chorale as the explicit unifying lynch pin of every single movement. But it is not the first time he tried it--look back to BWV 4 (which also, coincidentally, returns later as the 41st cantata of the current cycle but, because it was composed some 15 years earlier will not be discussed as a part of the current 2nd cycle sequence).

The point to consider is that whilst Bach made the MELODY of the chorale (Wer nur den lieben Gott läßt walten) the unifying factor of BWV 93 he made the TEXT the focal factor in BWV 107. This is a rare example of his setting every verses of the hymn---the usual practice being to set the first as a opening chorus, the last as a chorale, maybe one or two other verses but more likely interspersed with paraphrases, altered text, appropriate biblical references etc. This unusual decision probably also accounts for the unique structure of BWV 107--only one recit followed by four arias on the trot.

I make note of this because it is my conviction that a real understanding of these cantatas comes about only with the awareness of the experiments which Bach was continually making as the cycle evolved.

A final point about BWV 93. The words of the opening chorus refer, in the final lines, to the image of the house built upon sand. One notes the setting of the chorale phrases as sturdy homophonic blocks amidst the constant flickerings of the oboes and strings. I wonder if these two musical ideas were derived from that image--sturdy construction of the house (chorale blocks) and the flickering shifting sands below and around it.

If so it gives us another insight into Bach's comprehensive applications of textual images (i.e. not just the simplisitic turning of an image into a specific musical motive--although he does this as well) but picking up an idea which helps to determine some of the more fundamental considerations such as movement structure and the layout of the musical texture.

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 1, 2006):
Julian Mincham wrote:

>>A final point about BWV 93. The words of the opening chorus refer, in the final lines, to the image of the house built upon sand. One notes the setting of the chorale phrases as sturdy homophonic blocks amidst the constant flickerings of the oboes and strings. I wonder if these two musical ideas were derived from that image--sturdy construction of the house (chorale blocks) and the flickering shifting sands below and around it.<<

An interesting point describing how Bach, with stark contrast, structurally pits the vocal against the orchestral parts. I would even go as far as identifying BWV 93/1 mm65-68 as the 'core' motif or 'bud' from which the entire mvt. evolved. Assuming that Bach had to begin somewhere with his sketches and had not already worked everything out in his mind or by improvising an elaboration of the chorale melody at the keyboard, the first and last lines of the 1^st verse of the chorale text contain the essence of everything that follows: "Wer nur den lieben Gott läßt walten" ["Whoever trusts in God..."] and "...der hat auf keinen Sand gebaut" ["that person has not built upon sand." While holding out a long note on 'walten' ['to rule, prevail'] at the end of the first phrase/line can be considered a pictorial representation in music, it is the closing phrase/line which presents an opportunity for creating a much more vivid musical picture that can be heard and felt with greater intensity. Actually, the homophonic blocks occur throughout the mvt. wherever the cantus firmus is presented. The first 3 or 4 notes are solid chords (in dotted quarter notes) in all voices with only the bass vocal part occasionally showing a little more motion in quarter and eighth notes. Perhaps these blocks represent a strong, enduring faith which is present in every line. Looked at from the standpoint of musical imagery, the final descent of the chorale melody on "der hat auf keinen Sand gebaut" shows more of the 'shifting sands' (in the first 3 or 4 notes) in the vocal parts than the previous entrances of the cantus firmus. There is still, however, the general contrast between the slower moving notes in the vocal parts and the many 16^th notes in the orchestral parts.

It begins to make sense to consider how Bach expands his musical interpretation beyond word-painting to include the possibilities offered by involving the overall structure and form of a mvt. or even of all the mvts. in a single work. Here Bach's experimentation with representing text and ideas in music goes beyond the level of word-painting (ticking clocks, dogs barking, etc.) found in Baroque music and includes larger structural elements, thus creating the impression of a yet greater artistic unity that is deeply satisfying. To be sure, the greatest unifying element is the chorale (melody and text) itself, but Bach experiments with and exploits various musical possibilities within the restrictions posed by the chorale melody.

Peter Smaill wrote (July 1, 2006):
BWV 93, "Wer nur den lieben Gott laesst walten," in which every number is attractive, continues the Bach approach to the great second cycle - unity in diversity. Having in the first five experienced the cantus firmus switch through each of the voices, SATB, then SA in BWV 10 (I agree and like the interpretation, reflecting the "lowliness of the handmaiden"), what could Bach do next?

In BWV 93/1 he creates a new variant, giving the chorale homophonically to all the voices, but the monotony that could ensue is avoided by the ritornello and the fugato, SA, then TB, which precedes.

Undoubtedly this Chorale by Neumark is a Bach favourite, for he sets it many times for voices (refer BCW chorales site) and also for organ (BWV 690/1), several of the settings displaying daring harmonics and the organ works both charming in very different ways.

It is a much varied Cantata from its predecessors, not just because of the Chorale treatment, but because of the simple directness of the Tenor aria, BWV 93/3; and the lightness of the "Freudenstunden" ("joy-hours") duet, BWV 93/4. So intimate is the style, reminiscent of some of the works in the Anna Magdalena book, that Spitta thought it originally for domestic use!

A glimpse at the theology of BWV 93, however, gives an entirely different slant. It is about the Sovereignty of God, which is a Calvinist emphasis, and explicitly Calvinist at the point in BWV 93/3 when the T aria states:

"Gott, der die Auserwaehlten kennt"

("God, who the elect knows")

..... followed by a swipe in true Calvinist fashion at the image of the rich, pleasure-seeking complacent man in BWV93/5, much discussed in the last round of commentary on this Cantata on the BCW. By BWV93/6, the S aria, the librettist weaves in the sentiments of the Magnificat, heard in BWV 10 in the prior week, namely the deposition of the rich in favour of the poor.

The Chorale rounds off with a further hint of predestination, "Verricht das deine nur getreu" (Perform only what is thine faithfully). The theme throughout, resignation to divine will, couples the Sovereignty emphasis with stress on Providence. Calvin is at odds with baroque ideas of Fortune. Everything is down to God. One of his specific images is that " each shower is evidence of His favour. Calvin pleads here strongly that Christian people ought not to speak of Fortune as doing this or that, but should always say, "So God pleased"".

The librettist picks up on just this sort of divinely-ordained weather image, perhaps reflecting intense heat of the July week in which this cantata was performed in 1724:

"Think not in thy heat of affliction,
when lightning and thunder crack
and thee a sultry storm doth anxious make,
that thou by God forsaken art" (BWV93/5)

"After rain he gives sunshine
and appoints for everyone his final end" (BWV 93/5)

The librettist is generally stated to be unknown, but likely a theologian and probably, according to Wolff, Andreas Stuebel, conrector emeritus of St Thomas School, whose untimely death on January 27 1725 brought the chorale cantata cycle to an abrupt end. Wolff hints that Stuebel, a theologian, had "somewhat nonconformist views".

Was he, in fact, a Calvinist as BWV 93 suggests?

Julian Mincham wrote (July 1, 2006):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
< Here Bach's experimentation with representing text and ideas in music goes beyond the level of word-painting (ticking clocks, dogs barking, etc.) found in Baroque music and includes larger structural elements, thus creating the impression of a yet greater artistic unity that is deeply satisfying. >
Well put.

And the ultimate refutation of those who criticise Schweitzer's (and others)ideas about Bach's transmuting of textual images into musical ideas. They are on the right track (in my view) but one can, and I suggest should, go even further, as Thomas suggest.

The more one lives with these works the more complex are the ways (one finds) in which Bach takes a an idea, morale, action or feeling and renders it musically. Many critics do not go further than noting Bach's use of a motive (rhythmic or melodic) which they can relate back to the text. There is a lot of this of course but is is only the beginning of the journey. Phrase lengths, consonant and dissonant harmonies, musical form, notions of texture, choice of instruments----- all may be observed to have been used by JSB as a direct consequence of a single imaginative idea or concept.

(PS what I am continuing to value about this list is the way in which one individual can come up with an idea/observation, and others can come in to take it further. Long may it continue, particularly through this cycle, the greatest----in my opinion----of the Bach cantata canon).

Julian Mincham wrote (July 1, 2006):
Peter Smaill wrote:
< The librettist is generally stated to be unknown, but likely a theologian and probably, according to Wolff, Andreas Stuebel, conrector emeritus of St Thomas School, whose untimely death on January 27 1725 brought the chorale cantata cycle to an abrupt end. Wolff hints that Stuebel, a theologian, had "somewhat nonconformist views".
Was he, in fact, a Calvinist as BWV 93 suggests? >
An interesting thought.

And one wonders the same about JSB's own views although I guess, like Shakespeare, we are never going to be able to deduce anything about the man from his words---or, in this case, his settings of words.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 1, 2006):
Eric Bergerud wrote:
< If you share my liking for Ruth Holton, check Leusink’s performance [7].
That leaves Richter [3].... The soloists are fine singers and Fischer-Dieskau a legend, although more or less mute in this work.... Although I have a genuine respect for Bach lovers of the past, listening to Richter is a clear reminder of why the period performance movement has triumphed so completely....Comments? >
As I noted in the previous week's discussion (BWV 10), I do share your enjoyment of Ruth Holton, and I look forward to listening and writing again this week.

I am writing briefly now because I gave Richter [3] a quick listen to see if I felt the need to comment (as asked, thanks) immediately. I do feel the need. The opening chorus certainly sounds heavy, almost ponderous. I want to listen a bit more, because this is not generally characteristic of Richter. However, outstanding soloists are indeed characteristic, and BWV 93 is no exception. If you were baiting me (or others) by calling Fischer-Dieskau's powerful B rec. (BWV 93/2) <more or less mute>, you succeeded. The other soloists, Mathis, Reynolds, and Schreier, are equally excellent. Whether they are the best in this particular instance is a matter of taste and opinion for discussion. They are far, far too good to dismiss the Richter performance out of hand.

Complete triumph is a strong statement. I do respect the <informed> aspect of HIP, in particular, and in that respect I share your lack of enthusiasm for using the acronym to apply specifically to authentic or period instrument performances. But until something better comes along and is widely
accepted, why not?

I find that the modest sized choirs (adult male and female) and orchestras (modern instruments), along with thoughtful tempos, employed by Emmanuel Music and Cantata Singers in Boston, and I expect by many other groups, are <historically informed>, indeed. They have been so for over thirty years, starting to acquire a history of their own. I thought your comments on the debate of historic research was better stated, and probably represents your own opinion better, than a declaration of triumph for the period performance movement. Historic research has informed and improved the best performances? I can agree to that without reservation, and perhaps quench the flame in the process.

Some performances which are not necessarily the best have been justified on the basis of questionable historic information, within the period performance movement? I am no expert, barely a spectator, but I think I can agree to that as well. I expect we have not heard the last.. As you so eloquently pointed out previously, it is an ongoing, enjoyable, informative, and necessary debate.

Eric Bergerud wrote (July 2, 2006):
[To Ed Myskowski] I did put the remark about Fischer-Dieskau badly. His small piece is lovely. However, 93 is not a work that puts the bass in the spotlight. This one's for the tenor and soprano. As for period ensembles, who else is recording baroque (or even early classical) music now? There has been some cross-breeding I'll grant: groups employing modern instruments but using small forces and "historic" sensibilities. In any case, I do doubt we'll see many future recordings from the "big battalions" like those employed by Richter [3], Rotzsch etc. And, unless I miss my guess, ten years from now OVPP will be very common and conductors like Gardiner considered the "old masters." I'm not saying that this is good, but I don't see it changing. (I only have one Emmanuel CD with Loraine Lieberson performing BWV 82 and BWV 199. I was not very impressed, although I like a female soloist doing both works.)

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 2, 2006):
Eric Bergerud wrote:
< I did put the remark about Fischer-Dieskau badly. >
Not at all, I was just accepting the invitation to be conversational, and opinionated. One of the great virtues of BCW, even the disputes are civilized. At least compared to life on my block (and the typical web chatter). From day one, I have loved Yoel's comment: I can't ask someone I meet on the street what they think about BWV 93.

For grammarians in the crowd, I think proper English would be <what he thinks>. English needs more gender neutral pronouns, starting now.

As always, thanks to all contributors, especially weekly cantata discussions. Julian's structural comments this week are especially to my interest. If I don't get around to a specific response, noted and appreciated!

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 2, 2006):
BWV 93/1 Embedded Chorale Motifs

Aryeh Oron has created a page on the BCW which gives samples of interlinking (through the use of chorale melody motifs) of the instrumental ritornelli with the choral sections which present the chorale melody. These samples which I found in BWV 93/1 can be viewed at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/BWV93-M1.htm

For those who wish further confirmation on just how Bach can vary and ornament profusely a simple chorale
melody, check out BWV 662, BWV 663, BWV 664, BWV 676, BWV 677 (about half way down on the page): http://www.bach-cantatas.com/CM/Allein-Gott-in-der-Hoh.htm

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 3, 2006):
I am listening to Herreweghe [6], and posting an early (for me) comment to let you know what an outstanding performance this is. I will add some comparative detail later as, unusually (for me), I have four others. All are good, Herreweghe is clearly the top, IMO.

I checked back to previous discussion. Even what Aryeh had as negative points I wanted to mention as strengths, so might as well start there. What caught my ear, and made me decide to write, is the S/A duet (BWV 93/4, the crux of the chiastic structure, if you can cope with that again) with Mellon and counter-tenor Brett. Aryeh was looking for more emotive power, but I think that is already available with Richter/Mathis/Reynolds [3]. I certainly enjoy that, as well, as I already noted to Eric..

Brett (new to me) provides an accurate, unforced tone. I needed to check the booklet to determine if he is alto or counter. By the time I figured it out, I was listening to Mellon with oboe by Marcel Ponseele (BWV 93/6). All the best things in lhappen by coincidence:

(1) What a great name! What a great sound! What great booklet notes so that we can quickly identify the player (in fact, all the players, chorus included).
(2) In scanning the discussions for BWV 21 this morning, by chance I came across a comment to the effect that any recording with Marcel is bound to be good. New to me. I will recover the reference for next time.
(3) I come from the home town of Peggy Pearson, world class Bach oboe, I hear her live many times a year. One of the few things in Bach I consider myself qualified to comment on by direct experience. Marcel is world class Bach oboe, as well.

Herreweghe [6] is a beautifully balanced, consistent performance, with some superb musicians who are not as yet everyday names. And one who is by now. Suzuki's [11] choice also, B Peter Kooy, almost forgot to mention him. If you can access this CD, send your thoughts.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 4, 2006):
Apologies for writing yesterday, and researching today. Counter tenor Charles Brett [6] has been around for just about as long as I have. Aryeh has given him a spot in the archives, and exposed his secret: utterly secure and reliable. Recommends a dry sherry before concerts "to loosen the vocal cords".

To repeat. The Herreweghe with Brett [6], and many others who are (or should be) notables, is not to be missed. In addition, there is BWV 107 for next week, and BWV 39 for sometime next year. Or just play them all, as I am doing.

A quick look at amazon.com suggests availability may be limited, sorry if that is the case. On the other hand, get yours now.

Chris Kern wrote (July 4, 2006):
BWV 93

1. Chorale
Rilling [4] - 5:19
Harnoncourt [5] - 5:17

2. Recitativo/Chorale (B)
Rilling [4] - 2:02
Harnoncourt [5]: 1:29

3. Aria (T)
Rilling [4] - 3:13
Harnoncourt [5] - 2:53

4. Duet (S/A)
Rilling [4] - 3:17
Harnoncourt [5] - 2:49

5. Recitativo/Chorale (T)
Rilling [4] - 2:39
Harnoncourt [5] - 2:05

6. Aria (S)
Harnoncourt [5] - 2:32
Rilling [4] - 2:25

7. Chorale
Rilling [4] - 0:56
Harnoncourt [5] - 0:55

Unlike the Leonhardt versions, which were faster in the chorale but slower in the arias, Harnoncourt [5] is faster in every movement except for the 6^th -- and the opening chorale times only differ by 2 seconds.

I generally like Leonhardt's recordings better than Harnoncourt's, and indeed, this time I liked every movement of Rilling's version [4] better except for one -- the duet. I think the boy and Esswood [5] blend together much better than Rilling's singers. I also like hearing the boy in the soprano aria even if his singing is rough around the edges.

I really liked the chorale/recitative combo movements -- I don't recall Bach doing this before but it was interesting.

Neil Halliday wrote (July 4, 2006):
Re the opening chorus, I can understand Eric finding the Richter [3] to be unsatisfactory, since he has come to this music via the HIP phenomenon. As someone who was introduced to the cantatas via the 20th century symphonic tradition, I am more sympathetic to Richter's vision of this music. It is heavy going, but if one has a good sound system, is able to turn the volume up, and give it one's undivided attention, then one will experience the grandeur and be able to revel in the music's intricacies, all of which no doubt pleased Richter when he made this recording in Munich's Hercules Hall in 1974. As to whether performances like this are the reason for the triumph of period-style performances in the following years, I have my doubts. The fact is, while conductors have explored every nook and cranny of period performance style since the late 60's early 70's, audiences have not necessarily always been pleased by the results; for example, I recall a report on a recent OVPP period SMP, under Parrott's direction, which saw considerable numbers of the audience leaving at interval. For my part, exaggerated HIP mannerisms, and sometimes inadequate instrumental forces, remain ongoing problems in current practice.

Ed has mentioned Herreweghe's recording [6]; this is probably the most graceful, beautiful and perfect of all the recordings of the opening chorus. Firstly, it is in the mid-tempo range of the recordings, and secondly, the above-mentioned HIP mannerisms, including `swelling' tone production (sometimes a problem with Herreweghe), are kept within acceptable limits.

[Re tempo of this opening chorus, I have noticed three `groups': at around 5.20, we have Rilling [4], Harnonmcourt, Koopman and Leusink [7]; at around 6.00, we have Suzuki, Herreweghe [6] and Beringer [9], all three capturing a graceful, flowing aspect of this music; and finally Doormann [2], (around 7 mins?) and Richter 7.48 [3]. The 1967 Doormann recording (unfortunately unavailable) was highly rated by Aryeh, in fact the best of all the recordings; a short except of the beginning can be heard at the BCW. Non-HIP recordings can have a `chamber' effect, as well].

Schreier is fine in the tenor aria [3], but the tempo is slow; Rilling [4] has the right tempo and beautiful instrumentation, but Kraus does have a `barking' aspect to his voice; Herreweghe's instruments [6] have overly clipped articulation for my taste.

I prefer the more substantial (slower) performances of Richter [3] and Rilling [4] in the SA duet; while the voices with Herreweghe [6] are charming, the tempo is brisk and the effect somewhat light.

Interestingly, both Mathis [3] and Augér [4] are less satisfying when singing on their own in the soprano aria, than when combined with altos Reynolds and Watts respectively, in the duet mentioned above. Augér seems to be in her overwrought mode in this aria, and Mathis' somewhat shrill vibrato spoils Richter's charming instrumentation. Here I prefer Mellon (Herreweghe [6]) as the most pleasing to the ear, along with moderate tempo and Pomseele's oboe; and I would not be surprised if the sopranos of the other period groups are also easier on the ear than the first-named ladies.

Re the two recitative/chorale movements, Robertson writes (of the first one) that "this dialogue is most effective when divided between the solo and chorus basses", and he may well have a point. Whittaker raises the uncongeniality of this music form; Robertson's suggestion may help in relieving any tediousness in the effect of the music. Unfortunately none of the conductors I have heard has employed this method.

Neil Halliday wrote (July 4, 2006):
Chris Kern wrote:
<"I really liked the chorale/recitative combo movements -- I don't recall Bach doing this before but it was interesting.">
There are a few other instances, but the form is relatively rare in the cantatas.

Julian Mincham wrote (July 4, 2006):
Chris Kern wrote:
<"I really liked the chorale/recitative combo movements -- I don't recall Bach doing this before but it was interesting.">
Neil Hallidwrote:
< There are a few other instances, but the form is relatively rare in the cantatas. >
Not so rare at this stage of the cycle. Bach is clearly very interested in combining recit with chorale and/or arioso at this time almost certainly when he has large slabs of text which are
a) unsuitable for arias and choruses and
b) consequently are in danger of resulting in long slabs of (potentially tedious) recitative. The tedium comes through the lack of (musical) textual interest, slow bass and somewhat spasmodic chords. Also recit generally employs a less focused or structured melodic line. It is, from its roots in the Italian Camerata group more attuned to the rhythms and inflections of speech than conventional Cantata BWV 18 melody.

ergo there is potential for tedium in long stretches of set text, Bach was well aware of this and consciously sought ways of solving the problem.

As evidence of the fact that it occupied his thoughts at this time look at BWV 94/3 where the tenor sings ornamented versions of the chorale tune interspersed with recitative sections. Furthermore there is an instrumental ritornello section which begins and ends the movement and accompanies the chorale lines but not the recitative. So we have four formal principles combined in this movement ----chorale, arioso, recitative and concerto (ritornello) form. WOW!

Not convinced? Then look at the various experimental movements of BWV 178. 2nd movement is a very bare rendition of the chorale meoldy accompanied by a closely developed texture woven from a four note quaver motive. This is interspersed with recit sections. 4 is a delicious ritornello movement woven around the chorale and 5 has the chorale harmonised in four parts (NOT as a single melodic line as in the above movements) with it's own strongly marked rhythmic accomp and recit sections. Three different approaches to the problem within the one cantata.

This list of movements is obviously not comprehensive but is serves to show clearly that Bach was experimenting with all sorts of ways of bringing together recit, chorale, aria/arios, concerto form etc as ways of setting long texts.

Two further points a) what a cracker of a cantata BWV 178 is---for those who can't wait until it comes up, go and listen to the fantastic opening chorus and the breathtaking tenor aria (more of these later!) and b) look at just which lines Bach sets as chorale/arios and which as recit. These are not, in my view, arbitary judgements although whether it was Bach or the librettist who was most influential here, one does not know. But usually there is a pattern or strategy which I'll leave list members to work our for themselves! Mayby start with BWV 94/3.

Neil Halliday wrote (July 4, 2006):
Chorale/recit combos (was BWV 93)

[To Julian Mincham] Thanks, Julian, for pointing to these upcoming examples.

Rilling's recording of BWV 178/2, another chorale/recit. movement, perhaps proves the efficacy of Robertson's suggestion for the similar movements in BWV 93 – Rilling has the choir altos sing the chorale bits, while the alto soloist sings the recit. bits. This is much more interesting than a solo alto throughout. BWV 178/5 is also termed "Choral et Recitativo", but it is nothing less than a fully concerted piece for choir, soloists and lively continuo throughout its entire length. (Rilling shines in this cantata, near his colourful and vivid best).

Compared to the two examples in BWV 93, BWV 94/3 (choral/recit) is also more accessible from a musical viewpoint, despite the notated spaced chords in the recit. sections, because it has been orchestrated by Bach with two oboes d'amore (plus continuo) throughout its length.

Can we conclude that Bach was aware of the uncomfortably austere nature of the chorale /recit. movements in BWV 93, and rectified this in the following Sundays' cantatas?

Julian Mincham wrote (July 4, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< Can we conclude that Bach was aware of the uncomfortably austere nature of the chorale /recit. movements in BWV 93, and rectified this in the following Sundays' cantatas? >
Hi Neil Interesting idea. It may also be that, rather than 'rectifying' (which assumes a possible error of judgement) he simply wanted to try as many ways of dealing with long texts as possible and settle upon what he thought worked best.

One to keep an eye on as we go through the cycle?

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 4, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< There are a few other instances, but the form is relatively rare in the cantatas. >
don't think there is another cantata which treats a chorale in so many different ways. It's almost a set of partita variations.

Continue of this part of the discussion, see: Recitatives in Bach's Vocal Works - Part 14 [General Topics]

Julian Mincham wrote (July 4, 2006):
[To Douglas Cowling] I suspect the model for this may have been BWV 4. Written 15 or so years earlier sure, but brought back for the Easter service of 1724 only a few weeks before BWV 93. So Bach would have had it very much in mind.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 4, 2006):
[To Julian Mincham] I thought of that as well, but Bach keeps to the true partita model in BWV 4 by keeping every movement in the same key. Here Bach's use of the melody is so fluid and free: chorale fantasy, recit, duet, aria. Extraordinary variety and a joy to study. I just wish I liked it more in performance (grin)

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 4, 2006):
Julian Mincham wrote:
< he simply wanted to try as many ways of dealing with long texts as possible and settle upon what he thought worked best.
One to keep an eye on as we go through the cycle? >
Or perhaps to try a variety of methods, all of which he thought worked equally well, more or less? Certainly an idea to follow, counting on you for the reminders from week to week.

Julian Mincham wrote (July 4, 2006):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
< Or perhaps to try a variety of methods, all of which he thought worked equally well, more or less? >
Ed quite likely. Let's see what he persists with.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 4, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< Interestingly, both Mathis [3] and Augér [4] are less satisfying when singing on their own in the soprano aria, than when combined with altos Reynolds and Watts respectively, in the duet mentioned above. >
Thanks for the detailed comments, Neil. I hope to respond to several points within the week, but I want to correct one minor oversight in case others are interested: on the Rilling CD [4], Ann Murray, not Watts, is the alto with Augér in BWV 93. Watts is in the other cantatas on the disc, including a duet with Helen Donath in BWV 91, nice for comparison.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 5, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< Re the two recitative/chorale movements, Robertson writes (of the first one) that "this dialogue is most effective when divided between the solo and chorus basses" [...]
Unfortunately none of the conductors I have heard has employed this method. >
Not in my hearing, either, and that includes Doormann [2]. I had seen the Robertson comment, and was looking forward to hearing it, before you wrote. Is there support for his suggested approach in the score, or in documented performances?

I initially misread Julian's reference to BWV 94/3 as such a choir section/soloist alternation, but on listening realized that is not so. Nice stuff, nonetheless, looking forward to it.

Hope it is not confusing, I will just get to the points Neil raised as time permits, rather than trying to save it all up. A lot of stimulating posts, thanks for all the chat about music!

Happy Independence Day (Fourth of July) for all believers. Music unites us.

Neil Halliday wrote (July 4, 2006):
Ed Myskowrote:
< I want to correct one minor oversight in case others are interested: on the Rilling CD [4], Ann Murray, not Watts, is the alto with Auger in BWV 93 >
Thanks for the correction, Ed.

(I glanced at the personnel in BWV 92 by mistake).

BTW, I should have mentioned that another contender in the "beauty stakes" for performances of the opening chorus of BWV 93, along with Herreweghe [6], is definitely Beringer [9]. Male choir, modern instruments with period sensibilities (not that I'm personally enamoured by this last aspect); the performance has the perfection and grace of Herreweghe, with acoustic richness.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 4, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< modern instruments with period sensibilities (not that I'm personally enamoured by this last aspect) >
Could you be more specific?

Bradley Lehman wrote (July 5, 2006):
< The fact is, while conductors have explored every nook and cranny of period performance style since the late 60's early 70's, (...) >
Sorry, but what "fact" is this? At least two major areas of Baroque performance practices remain largely unexplored, in published recordings of Bach's vocal music:

(1) Vocal/instrumental solos where the soloist takes considerably more freedom of rhythm ahead of or behind the beat, and

(2) Allowing the intonation of the continuo group (Bach having asserted that thoroughbass is the soul of music...) to influence more deeply the Affekt and the articulation/rhythm of the music: reacting to that sound to assess the strong/weak moments, and to set the basic tone for the brightness/mellowness/vehemence/calm of a section. Some of the pacing can come from listening attentively to the effects the chord progressions are making, and with the realization that all of the major and minor keys sound somewhat *different* from one another.

In area #2, the Netherlands Bach Society did very well in spring 2006 with the St Matthew Passion (BWV 244) in a series of concert performances. Some of the modulations of mood came out quite clearly, as the music shifts around from key to key. The recording is only an aircheck, unfortunately.

Neil Halliday wrote (July 6, 2006):
I wrote (of Beringer's performance [9]): "modern instruments with period sensibilities (not that I'm personally enamoured by this last aspect)".

Doug asked: "Could you be more specific?"

I was referring to the string (violins') articulation, with very short staccato on the short note and swelling tone on the following long note. If overdone, this type of articulation can sound fastidious.

[However, I must admit that the Doormann ritornello [2] sounds a little shapeless right after Beringer [9].....hmm, tricky stuff].

On a similar matter, of more concern is the treatment of the last note of the first phrase, etc, in Herreweghe's soprano aria [6] (the 'un' of 'schaun'). Mellon cuts it off in very short fashion, making it difficult to even hear the pitch of the note and altering the shape of the melody (the note on 'shau-' almost sounds like the last note of the phrase). The same note played by the oboe in the ritornello is much more satisfactorily presented; evidently Ponseele is not so doctrinaire in his handling of the strong note/weak note doctrine.

Period sensibilities? Fine, but don't overdo it.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 6, 2006):
Neil Halliday wrote:
< The fact is, while conductors have explored every nook and cranny of period performance style since the late 60's early 70's, audiences have not necessarily always been pleased by the results >
(1) Fair enough for Brad Lehman to question "fact", still plenty of unexplored corners.
(2) Brad Lehman continued: Bach having asserted that thoroughbass is the soul of music... Maybe the source was cited in the recent lengthy chat on figured bass. Wouldn't hurt to repeat a brief reference here. Did Bach actually assert this? Documented?
(3) Without an audience, the composer and performer are two legs of a three-legged stool. How does the old saying go? If you want to fiddle, you have to play for the dancer. Actually, if you want to dance, you have to pay the fiddler. But you can see Neil's point, without necessarily agreeing with its significance.

< Ed has mentioned Herreweghe's recording [6] >
With excessive enthusiasm. It is new to me. I subsequently see that there is plenty of past support for Herreweghe [6] in the archives. That doesn't change my enthusiasm, add me to the group. For other newcomers, I repeat, not to be missed, and not difficult of access. The link to amazon.com from BWV 93 would suggest so, but only because it is more economically available as part of a four (for the price of one) set, discussed at length in the BCW archives. Find your way to that.

< in the tenor aria, ... Herreweghe's instruments [6] have overly clipped articulation for my taste. >
I chose this as an opportunity to compare the recordings, an unusual assortment for me. I have three traditional, Doormann [2] LP, Richter [3], and Rilling [4], and two HIP, Herreweghe [6], and Leusink [7]. These were all included in the first round of discussions. Every performance here is enjoyable for a continuous listen. It is interesting that with all the discussion of HIP and traditional tempos, Neil has pointed out the maximum variation in the opening chorus, BWV 93/1, is from Rilling's quickness to Richter's stateliness, which I regret calling ponderous. Neil is correct, turn the volume up and sit back. Doormann has the middle ground, comparable to Herreweghe.

In fact the instrumental articulation in the T aria BWV 93/3, as well as in the S aria oboe line, BWV 93/6, is a significant and consistent HIP distinction. I do not have access to a score, but in the piano reduction on BCW, as well as the thematic BWV index (thanks to Brad Lehman for the recommendation) both places are indicated as legato notes followed by staccato. This distinction comes across better in the HIP articulation. Is it overdone? A matter of taste, or is there support in the performance practice literature? Note the structural detail here, with staccato elements balanced on either side of the central S/A duet BWV 93/4, all the more reason to make them prominent and consistently played in both instances.

< I prefer the more substantial (slower) performances of Richter [3] and Rilling [4] in the SA duet; while the voices with Herreweghe [6] are charming, the tempo is brisk and the effect somewhat light. >
I have a slight preference for Herreweghe [6] here, but it is a pity that Doormann [2] is not in CD release, a lovely middle ground alternative. Then again, we have an abundance of good choices.

< Interestingly, both Mathis and Auger are less satisfying when singing on their own in the soprano aria.... Here I prefer Mellon (Herreweghe [6]) as the most pleasing to the ear, along with moderate tempo and Ponseele's oboe; and I would not be surprised if the sopranos of the other period groups are also easier on the ear than the first-named ladies. >
I can see from the BCW archives that Ponseele doesn't need any help from me, nice to discover him anyway, better late than never. Ruth Holton with Leusink [7] is new to me as well, a more delicate S voice than the traditional stars, and absolutely appropriate with Leusink.

Thanks to Julian for details on the intimate fabric of the chorale melody throughout BWV 93, I am still doing more listening to the spe. Also for the look ahead to BWV 107, with complete contrast in architecture and unifying chorale relations. Very stimulating comments this week, hope to see more of the same.

Bradley Lehman wrote (July 6, 2006):
< (2) Brad Lehman continued: Bach having asserted that thoroughbass is the soul of music... Maybe the source was cited in the recent lengthy chat on figured bass. Wouldn't hurt to repeat a brief reference here. Did Bach actually assert this? Documented? >
It's readily available in the introductory sections of The New Bach Reader (Wolff et al), and we've gone over this many times already in discussions; see archives....

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 7, 2006):
A spurious document [was: BWV 93.]

Someone asked (of course the quotation does not include who made the statement or asked the question):
>>Brad Lehman continued: Bach having asserted that thoroughbass is the soul of music... Maybe the source was cited in the recent lengthy chat on figured bass. Wouldn't hurt to repeat a brief reference here. Did Bach actually assert this? Documented?<<
to which Brad Lehman replied:
>>It's readily available in the introductory sections of The New Bach Reader (Wolff et al), and we've gone over this many times already in discussions; see archives....<<
And thus, as usual, the issue is simply glossed over and easily dismissed.

Here is what I found this time around:

“When Bach dictated to his pupils excerpts from Niedt’s book on thorough bass, he reworded thoughts expressed by Niedt as follows: “The thorough bass is the most perfect foundation of music, being played with both hands in such manner that the left hand plays the notes written down while the right adds consonances and dissonances, in order to make a well-sounding harmony to the Glory of God and the permissible delectation of the spirit, and the aim and final reason, as of all music, so of the thorough bass should be none else but the Glory of God and the recreation of the mind. Where this is not observed, there will be no real music but only a devilish hubbub.” (from pp. 16-17 of “The New Bach Reader: A Life of Johann Sebastian Bach in Letters and Documents” Norton, 1945, 1966, 1998, edited by Hans T. David, Arthur Mendel, and Christoph Wolff)

In his preface to “The New Bach Reader” on pp. ix and x, Christoph Wolff explains that many new documents had been added to the “Bach Reader”, 1945 and 1966 editions, (see footnote at the bottom of p. ix). But also that some “documents of questionable value have been dropped” such as “The Precepts and Principles…for Playing a Thorough Bass” which is referred to and quoted in the essay from the first edition of the book. However, now, as a result of Wolff’s deletion, this quotation no longer has the promised documentation in the body of the book for which we need to go to other sources:

1. Philipp Spitta’s biography of Bach is the first to present documentation and analysis of this ‘questionable document’ [Wolff’s own description of this source in 1997]. Spitta pointed out the plagiaristic aspect of this source which points to Friedrich Erhard Niedt’s “Musicalische Handleitung” (Hamburg, 1710). Current Bach scholarship is aware of the fact that not a single word of this document (including the title page with a reference to J. S. Bach) shows any evidence of Bach’s direct input. The document, according to Spitta’s own admission, even contains “numerous and silly blunders of writing” as well as “frequent inaccuracies in the four-part writing” and “thus there remain mistakes”. Spitta, however, still praises this document as evidence for Bach’s method of instruction, a view apparently not held by more recent Bach scholars such as Wolff who have good reason to doubt the authenticity of this document. All of this has been discussed previously on the BCML and can be found by doing a search on “Niedt”. [It was Niedt who, in an early edition of the “Musicalische Handleitung”, defines “Andante = gantz langsam (very slow)”.]

2. The authoritative “Bach-Dokumente” Vol. 2 (Bärenreiter, 1969) casts doubt about Bach’s possible connection with this document since there is no evidence that Bach ever possessed Niedt’s book. The editors of the BD were also quite concerned about the numerous glaring, but uncorrected errors in the musical samples given in the body of the document which they no longer reprinted in the BD (only the text of the title page appears). There was a subsequent attempt to attach specific names of possible students at the university who might have sought musical instruction with Bach to the handwriting of the two individuals who copied/wrote out the title page and text of this document. However, at least two major questions remain: Did Bach in 1738 own a copy of Niedt’s book in 1738 from which these students could plagiarize or only slightly reword a whole section of the original? Why would Bach quote directly or almost directly Niedt, who, as stated clearly in his own books, abhorred counterpoint and fugues in figural music for the church?

None of the above is meant as a criticism of the content of initial statement as quoted by Spitta/David/Mendel, but rather as means clarifying the following:

1. No serious evidence has been provided that the statements by Niedt, plagiarized, reworded , and/or paraphrased as they are in this unusual and questionable document can be attributed to J.S. Bach.

2. The numerous glaring errors in the samples of 4-part harmony and even in the German language itself, left uncorrected as they were in this spurious document even after two individuals had labored over it, stand quite apart from the only other similar evidence found in the even shorter list of rules of thorough-bass as found in the 2nd Notenbuch für AMB. These are given on p. 206 of “The New Bach Reader” referred to above under the section entitled: “Bach writes out Through-Bass Rules” where the scholarly fact of the matter is that that Bach did not lift his pen to write anything at all or even attempt to make a correction in the text. It is now known that approximately 1/3 of the document (the first part) was written by Johann Christoph Friedrich Bach (a son who was still quite young at the time) and the remainder by Anna Magdalena Bach. The errors in JCF Bach’s section were corrected by a yet unidentified hand, and AMB’s section has an uncorrected, but understandable copy error. Although quite short and succinct, and as fragmentary as this set of rules is, it is a very usable basis for learning through-bass. This is in stark contrast with the Niedt-based, error-filled set attributed to Bach.

3. By leaving in “The New Bach Reader” the initial quotation from 1945 given at the very beginning of this message, Wolff has perhaps unwittingly allowed the misconceptions of outdated scholarship (Spitta, David, Mendel) to continue and influence uncritical readers, despite Wolff’s commendatory efforts to expunge the documentary listing of it in the main part of the book which was a step in the right direction.

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 7, 2006):
Mattheson on 'liturgical recitative' [was:BWV 93]

On the „liturgical recitative“, use of chorales in larger cantata mvts., arias, and recitatives, among other things:

Johann Mattheson „Das Beschützte Orchestre“ (Part 2, Chapter 3 of the „Orchestre-Schriften”, Hamburg, 1717, pp. 132-133.

Mattheson claims that all reasonable people would agree with him that at the present time and place (1717, Hamburg with the rest of the German-speaking principalities in mind) and considering only the best music available, there are only 3 categories of music with their specific subcategories:

Ecclesiatico or Kirchen-Styl (church style) with the following subcategories:
Ligatus, Motecticus, Madrigalescus, Symphoniacus, and Canonicus.

Stylo Theatrali or Theater-Styl (opera style) with the following subcategories:
Dramaticus, Symphoniacus, Hypochematicus, Phantasticus, and Melismaticus.

Stylo Camerae or Kammer-Styl (chamber style) with the following subcategories:
Symphoniacus, Canonicus, Choraicus, Madrigalescus, and Melismaticus.

Ecclesiasticus Stylus, more properly given another term, (1) Stylus ligatus. My opponent, if he has all his wits about him, does not comprehend all the types that belong to this category when he considers only choral singing and the so-called “Kirchen-Recitativ” (“church or liturgical recitative”) which is sung before the altar. These are the antiphons, graduals, etc. which were composed at a time when all that they knew about was Gregorian chant or at most something about the Greek church modes which forced them to follow the inherent prescriptions that these imposed, and which no ‘galant’ individual nowadays would even consider to be real music. For if anyone would now say: There is music in the churches today, then no one would understand this to mean what a priest or pastor sings as a ‘Praefation’, ‘Collect’ or a ‘Dominus vobiscum’, etc. while standing before the altar, or when, here and there, the congregation sings to the accompaniment of the roaring sound and inane doodling coming from the organ and joins in so splendidly out of tune that your ears often begin to ache; but rather they would understand this [‘church music’] to mean only figural music which is the type that is the nobler and more excellent part of the church service.

(2) Motecticus, vel Muteticus Stylus (Motet style) comprises compositions having fugues, allabreves, double counterpoint, and numerous other, very artistic compositions called “Kirchen=Musik” (“Church music”). Whenever canons appear to issue from these types, the Stylus Canonicus would also be applicable here.

(3) Madrigalescus Stylus (Madrigal style); counted as belonging to this style are all oratorios, so-called Passions, dialogues, soliloquies, arias, accompaniments, cavatas, recitatives, etc, all of which are preferred nowadays.

(4) Symphoniacus Stylus (Symphonic style) contains vocal compositions preceded by sonatas, sonatinas, the ritornelli which precede and appear between the vocal sections, and other types of instrumental compositions as well. Actually, this category could also appear under “Kirchen-Styl-Stylus ligatus” wherever a chorale melody is inserted into the composition. This can have a very beautiful special effect while also allowing great freedom despite the restrictions imposed.

[My comment: In the last statement it appears that Mattheson enthusiastically supports the type of effort found in BWV 93. However, his modern (‘galant’ – this word, at least apparently for Mattheson, did not yet mean musically moving away from pure polyphony to simple soprano and bass-line compositions as this term is now generally applied in musicology) viewpoint evokes a strong criticism of equating ‘liturgical recitative’ with recitatives found in the Madrigal style church compositions. Bach’s output of sacred music, however, seems to defy this division into categories by often making use of more or all of them at the same time in a single cantata.]

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 7, 2006):
Thomas Braatz wrote:
< All of this has been discussed previously on the BCML and can be found by doing a search on “Niedt” >
This is a useful detail to ad to Brad's reference to BCW archives. By now, you might expect me to know what thicket I was wandering into. I plead innocence. Perhaps this is an appropriate moment for an intermediate summary update? As I read you both (Tom Braatz and Brad Lehman) from identified sources:

(1) Niedt is Brad's ultimate reference for Bach's approach to thoroughbass practice.
(2) The direct link from Niedt to Bach is now in question, by Wolff, and others, but not necessarily definitively discredited. As if there is such a thing as definitive in historical research.
(3) Brad supports the validity of Niedt with regard to period performance practice, whether or not there is a direct link to Bach

There is a lot of material in the archives, I have only had a quick look. If I have misunderstood, corrections are not only tolerated, they are invited. Concise responses are especially welcome, but I repeat my opinion: too much information is preferable to the alternative. However, no need to repeat material already archived, just tell us to look it up (keywords appreciated).

I did notice Brad's suggestion that Quantz should be required reading before anyone is allowed to comment on a HIP performance. A bit extreme, but I do agree with the underlying point: one cannot dismiss a performance out of hand without considering the intent, and the scholarly support for that intent.

Not to overlook Aryeh's distinctly different suggestion: send your comments, even if it is only to say <I like this recording> (or not). I stand by my often expressed opinion, post your ideas, read what you want, skip over the rest. Let Aryeh scream when the editing gets out of hand.

Apropros nothing, just not to forget, I second Yoel's comment that adult counter tenors, just as much as female altos, are a non authentic substitute in Bach church cantatas. The obvious is only obvious after someone points it out.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 7, 2006):
BWV 93

I previously wrote (7/03/06):
< In fact the instrumental articulation in the T aria BWV 93/3, as well as in the S aria oboe line, BWV 93/6, is a significant and consistent HIP distinction. I do not have access to a score, but in the piano reduction on BCW, as well as the thematic BWV index (thanks to Brad Lehman for the recommendation) both places are indicated as legato notes followed by staccato. This distinction comes across better in the HIP articulation. >
I naively (or conventionally) interpreted the dots over notes as staccato indication. I have since discovered (search on Niedt, as suggested by Thomas Braatz) the long BCW section Bach's Markings and Notations, which includes the comment that dots over notes do not indicate true staccato, which Bach indicates by a wedge (or dash). In fact the dots can indicate a range of emphasis, and are not necessarily specific. I concede that I am looking for a bit of free and convenient education here, as opposed to taking an appropriate university course, so corrections welcome as always.

Interesting to me is the fact that the HIP performers interpret the articulation as full staccato (or more). A question re the NBA score: are these notes (opening phrase of BWV 93/3 and 93/6) indicated with wedges, which have been converted to conventional dots in the thematic index and piano reduction? If not, and Bach in fact wrote dots, it seems that the traditional performers have a more historically informed interpretation than the HIP in the five recordings I previously commented on.

In fact, each of the five has a unique interpretation. Rilling in particular stands out, with a difference internally: the oboe staccato in BWV 93/6, but the strings not at all in BWV 93/3.

Probably not only by coincidence, BWV 93/3 is the very phrase which Julian Mincham gave as the example of the chorale tune re-rhythmatised (sic), indicating its importance to Bach's thematic structure in BWV 93. This would be a nice example for me, while fresh in our minds and ears, to get the professionals' and researchers' opinions as to what is the historically informed preferred articulation (or range of articulations), and how certain (or not) can we be of Bach's intentions?

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 7, 2006):
BWV 93/Staccato

My copy of the Harvard Dictionary of Music (1972 edition), in the entry for staccato, states: Today, the dot is used as the normal sign, and the dash for a more pronounced staccato.

However, in the entry for legato, a note with a dash is indicated as between legato (tied) and staccato (dot), described by the woleggiero. Exactly different - less, rather than more pronounced staccato. So much for reliable scholarly standards. I believe everyone has good intentions, probably no worse (or better) than 250 years ago. Informed remains elusive.

The wedge is covered as <the preferred notation for staccato by earlier composers, such as K.P.E. Bach, Haydn, and Beethoven.>

Not so fast, this only would go back to J.S. Bach by inference, and the entry continues: Five scholars [named] investigate the significance of the wedge, vertical stroke, and dot in Mozart's autographs and first editions, with more or less differing results.

I accept, indeed welcome, the challenge to become a historically informed listener. I suggest scholars, performers, et al make every effort to distinguish between informed and opinionated (HIP vs. HOP). I think we all agree, HOP is welcome, or at least not a crime (other than the acronym). Just label it as such. Well, don't call it HOP. You know what I mean.

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 7, 2006):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
>>A question re the NBA score: are these notes(opening phrase of BWV 93/3 and 93/6) indicated with wedges, which have been converted to conventional dots in the thematic index and piano reduction? ...how certain (or not) can we be of Bach's intentions?<<
The pattern of phrase markings/slurring and dots (no wedges) as you see it in your sources is absolutely according to Bach's intentions since he was, according the NBA KB I/17.2, "very precise" in marking all articulation and dynamic markings as well as embellishments on the violin and oboe parts in BWV 93/3 and BWV 93/6 (as well as most other parts).

In the cantatas I have noticed that Bach sometimes uses 'dots' to call attention to a specific pattern of notes that might go unnoticed if it were not for the 'dots' markings. Here he may be ensuring by means of a contrasting, non-legato treatment, that the listener might be able to recognize these motifs as being based upon the chorale melody.

Raymond Joly wrote (July 7, 2006):
Ed Myskowski wrote:
"I suggest scholars, performers, et al make every effort to distinguish between informed and opinionated (HIP vs. HOP). I think we all agree, HOP is welcome, or at least not a crime (other than the acronym). Just label it as such."
A witty and wise admonition!

As to the certainly misguided notion that any dot above a note in music from any period should be interpreted to mean "play as sharp as staccato as you can", I wonder if it is a coincidence that some HIP performances fell into that trap just as a genius emerged who did just that with all notes systematically, no matter if they had no dot or indeed had a slur above them. Now, you certainly would not call Glenn Gould or a Moog machine HIP, would you? And was not there a fascination for tinkling jazz pianos and vibraphones in some quarters around that time too? Maybe very different pursuits and persuasions coalesced in one same fashion. Is that what they call "Zeitgeist"?

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 8, 2006):
BWV 93/Notation

Ed Myskowski wrote:
>>A question re the NBA score: are these notes(opening phrase of BWV 93/3 and 93/6) indicated with wedges, which have been converted to conventional dots in the thematic index and piano reduction? ...how certain (or not) can we be of Bach's intentions?<<
Thomas Braatz wrote:
< The pattern of phrase markings/slurring and dots (no wedges) as you see it in your sources is absolutely according to Bach's intentions since he was, according the NBA KB I/17.2, "very precise" in marking all articulation and dynamic markings >
First of all, thanks for being so generous with your time and resources to respond to questions, especially regarding NBA, as well as for posting musical examples to the archives. Very useful for future reference, in addition to weekly discussions. I gather you enjoy this or you wouldn't bother. Truly appreciated, nonetheless.

Not to belabor the dots and wedges, but I can see the topic has had plenty of attention and interest in the past, so I might as well share a few very inexpert thoughts. I hoped to find a passage or two with wedges to compare with the dots of BWV 93. I started scanning the thematic index at BWV 1 and got as far as BWV 127 without finding a single wedge. Dots prevalent, but by no means common, so clearly a special marking. At that point, I did notice that BWV 127/3 has a full measure (eight notes) for flute, all with dots over, and marked <stacc> in addition. I think this is a nice confirmation that the dot by itself does not indicate staccato, but some different special articulation or attention.

I wondered if the thematic index simply does not use wedges. I stopped scanning sequentially and skipped ahead to the Passions and Oratorios. Wedges still very scarce, but in part 6 of the Christmas Oratorio, BWV 248/54 there are a handful of wedges, as well as an equal number of dots on different notes. The wedges don't appear to indicate staccato, more like attack.

As luck would have it, I recently found the Harnoncourt LP set including score, and bought it as much for that reason as anything. I got out the score a few minutes ago - not a wedge or dot in sight in BWV 248/54, in this version of the pocket score. I assume that the thematic index is correct and in agreement with NBA, as you confirmed for BWV 93.

Can you (or anyone) suggest any passages for comparative listening where wedges (or any other specific notation) are used to indicate staccato? Not to get too far away from the weekly discussion, but in any case, more dots coming in BWV 107, so we can carry the notation topic forward if necessary.

I have just revisited the prior discussion in Markings and Notations to recover the original reference I noticed in passing for wedges in modern score substituting for vertical dashes in the manuscripts. I realize that it was a discussion you had initiated, already citing BWV 248/54, not without subsequent controversy. Sorry, no intent on my part to stir up old misunderstandings, in fact just the opposite. I do like follow open and interesting questions which catch my attention and make listening more enjoyable.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 8, 2006):
BWV 93/Notation or OT

Raymond Joly wrote:
< A witty and wise admonition. >
Merci, mon ami, especially for noticing the attempted wit.

< you certainly would not call Glenn Gould or a Moog machine HIP, would you? >
No defense for the Moog from here, although I remember Switched On Bach by Walter (later Wendy) Carlos, quite well. Or maybe not so well. But isn't the point that, if you stretch the performance options, label them as stretched, maybe you get somebody to catch on? Either to Bach or you. Or with luck, both.

The first Bach recording I owned was Glenn Gould from the late 1950's. Not the first I heard, but that is a different story, too long for this moment. The things I loved at the time were:
(1) Rhythm-a-ning. A Thelonius Monk title, Julian. Rhythmatising? I am hard pressed to choose.
(2) Projection of an individual feeling, interpretation (you owe me one, Brad, and others)
(3) Superb marketing and packaging, with the double liner and thus double liner notes, by the performer, Gould. I still read them occasionally. In fact, if I hadn't stumbled into the cantata discussion cycle, the last several months would have been enjoyed listening to Goldberg Variation CDs, to compare with the original memories (and liner notes).

They will be around as long as I am. Faith in record player technology! Viva LP! No? Keep those harpsichords tuned.

For the BWV 93 die-hards, Richter has staying power. Stately, not ponderous, in BWV93/1. Once more, right now, for me, followed by Fischer-Dieskau. Then those short dots (long staccatos, whatever) on the strings behind Schreier. Thanks again to all for an illuminating week.

Thomas Braatz wrote (July , 2006):
BWV 93 - Articulation

Johann Gottfried Walther “Musicalisches Lexicon…”
Leipzig, 1732

>>‚Spiccato’ (ital.) bedeutet: daß man die Klänge auf Instrumenten wohl von einander sondern, und jeden‚ distincté’ soll hören lassen.

‚Staccato’ oder ‚Stoccato’ (ital.) ist mit ‚spiccato’ fast einerley, daß nemlich die Bogen-Striche kurtz, ohne Ziehen, und wohl von einander abgesondert werden müssen. Das erstere kommt von ‚staccare’, ‚entkleben, ablösen’, und dieses ‚Verbum’ von ‚taccare’ ‚kleben,’ ‚dis’; oder, besser, von ‚attacare’ ,anhängen, ankleben’ her, und wird an statt der Sylbe ‚at’, ‚dis’ oder ‚s’, so ‚ent’ bedeutet, genommen; das zweyte aber kommt her von ‚Stocco’, ein Stock, heisset demnach ‚gestossen, nicht gezogen’. Die ‚marque’ dieser Art ist, wenn das Wort ‚staccato’ oder ‚stoccato’ nicht dabey stehet, ein kleines über oder unter den Noten befindliches Strichelgen, also gestaltet: ‚|’.<<

(„’Spiccato’ {Italian} means that you should have the sounds made by instruments be separated [one from the other] and have each note be heard ‘distinctly’ [as a separate note not slurred with the note before or after].

’Staccato’ or ‘Stoccato’ {Italian} is almost identical in meaning with ‘spiccato’ meaning specifically that the bow movement is kept short without drawing out a long bow and that each of these short bow movements must be kept separate from the others. The first term, ‘staccato’, is derived from the Italian verb, ‘staccare’ which means to ‘unglue’’to remove something from something else so that it comes off’, and this verb [‘staccare’] comes from ‘taccare’ ‘to glue together’ with the prefix ‘dis’; or better yet, from ‘attacare’, ‘to attach or glue to’ where instead of the syllable [prefix] ‘at’, ‘dis’ or ‘s’ meaning ‘ent’ [the German privative, ‘ent’ = ‘away from’]; the second term [‘stoccato’], however, comes from the Italian word ‘stocco’ which in German is ‘Stock’ {= ‘stick’ or ‘pole’ in English}, hence it means ‘poking’, not ‘being drawn’. The marking [in notation] for performing in this manner whenever the word ‘staccato’ or ‘stoccato’ do not appear written out is a little vertical line which may appear above or under the notes. It looks like this: | .”)

[My commentary:

Playing or singing ‘staccato’ involves a decision reflecting the degree to which the notes are separated one from the other as well as the amount of accentuation given to each one.

If a quarter note is marked and played ‘staccato’, is it sufficient in the case of the quarter note to think in terms of a very short breath or stoppage of sound that reduces the value of the note only very slightly without reducing the overall tempo, or should the same quarter note be reduced to a 32nd note (or even shorter) as can be heard in some HIP recordings? How much separation is necessary to ‘unglue’ one note from the next so that they are not ‘run together’ without any separation at all? (Of course, the acoustical environment will play a role in all of this as well.)

If a note is marked ‘staccato’ and putting aside the fact that some notes in a pattern of subsequent dotted notes might receive a slightly stronger accent than some of the others, will not such a note with a staccato articulation simply ‘stand out’ from other notes normally played quasi legato and unmarked in the parts or score without having strong, sharp accents placed on each one or even to allow the unaccented staccato notes to become practically inaudible when they are played too fast?]

To add some further confusion to the above (I am unable to find anywhere in Walther’s dictionary an explanation of a simple dot over or below a note – his definition of ‘Punctum’, ‘Punctus’, or ‘Punto’ is only a dot which follows a note directly), here is a definition of small horizontal lines (dashes) appearing over or under notes (these are normally considered ‘tenuto’ markings today, but ‘tenuto’ as a term is still non-existent in Walther’s dictionary).

>>‘Punctus percutiens’ (lat.) heißt der, welcher so wohl in Sing- als Kling-Stücken über oder unter die Noten gesetzet wird, anzuzeigen, daß selbige ‚abgestossen’ werden sollen. Wenn nebst den Puncten auch Bogen sich über oder unter den Noten in Instrumental-Sachen befinden, müssen selbige mit einem Strich ‚absolvirt’ werden.<<

(„’Punctus percutiens’ (Latin) means that mark of notational punctuation which is placed above or under the notes in vocal as well as instrumental compositions, a mark [in the example Walther gives it is a short horizontal line or dash above or below the note] that signifies that these notes ought to be separated [by breaking off the continuous sound that otherwise occurs when moving from one note to the other in legato style]. When, in addition to these marks of punctuation, curved phrasing marks of articulation also occur above or below these notes in instrumental compositions, then all of these notes [in a group of notes] must be executed in one bow stroke in the same direction.”)

Hermann Keller’s (his doctoral dissertation was entitled: “Die musikalische Artikulation, besonders bei J. S. Bach“ - „Musical articulation, particularly as used by J. S. Bach”) article on ‘articulation’ in the MGG1 (Bärenreiter, 1986) has the following remarkable statement:

>>Noch Beethoven gebraucht fast ausschließlich den Keil als staccato-Zeichen.<<

(“Even Beethoven still used the wedge [this is, hopefully, the same as the ‘Strichelchen’ – the little vertical line referred to by Walther] almost exclusively as a means of indicating staccato.“)

Bradley Lerhman wrote (July 10, 2006):
BWV 93. (dots over notes)

< I naively (or conventionally) interpreted the dots over notes as staccato indication. I have since discovered (search on Niedt, as suggested by Thomas Braatz) the long BCW section Bach's Markings and Notations, which includes the comment that dots over notes do not indicate true staccato, which Bach indicates by a wedge (or dash). In fact the dots can indicate a range of emphasis, and are not necessarily specific. I concede that I am looking for a bit of free and convenient education here, as opposed to taking an appropriate university course, so corrections welcome as always. >
We've discussed notational dots-over-notes numerous times here in the past, and in various contexts of Bach's instrumental and vocal music. In addition to anything about emphasis (like a modern "hot" type of staccato, played crisply), the dots can also indicate a range of DE-EMPHASIS, i.e. playing the notes lightly and quietly and evenly so as *not* to draw special attention to them. For example, canceling rhythmic inequality or canceling normal patterns of strong/weak accentuation, by playing the notes more nearly the same (drawing less attention to any of them individually).

Short of giving direct harpsichord/organ/clavichord/fortepiano lessons to those here willing to learn these instruments (and which would have to be done on appropriate instruments in good acoustic spaces anyway): I believe I've described my position on these matters sufficiently in the postings that are archived at the following pages.

http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Markings.htm
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Minim.htm
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Notes.htm
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/HIP-2.htm
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Perform-Gen13.htm
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Topics/Recitatives-5.htm

I've also recommended several excellent books, in some of those postings.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 11, 2006):
[To Bradley Lehman] That's the spirit, Brad! I repeated the cross references just in case anyone missed them the first time, and as an excuse to sneak a personal message onto the list.

Until I get to looking at them, I will proceed on the underthat a dot over/under a note to Bach, means nothing more specific (or less!) than pay special attention.

If we are ever in the same neighborhood for long enough, I would very much enjoy a bit of actual education. Until the real thing comes along, thanks for the BCW posts.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 17, 2006):
BWV 93/Bach on radio

The WGBH broadcast this morning was BWV 93, which we discussed two weeks ago. The performance chosen was Doormann [2], on MHS LP. This was the same recording Aryeh mentioned in the first round of discussions, while I commented on the Cantate release this time. Not exactly a precise comparison, but the MHS sounded superb, better than my Cantate. The announcement was incomplete, and I needed to phone in to be sure it was not a CD release. Alas, no such luck. Anyone looking for the LP can be well satisfied with the MHS version if it turns up.

Cantata BWV 93: Complete Recordings | Recordings of Individual Movements | Discussions

Recordings & Discussions of Cantatas: Cantatas BWV 1-50 | Cantatas BWV 51-100 | Cantatas BWV 101-150 | Cantatas BWV 151-200 | Cantatas BWV 201-224 | Cantatas BWV Anh | Order of Discussion

Introduction | Cantatas | Other Vocal | Non-Vocal | Performers | General Topics | Articles | Books | Movies
Biographies | Texts & Translations | Scores | References | Commentary | Music | Concerts | Bach Tour | Memorabilia
Chorale Texts | Chorale Melodies | Lutheran Church Year | Readings | Poets & Composers | Transcriptions
Search Website | Search Works/Movements | Terms & Abbreviations | Copyright Notice | How to contribute | Links