Recordings/Discussions
Background Information
Performer Bios

Poet/Composer Bios

Additional Information

Instrumental Works: Recordings, Reviews & Discussions - Main Page | Order of Discussion
Recording Reviews of Instrumental Works: Main Page | Organ | Keyboard | Solo Instrumental | Chamber | Orchestral, MO, AOF
Performers of Instrumental Works: Main Page | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Partitas BWV 825-830
General Discussions - Part 1 (2001)

Bach's Partitas for Harpsichord

Donald Satz wrote (May 2, 2001):
Listmember Ramiro Arguello asked for my opinion of Roussett's set of the Bach Partitas for Harpsichord. I would like to have an opinion, but I've heard very little of the performances. When the set was issued, I was not
into that repertoire at the time; now, I can't find it in stores or my usual web sites. But you all know I'm a patient guy. The set will show up at some point in the future.

Decca's treatment of Rousset's recordings is perplexing. This performer gets rave reviews, and Decca deletes his recordings almost as fast as EMI deletes those of Norrington. I have a sneaky suspicion that Christmas bonuses for the big managers are tied to the quantity of deletions. I should have joined a record company; I love to throw things out.

 

Partita 4 - Allemande

Kirk McElhearn wrote (May 3, 2001):
This may be my favorite movement in all of Bach's keyboard works. I find it moving, subtle, and delicate. But what gets me is how different it is from most of his other keyboard movements. Not only in its length (it might be the longest...) but also its style. While the Aria from the Goldbergs is similar, I can't think of another movement that is so expository - I hear this as a conversation relating a story of love, loss, and rediscovery.

Of the various versions I have, I find Parmentier's to be best. (Looking back at Don's review, I have to disagree - however, I don't have either Gould or Tureck.)

Any thoughts from the rest of you?

Jim Morrison wrote (May 3, 2001):
[To Kirk McElhearn] Like you, I too find the Parmentier Allemande from the fourth partita something special. I've listened to some other versions that I have, Hewitt, Tureck, Weissenberg, Gould, Rübsam, Troeger, and Gieseking and it seems to me that Parmentier has an unusual high level of urgency, mystery, and drama to his interpretation, an interpretation which, to make further use your metaphor, seems to focus more on the pain and confusion of the loss of a love. It doesn't flow quite as easily along as some of the other performences, but I think this heightens the drama of the movement. By adding turbulence, Parmentier makes the movement sound more like a spontaneous conversation about a troubled love affair rather than a great, though perhaps too-well planned out speech, as we might call some of the other versions out there.

Parmentier has a kind of vitality to him than creates in his recordings a consisent level of change and surprise, something I find extremly interesting and rewarding, though I can understand how some people might be a bit discomfited and put off by his unusual work, esp considering how some other Bach performers play a more stricter, straightforward, metronomic, reserved, or reverential type of Bach, less full of surprise and more clearly
structurally blocked off and delineated.

But me, I find Parmentier's style complex, refreshing, rich, subtle, energetic, deep, intense, bold part of the time and delicate at others, sparkling, and most importantly, alive, that is to say, I think his work imaginative music-making of a seriously high order.

The Parmentier Partita set is one of my favorite harpsichord albums, and I think not only is the playing extremly fine, but the quality of the recorded sound is of audiophile level. Great playing on a great instrument (of which
one review justly wrote "it has a strong attack and a big but warm sound." For my money, this is a must-have set of the Partitas. I also say that about Gould, Hewitt, and Tureck. When we're talking about musicians of that high of an order, judgements about which is best become a bit, well, shall we say, non-essential. They are all four great, in my opinion, in their own separate ways.

Anyone else out there have some favorite Partita sets?

Here are a few comments on specific recordings of the allemande.

The Hewitt allemande emphasized the singing lines and used a fair amount of pianistic color to fine effect. Tureck took a more calm, contemplative approach that has her usual air of self-assured authority. I really enjoy Tureck, but I sometimes wish I could detact a larger element of risk in her work. I like Tureck most late in the evening. People like Parmentier and Gould often make for great Spring-day Bach.

Troeger and I just don't connect, though I should say I am a fan of the clavichord so the instrument isn't a problem. Gieseking ripped through this piece at a staggering clip (2:32!?) The less said about that performance perhaps the better for Gieseking, who happens to be truly incredible in Debussy.

Weissenberg's is a fine version that reminded me of Gould's. Bryce Morrison of Gramophone made the following comment of the entire partita: "Yet even Weissenberg's strongest detractors will find his Bach D major Partita of a crystalline perfection and unfailing musical strength and sensitivity. The Courante is elegantly shaped and nuanced and if the performance, in its razor-sharp articulacy, is a clear relation of Gould's Bach, it is quite without his alternately enthralling and infuriating perversity. "

Rübsam was his usual geodesic self (I like Rübsam but find it hard sometimes to tell a good performance from a not so good one, if you know what I mean.)

And Gould, well Gould is playing incredibly well in his probing yet still flowing and intimate manner. He claimed to have a special fondness for the warmth of this partita. Gould's partita double disc set, which also contains a wealth of assorted "little" pieces, is one of my favorites of his, and if anyone out there is thinking
of buying some Gould discs and they aren't sure which ones to purchase, if I were you I'd seriously consider investing in this one.

Riccardo Nughes wrote (May 3, 2001):
Jim Morrison wrote :
< Anyone else out there have some favorite Partita sets? >
Well I've got only one set, the one by the late Scott Ross, recorded in 1989 and they sound really great to me. They were reissued in Europe in 2000 on the budget serie "Ultima".

Donald Satz wrote (May 4, 2001):
[To Riccardo Nughes] Karl Richter and Glenn Gould with Rosalyn Tureck and Gustav Leonhardt close behind.

William D. Kasimer wrote (May 4, 2001):
Jim Morrison asks:
< Anyone else out there have some favorite Partita sets? >
I'm relatively new to Bach keyboard music, but I've been enjoying Weissenberg on a recently issued 3 CD EMI set, along with the Goldbergs, the Italian Concerto, and something else I'm blanking on.

Donald Satz wrote (May 4, 2001):
[To Jim Morrison] Jim's conception of the Allemande from the 4th Partita is quite different from mine and likely goes a long way in explaining our particular views of Parmentier's performance compared to Gould's. Jim hears the music as representing a "troubled love affair"; I hear it as highly noble and heroic music. Parmentier's choppy rhythm doesn't sound to me to be enhancing drama/urgency, just enhancing the chop. His hesitations limit my enjoyment of his reading as they damage the music's flow. Switch to Gould and the nobility and ceremony are supreme; in his reading, there is no love affair except perhaps for the love affair a hero might have with himself.

There's no doubt that conceptions of music lead directly to perferences concerning performances. Last night I listened again to Parmentier's Allemande, trying to go with the troubled love theme. I simply can't connect with it. There is nothing in the music that makes my mind veer toward love relationships between individuals. For me, the hero in this Allemande does not concern himself with individuals; his priority is of a somewhat global and adversarial nature - hero against foes. Just writing this posting, I feel like fighting for territory. So, Jtakes Parmentier and I take the Goulds of the world - we both get what we want. I like that result.

Jim Morrison wrote (May 4, 2001):
[To Donald Satz] What a great post by you that presented a different reading of a musical performance.

You said "So, Jim takes Parmentier and I take the Goulds of the world - we both get what we want. I like that result."

Which seems to me to be saying "music means different things to different people, and I'm okay with that."

Great attitude.

By the way, I take both the Goulds and the Parmentiers of the world, along the Turecks, Hewitts, Leonhardts, van Asperens, Ricthers, Horowitzs, Argerichs, Manzes, Rifkins, Casals, etc.

I should say that overall I'm most receptive to music that has more of an "edge" to it, music that people would probably call full of personality, eccentricity, surprise, heat, energy, turbulence, risky music with a lot of the performer in the work, but a performer that clearly is trying to tell me something intelligent and important via the music, not simply a performer that wants to show off himself and pose.

Other people are more receptive to different ways of presenting music, and undoubtably have a better understanding of that sort of music than I do.

Don, there's no need to feel like you're fighting for ground. You've got your ground and I've got mean, but I don't see anyone really trying to take any from the other. I do see some people saying "that music doesn't mean
the same thing to me as it does to you" and boy, if that's not a normal kind of comment between people talking about art, I don't know what is.

One very interesting thing that comes out of discussions on music is uncovering the sorts of, oh, let's call them, emotional narratives that people bring to a work and use to talk about it, how when listening to music we sometimes populate the score with human beings, how what's happened in our relationships with other people affects how we hear and interpret the music, how some music reminds us of this emotional experience we've had and others do not. Some music more closely resembles an internal, emotional experience, while other works seem more connected to the outside world. Strange how "social" music apprecation can be.

I suspect this complex mingling of our own lives with music has big effect on how we appreciate music, what music we choose to listen to, what music moves us and speaks to us, for us.

Which helps account for why I'm such a big fan of the internet. It allows for people who wouldn't normally be in touch with each other to discuss works of art, to talk about particular recordings. It helps us to share what has or has not moved us. We help ourselves and others find the music that reflects and enhances who we are, which in a very real way, helps us better enjoy capital-L Life.

Jim (who is in total agreement with Don that the Parmentier Allemande is much more choppy than the other versions I have. If you don't like "chop" then Parmentier isn't going to be the man for you. I think I hear more in
the chop than Don does, but on the flip side, I bet he hears more in the smoother flow of Gould and Tureck than I do. I forget, did I mention that Gould and Parmentier's are my two favorite versions of this movement? One thing that makes Gould so special to me is that he works into his work both chop and flow.)

Bradley Lehman wrote (May 5, 2001):
What do you (anyone) think of Rachmaninoff's recording of the partita 4's sarabande?

I wish he had recorded the whole partita....

Bradley Lehman wrote (May 5, 2001):
Donald Satz wrote:
< Jim's conception of the Allemande from the 4th Partita is quite different from mine and likely goes a long way in explaining our particular views of Parmentier's performance compared to Gould's. Jim hears the music as representing a "troubled love affair"; I hear it as highly noble and heroic music. Parmentier's choppy rhythm doesn't sound to me to be enhancing drama/urgency, just enhancing the chop. His hesitations limit my enjoyment of his reading as they damage the music's flow. >
What hesitations? What "choppy"? To me Parmentier's performance sounds as if it's flowing very steadily (based on the LEFT hand)...the right hand is playing freely above a steady beat. I think that's more of what Bach probably wanted than Gould (and others) who play the right hand notes steadily: the right hand part is all written-out ornamentation, and the rhythmic values are to suggest relationships while not restricting them completely. It's what CPE Bach, Mozart, Chopin, and others recommended: left hand steady, right hand freely expressive. Loose, the way a good singer would deliver it. Parmentier's performance here at least suggests that conception of the music. (And in his teaching he is a proponent of always knowing what the words are in an instrumental piece, or inventing suitable words if none are available. Expression comes from imagining how a singer would deliver those words.)

To call Parmentier "choppy" here is analogous to calling Frank Sinatra's or Barbra Streisand's rhythm bad: sure, they bend things, but it's a classy thing within a steady beat of the other parts. The gracefulness comes from the way the loose stuff interacts with the strict stuff. Frankly (no pun intended) I'd rather hear more improvisatory freedom in the right hand than Parmentier gives it; his recording is stricter in right-hand rhythm than the way he and I both played it when I was studying this piece with him (that same year, 1991). That is, the recording is more conservative than one might do in a more off-the-cuff and ephemeral performance. That just tends to be the nature of recordings in the classical field: they preserve interpretations that tend to be a little more safe than one might play "live."

Another piece in this mould is the 25th variation of the Goldbergs. Or, for that matter, the "O Mensch bewein..." chorale for organ, or many Buxtehude chorales. So many people play the right hand part in exactly the rhythms that are notated. I think that completely misses the point. How else could Bach notate a very free melody over a strict accompaniment? Should he have written an even more complex-looking thing across the bars, the way a MIDI sequencer transcribes a freely played melody into 32nd-note resolution? Should we punish Bach for fitting his music into the barlines, even though it doesn't necessarily have to be played exactly lined up as it looks on the page? Or can we let the right hand be loose and make good swingin' vocal music of it?

< Switch to Gould and the nobility and ceremony are supreme; in his reading, there is no love affair except perhaps for the love affair a hero might have with himself.
There's no doubt that conceptions of music lead directly to perferences concerning performances. >
Hear, hear!

< Last night I listened again to Parmentier's Allemande, trying to go with the troubled love theme. I simply can't connect with it. There is nothing in the music that makes my mind veer toward love relationships between individuals. For me, the hero in this Allemande does not concern himself with individuals; his priority is of a somewhat global and adversarial nature - hero against foes. >
I don't hear love or heroes or whatever extramusical associations in this movement: only some purely graceful music not connected to any specific program. Don, I agree with that nobility in character you mention, but I hear it in both Parmentier and Gould. I think that comes from the piece's harmonic rhythm and melodic shapes, more than from any particular performance.

< Just writing this posting, I feel like fighting for territory. So, Jim takes Parmentier and I take the Goulds of the world - we both get what we want. I like that result. >
Me too.

Bradley Lehman wrote (May 5, 2001):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
< Another piece in this mould is the 25th variation of the Goldbergs. Or, for that matter, the "O Mensch bewein..." chorale for organ, or many Buxtehude chorales. So many people play the right hand part in exactly the rhythms that are notated. I think that completely misses the point. How else could Bach notate a very free melody over a strict acco? Should he have written an even more complex-looking thing across the bars, the way a MIDI sequencer transcribes a freely played melody into 32nd-note resolution? Should we punish Bach for fitting his music into the barlines, even though it doesn't necessarily have to be played exactly lined up as it looks on the page? Or can we let the right hand be loose and make good swingin' vocal music of it? >
In a nutshell: this is Italianate instrumental/vocal music. The kind that young Bach and his buddy Walther eagerly devoured when transcribing Vivaldi violin concertos for solo harpsichord or organ. The kind that shows up in the second movement of the Italian Concerto, the cantatas, the passions, etc etc etc. How does one learn how to play these expressively enough on the keyboard? Go listen to good singers and violinists, and study the treatises that tell how 17th/18th century singers and players crafted performances...!

Jim Morrison wrote (May 5, 2001):
Bradley Lehman wrote concerning Parmentier's version of the allemande of the fourth partita:
< What hesitations? What "choppy"? >
Ah yes, language is a funny thing. Let me clarify a bit. I don't listen to this piece and really say to myself "this is choppy." However, this is something akin to choppiness in this work when compared to other recordings. It isn't as smooth as say Gould or Tureck, it has more texture, more side-roads, heck, maybe even so evaluative word as complexity, and perhaps by choppy Don meant "less smooth" and "less steady," and "more textured."

That's what I thought he meant and that's how I was using the word in our discussion, you know, trying to speak with the words that people are speaking to me so as better to facilitate communication and an open exchange
of ideas.

Don in an early review mentioned that in one movement Parementier seemed to be coming at him from many directions. I can see how in some sense that could be called choppy as well, and something I hear much of in Parmentier and I value greatly in his music. But I'm also comfortable calling him graceful. The first movement of the first partita sings to me with much grace. Yes list, I guess it's getting obvious you need to keep your eye on my words and ask me just what I meant if I come off as sounding "odd."

Here's where it's nice to have Brad come in to help us see what our words may mean to other people on the list. Parmentier is not in a larger, more common use of the word "choppy." He does have flow, and yet also does
bend the music a bit more than other piano versions of the allemande, which adds to my mind some extra tension to the work that I don't hear in the other performances I mentioned.

Funny, how this piece sounds at times a bit pensive and sighing, but I don't see others talking about that quality in the music. Am I the only one? Kirk? You brought up the work. Care to go into more detail as to what you
hear? This first movement, with it's kind of fanfare announcements, sounds much more"noble" to me than the allemande. And the allemande sounds more serious to me than the following courantet, though not as emotionally turbulent as the toccata to the sixth partita.

It's not that I get clear associations of extra-musical events or, oh yes, here is the love scene, there's the slap in the face, there's the lonely walk in the cold woods after the break up, but that the emotions I feel while listening to it do remind me of emotions I feel when experiencing, and perhaps more accurately, recounting trouble in love. I certainly wouldn't ever insist this music was really about love, though it does in a complicated very personal way remind me of love.

Mileage, I'm sure, will vary.

Me, I'm okay saying that Frank Sinatra is "choppier" than Tony Bennett, and that's one reason I much prefer the former to the latter, but I see where that word could cause some confusion. I'm also comfortable saying Sinatra
is "skankier" and mean that in an entirely positive way, but that's a word best left for another discussion.

I think Brad's years of playing and listening to the harpsichord, and all that implies, has, oh, increased his appreciation for the free play of musicians like Parmentier, a kind of freeplay and vitality that to ears not
accustomed to the harpsichord, ears use to hear Bach played in a more streamlined manner on the piano, sound a little bit "choppy." Heck, even the pluck of the plectrum and the chunk and buzz of dampeners add a kind of
"choppines" to the music that you don't hear on piano recordings.

Brad and I have spoken about Rübsam's Bach as being "geodesic." Perhaps that's a better word for what Don and I are hearing in Parmentier.

I'm curious if Brad knows of another recording of this work that is less smooth, more textured, more geodesic, and played with more swing than Parmentier. I'd love to hear it and I'm definitely in the market for another
set of Partitas on harpsichord.

PS

Here's a link to a page I just found on the allemande to the third English suite: http://www.homoecumenicus.com/essay_ioannidis_analysis_allemande.htm

Bradley Lehman wrote (May 5, 2001):
Jim Morrison wrote:
< Ah yes, language is a funny thing. Let me clarify a bit. I don't listen to this piece and really say to myself "this is choppy." However, this is something akin to choppiness in this work when compared to other recordings. It isn't as smooth as say Gould or Tureck, it has more texture, more side-roads, heck, maybe even so evaluative word as complexity, and perhaps by choppy Don meant "less smooth" and "less steady," and "more textured."
That's what I thought he meant and that's how I was using the word in our discussion, you know, trying to speak with the words that people are speaking to me so as better to facilitate communication and an open exchange of ideas.
Don in an early review mentioned that in one movement Parementier seemed to be coming at him from many directions. I can see how in some sense that could be called choppy as well, and something I hear much of in Parmentier and I value greatly in his music. (...) >
Where I came from, "choppy" always meant "unable to play legato phrases." That is, it was a pretty nasty insult to say that a player's performance was choppy. Don't put your boat on those choppy waves, they'll flip you right over....

But I can see yet another possible meaning: "Listen to her play, man, she really has the piano chops!" (As in an ability to play with ease and usually speed and smoothness.)

Kirk McElhearn wrote (May 5, 2001):
Jim Morrison said:
< Funny, how this piece sounds at times a bit pensive and sighing, but I don't see others talking about that quality in the music. Am I the only one? Kirk? You brought up the work. Care to go into more detail as to what you hear? This first movement, with it's kind of fanfare announcements, sounds much more"noble" to me than the allemande. And the allemande sounds more serious to me than the following courantet, though not as emotionally turbulent as the toccata to the sixth partita. >
I tend to agree with you. And the other movements (except the sarabande) are in strong opposition. In a way, the sarabande sounds like a response to the allemande. But the other lively movements don't quite fit, if you look at it in that way. I sometimes feel that, for certain suites, there is a "cut and paste" feeling, rather than a true thematic relationship. This is perhaps less so with the French suites...

In any case, I am basically in awe when listening to this work. That Bach could write such beauty... and that, one day, I might even be able to play it.

Donald Satz wrote (May 5, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] Interesting. Brad recognizes no hesitations or choppiness and loves Parmentier's Allemande. Jim Morrison does recognize those characteristics and appreciates them. I recognize them and don't appreciate them. All we need now is someone who doesn't recognize them and does not care for them. Too bad that's a condition that can't be met.

I consider it a fact that the hesitations exist, and there are many when I enjoy hesitations in a Bach performance. It's certainly possible that I might have liked Parmentier's hesitations if he hadn't played in a choppy manner with his right hand. The combination of the two takes his performance out of my preferred category.

In a way, I don't like keying on Parmentier's Allemande in that there are many other movements in the Partitas where I love Parmentier's readings. As I indicated in my recent review of his set, my overall opinion of it is very
high. In that respect, Brad, Jim, and I are on the same wavelength.

Donald Satz wrote (May 5, 2001):
[To Kirk McElhearn] Kirk's got it right. The main thing is the mastery and inspiration of the Allemande. That also applies to the entire 4th Partita which is my favorite of the six. I love the ceremony in the 4th, and that's why I most like Gould's performances. Nobody is better at it than him.

Donald Satz wrote (May 5, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] Brad states that, in his experience, 'choppy' is a negative term indicating a lack of ability to "play legato phrases". I don't see it that way at all. There are times when I like a choppy delivery, and I always think that the choppy playing is a decision of the artist, not an inidication of any lack of ability to play in a legato manner.

Bradley Lehman wrote (May 6, 2001):
Donald Satz wrote:
< Interesting. Brad recognizes no hesitations or choppiness and loves Parmentier's Allemande. Jim Morrison does recognize those characteristics and appreciates them. I recognize them and don't appreciate them. All we need now is someone who doesn't recognize them and does not care for them. Too bad that's a condition that can't be met.
I consider it a fact that the hesitations exist, and there are many times when I enjoy hesitations in a Bach performance. It's certainly possible that I might have liked Parmentier's hesitations if he hadn't played in a choppy manner with his right hand. The combination of the two takes his performance out of my preferred category. >
Perhaps we're arguing semantics.

To me, a "hesitation" would only be something that interrupts the flow of the big beats, i.e. the quarter notes here, four per (very slow) bar. Conduct along with Parmentier's performance and you'll see what I mean. I hear hesitations only at major cadential points of important harmonic events: just after the downbeat of bar 24 (in both repeats), at the end of bar 39 (where Bach establishes b minor), before the downbeat of bar 50 (where Bach is finally getting off the A pedal point), and then several places in 55-57 as we are coming to the end of the movement: he finally allows the beat to disintegrate a bit there. Since Parmentier does not take the second repeat, these occurrences in the second half do not come up a second time.

I imagine that if one were listening at the level of sixteenth or thirty-second notes, the melodic filigree, the catalogue of hesitations would have maybe a hundred entries, not five. But (as Sonny Bono might say) "the beat goes on" in all those spots except the five I mentioned. 24, 24, 39, 50, and the closing. And those five exceptions are to point up the musical structure. The pauses and other rubato in the melody are simply agogic expression, a way of making dynamic effects on the harpsichord. Wouldn't a wind player or singer breathe similarly, bending the tempo a bit around the breaths?

For some real hesitations everywhere, listen to Rübsam. It's a completely different effect from the one Parmentier establishes. Parmentier gets it going like a large slow pendulum, and it's pretty steady throughout. Rübsam never has it anywhere near that steady. He sets up a strong and mostly consistent character, but sounds undisciplined next to Parmentier: he doesn't project much of a big beat.

And at the other extreme, Gould plays even the melodic notes steadily, exactly as notated (with some minor exceptions). When I listen to this directly after Parmentier's recording, it seems unbearably stiff. I do like the Gould recording, especially in the Affekt he sets up, but the melodic line could have been loosened considerably.

If anyone sounds "choppy," to me it's performers who read the rhythmic values exactly as notated and end up playing the meter instead of playing the music's rhythm. "Choppy" is the way a computer plays a MIDI file, putting every note into a geometrically precise position within the meter. It's boring, because computers do not understand rhythm, only meter. Gould fortunately does enough with dynamics and articulation to make it interesting. But the notes are still awfully strict....

Don, I think I still don't understand what the word "choppy" means to you. Could you please explain it a bit?

Jim Morrison wrote (May 6, 2001):
No time to get into the discussion tonight, but for those of you with windows media player, here's a link to Rübsam's version of the allemande (which possibly has set a record for longest performence of single movement
of Bach's keyboard works.): http://web02.hnh.com/scripts/newreleases/naxos_cat.asp?item_code=8.550693

Donald Satz wrote (May 6, 2001):
[To Jim Morrison] I listened to the Allemande from Rübsam, although the sound wasn't very strong. Seems like a version to doze off by, but that's just first perceptions with inadequate audio.

Donald Satz wrote (May 8, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] It's a lot easier to feel something than describe it, but here it is:

Choppy playing - varying the music's flow in a relatively abrupt manner.

Jim Morrison wrote (May 9, 2001):
Donald Satz wrote
< It's a lot easier to feel something than describe it, but here it is: >
Very true, and one thing we've been trying to do that last few days is fine tune the meanings of the words we use in order to make ourselves better understood. Don's right on when he says the same words have different effects on different people. I think it's a good sign that the list can be so patient while we try to work out those differences.

I just came across what I think is a phenomenal recording of the fourth partita, sans final movement though due to the death of the performer, William Kapell. A very clearly articulated performance that is full of emotion that's brimming just below the surface, reminds me of some of Gould's performances though not his own allemande, a kind of slow, seething rendition, the kind of music I have a special fondness for. Highly recommended. The most Parmentierish version that I have.

Another such allemande people may appreciate is the one from the sixth cello suite as performed by Casals.

 

The Partitas

Thomas Boyce wrote (May 3, 2001):
I throw my hat in the ring for Trevor Pinnock's recent recording of the Partitas.

 

Bach Partitas

Francine Renee Hall wrote (December 23, 2001):
dear Bach lovers-- Opened one of my x-mas presents early today -- the 12-CD Gould set with original covers (it was fun to open the sides and save the 'shrink' wrap as in the old LP days!)! What amazed me was that I never heard GG play the Bach Partitas. I was so moved I kept playing them over and over. Wonderful! sorry for the gushing! warm wishes-- Francine (of course, Christophe Rousset does a wonderfully thoughtful job too!)

 

Continue on Part 2

Partitas BWV 825-830: Details
Recordings:
1900-1949 | 1950-1959 | 1960-1969 | 1970-1979 | 1980-1989 | 1990-1999 | 2000-2009 | 2010-2019
Comparative Review:
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6
Reviews of Individual Recordings:
Partitas - P. Anderszewski [McElhearn] | Partitas - P. Anderszewski [Satz] | Partitas - L. Corolan & I. Kipnis | Partitas - F. Kempf | Partitas - E. Feller 1 | Partitas - E. Parmentier | Partitas - A. Rangell | GV & Partitas - K. Richter | Partitas - B. Roberts | Partitas - S. Ross | Partitas - C. Rousset | Partitas - S. Sager | Partitas - C. Sheppard [Morrison] | Partitas - C. Sheppard [Satz] | Partitas - J.L. Steuerman | Partitas - M. Suzuki [McElhearn] | Partitas - M. Suzuki [Henderson] | Partitas - C. Tiberghien | Partitas - R. Troeger | Partitas - B. Verlet | Partitas - K. Weiss | Rübsam - Part 2 | Rübsam - Part 3
General Discussions:
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 Part 4 | MD: Partita No. 1 in B flat major BWV 825
Discussions of Individual Recordings:
Partitas - P. Anderszewski | Partitas - V. Dondysh | Partitas - played R. Goode
|
Partitas - R. Kirkpatrick | Partitas - A. Rangell | Partitas - S. Ross | Partitas - A. Schiff | Partitas - M. Suzuki | Partitas - B. Verlet | Partitas - K. Weiss | Partitas - R. Woolley | Partitas - Z. Xiao-Mei

Instrumental Works: Recordings, Reviews & Discussions - Main Page | Order of Discussion
Recording Reviews of Instrumental Works: Main Page | Organ | Keyboard | Solo Instrumental | Chamber | Orchestral, MO, AOF
Performers of Instrumental Works: Main Page | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Introduction | Cantatas | Other Vocal | Instrumental | Performers | General Topics | Articles | Books | Movies | New
Biographies | Texts & Translations | Scores | References | Commentaries | Music | Concerts | Festivals | Tour | Art & Memorabilia
Chorale Texts | Chorale Melodies | Lutheran Church Year | Readings | Poets & Composers | Arrangements & Transcriptions
Search Website | Search Works/Movements | Terms & Abbreviations | Copyright | How to contribute | Sitemap | Links



 

Back to the Top


Last update: July 12, 2010 21:04:00