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

Goldberg Variations BWV 988
David Shemer (Harpsichord)
Review of Shemer's Goldberg


Bach: Goldberg Variations

Goldberg Variations BWV 988

David Shemer (Harpsichord)


Oct 2, 3 & 6, 2008

CD / TT: 80:00

Recorded at Christ Church, Jerusalem, Israel.
Buy this album at:
CD (2011): | via e-mail: David Shemer (

Review of Shemer's Goldberg

Uri Golomb wrote (July 23, 2014):
David Shemer is a leading figure in the Israeli early music scene, both as a harpsichordist (and teacher) and as a conductor; he is, among other things, the founder of the Jerusalem Baroque Orchestra (JBO), Israel’s premier period-instrument ensemble. This recording of Bach’s Goldberg Variations is the first-ever release on the JBO’s independent record label, and represents an ambitious – and revelatory – inaugural disc.

Shemer offers us one of the most sonically beautiful and texturally transparent versions of the Goldberg Variations. Its beauty arises, in part, from Shemer’s basic “hardware” choices; as he explains in the notes,

The instrument used in this recording – a 2001 harpsichord of Franco-Flemish type by Martin Skowroneck of Bremen – is tuned to a’ = 392 HZ (a whole step below the “modern” a’). This pitch, one of several that were practiced in Bach’s day, gives the instrument a particularly dark, mellow sound.

Shemer also explains that he has chosen “a tuning system that would do full justice to the Goldberg home key, while, at the same time, highlighting the many jarring chromaticisms and dissonances of the g minor variations”. These choices indeed prove highly effective; the basic sound – as captured on this recording, made at Christ Church, Jerusalem – is rich and resonant, yet still allows inner lines to emerge with crystalline clarity. The effect is further enhanced by Shemer’s choice of registration, which reserves the sharper and more strident sonorities available on his chosen instrument to a small number of the more extrovert, virtuosic variations, relying elsewhere on gentler and mellower registers.

These basic choices would not have been sufficient in themselves to guarantee the lyrical yet searching results obtained by Shemer; what matters, ultimately, is the performer’s musicianship as expressed in moment-to-moment decisions, in the subtle inflection of such parameters as phrasing, agogic shaping, accentuation and ornamentation. It is here that Shemer’s unique contribution gradually emerges: his is one of the most supple and flexible renditions of the Goldberg Variations on record. Shemer dares to go much further than most of his colleagues in small yet clearly noticeable modifications, stretching and squeezing the pulse, occasionally straining – though never actually endangering – the sense of metre. This might require some adjustment from listeners who are used to more rigid renditions, but the results are highly persuasive and expressively compelling.1

Shemer is far too sensitive a player to introduce this flexibility in each and every variation; he recognizes that some movements – particularly the virtuosic double-keyboard variations – require a steadier beat, and the level of flexibility thus becomes an interpretive element, enhancing the differentiation between variations and ensuring variety in the work as a whole. Yet even this unstated “rule” is not consistently adhered to; Variation 23, for instance, is handled with far greater delicacy and suppleness than one might expect, given the aesthetics established earlier in the performance. The results are surprisingly convincing, turning this seemingly “solid” variation into a series of arresting rhetorical flourishes.

Shemer’s sense of flexibility reaches its zenith in variation 25, sometimes dubbed the “black pearl” or the Chopinesque variation. Here, Shemer employs something akin to melodic rubato – especially towards the end of the variation – holding the left hand steady while allowing considerable flexibility in the right hand. This practice is seldom employed by present-day musicians (historically-informed or otherwise). Shemer’s employment of it here is startlingly effective, subtly enhancing the music’s expressive intensity. Regrettably, however, this is the only variation which Shemer performs without repeats, inhibiting listeners from contemplating and absorbing the harmonic and expressive complexities of the music and of Shemer’s handling of it (I also suspect that, if Shemer had performed the repeats, his rubato would have been subtly different in each repeat – further enhancing the richness of his interpretation).

I also have some reservations with Shemer’s handling of the double bar-lines. Each of the Goldbeg variations consists of two parts of equal length, each repeated twice. This structure is clearly, even trivially, audible and requires no emphasis; many performers create a sense of continuity, allowing each repeat, and each section, to flow into the next (some even flow from one variations to the next). On some occasions, Shemer is similarly fluent (notable examples include variations 1, 2 and 21). On other occasions (e.g., variations 7, 11 and 15), I feel that he over-emphasizes the work’s sectional divisions – making the end of a first repeat sound like the end of the entire variation, thereby creating a disconcerting stop-and-go effect when he does proceed with the second repeat. This effect is all the more jarring when set against admirable flexibility of pulse and phrasing that leads up to these ungainly pauses.

This is, however, a minor reservation, which only briefly and marginally dampened my enjoyment of this otherwise highly refined, original and compelling account of this oft-recorded work. In his absorbing liner note essays, Shemer emphasizes the work’s intellectual aspects, describing it as “a highly complicated game, both of the intellectual and emotional kind, that of a great artist aware of his own creative powers and enjoying his practically unlimited compositional ability”. He postulates an affinity between Bach’s masterpiece and Herman Hesse’s concept (in The Glass Bead Game) of games as “the epitome of mankind’s spiritual and intellectual achievement”. Shemer’s written essay emphasizes Bach’s intellect rather than his emotion (though he does address the music’s tongue-in-cheek aspects); his actual performance, however, is equally attuned to the music’s expressive depth and sheer beauty. Few performances of The Goldberg Variations have afforded me such profound pleasure, and invited so many repeated hearings.

© Uri Golomb, 2014

1 I have read about performances which apparently take even greater agogic liberties, to the point of being described as “mannered”. I have not heard any of these performances myself, and therefore cannot comment on them or compare them with Shemer’s; suffice to say that, in itself, Shemer’s rendition succeeds in being highly flexible withoutdegenerating into unmusical mannerisms.


Goldberg Variations BWV 988: Details
1900-1949 | 1950-1959 | 1960-1969 | 1970-1979 | 1980-1989 | 1990-1994 | 1995-1999 | 2000-2005 | 2005-2009 | 2010-2014 | 2015-2019
Comparative Review: Goldberg Variations on Piano:
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5
Comparative Review: Round-Up of Goldberg Variations Recordings:
Recordings | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7
Reviews of Individual Recordings:
GV - R. Barami, J. Crossland, O. Dantone, D. Propper | GV - M. Cole | GV - J. Crossland | GV - E. Dershavina | GV - S. Dinnerstein | GV - R. Egarr [Lehman] | GV - R. Egarr [Satz] | GV - R. Egarr [Bright] | GV - Feltsman | GV- P. Hantai | GV - P. Hantaï (2nd) | GV - K. Haugsand | GV - A. Hewitt | GV - R. Holloway | GV- H. Ingolfsdottir | GV- K. Ishizaka | GV - J. Jando | GV - B. Lagacé | GV - G. Leonhardt | GV- K. Lifschitz | GV - A. Newman | GV - T. Nikolayeva 3rd | GV- J. Payne | GV - W. Riemer | GV - C. Rousset | GV - S. Schepkin, M. Yudina & P. Serkin | GV - A. Schiff [ECM] | GV- H. Small | GV - M. Suzuki | GV - G. Toth | GV - K.v. Trich | GV - R. Tureck [Satz] | GV - R. Tureck [Lehman] | GV- B. Verlet | GV - A. Vieru | GV - J. Vinikour | GV - A. Weissenberg | GV - Z. Xiao-Mei
General Discussions:
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Quodlibet in GV | GV for Strings
Discussions of Individual Recordings:
GV - D..Barenboim | GV - P.J. Belder | GV - E. Dershavina | GV - S. Dinnerstein | GV - R. Egarr | GV - V. Feltsman | GV - C. Frisch | GV - G. Gould | GV - P. Hantaï | GV - R. Holloway | GV - J. Jando | GV - K. Jarrett | GV - G. Leonhardt | GV - V. Makin | GV - A. Newman | GV - S. Ross | GV - A. Schiff | GV - R. Schirmer | GV - H. Small | GV - G. Sultan | GV - G. Toth | GV - R. Tureck | GV - S. Vartolo | GV - B. Verlet
The Quodlibet as Represented in Bach’s Final Goldberg Variation BWV 988/30 [T. Braatz]

Dadid Shemer: Short Biography | Jerusalem Baroque Orchestra | Recordings of Instrumental Works
Reviews of Instrumental Recordings:
Review of Shemer's Goldberg

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


Back to the Top

Last update: Sunday, June 04, 2017 06:29