|
Recordings & Discussions of Other Vocal Works : Motets BWV 225-231 | Mass in B minor BWV 232 | Missae Breves & Sanctus BWV 233-242 | Magnificat BWV 243 | Matthäus-Passion BWV 244 | Johannes-Passion BWV 245 | Lukas-Passion BWV 246 | Markus-Passion BWV 247 | Weihnachts-Oratorium BWV 248 | Oster-Oratorium BWV 249 | Chorales BWV 250-438 | Geistliche Lieder BWV 439-507 | AMN BWV 508-523 | Quodlibet BWV 524 | Aria BWV 1127 |
Conducted by Masaaki Suzuki
Recording
|
1 |
|
|||
|
Tenor (Evangelist) - Gerd Türk, Bass (Jesus) - Peter Kooy, Soprano – Nancy Argenta, Counter-tenor - Robin Blaze, Tenor (Testis 2) - Makoto Sakurada, Bass (Judas, Petrus, Pilatus, Pontifex) - Chiyuki Urano, Soprano (Ancilla 1, Uxor Pilati) - Midori Suzuki; Soprano (Ancilla 2) - Yoshie Hida, Alto (Testis 1) - Kirsten Sollek-Avella, Bass (Pontifex 1) - Jun Hagiwara, Bass (Pontifex 2) – Tetsuya Odagawa |
||||
|
BIS |
Mar 1999 |
3-CD / TT: 2:43:52 |
||
Suzuki's St. Matthew Passion
SMP by Masaaki Suzuki
Suzuki Tackles the Big One
Suzuki’s St. Matthew Passion
Donald Satz
wrote (February 3, 2000):Ryan related how much he is enjoying Suzuki's new recording. Although I'm not as enthusiastic as Ryan concerning Nancy Argenta, in every other respect I share Ryan's opinion.
Suzuki's Bach cantata Vol.11 arrived at my home yesterday, and that's a great recording also. I'm coming around to the opinion that Suzuki is the best interpreter of Bach sacred choral works on period instruments. I'm very glad that BIS has given Suzuki the opportunity to provide us with so many masterful Bach performances in outstanding sound.
Ryan Michero
wrote (February 3, 2000):< Donald Satz wrote: Suzuki's Bach cantata volume 11 arrived at my home yesterday, and that's a great recording also. >
I agree! I wrote an enthusiastic review of it on this list a few weeks ago. I can pass it to you through private e-mail if you would like. Or if anyone else is interested, I'll re-post.
< I'm coming around to the opinion that Suzuki is the best interpreter of Bach sacred choral works on period instruments. >
Indeed! I agree again. Suzuki is certainly a Bach specialist and his Bach recordings have been wonderful, but his other recordings of Handel, Buxtehude, and Schütz show great potential in other repertoire as well.
You don't like Argenta though? I'll admit her vibrato is a bit wide for Bach, but it's not a constant, strained vibrato and it isn't used to cover vocal insecurities. I think overall, she's a stylish, expressive singer with a fine tone. Your opinion?
Were you as impressed with the other singers as I was? I didn't think Blaze could measure up to Mera at first, but I was very pleasantly surprised.
Samuel Frederick
wrote (February 4, 2000):< You don't like Argenta though? I'll admit her vibrato is a bit wide for Bach, but it's not a constant, strained vibrato and it isn't used to cover vocal insecurities. I think overall, she's a stylish, expressive singer with a fine tone. Your opinion? >
I also finally got the recording and am very impressed, with the notable exception of Argenta. In fact, I think "Ich will Dir mein Herze schenken" is almost ruined by her singing. The piece sits too low for her, it seems, and she just wobbles her way through it without any kind of control or precision. Too bad.
But that's only a first impression. I will be re-listening to it again this weekend and will share my thoughts thereafter. All the other singers sound terrific though.
Donald Satz
wrote (February 4, 2000):< Ryan asked: You don't like Argenta though? I'll admit her vibrato is a bit wide for Bach, but it's not a constant, strained vibrato and it isn't used to cover vocal insecurities. I think, overall, she's a stylish, expressive singer with a fine tone. Your opinion? >
I don't have a problem with Argenta's vibrato; I just don't find her voice very attractive or expressive. Sibylla Rubens for Herreweghe's St. Matthew Passion is more to my liking.
< Were you as impressed with the other singers as I was? >
Yes. The others were excellent, and Robin Blaze did compare well to Mera.
For whatever reason, I tend to be more "picky" with the soprano and mezzo-soprano roles than the other roles.
Johan van Veen
wrote (March 14, 2000):Last week there has been a short discussion on recordings of Bach's St Matthew Passion. Matthew Westphal gave his opinion on the recent recording by the Bach Collegium Japan. In case you haven't read his review, look at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000046S1M/o/qid=953049139/sr=2-3/102-4287916-4444818.
In some respects I can agree with his view, but in general I am somewhat more negative. Matthew observed that Suzuki's recording is some sort of meditation about the passion, and I think he is right. I personally prefer a more dramatic approach, but one could certainly argue for a more introverted kind of performance. In fact, one of my favorite recordings follows the same path: Leonhardt's recording with the Tölzer Knabenchor and La Petite Bande (Deutsche Harmonia Mundi - RD 77848). In fact, he takes more time for the whole SMP than Suzuki. But, of course, tempo isn't the main thing. So let me sum up my impressions. For reasons of fairness, I will compare Suzuki now and then with Leonhardt, and not with a recording with a more dramatic approach.
First some general points. I can understand that a conductor uses only 4 soloists for the arias in both choirs, but is it unrealistic to expect 8 of them in a recording? Leonhardt has the luxury of having two singers in the roles of the Evangelist and Jesus, and 8 more for the other roles and the arias. (It is a shame that he has made two unhappy choices: David Cordier and especially Peter Lika.) I am not very happy with the sound of the recording. Both choirs contain 15 singers (4/3/4/4), but they sound larger. Maybe that is a matter of the acoustics. The choral sound is not as crisp and clear, as one would expect. On the whole there is a little too much reverberation to my taste. The 'soprano in ripieno'-part is sung by - well, that is a little confusing. The list of the performers says: Shizuoka Children's Choir, but in the text of the passion the English text says: Chorale (Children's Choir), the German text: Choral (Knabenchor). The names of the children are given, but since I don't know the difference between boys' and girls' names in Japanese I just can't tell what is correct. On the basis of the sound I would guess: boys. In fact, their sound reminds me of the Holland Boys Choir, which some of you may know from the Brilliant Classics recordings of Bach's cantatas. One of my problems with this recording - and in fact with many recordings of baroque vocal music - is the interpretation of the recitatives. More often than not they are sung as they have been written down by the composer. According to the performance habits of the baroque that is not what composers had in mind. The interpretation should follow the rhythm of the text rather than the rhythm of the music. That means that the length of notes can be reduced or extended, in accordance with the importance of the words or syllables. Recitatives should be 'spoken' rather than sung. Often the tempo in the recitatives is too slow. That is true for both Leonhardt and Suzuki. I never liked Kurt Equiluz' voice as such, but he certainly knew how to sing a recitative.
What about the interpreters?
I agree with Matthew about Nancy Argenta. She is a major disappointment. Her voice sounds very unpleasant, somewhat shrill. The soprano arias have all a bittersweet character, they are about love, gratitude and devotion - and Nancy Argenta fails to communicate that. The boys Leonhardt uses do a lot better. The alto arias have a different character. They reflect pain and deep sorrow. Robin Blaze just doesn't have the range of colors in his voice to bring that across. His voice lacks dramatic power to give way to the 'exclamatio'-character of the arias. (His pronunciation isn't perfect too.) I know that many people loathe René Jacobs, but it is in this kind of pieces where he shows his strength. I have never heard a more heart-broken interpretation of 'Buss und Reu' than from him in Leonhardt's recording. Makoto Sakurada doesn't have a voice many will immediately fall for. It has a certain harshness and sharpness. In that respect he reminds me a little of Nigel Rogers - although he sounds differently. His articulation is excellent, in particular in the recitativo accompagnato 'O Schmerz'. In his second recitative and aria he is far less convincing. The bass Chiyuki Urano is a problem. He also sings the roles of Judas, St Peter, Pilate and the High Priest. His performance of the recitatives is too stiff and inflexible, and therefore anything but natural. It seems that singing the German text at a certain speed is too difficult for him. During the recording he is improving in the performance of the arias, but it doesn't move me at all. The roles of the Evangelist and of Jesus are very well sung by Gerd Türk and Peter Kooy respectively. There are some very moving moments. They both have the right voices, and give the text every attention it needs. The orchestra is good, but not excellent. It lacks some drama and also some subtlety where it is needed. When I listen to La Petite Bande, with such first class players like Sigiswald Kuijken (violin), Wieland Kuijken (viola da gamba), Barthold Kuijken (flute) and Paul Dombrecht and Marcel Ponseele (oboes), I admire how they contribute to the drama. They illustrate the text much more than the Bach Collegium. That brings me to one of my main complaints: the lack of a really good and crisp articulation. It is very striking how the choirs of Suzuki and Leonhardt sing the choruses and chorales. The Tölzer Knabenchor articulates very sharply, the main words are stressed, and every part of the text gets a full emotional weight, whereas Suzuki's choir sounds rather pale and neutral. In Leonhardts recording the chorales are gripping, because of the emotional interpretation of the text. Suzuki seems to take them as moments of rest and reflection, rather than as emotional reaction of the faithful. Some time ago someone (I think it was Sybrand Bakker) wrote that he judges a performance of the SMP by the interpretation of the chorus 'Sind Blitze, sind Donner'. A comparison between Leonhardt and Suzuki is very interesting. Suzuki takes a faster tempo. But he starts in full speed and full power, which makes it impossible to create a strong climax. That is where Leonhardt shows his strength: he takes a slower tempo, and the first bars sound almost subdued - I think that is appropriate on the basis of the text (Have lightnings and thunders disappeared in the clouds?) But after that he directs the choirand orchestra to a highly emotional eruption, with very sharp and biting accents. It has a very strong dramatic impact, which I haven't experienced in Suzuki's recording.
The problem I have with Suzuki's recording is not the lack of drama or its introverted character, but a general blandness. Apart from some moments where both the Evangelist and the character of Jesus are involved, it never touches me. I have tried to formulate the reasons for that. Is my verdict too harsh? I am looking forward to other listeners' comments.
Donald Satz
wrote (March 15, 2000):I think Suzuki's SMP is on as high a level as Herreweghe's two recordings except for the singing of Nancy Argenta. Suzuki doesn't tend to select sopranos I like very much, but Argenta's the worst yet. Her voice was better in the 1980's (Gardiner's B minor Mass), but she's always, to my taste, been low on expressiveness.
Otherwise, I greatly enjoy the Suzuki version. He has the idiom in his blood, and I thought he projected the drama of the SMP just fine. The orchestra is excellent and the recorded sound superb.
Matthew Westphal
wrote (March 15, 2000):(To Donald Satz, regarding Nancy Argenta) I've been listening to Volume 2 of the Purcell Quartet "Plus" Bach 'Lutheran' (i.e., short) Masses on Chandos, which uses one singer per part, those singers being, in this case, Nancy Argenta, Michael Chance, Mark Padmore and Peter Harvey. I'll post more extended comments later, but for what it's worth, Argenta doesn't sound quite as shaky there as she does on the Suzuki SMP. (Maybe it was jet lag?) Michael Chance's voice, on the other hand, sounds like it has deteriorated quite a bit. Both Argenta and Chance were at their peak in the 1980's, so maybe we shouldn't be too surprised. (Harvey and especially Padmore are in excellent form.)
Luis Villalba
wrote (March 15, 2000):I agree with Don.
I personally believe that Suzuki sounds more natural, no less intense, than the other conductors.
I admire Leonhardt very much, but his SMP I find truly bland, like his Well Tempered Clavier.
But of course, "de gustibus..." (and, dare I say, national affinities...)
Johan van Veen
wrote (March 15, 2000):(To Luis Villalba) I can assure you that my preferences have nothing to do with national affinities. I don't have any national feelings at all. But, since so many figures in the baroque music scene are Dutch, it is almost inevitable that I like some of them... But Ton Koopman is Dutch, and on the whole I don't like what he is doing with Bach. His recordings of Bach's organ works - in particular the chorales - is pretty awful. Bob van Asperen's recording on Handel's organ concertos is ugly. And the SMP by the Netherlands Bach Society isn't very good either. Even Leonhardt, whom I generally admire, has made some recordings I am not very fond of, like some Odes by Purcell, or some of the secular cantatas by Bach. I can assure you that my judgement is strictly based on musical considerations. And that personal taste plays a role is inevitable.
Luis Villalba
wrote (March 15, 2000):(To Johan van Veen) Mea culpa and apologies. Please enjoy your Leonhardt.
Ryan Michero
wrote (March 15, 2000):Well, what can I say, except that I disagree with just about everything Johan had to say about this recording? Suzuki gives a very valid, effective, and dramatic interpretation, and I think Johan's preference for Leonhardt's version colors his negative comments. Perhaps I myself am a little overzealous in my endorsement of Suzuki's Bach recordings, but I think Johan is way too harsh on this SMP. Here's an avowed Suzuki-lover's take on the points mentioned in Johan's post:
< Johan van Veen wrote: First some general points. I can understand that a conductor uses only 4 soloists for the arias in both choirs, but is it unrealistic to expect 8 of them in a recording? Leonhardt has the luxury of having two singers in the roles of the Evangelist and Jesus, and 8 more for the other roles and the arias. (It is a shame that he has made two unhappy choices: David Cordier and especially Peter Lika.) >
The use of only a few soloists to perform this work is in accordance with Suzuki's beliefs about performance practice in Bach's day. His idea in the light of the "one-per-part" controversy is that since Bach wrote for so few soloists, it makes sense to have the soloists sing in the choir and to sing multiple roles since this is probably what Bach did. You may think he is wrong, and certainly he is inconsistent about "enforcing" this rule (for instance, the main soloists here do not sing in the choir), but that's his reasoning. In the light of this preference, he is actually a bit luxurious in his casting, as his Jesus and Evangelist don't sing in the arias!
I admit to finding this something of a strange if valid solution to performing this work. However, I think it can really pay off and teach us new things. The prime example: Bass Chiyuki Urano sings every major bass part (Pilate, Petrus, the High Priest, and Judas as well as the recitatives/arias for bass!). In the course of the work he develops a strong personality through his singing of the parts of the "flawed" characters and through the contrast between the heavenly voice of Kooij and his own much more earthy and rough voice. He becomes the human bass voice of the work, the voice of the flawed sinner. And thus, how intensely moving it is to hear him sing
"Mache dich" at the end of the piece VERY BEAUTIFULLY! I'll admit Urano is a weak selling point of Suzuki's set, but he surpasses himself in his final aria, mirroring (unintentionally?) the transfiguration of the human spirit which is making itself clean in order to bury Jesus. I was worried that Urano couldn't handle "Mache dich", but I nearly sobbed when I heard it. It's really quite unexpectedly affecting in the context of Urano's singing in this recording.
Probably Suzuki never intended nor even thought of this effect, but it happens simply because of the way he chooses to assign singers.
< I am not very happy with the sound of the recording. Both choirs contain 15 singers (4/3/4/4), but they sound larger. Maybe that is a matter of the acoustics. The choral sound is not as crisp and clear, as one would expect. On the whole there is a little too much reverberation to my taste. >
The venue Suzuki uses (the Shoin Women's Chapel in Kobe, I believe) has a lot of reverberation. The way the microphones are set up is, I think, great for the acoustic: It captures a bit of the atmosphere while still retaining clarity and detail. But the choir, further back from the microphones, is more blurred by the rich acoustic. It still has tremendous bite and presence, though, and overall I don't think the acoustic is much of a drawback. But really, do you think Leonhardt's choir is really that much clearer?
< One of my problems with this recording - and in fact with many recordings of baroque vocal music - is the interpretation of the recitatives... Recitatives should be 'spoken' rather than sung. Often the tempo in the recitatives is too slow. That is true for both Leonhardt and Suzuki. I never liked Kurt Equiluz' voice as such, but he certainly knew how to sing a recitative. >
I heard an interview with Gerd Türk where he explained his technique for preparing to sing a recitative. First he reads the text aloud, fixing in his mind the rhythm of the words alone. Then he sings the melody of the recitative without the words, and finally he combines the two with an ear for the melody but basically following the rhythm of the text. I think Türk, more than just about any tenor (even Equiluz), has a "speaking" style of recitative.
He also said in that interview, though, that he slowed down the rhythms of the recitative to compensate for the acoustic. This may account for your displeasure, but I only think it adds to the amount of nuance and color he can bring to the music.
< What about the interpreters? I agree with Matthew about Nancy Argenta. She is a major disappointment. Her voice sounds very unpleasant, somewhat shrill. The soprano arias have all a bittersweet character, they are about love, gratitude and devotion - and Nancy Argenta to communicate that. The boys Leonhardt uses do a lot better. >
A major disappointment? Unpleasant and shrill? I strongly disagree, though I concede that her voice is not as fresh and light as it was in the 80's. Like Matthew, I think she is an unfailingly musical singer, and she does fine by me in Suzuki's SMP. It's hard for me to compare her with Leonhardt's boys. They give a very different kind of feel to the arias, very innocent and weak. You may prefer that, but I'll stick to Argenta. I also prefer Argenta to the quasi-operatic Sibylla Rubens in Herreweghe II. But to each his own.
< Robin Blaze just doesn't have the range of colors in his voice to bring that across. His voice lacks dramatic power to give way to the 'exclamatio'-character of the arias. (His pronunciation isn't perfect too.) I know that many people loathe René Jacobs, but it is in this kind of pieces where he shows his strength. >
Here is where I disagree most strongly. I think Blaze is really terrific here. He has a great range--larger than most countertenors--and is a highlight of this recording. I like Jacobs in Leonhardt's SMP (though I despise his voice in many other performances), but I far prefer Blaze.
< Makoto Sakurada doesn't have a voice many will immediately fall for. It has a certain harshness and sharpness. In that respect he reminds me a little of Nigel Rogers - although he sounds differently. His articulation is excellent, in particular in the recitativo accompagnato 'O Schmerz'. In his second recitative and aria he is far less convincing. >
Well, I think Sakurada is one of Suzuki's great finds--a fine, dramatic, musical tenor. No, he doesn't have a beautiful, mellifluous voice, but his voice works splendidly in certain contexts, like in this SMP.
< The bass Chiyuki Urano is a problem. He also sings the roles of Judas, St Peter, Pilate and the High Priest. >
See above for my thoughts about Urano and his singing of many different roles.
< The role of the Evangelist and of Jesus are very well sung by Gerd Türk and Peter Kooy respectively. There are some very moving moments. The both have the right voices, and give the text every attention it needs. >
Agreed!
< The orchestra is good, but not excellent. It lacks some drama and also some subtlety where it is needed. When I listen to La Petite Bande, with such first class players like Sigiswald Kuijken (violin), Wieland Kuijken (viola da gamba), Barthold Kuijken (flute) and Paul Dombrecht and Marcel Ponseele (oboes), I admire how they contribute to the drama. They illustrate the text much more than the Bach Collegium. >
I think the Bach Collegium Orchestra is wonderful. It's hard to compete with the HIP luminaries you mention. BUT Ryo Terakado, Alfredo Bernardini, and Hidemi Suzuki? These are hardly second-class players. Terakado's playing of the violin part of "Erbarme dich" is the most fluent, beautiful, and moving I've ever heard, surpassing even Kuijken in my estimation.
It's funny that you say that they don't illustrate the text, because that doesn't make coincide with what I know about the BCJ. They are very personally involved with Suzuki's interpretation. Whereas Suzuki at first (before they started recording) had to motivate and interest them in the material, they now demand to read the text of each piece before they play it. No, Lutheranism is not an ingrained part of Japanese culture, but they are quite engaged with the intent and meaning of what they play. I hear this vividly, but I guess you do not.
< That brings me to one of my main complaints: the lack of a really good and crisp articulation. >
On the other hand, Leonhardt can be faulted for over-articulation.
< It is very striking how the choirs of Suzuki and Leonhardt sing the choruses and chorales. The Tölzer Knabenchor articulates very sharply, the main words are stressed, and every part of the text gets a full emotional weight, whereas Suzuki's choir sounds rather pale and neutral. In Leonhardt's recording the chorales are gripping, because of the emotional interpretation of the text. Suzuki seems to take them as moments of rest and reflection, rather than as emotional reaction of the faithful. >
Suzuki's choir does not sound "pale and neutral" to me. Also, it just seems like an aspect of Suzuki's interpretation that the chorales are more like moments of rest and reflection. He avoids over-emotional dramatizing of the chorale texts, using them as more iconic representations of certain feelings than as a literal part of the drama. This is a valid interpretation. In this light, Leonhardt's chorales can seem mannered.
< Some time ago someone (I think it was Sybrand Bakker) wrote that he judges a performance of the SMP by the interpretation of the chorus 'Sind Blitze, sind Donner'. A comparison between Leonhardt and Suzuki is very interesting. Suzuki takes a faster tempo. But he starts in full speed and full power, which makes it impossible to create a strong climax. That is where Leonhardt shows his strength: he takes a slower tempo, and the first bars sound almost subdued - I think that is appropriate on the basis of the text (Have lightnings and thunders disappeared in the clouds?) But after that he directs the choir and orchestra to a highly emotional eruption, with very sharp and biting accents. It has a very strong dramatic impact, which I haven't experienced in Suzuki's recording. >
I find Suzuki's version of this chorus ten times more exciting and effective than Leonhardt's (actually, I think Herreweghe II is even better). With Suzuki, the tension is palpable but repressed throughout "So is mein Jesus nun gafangen", and it explodes in "Sind Blitze, sind Donner". This fits with the baroque idea of terraced dynamics and Bach's obvious sharp contrast between the full, ferocious chorus and the quiet, chamber-like duet. But Suzuki also builds up the intensity even more throughout the chorus, with the pause between sections very dramatic and the final chord explosive. He also transitions better to the next recitative than Leonhardt. Very dramatic!
< The problem I have with Suzuki's recording is not the lack of drama or its introverted character, but a general blandness. Apart from some moments where both the Evangelist and the character of Jesus are involved, it never touches me. I have tried to formulate the reasons for that. Is my verdict too harsh? I am looking forward to other listeners' comments. >
I know I am predisposed to like Suzuki's recording as I have followed his cantata series almost from the beginning and I have found myself agreeing with most of the performing decisions he has made and enjoying his recordings immensely. For me, Suzuki has enlivened this passion the way no other performer has before. For you, he has not.
"De gustibus non est disputandum", I guess, but I will not accept that Suzuki's interpretation is invalid, bland, or uninspired. You just don't respond to his brand of Bach, which is fine.
Thanks for starting this healthy discussion--happy listening!
EMRecordings Suzuki's SMP
Donald Satz
wrote (March 16, 2000):< Johan van Veen wrote: It puzzles me why I never can find a totally convincing recording of the works I most love, like Bach's B-minor Mass (BWV 232), or Händel's Messiah, or Monteverdi's Vespers. Maybe the fact that I like these works so much makes me too critical. >
Being intimately familiar with a work does tend to have that effect. In addition, with long/large-scale works, it might well be impossible to find a performance that gets everything just right as far as a particular listener is concerned. All the more reason to have multiple versions of the works we love most.
Suzuki SMP
John Downes
wrote (August 13, 2000):I recently bought a copy of the Suzuki SMP at a second hand shop. At 20UKP for the 3-disk set I rate it as the best value purchase I ever made.
I haven't heard it all yet, I haven't got into part 2 yet, but it sounds gorgeous. Although some of the tempi are a little slower than I expected. The choruses are about 3 voices to the part.
I don't recall any review or comment being made about this 1999 recording which must rival the new Herreweghe set for pposition for this work. Is there an archive or these discussions? I've found the Cantatas archive of course, but not any others.
Ryan Michero
wrote (August 14, 2000):< John Downes wrote: I don't recall any review or comment being made about this 1999 recording which must rival the new Herreweghe set for pole position for this work. >
We discussed it a bit when it first came out, though I don't think anyone has given it a full review. I personally think it is the most satisfying and beautiful SMP on the market, due to the wonderful chorus and orchestra, the fantastic soloists (especially the three most important soloists--the Evangelist Gerd Türk, Christus Peter Kooy, and alto soloist Robin Blaze), and Suzuki's sensitive and deeply moving conception of the work.
< Is there an archive or these discussions? I've found the Cantatas archive of course, but not any others. >
There is an archive for both lists on http://www.listbot.com/. Unfortunately, there is no way to search for a particular message--you have to flip through tons of pages reading the subject lines to find anything you want. You would think Microsoft would have the know-how to implement a simple search feature...
Johan van Veen
wrote (August 14, 2000):< John Downes wrote: I don't recall any review or comment being made about this 1999 recording which must rival the new Herreweghe set for pole position for this work. Is there an archive or these discussions? I've found the Cantatas archive of course, but not any others. >
First some general points. I can understand that a conductor uses only 4 soloists for the arias in both choirs, but is it unrealistic to expect 8 of them in a recording? Leonhardt has the luxury of having two singers in the roles of the Evangelist and Jesus, and 8 more for the other roles and the arias. (It is a shame that he has made two unhappy choices: David Cordier and especially Peter Lika.) I am not very happy with the sound of the recording. Both choirs contain 15 singers (4/3/4/4), but they sound larger. Maybe that is a matter of the acoustics. The choral sound is not as crisp and clear, as one would expect. On the whole there is a little too much reverberation to my taste. The 'soprano in ripieno'-part is sung by - well, that is a little confusing. The list of the performers says: Shizuoka Children's Choir, but in the text of the passion the English text says: Chorale (Children's Choir), the German text: Choral (Knabenchor). The names of the children are given, but since I don't know the difference between boys' and girls' names in Japanese I just can't tell what is correct. On the basis of the sound I would guess: boys. In fact, their sound reminds me of the Holland Boys Choir, which some of you may know from the Brilliant Classics recordings of Bach's cantatas. One of my problems with this recording - and in fact with many recordings of baroque vocal music - is the interpretation of the recitatives. More often than not they are sung as they have been written down by the composer. According to the performance habits of the baroque that is not what composers had in mind. The interpretation should follow the rhythm of the text rather than the rhythm of the music. That means that the length of notes can be reduced or extended, in accordance with the importance of the words or syllables. Recitatives should be 'spoken' rather than sung. Often the tempo in the recitatives is too slow. That is true for both Leonhardt and Suzuki. I never liked Kurt Equiluz' voice as such, but he certainly knew how to sing a recitative.
What about the interpreters?
I agree with Matthew about Nancy Argenta. She is a major disappointment. Her voice sounds very unpleasant, somewhat shrill. The soprano arias have all a bittersweet character, they are about love, gratitude and devotion - and Nancy Argenta fails to communicate that. The boys Leonhardt uses do a lot better. The alto arias have a different character. They reflect pain and deep sorrow. Robin Blaze just doesn't have the range of colors in his voice to bring that across. His voice lacks dramatic power to give way to the 'exclamatio'-character of the arias. (His pronunciation isn't perfect too.) I know that many people loathe René Jacobs, but it is in this kind of pieces where he shows his strength. I have never heard a more heart-broken interpretation of 'Buss und Reu' than from him in Leonhardt's recording. Makoto Sakurada doesn't have a voice many will immediately fall for. It has a certain harshness and sharpness. In that respect he reminds me a little of Nigel Rogers - although he sounds differently. His articulation is excellent, in particular in the recitativo accompagnato 'O Schmerz'. In his second recitative and aria he is far less convincing. The bass Chiyuki Urano is a problem. He also sings the roles of Judas, St Peter, Pilate and the High Priest. His performance of the recitatives is too stiff and inflexible, and therefore anything but natural. It seems that singing the German text at a certain speed is too difficult for him. During the recording he is improving in the performance of the arias, but it doesn't move me at all. The role of the Evangelist and of Jesus are very well sung by Gerd Türk and Peter Kooy respectively. There are some very moving moments. The both have the right voices, and give the text every attention it needs. The orchestra is good, but not excellent. It lacks some drama and also some subtlety where it is needed. When I listen to La Petite Bande, with such first class players like Sigiswald Kuijken (violin), Wieland Kuijken (viola da gamba), Barthold Kuijken (flute) and Paul Dombrecht and Marcel Ponseele (oboes), I admire how they contribute to the drama. They illustrate the text much more than the Bach Collegium. That brings me to one of my main complaints: the lack of a really good and crisp articulation. It is very striking how the choirs of Suzuki and Leonhardt sing the choruses and chorales. The Tölzer Knabenchor articulates very sharply, the main words are stressed, and every part of the text gets a full emotional weight, whereas Suzuki's choir sounds rather pale and neutral. In Leonhardts recording the chorales are gripping, because of the emotional interpretation of the text. Suzuki seems to take them as moments of rest and reflection, rather than as emotional reaction of the faithful. Some time ago someone (I think it was Sybrand Bakker) wrote that he judges a performance of the SMP by the interpretation of the chorus 'Sind Blitze, sind Donner'. A comparison between Leonhardt and Suzuki is very interesting. Suzuki takes a faster tempo. But he starts in full speed and full power, which makes it impossible to create a strong climax. That is where Leonhardt shows his streng: he takes a slower tempo, and the first bars sound almost subdued - I think that is appropriate on the basis of the text (Have lightnings and thunders disappeared in the clouds?) But after that he directs the choir and orchestra to a highly emotional eruption, with very sharp and biting accents. It has a very strong dramatic impact, which I haven't experienced in Suzuki's recording.
The problem I have with Suzuki's recording is not the lack of drama or its introverted character, but a general blandness. Apart from some moments where both the Evangelist and the character of Jesus are involved, it never touches me. I have tried to formulate the reasons for that. Is my verdict too harsh? I am looking forward to other listeners' comments.
Ryan Michero replied:
Well, what can I say, except that I disagree with just about everything Johan had to say about this recording? Suzuki gives a very valid, effective, and dramatic interpretation, and I think Johan's preference for Leonhardt's version colors his negative comments. Perhaps I myself am a little overzealous in my endorsement of Suzuki's Bach recordings, but I think Johan is way too harsh on this SMP. Here's an avowed Suzuki-lover's take on the points mentioned in Johan's post:
< Johan van Veen wrote: First some general points. I can understand that a conductor uses only 4 soloists for the arias in both choirs, but is it unrealistic to expect 8 of them in a recording? Leonhardt has the luxury of having two singers in the roles of the Evangelist and Jesus, and 8 more for the other roles and the arias. (It is a shame that he has made two unhappy choices: David Cordier and especially Peter Lika.) >
The use of only a few soloists to perform this work is in accordance with Suzuki's beliefs about performance practice in Bach's day. His idea in the light of the "one-per-part" controversy is that since Bach wrote for so few soloists, it makes sense to have the soloists sing in the choir and to sing multiple roles since this is probably what Bach did. You may think he is wrong, and certainly he is inconsistent about "enforcing" this rule (for instance, the main soloists here do not sing in the choir), but that's his reasoning. In the light of this preference, he is actually a bit luxurious in his casting, as his Jesus and Evangelist don't sing in the arias!
I admit to finding this something of a strange if valid solution to performing this work. However, I think it can really pay off and teach us new things. The prime example: Bass Chiyuki Urano sings every major bass part (Pilate, Petrus, the High Priest, and Judas as well as the recitatives/arias for bass!). In the course of the work he develops a strong personality through his singing of the parts of the "flawed" characters and through the contrast between the heavenly voice of Kooij and his own much more earthy and rough voice. He becomes the human bass voice of the work, the voice of the flawed sinner. And thus, how intensely moving it is to hear him sing
"Mache dich" at the end of the piece VERY BEAUTIFULLY! I'll admit Urano is a weak selling point of Suzuki's set, but he surpasses himself in his final aria, mirroring (unintentionally?) the transfiguration of the human spirit which is making itself clean in order to bury Jesus. I was worried that Urano couldn't handle "Mache dich", but I nearly sobbed when I heard it. It's really quite unexpectedly affecting in the context of Urano's singing in this recording.
Probably Suzuki never intended nor even thought of this effect, but it happens simply because of the way he chooses to assign singers.
< I am not very happy with the sound of the recording. Both choirs contain 15 singers (4/3/4/4), but they sound larger. Maybe that is a matter of the acoustics. The choral sound is not as crisp and clear, as one would expect. On the whole there is a little too much reverberation to my taste. >
The venue Suzuki uses (the Shoin Women's Chapel in Kobe, I believe) has a lot of reverberation. The way the microphones are set up is, I think, great for the acoustic: It captures a bit of the atmosphere while still retaining clarity and detail. But the choir, further back from the microphones, is more blurred by the rich acoustic. It still has tremendous bite and presence, though, and overall I don't think the acoustic is much of a drawback. But really, do you think Leonhardt's choir is really that much clearer?
< One of my problems with this recording - and in fact with many recordings of baroque vocal music - is the interpretation of the recitatives.... Recitatives should be 'spoken' rather than sung. Often the tempo in the recitatives is too slow. That is true for both Leonhardt and Suzuki. I never liked Kurt Equiluz' voice as such, but he certainly knew how to sing a recitative. >
I heard an interview with Gerd Türk where he explained his technique for preparing to sing a recitative. First he reads the text aloud, fixing in his mind the rhythm of the words alone. Then he sings the melody of the recitative without the words, and finally he combines the two with an ear for the melody but basically following the rhythm of the text. I think Türk, more than just about any tenor (even Equiluz), has a "speaking" style of recitative.
He also said in that interview, though, that he slowed down the rhythms of the recitative to compensate for the acoustic. This may account for your displeasure, but I only think it adds to the amount of nuance and color he can bring to the music.
< What about the interpreters? I agree with Matthew about Nancy Argenta. She is a major disappointment. Her voice sounds very unpleasant, somewhat shrill. The soprano arias have all a bittersweet character, they are about love, gratitude and devotion - and Nancy Argenta fails to communicate that. The boys Leonhardt uses do a lot better. >
A major disappointment? Unpleasant and shrill? I strongly disagree, though I concede that her voice is not as fresh and light as it was in the 80s. Like Matthew, I think she is an unfailingly musical singer, and she does fine by me in Suzuki's SMP. It's hard for me to compare her with Leonhardt's boys. They give a very different kind of feel to the arias, very innocent and weak. You may prefer that, but I'll stick to Argenta. I also prefer Argenta to the quasi-operatic Sibylla Rubens in Herreweghe II. But to each his own.
< Robin Blaze just doesn't have the range of colors in his voice to bring that across. His voice lacks dramatic power to give way to the 'exclamatio'-character of the arias. (His pronunciation isn't perfect too.) I know that many people loathe René Jacobs, but it is in this kind of pieces where he shows his strength. >
< That brings me to one of my main complaints: the lack of a really good and crisp articulation. >
On the other hand, Leonhardt can be faulted for over-articulation.
< It is very striking how the choirs of Suzuki and Leonhardt sing the choruses and chorales. The Tölzer Knabenchor articulates very sharply, the main words are stressed, and every part of the text gets a full emotional weight, whereas Suzuki's choir sounds rather pale and neutral. In Leonhardts recording the chorales are gripping, because of the emotional interpretation of the text. Suzuki seems to take them as moments of rest and reflection, rather than as emotional reaction of the faithful. >
Suzuki's choir does not sound "pale and neutral" to me. Also, it just seems like an aspect of Suzuki's interpretation that the chorales are more like moments of rest and reflection. He avoids over-emotional dramatizing of the chorale texts, using them as more iconic representations of certain feelings than as a literal part of the drama. This is a valid interpretation. In this light, Leonhardt's chorales can seem mannered. >
< Some time ago someone (I think it was Sybrand Bakker) wrote that he judges a performance of the SMP by the interpretation of the chorus 'Sind Blitze, sind Donner'. A comparison between Leonhardt and Suzuki is very interesting. Suzuki takes a faster tempo. But he starts in full speed and full power, which makes it impossible to create a strong climax. That is where Leonhardt shows his strength: he takes a slower tempo, and the first bars sound almost subdued - I think that is appropriate on the basis of the text (Have lightnings and thunders disappeared in the clouds?) But after that he directs the choir and orchestra to a highly emotional eruption, with very sharp and biting accents. It has a very strong dramatic impact, which I haven't experienced in Suzuki's recording. >
I find Suzuki's version of this chorus ten times more exciting and effective than Leonhardt's (actually, I think Herreweghe II is even better). With Suzuki, the tension is palpable but repressed throughout "So is mein Jesus nun gafangen", and it explodes in "Sind Blitze, sind Donner". This fits with the baroque idea of terraced dynamics and Bach's obvious sharp contrast between the full, ferocious chorus and the quiet, chamber-like duet. But Suzuki also builds up the intensity even more throughout the chorus, with the pause between sections very dramatic and the final chord explosive. He also transitions better to the next recitative than Leonhardt. Very dramatic!
< The problem I have with Suzuki's recording is not the lack of drama or its introverted character, but a general blandness. Apart from some moments where both the Evangelist and the character of Jesus are involved, it never touches me. I have tried to formulate the reasons for that. Is my verdict too harsh? I am looking forward to other listeners' comments. >
I know I am predisposed to like Suzuki's recording as I have followed his cantata series almost from the beginning and I have found myself agreeing with most of the performing decisions he has made and enjoying his recordings immensely. For me, Suzuki has enlivened this passion the way no other performer has before. For you, he has not.
"De gustibus non est disputandum", I guess, but I will not accept that Suzuki's interpretation is invalid, bland, or uninspired. You just don't respond to his brand of Bach, which is fine.
Thanks for starting this healthy discussion--happy listening!
I have replied his message like this:
Thank you for your comments, Ryan. I find it always interesting that two people hear the same recording and seem to have totally different experiences. It is one of the nice things of these lists that we can discuss our experiences, not to convince each other that one of us is wrong and the other is right, but to try to understand why we have different opinions. So let me add some comments to what you write.
< Ryan Michero wrote: Well, what can I say, except that I disagree with just > about everything Johan had to say about this recording? Suzuki gives a very valid, effective, and dramatic interpretation, and I think Johan's preference for Leonhardt's version colors his negative comments. >
Let me try to make my position somewhat clearer. I don't think I have been influenced by my preference for Leonhardt's recording. As I wrote in my review, it is my favorite version in the category of the more introverted recordings. I personally prefer a more extraverted, dramatic approach. So far I haven't heard a recording which I am totally happy with. It puzzles me why I never can find a totally convincing recording of the works I most love, like Bach's B-minor Mass, or Handel's Messiah, or Monteverdi's Vespers. Maybe the fact that I like these works so much makes me too critical. Another factor which makes me prefer Leonhardt is the Tölzer Knabenchor, first of all because I can't quite swallow the singing of female singers in pre-romantic liturgical music, secondly because I hugely admire the Tölzer Knabenchor (together with some others like the Knabenchor Hannover). It was one of the reasons I bought the whole Teldec cantata series at the end of 1998, and I started to collect the LP's when they were issued in the early 1970's. We certainly disagree on some points, but I noticed that we agree on others, but assess it differently. The things I want to hear you would probably consider 'mannerist'. I admit that I am pretty radical in my wishes: I prefer very strong contrasts in tempi, dynamics, and articulation. If you regard that as 'mannerist', so be it. I have snipped the parts I don't comment on.
<< Johan van Veen wrote: I am not very happy with the sound of the recording. Both choirs contain 15 singers (4/3/4/4), but they sound larger. Maybe that is a matter of the acoustics. The choral sound is not as crisp and clear, as one would expect. On the whole there is a little too much reverberation to my taste. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: The venue Suzuki uses (the Shoin Women's Chapel in Kobe, I believe) has a lot of reverberation. The way the microphones are set up is, I think, great for the acoustic: It captures a bit of the atmosphere while still retaining clarity and detail. But the choir, further back from the microphones, is more blurred by the rich acoustic. It still has tremendous bite and presence, though, and overall I don't think the acoustic is much of a drawback. But really, do you think Leonhardt's choir is really that much clearer? >
The acoustics is a subject, which is often underestimated in recordings. Over the years I have heard many recordings where details are literally drowned in the reverberating acoustics. It is not that bad in this recording, but it makes the choir sound larger than it is. But I admit that it is difficult to imagine how Bach's music originally sounded in Leipzig. Of course it makes a difference whether a church or hall is full of people or empty. As far as the clarity of the choirs is concerned: yes, I think Leonhardt's chis indeed clearer, but that is not only a matter of the somewhat dryer acoustics of his recording, it is also a matter of interpretation. And that is where we disagree. (Another factor is that boys' voices are different in character, somewhat thinner and more penetrating.) >
<< Johan van Veen wrote: One of my problems with this recording - and in fact with many recordings of baroque vocal music - is the interpretation of the recitatives... Recitatives should be 'spoken' rather than sung. Often the tempo in the recitatives is too slow. That is true for both Leonhardt and Suzuki. I never liked Kurt Equiluz' voice as such, but he certainly knew how to sing a recitative. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: I heard an interview with Gerd Türk where he explained his technique for preparing to sing a recitative. First he reads the text aloud, fixing in his mind the rhythm of the words alone. Then he sings the melody of the recitative without the words, and finally he combines the two with an ear for the melody but basically following the rhythm of the text. I think Türk, more than just about any tenor (even Equiluz), has a "speaking" style of recitative.
He also said in that interview, though, that he slowed down the rhythms of the recitative to compensate for the acoustic. This may account for your displeasure, but I only think it adds to the amount of nuance and color he can bring to the music. >
Like I just said, acoustics is an important issue. I can understand that the tempo is slowed down because of the acoustical circumstances, but what I have problems with (not in particular with Gerd Türk's performance, but in general) is that the difference between the really important words and syllables and the less important ones - which is reflected in the typically baroque thinking in "good" and "bad" notes - is too often underplayed. But I understand that it has to do with the approach - the way Türk and
Prégardien's singing of the recitatives reflects the more introverted approach which Leonhardt and Suzuki share.
<< Johan van Veen wrote: Robin Blaze just doesn't have the range of colors in his voice to bring that across. His voice lacks dramatic power to give way to the 'exclamatio'-character of the arias. (His pronunciation isn't perfect too.) I know that many people loathe René Jacobs, but it is in this kind of pieces where he shows his strength. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: Here is where I disagree most strongly. I think Blaze is really terrific here. He has a great range--larger than most countertenors--and is a highlight of this recording. I like Jacobs in Leonhardt's SMP (though I despise his voice in many other performances), but I far prefer Blaze. >
I think one of the aspects of Jacobs' singing which annoys many people is his frequent use of the 'messa di voce', but that is exactly one of the things I like, as well as his articulation. Blaze sings (as most English singers do) more legato and that's what I don't like.
<< Johan van Veen wrote: Makoto Sakurada doesn't have a voice many will immediately fall for. It has a certain harshness and sharpness. In that respect he reminds me a little of Nigel Rogers - although he sounds differently. His articulation is excellent, in particular in the recitativo accompagnato 'O Schmerz'. In his second recitative and aria he is far less convincing. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: Well, I think Sakurada is one of Suzuki's great finds--a fine, dramatic, musical tenor. No, he doesn't have a beautiful, mellifluous voice, but his voice works splendidly in certain contexts, like in this SMP. >
The characterization of Sakurada's voice wasn't meant to be a criticism. I like his voice (just as I always liked Rogers'). Some weeks ago I heard him in one of the cantatas, and I liked that very much. But there are singers who have a voice almost everyone immediately likes, independent on what he is doing with it (I suppose people like Van Egmond, Prégardien and Mertens belong to that category). Others have to do a little more. But maybe you have different experiences.
<< Johan van Veen wrote: The orchestra is good, but not excellent. It lacks some drama and also some subtlety where it is needed. When I listen to La Petite Bande, with such first class players like Sigiswald Kuijken (violin), Wieland Kuijken (viola da gamba), Barthold Kuijken (flute) and Paul Dombrecht and Marcel Ponseele (oboes), I admire how they contribute to the drama. They illustrate the text much more than the Bach Collegium. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: I think the Bach Collegium Orchestra is wonderful. It's hard to compete with the HIP luminaries you mention. BUT Ryo Terakado, Alfredo Bernardini, and Hidemi Suzuki? These are hardly second-class players. Terakado's playing of the violin part of "Erbarme dich" is the most fluent, beautiful, and moving I've ever heard, surpassing even Kuijken in my estimation. >
I don't think Suzuki's players are second class. But it is as with Bach's works for solo violin. I know a number of recordings, all by first class players of the baroque violin. But most of them don't touch me, and don't bring the depth of Bach's music across as I hear it.
< It's funny that you say that they don't illustrate the text, because that doesn't make coincide with what I know about the BCJ. They are very personally involved with Suzuki's interpretation. Whereas Suzuki at first (before they started recording) had to motivate and interest them in the material, they now demand to read the text of each piece before they play it. No, Lutheranism is not an ingrained part of Japanese culture, but they are quite engaged with the intent and meaning of what they play. I hear this vividly, but I guess you do not. >
There are two different points here. I am not saying that they don't know what they are doing. In fact, I would be very surprised if any player in any performance of SMP wouldn't care about the text. That is self-evident. Maybe the conductor has to explain a few things, but I can't believe that any player is only interested in his own part. The religious aspect is another thing. I can't possibly judge to what extent they understand the text nor is it my right to assess their relationship to the text. And, in case you don't know, Suzuki himself belongs to the Reformed Church in Japan, which is Calvinist in orientation, so he has certainly an understanding of and personal relationship to the content of SMP. I have no doubts about the understanding of the text. It is merely a matter of interpretation. I feel that La Petite Bande, because of things like articulation and dynamics, contribute more to the content of the arias than the Bach Collegium. But, like I said before, it is quite possible that you would call 'mannerist' what I like about the way La Petite Bande plays. Your next point about articulation underlines that.
<< Johan van Veen wrote: That brings me to one of my main complaints: the lack of a really good and crisp articulation. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: On the other hand, Leonhardt can be faulted for over-articulation. >
<< Johan van Veen wrote: It is very striking how the choirs of Suzuki and Leonhardt sing the choruses and chorales. The Tölzer Knabenchor articulates very sharply, the main words are stressed, and every part of the text gets a full emotional weight, whereas Suzuki's choir sounds rather pale and neutral. In Leonhardts recording the chorales are gripping, because of the emotional interpretation of the text. Suzuki seems to take them as moments of rest and reflection, rather than as emotional reaction of the faithful. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: Suzuki's choir does not sound "pale and neutral" to me. Also, it just seems like an aspect of Suzuki's interpretation that the chorales are more like moments of rest and reflection. He avoids over-emotional dramatizing of the chorale texts, using them as more iconic representations of certain feelings than as a literal part of the drama. This is a valid interpretation. In this light, Leonhardt's chorales can seem mannered. >
You see? :)
<< Johan van Veen wrote: The problem I have with Suzuki's recording is not the lack of drama or its introverted character, but a general blan. Apart from some moments where both the Evangelist and the character of Jesus are involved, it never touches me. I have tried to formulate the reasons for that. Is my verdict too harsh? I am looking forward to other listeners' comments. >>
< Ryan Michero wrote: I know I am predisposed to like Suzuki's recording as I have followed his cantata series almost from the beginning and I have found myself agreeing with most of the performing decisions he has made and enjoying his recordings immensely. For me, Suzuki has enlivened this passion the way no other performer has before. For you, he has not. >
So far I haven't heard his recording of the St John Passion (BWV 245) - a work I like even more than SMP. I hope to hear it some day. I haven't heard all his cantata recordings. My feelings about what I have heard are mixed. I liked some of them, some disappointed me. But I suppose that is inevitable in a series with all cantatas. There will always be some on which you disagree with an interpretation. I don't always like the Teldec recordings either. (Some basses Harnoncourt used are awful.) If I had to choose between Suzuki and Koopman, I think I'd prefer Suzuki.
< Ryan Michero wrote: "De gustibus non est disputandum", I guess, but I will not accept that Suzuki's interpretation is invalid, bland, or uninspired. You just don't respond to his brand of Bach, which is fine.
Thanks for starting this healthy discussion--happy listening! >
The same to you - I am happy that you enjoy Suzuki's SMP.
Matthew Westphal
wrote (August 14, 2000):< John Downes wrote: Is there an archive or these discussions? I've found the Cantatas archive of course, but not any others. >
I have a review of the Suzuki SMP up at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000046S1M/
I was flattered to find a link to the review from the front page of the BCJ's own Web site. Interestingly, they chose my review not because it was a rave, but because it was "the most balanced" review they found.
Suzuki SMP on headphones
Kirk McElhearn
wrote (March 25, 2001):I don't often listen to music on headphones, and don't have a very good set, but this evening decided to listen to the Suzuki SMP on headphones. I also listened to the first chorus of the Leonhardt recording to compare.
The Suzuki recording has much better spatial effects than the Leonhardt; the interplay between the orchestras and choruses stands out quite well. I wonder how other recordings stand up in this way?
Donald Satz wrote (March 25, 2001):
(To Kirk McElhearn) I generally listen to all my SMP's on headphones. Both Herreweghe's, Gardiner, the new Harnoncourt, Veldhoven, etc. are just as fine sounding in terms of interaction as the Suzuki.
Philips Peters wrote (March 26, 2001):
(To Donald Satz) Veldhoven?? Never heard this name before. Could you please give some details like names of the soloists et., year of recording, label & number, if it´s not too much trouble?
Aryeh Oron wrote (March 26, 2001):
(To Philip Peters) You have all the details in Bach Cantatas Website in the following page: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Vocal/BWV244-Veldhoven.htm
Donald Satz wrote (March 26, 2001):
(To Philip Peters) No problem. Actually the name is Veldhoven - Jos van Veldhoven. It's a three CD set on Channel Classics 11397. Veldhoven directs the Choir and Orchestra of the Netherlands Bach Society. The recording was made in 1997. Vocal soloists are:
Evangelist: Gerd Türk
Jesus: Geert Smits
Soprano: Johannette Zomer
Countertenor: Andreas Schmidt
Tenor: Hans Jorg Mammel
Bass: Peter Kooy
Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (March 26, 2001):
(To Donald Satz) The Andreas Schmidt I know is a baritone. Is this the same person?
Philip Peters
wrote (March 26, 2001):(To Donald Satz) Oh...I see....I have that one. I should have guessed....thanks
Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (March 26, 2001):
Well now I am more confused as Aryeh's site gives the following:
Tenor (Evangelist) - Gerd Türk, Bass (Jesus) - Geert Smits, Soprano - Johannette Zomer, Countertenor - Andreas Scholl, Tenor - Hans Jörg Mammel, Bass (Pilatus, Judas) - Peter Kooy
Oh, I've been reading it wrong. The comma is what counts, not the dash. OK. I know that Aryeh doesn't err :-). Last on this! Me
-------------
OKAY, Don made a lapsus, but Andreas Scholl in an alto/counter-tenor, so I still don't get him as the tenor.
BCJ US tour
SMP: Bach Collegium Japan
Suzuki and Bach Collegium Japan on Tour in the US
Masaaki Suzuki and Matthew
Masaaki Suzuki
: Short Biography | Bach Collegoim JapanTable of recordings by BWV Number
|
Recordings & Discussions of Other Vocal Works : Motets BWV 225-231 | Mass in B minor BWV 232 | Missae Breves & Sanctus BWV 233-242 | Magnificat BWV 243 | Matthäus-Passion BWV 244 | Johannes-Passion BWV 245 | Lukas-Passion BWV 246 | Markus-Passion BWV 247 | Weihnachts-Oratorium BWV 248 | Oster-Oratorium BWV 249 | Chorales BWV 250-438 | Geistliche Lieder BWV 439-507 | AMN BWV 508-523 | Quodlibet BWV 524 | Aria BWV 1127 |
Last update: ýOctober 9, 2004 ý10:26:33