|
|
Cantata BWV 139
Wohl dem, der sich auf seinen Gott
Discussions - Part 5 |
|
Continue from Part 4 |
|
Discussions in the Week of June 27, 2026 (5th round)
Cantata BWV 139 ‘Gott soll allein mein Herze haben’ by Rudolf Lutz compared to 5 other HIP recordings. |
|
Frits V. Herbold wrote (June 27, 2026):
The BCW shows 22 recordings so far, starting with an (incomplete) early interpretation from 1936 (Karl Straube with the ‘Thomanerchor Leipzig’ and the ‘Gewandhausorchester Leipzig’) and ending with recent renditions, some of them only available on YouTube.
BWB 139 is the 18th. cantata of Rudolf Lutz’s cycle, recorded live at the Evangelic Church in Trogen, on Friday, October 2008 - two days before the respective 23rd. Sunday after Trinity in that year. See also the Bachipidia Bachipedia with links to the concert (YouTube), workshop and reflexion. The names of all performers, including all choristers can also be found there. See also my general comments about the Lutz cycle at Rudolf Luts - Discussions Part 1.
Scoring: see NBA: I/26 | BC: A 159 and Bach Digital: Bach Digital
Soprano solo, Alto solo, Tenor solo, Basso solo, Soprano, Alto, Tenor, Bass, Oboe d'amore I, Oboe d'amore II, Violin I, Violin II, Violoncello piccolo? (at later performance: Violin I), Viola, Basso continuo. Obligato part missing (Violine II?)
Remarks:
1. The NBA I/26 with its ‘Kritischer Bericht’ (critical report) was published in 1995 by Andreas Glöckner, meaning that it was available to all conductors of the recordings discussed her.
2. The ‘Kritischer Bericht’ (critical report) mentions the original extant parts as well as the lost original score. There are also different parts for the different dates of the probably 3 performances. These are explained in detail in the BCW, see BCW
3. The original Leipzig key is in E Major played at the Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch a’ = 415. There is a transposed part for the church organ, but no indication of the use of a harpsichord.
Introduction Cantata BWB 139 by Alfed Dürr (from The Cantatas of J. S. Bach)
‘This chorale cantata, written for performance on 12 November 1724, is based on the five-verse hymn with the same opening line by Johann Christoph Rube (1692). As usual, the anonymous librettist retains the first and last verses word for word. The inner verses are each paraphrased to form a cantata movement (nos. 2, 4, and 5). The third movement, however, is a free insertion that establishes a link with the Sunday Gospel.* This takes place— by way of digression, as it were— at the very point where the hymn draws closest in content to the biblical narrative. Trust in God, says Rube’s hymn, protects us in all things (verse 1): against the wickedness of the world (verse 2), against all misfortune (verse 3), from my burden of iniquities (verse 4), and finally from the fear of death (verse 5). After verse 2 (the wickedness of the world), the librettist adduces the biblical narrative as an example: the biblically depicted malice of the Pharisees is but another manifestation of the wickedness of the world, into which the Saviour sends His own people as among wolves (cf. Matthew 10.16). Yet even here Jesus protects me, since His mouth makes such a wise pronouncement— the reference here is to His reply to the Pharisees, ‘Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s’. With this pronouncement the cunning attack of the world is staved off. Bach’s composition is transmitted only in a slightly incomplete set of performing parts: it lacks the second obbligato* part in the aria, no. 2, which was presumably for a second solo violin. 57 For the fourth movement, we possess (in addition to the other parts; see below) a violin part prepared for a revival around 1744– 7 by Bach’s pupil and eventual son-in-law Johann Christoph Altnickol, who was resident in Leipzig from 1744 to 1748. Thus in 1724 the movement seems to have required a second obbligato instrument other than violin— perhaps a violoncello piccolo.
Remarks:
· Total times vary between the fastest tempo at 16:40 (Gardiner 1) and the slowest 18:24 (Leusink).
· All recordings are performed in E Major at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’= 415.
Movement 1: Chorus, Choral S, A, T, B, Oboe d’Amore I and II, Strings and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘ The opening movement follows the design especially favored by Bach. The chorale, sung by the choir with the melody in the soprano, is incorporated line by line within a concertante* orchestral texture. A distinctive feature of this particular movement is the clear reference made to the chorale in all parts. Even the theme of the introductory instrumental ritornello is derived from the chorale melody, ‘Machs mit mir, Gott, nach deiner Gut’: This theme is maintained both in the instrumental episodes and in the postlude, a reprise of the opening ritornello. In the choral passages, all parts, when they are not resting, share in the theme of whichever chorale line is being sung. The soprano delivers the chorale line in minims, while the other voices, the two oboes d’amore, and the continuo accompany it in an imitative texture with the chorale line diminished to quavers. At the beginning of each vocal passage the strings rest (probably to make the cantus firmus* more audible) entering only towards the end of each chorale line. They too are thematic, provided that sufficient time remains for thematic treatment (in lines 1 and 3 they have only a brief cadence). Thematic imitation, which in the ‘normal’ chorale-cantata first movement is restricted to the preparatory texture before the entry of the chorale cantus firmus, is thus here maintained throughout the whole chorale line. It even drives out the independent concertante texture of the instruments, which here finds scope only in the episodes.
Remark: total times vary only slightly between the fastest at 4:19 (Koopman) and the slowest 5:08 (Gardiner 2).
Gardiner 1 (12-1998: this is the first HIP recording after Harnoncourt (not discussed here) and the as well first recording by Gardiner, released by the ‘Archiv Produktion’ (limited) series. Everything sounds perfect here: the instrumental ritornello playing as well as the experienced participants of Gardiner’s Monteverdi Choir (4 S, 3 A, 3 T and 3 B). The string size is average with 4 first, 3 second violins and 3 violas. The liner notes and the info from the BCW mention as BC instruments 2 violoncellos, double-bass, bassoon, organ and harpsichord, but I don’t hear a harpsichord in this opening movement. In the same liner notes by Ruth Tatlow (see Wikipedia) she mentions the opening chorus in ‘ bright E Major’, which makes no sense at all , since with the use of an equal temperament in most recording nowadays there are no ‘emotions’/ ‘feelings’ related to a certain key. All sound ‘equal’. This could have been the case if Gardiner had chosen an unequal temperament similar to Bach’s days, but although Gardiner has used sometimes unequal temperaments (as an example) following Valotti in some recordings (Vallotti temperament is a historical musical tuning system attributed to Francesco Antonio Vallotti, characterized by its unique approach to tempering fifths and its practical applications in Baroque music) , the booklet only confirms the pitch of a’ = 415 ( ‘Leipzig Kammerton’ ) but not an unequal temperament. For further details on this matter, I recommend ‘How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (and Why You Should Care)’ by Ross W. Duffin (W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., New York, 2007). In a very direct and humoristic style, he offers insights into the history of temperament and includes several comments on Bach’s temperament, also pointing out that ‘well-te’ is not to be mistaken by ‘equal temperament’.
Among my first choices.
Koopman (10-1999): this performance is at the same level as Gardiner’s (above). Size of choir, instruments and BC are very similar, but with the addition of a lute. There is no mention of the use of a harpsichord. Among my first choices.
Leusink (11 & 12 -1999): although mostly not my first choice, I like to include whenever his soprano Ruth Holton with her boyish voice (see movement 5) and especially because he uses the Church Organ St. Nicolaschurch, Elburg, Netherlands. The size of his choir is too big IMHO, although this first movement still sounds transparent. Strings and BC are similar to the recordings discussed above, although the liner notes and the BCW don’t inform their exact composition. I didn’t find any information about the tuning of the church organ but I guess either also at ‘Kammerton’ or transposed playing at ‘Chorton’ at a’= 465 Hz in D Major. Not bad, but not my first choice.
Gardiner 2 (11-2000): this I the second recording by Gardiner, launched with his own label ‘Soli Deo Gloria’ . The composition of the very experienced Monteverdi Choir probably is not very different compared to first recording – idem ditto for the string section, woodwinds and BC. Only all soloists are different. I wouldn’t know which recording I like more, but this interpretation is also among my first choices.
Suzuki (02-2004): an important feature of this rendition is the reduced choir with only 3 soloists per part as well as a reduced string section with only 3 first and 3 second violins and 2 violas. The liner notes detail the composition of BC for each movement: in this movement violoncello, doble-bass, bassoon and only chest organ (no harpsichord). This scoring enhances the transparency of all voices, especially the choral melody sung by the sopranos. At the top of my first choices, after Lutz (see below).
Lutz (10-2008): the choir size is comparable to Suzuki’s (1 additional chorister for S, A and B), but the string section is minimal with only 2 first violins, 1 second violin and 1 viola. The BC features violoncello, violone, bassoon and only chest organ. This is by far the most transparent and sensitive rendition and my first choice.
Ranking (based on the transparency of all choir parts and instrumental ritornellos): (1) Lutz, (2) Suzuki), (3) Gardiner 1, (4) Gardiner 2 (5) Koopman, (6) Leusink
Movement 2: Aria T, Violino concertato I and II, BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘In the aria ‘Gott ist mein Freund’, no. 2, Bach derives his thematic material from the textual contrast between the ‘raging’ of the enemy and the confident tranquility of the Christian who is secure in the friendship of God. Voice and instruments have the same theme. In the opening ritornello, the two solo instruments and the continuo alternate between calm and excited passages, and in the vocal section the ‘raging’ is illustrated by lively violin figures. Even the middle section of the movement, which is designed in pure da capo form, brings no relaxation.’
Remarks:
· This is the movement with the initially missing second obbligato instrument. Most of the following recordings reconstructed this voice for violino II but other alternatives are used by Koopman and Leusink.
· Total times vary only slightly between the fastest at 5:03 (Gardiner 1 and Leusink) and the slowest 6:00 (Suzuki).
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): the liner notes by Ruth Tatlow inform that the reconstruction of the second obligato part was especially reconstructed by Robert Levin (see Wikipedia). English tenor and conductor, Julian Podger, was educated in Kassel, Germany, where upon leaving school, he first established himself as a solo singer and conductor. (see BCW) has a too shrill timbre and his performance sounds somewhat exaggerated regarding disclamation. Not my first choice.
Koopman (10-1999): the liner notes by Christoph Wolff inform that Koopman reconstructed the second obligato part himself, but he fails to mention for transverse flute instead o f a second violin. German tenor, Christoph Prégardien (see BCW) sounds much better than Podger, above. The whole movement sounds very specific and different with the transverse flute. Certainly among my first choices.
Leusink (11 & 12 -1999): took a completely different approach, supplementing the missing second violon as obligato instrument by a very pleasant sounding (church) organ. With Dutch tenor, Nico van der Meel (see BCW) this sounds as a very interesting alternative, although it is not very probable that Bach had the organ in mind for this second obligato part. Also among my first choices.
Gardiner 2 (11-2000): uses the same reconstruction by Robert Levin (see above) for a second obligato violino II. I don’t like English Tenor, William Kendall (see BCW) much better as Podger (see above). Not my first choice.
Suzuki (02-2004): the liner notes by Klaus Hofmann point out that a second violin was intended for the second obligato voice, an assumption used in this rendition (as did both Gardiner recordings). Japanese tenor, Makoto Sakurada (see BCW) sound better regarding timbre and technique in his coloraturas. Among my first choices.
Lutz (10-2008): also uses 2 violins as obligato instruments. German tenor, Johannes Kaleschke (see BCW) is a very competent tenor of the new generation. His coloraturas are technically perfect and I like his strong dark timbre. Certainly my first choice.
Ranking: (1) Lutz, (2) Suzuki), (3) Koopman, (4) Leusink (5) Gardiner 2, (6) Gardiner 1.
Movement 3: Recitativo A and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘Only eight bars of secco recitative separate the first aria from the second, no. 4 …’
Remarks:
· I am only commenting on the alto soloists, not on the composition of the BC, although e.g. Suzuki and Lutz use a harpsichord as keyboard instrument. Certainly not Bach’s intention.
· Total times vary only slightly between the fastest at 0:35 (Gardiner 1 and Leusink) and the slowest 0:40 (Suzuki).
Gardiner 1 (12-1998: American counter-tenor, Derek Lee Ragin (see BCW) has a very clear timbre and is technically perfect in this short recitative. Among my first choices for CT’s.
Koopman (10-1999): German mezzo-Soprano, Annette Markert (see BCW) although technically perfect is not my first choice for MS’s.
Leusink (11 & 12 -1999): Dutch counter-tenor, Sytse Buwalda (see BCW) sings most of the alto parts with Leusink. Although sounding somewhat shrill in some instances, also among my first choices for CT’s.
Gardiner 2 (11-2000): Welsh contralto, Hilary Summers (see BCW) might not be as well-known as other mezzo-sopranos but has a very expressive declamation and pleasant timbre. Also among my first choices for MS’s.
Suzuki (02-2004): English counter-tenor, Robin Blaze (see BCW) is my preferred CT voice in this recording. Very forceful and technically perfect. My first choice for CT’s.
Lutz (10-2008): young Swiss mezzo-soprano, Antonia Frey (see BCW) is a choir member in Lutz’s recordings but sings the alto soloists parts in many other rendition. Her forceful and technical perfection make her my first chofor MS’s .
Ranking: (1) Lutz, (2) Suzuki), (3) Gardiner 1, (4) Gardiner 2, (5) Koopman, (6) Leusink.
Movement 4: Aria B, Oboe da more I and II (unisono), Violin
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘Only eight bars of secco recitative separate the first aria from the second, no. 4, which again requires two obbligato instruments— in its transmitted form, unison oboes d’amore and violin. The flowing figuration and symmetrical form of the first aria here give way to oft-changing rhythms and a text-engendered multi-sectional form that might be construed as a complex variant of da capo form: a b c c a b1 a1 b2. In the first aria textual antithesis was largely developed as a simultaneous contrast between calmer and more agitated parts; now it takes the form of successive contrast: a ‘Das Unglück schlägt…’ (‘ Misfortune throws …’): dotted rhythms, ‘poc’ allegro’ b ‘Doch plötzlich erscheinet…’ (‘ Yet suddenly appears …’): triadic melody, compound duple time, ‘vivace’ c ‘Mir scheint des Trostes Licht …’ (‘ Comfort’s Light shines for me …’): flowing cantabile, continuo texture (the obbligato instruments resting), ‘andante’ The last two lines of text (‘ Da lern ich erst…’) are quoted from the third verse of the hymn, but in his setting Bach makes no reference at all to the chorale melody.
Remarks:
· I am only commenting on the bass soloists, not on the obligato instruments and BC.
· Total times vary only slightly between the fastest at 0:35 (Gardiner 1 and Leusink) and the slowest 0:40 (Suzuki).
Gardiner 1 (12-1998: German bass-baritone and conductor, Gotthold Schwarz (see BCW) has a very forceful, dark timbre and perfect technique. One of my first choices.
Koopman (10-1999): German bass-baritone, Klaus Mertens (see BCW) has a characteristic dark but ‘warm’ timbre, that I like very much. His technique is also perfect as experiences Bach soloist. Among my first choices.
Leusink (11 & 12 -1999): Dutch bass and conductor and music teacher, Bas Ramselaar (see BCW) has an even ‘darker’ timbre compared to both above. His technique is also perfect. Among my first choices, but not at the top.
Gardiner 2 (11-2000): English baritone, Peter Harvey (see BCW) performs in many recordings with Gardiner and has an excellent performance, both technically as well as in declamation. Among my first choices.
Suzuki (02-2004): Dutch bass, Peter Kooij (see BCW) is at the same level as Mertens, although I prefer the latter. Also among my first choices.
Lutz (10-2008): German bass-baritone, Ekkehard Abele (see BCW) is of a younger generation, but is certainly comparable with all other soloists her. I like his very dark (‘black’) timbre as forceful declamation. Probably at the top among all other soloists discussed here.
Ranking: (1) Lutz, (2) Koopman, (3) Suzuki), (4) Gardiner 1, (5) Gardiner 2, (6) Leusink.
Movement 5: Recitativo S, Strings and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘The second recitative, no. 5, is accompanied by strings, which lends musical prominence to the admission that the ‘greatest enemy’ lies ‘within me’. The line ‘I give God what is God’s’ refers to Jesus’s words in the Gospel reading.’
Remarks:
· I am only commenting on the soprano soloists, not on the strings nor BC.
· Although very short, this recitative requires two jumps in the higher registers, e.g. a high f on ‘Heiland” and high g on ‘lässt’ in the 3rd. line ‘Mein Heiland lässt mich Ruhe finden’.
· Total times vary only slightly between the fastest at 0:40 (Gardiner 1 and II, and Leusink) and the slowest 0:52 (Koopman).
Gardiner 1 (12-1998: English soprano, Katharine Fuge (see BCW) has a relatively ‘boyish’ and ‘slim’ voice and hits the higher notes with technical perfection. One of my first choices.
Koopman (10-1999): German soprano, Sibylla Rubens (see BCW) has a longstanding experience as Bach soprano, having worked also with Rilling and Herreweghe among many other conductors. Her technique is as good as any other soprano discussed her, but the higher notes tend to sound slightly operatic. Not bad, but not my first choice.
Leusink (11 & 12 -1999): English soprano, Ruth Holton (see BCW) with her typical ‘boyish’ timbre and excellent diction is one of my favorite Bach sopranos. The clarity of this rendition also makes it one of my first choices.
Gardiner 2 (11-2000): Canadian soprano, Gillian Keith (see BCW) has a somewhat of a ‘shaky’ voice. I don’t like her timbre with a tendency to be ‘shrill’. Not my first choice.
Suzuki (02-2004): Japanese soprano, Yukari Nonoshita (see BCW) reminds Sibylla Rubens (with Koopman, above) in both timbre and declamation. Not bad, but not my first choice.
Lutz (10-2008): Swiss soprano, Susanne Frei-Seitter (see BCW) is one of the very promising artists of a younger generation, who started become visible as chorister in Lutz choir but occasionally also sings solo parts. I like her clear timbre and good technique. One of my first choices.
Ranking: (1) Leusink, (2) Lutz, (3) Gardiner 1, (4) Koopman, (5) Suzuki, (6) Gardiner 2
Movement 6: Choral S, A, T, B, Instruments and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘A plain chorale setting ends the cantata.
Remarks:
· I am only commenting on the ‘size and transparency of the choir, not on instruments and BC. See also comments to movement 1, above.
· Whenever Dürr mentions ‘plain chorale setting’ one is led to believe in ‘plain’ as in simple. IMHO there is never anything ‘plain’ or ‘simple’ about Bach’s harmonization of his choral settings. I always prefer a OVPP interpretation for the sake of clarity. (Not available with the recordings discussed here.). My preferences always tend to the recordings with the smallest choirs (mostly Suzuki and/or Lutz.
· Total times vary only slightly between the fastest at 0:39 (Lutz) and the slowest 0:48 (Gardiner 2).
Ranking: (1) Suzuki, (2) Lutz, (3, 4 and 5) Koopman = Gardiner 1 = Gardiner 2, (6) Leusink |
| |
|
|
