|
Fritz V. Herbold wrote (September 8, 2025):
BWV 185 is the sixth cantata of Rudolf Lutz’s cycle, recorded as OVPP interpretation live at the Evangelic Church in Trogen on Jun 29, 2007– 2 days before the 4th 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
I am comparing all movements with 1 other OVPP recording (Suzuki) and 3 other HIP interpretations: Koopman, Leusink and Gardiner.
I am not going into the already existing discussion about OVPP interpretations at the BCW, but IMHO this intimate and delicate Weimar cantata clearly justifies single OVPP voices, although the original score (partially autograph) and the parts contain both soloist and choir parts. See also the introduction by Alfred Dürr, below.
This Weimar cantata has been performed on several occasions (see Bach Digital):
First performance on July 14, 1715 (Weimar, Himmelsburg, Schlosskirche, autograph date) in F-sharp minor (Chorton) [= A minor (low chamber pitch)]; presumed subsequent performance in G minor (Chorton) = A minor (chamber pitch)
Scoring: see KB, NBA: I/17.1 and Bach Digital at Bach Digital
Important note: The NBA I /17.1 was published in 1993 and available at the time of all discussed recordings here.
Introduction Cantata BWV 185 by Alfed Dürr (from ‘The Cantatas of J. S. Bach’): ‘ Bach composed this cantata as concertmaster at Weimar and added the date ‘1715’ to the manuscript in his own hand. It was thus performed for the first time on 14 July that year. Possibly another Weimar performance took place, this time in G minor at Chorton pitch, or else the first performance was rearranged at short notice. For the revival of the work in Leipzig on 20 June 1723 (and again around 1746 – 47) Bach made several alterations: in particular, although it was written for performance at Weimar Chorton pitch, he transposed it once and for all into G minor Kammerton, since F sharp minor would have been too low. The text is drawn from the cycle ‘Evangelisches Andachts-Opfer’ by Salomo Franck and was thus specifically written for the 1715 performance. Franck closely follows the text of the Gospel. The call to cultivate compassion, the injunction not to judge, the warning The way you measure will be measured to you again’ (Luke 6.38), and the two concluding parables— of the mote and the beam and of the blind leading the blind— all these things are reproduced; and the final aria unites them under the motto This is the art of the Christian’. The cantata concludes with the first verse of the hymn Ich ruf zu dir, Herr Jesu Christ by Johann Agrícola (c. 1530). Bach’s Weimar composition requires four voices, one oboe, strings, and continuo. The opening movement is a duet, accompanied by a continuo part which is at times thematic but for the most part moves swiftly in quavers. The melody of the concluding chorale is here anticipated line by line in an instrumental quotation on the oboe (which was altered to trumpet in the Leipzig version). The falling third of the voice and continuo theme also refers, no doubt intentionally, to the opening of the chorale. The mirror version of the opening theme is also its counterpoint, probably in order to represent the ‘reflection’ of the text— the stirring of human compassion through its divine counterpart: (illustration omitted)
Remark: the total times of the discussed interpretations here vary slightly– from 14:13 (Suzuki) to 15:09 (Leusink), but most recordings are around 14:30 to 14:40. I will discuss tempo, soloists, choir and instrumentation (including the different composition of the basso continuo (BC) of each movement below. For movement 1, I am also commenting on version, key, pitch and temperament of each recording.
Movement 1: Aria – Duetto for Soprano and Tenor, Oboe (Trumpet in Leipzig) and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘The opening movement is a duet, accompanied by a continuo part which is at times thematic but for the most part moves swiftly in quavers. The melody of the concluding chorale is here anticipated line by line in an instrumental quotation on the oboe (which was altered to trumpet in the Leipzig version). The falling third of the voice and continuo theme also refers, no doubt intentionally, to the opening of the chorale. The mirror version of the opening theme is also its counterpoint,* probably in order to represent the ‘reflection’ of the text— the stirring of human compassion through its divine counterpart: (illustration omitted).
Koopman (Nov 23-Dec 3, 1994): in his liner notes, Koopman points out the use of the Weimar ‘Chorton, a’= 465 Hz in his first recordings of Volumes I and II. Accordingly he performs the Weimar version at f sharp minor at the pitch of a’= 468 Hz here. I checked the key with a software that informs the key at the modern pitch of a’= 440 Hz (https://samples.landr.com/key-bpm-finder) and obtained accordingly g minor, a half tone higher, which confirms Koopman’s key. The tempo of 4:04 is a good average and sounds adequate. The entry of experienced German soprano, Barbara Schlick (see BCW) sounds shrill and is not my first choice in this intimate duet. Belgian tenor, Guy de Mey (see BCW) sounds much better. It is a pity that this mix is not ideal, since the instrumental accompaniment with the oboe played by master Marcel Ponseele (not trumpet) and the BC with violoncello and chest organ only is perfect IMHO. Because of the soprano part, not my first choice!
Suzuki (June 1996): as did Lutz (see below) Suzuki chose the OVPP interpretation, which sounds very pleasant. Contrary to Koopman, this interpretation, although also in f sharp minor, Suzuki explains in his liner notes that he performed at a pitch a’ = 415 Hz (‘ Cammerton in Leipzig’) because of the impossibility to use an adequately pitched bassoon. The tempo of 3:21 is faster than with Koopman but still sounds well. Japanese soprano, Midori Suzuki (see BCW) and Japanese tenor, Makoto Sakurada (see BCW) are a perfect mix here with a special mention for the outstanding soprano part. The instrumental accompaniment with oboe, (not trumpet) and the BC with violoncello and chest organ only is also perfect! My first choice!
Pieter Jan Leusink ( Nov-Dec 1999): I have included this recording of Leusink solely for one reason: English soprano, Ruth Holton (see BCW) with her ‘ boyish’ voice that I like very much! German tenor, Knut Schoch’s (see BCW) mixes very well and both voices sound especially inti(even somewhat reserved). The tempo with 3:15 is even faster as with Suzuki. The instrumentation with oboe and BC is equally intimate. Regarding key and pitch, I guess Leusink is playing at modern pitch (a’ = 440 Hz), and his key is clearly f minor (not f sharp minor!), although there is no explanation available in the liner notes. One of my first choices, very close to Suzuki.
Gardiner (July 2000): I am not even discussing his both soloists Magdalena Kožená (see BCW ) and Paul Agnew (see BCW) because this interpretation is unbearable slow at 4:36 (as happens also with both Gardiner recordings of BWV 4!). His oboe and BC sound louder than in all other recordings. In his many comments about his ‘ Pilgrimage’ we know that Gardiner had to compromise for single pitch of ‘a = 415 Hz, but for some reason the key is also clearly f minor (not f sharp minor!). My last choice because of the exaggerated slow tempo!
Lutz (June 2007): in this second OVPP version, Lutz plays a g minor version at a’ = 415 Hz according to his liner notes. German soprano, Regina Kabis (see BCW) might not be as well=knows as her colleagues above, but She completed her studies with distinction at the famous Schola Cantorum Basiliensis. American tenor, Jens Weber (see BCW) performed also with Kuijken and 3 other recordings with Lutz. Both voices mix very well, and the instrumentation is very delicate with the oboe (duplicated by the first violin!) and a relatively ‘heavy’ BC with violoncello, violone, chest organ AND harpsichord played by Lutz himself. At an average time of 3:59, one of my first choices!
My personal preferences:
(1) Suzuki – (2) Lutz – (3) Leusink - (4) Koopman – (5) Gardiner
Movement 2: ‘Recitativo Alto, Strings and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘ The recitative, no. 2, accompanied by strings, changes towards the end into an arioso accompanied only by continuo, whose imitative texture again serves the purpose of textual interpretation: For the way you measure will be measured to you again’.
Remark: I am discussing the Alto part in more detail in movement 3 (see ‘ Aria’ below). My preferences are the same, see below.
Movement 3: Aria Alto, Oboe, Strings and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘ The complete instrumental forces are first deployed in the central aria, no. 3, where the oboe— at times treated as a soloist— is assigned some rich figure-work.’
Remark: the tempos of this aria vary from 3:42 (Koopman) to 4:31 (Suzuki). All recordings around 4 minutes sound adequate.
Koopman (Nov 23-Dec 3, 1994): my first impression is the excellent oboe playing by Marcel Ponseele! German counter-tenor, Kai Wessel (see BCW) has an extended previous experience with other conductors like René Jacobs, Martin Haselböck, Reinhard Goebel and Jordi Savall and participates in many recordings of the Koopman cycle. His timbre and technique are very good here, not so his diction. Apart from the strings, according to the liner notes his BC only uses violone and organ. His tempo at 3:42 is one of the fastest but sounds adequate. One of my first choices!
Suzuki (June 1996): The ritornello entry here sounds somewhat heavier that above with Koopman, and the oboe playing by Alfredo Bernardini doesn’t sound as prominent as with Marcel Ponseele. Japanese counter-tenor, Akira Tachikawa (see BCW) reminds Kai Wessel – certainly comparable in technique – but his diction is better as a whole. The BC is ‘heavier ‘here with violoncello, violone, bassoon and organ. The tempo of 4:31 is clearly slower, bit still sounds good. Also one of my first choices!
Pieter Jan Leusink ( Nov-Dec 1999): I must confess that I am not a big fan of Dutch counter-tenor, Sytse Buwalda (see BCW). I don’t like his timbre nor his diction. The instrumental accompaniment (although too many strings!) and BC sound ok and the tempo of 4:03 is a good average. Not my first choice!
Gardiner (July 2000): the orchestral ritornello entry sounds somewhat ‘washed out’, not as transparent as e.g. Lutz. The alto part is sung by the only female voice here, French contralto (see BCW) she has what experts say a ‘dark-grained, expressive singing’ and is technical perfect, but I don’t like her timbre nor her diction. According to the liner notes, Gardiners BC is very ‘heavy’ with 3 violoncello ?, 2 double-basses ? , 2 bassoons ? , Harpsichord AND organ ? I am not hearing all these instrument. Possibly Gardiner uses only part of them. The oboe playing is good (not sure who is playing, because the liner notes also mention 3 oboe players). The tempo of 3:48 sounds adequate. Not bad, but not my first choice!
Lutz (June 2007): this performance with minimal orchestration sounds very intimate and transparent. English counter-tenor, Alex Potter (see: BCW) is also the better voice compared to Koopman and Suzuki. The BC with violoncello, violone, organ AND harpsichord (played by Lutz himself) does not sound too heavy and the tempo of 3:54 is a good average. Clearly my first choice!
Final preferences:
1) Lutz – (2) Suzuki – (3) Koopman - (4) Gardiner (5) Leusink
Movement 4: Recitativo Bass and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘A plain secco recitative, no. 4, leads to the third aria, no. 5.’
Remark: I am discussing the Bass part in more detail in movement 5 (see ‘ Aria’). My preferences are the same, see below.
Movement 5: Aria Bass and BC (Strings in 8va Leipzig version)
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘A plain secco recitative, no. 4, leads to the third aria, no. 5, for bass voice with a continuo part which in the Leipzig version is reinforced by all the strings at the octave above. The text, with its uninterrupted enumeration of all the injunctions in the Gospel reading, allows no room for episodes and is therefore most unsuitable for aria composition. 8 However, Bach knew how to organize it skillfully, repeating the introductory line ‘Das ist der Christen Kunst’ (‘ This is the art of the Christian’) at the beginning and end of each section. Taking up the head-motive to which these words are set, even the continuo seems to interject the phrase repeatedly in the course of the musical flow.’
Koopman (Nov 23-Dec 3, 1994): German bass-baritone, Klaus Mertens (see BCW) sings most of the bass solo parts with Koopman. His highly experienced soft and warm timbre and technique as well as clear diction in German makes him one of my favorites. The BC with bassoon and organ is very well played. The tempo of 2:19 sounds very adequate. One of my first choices!
Suzuki (June 1996): German bass, Stephan Schreckenberger (see BCW) is as good as Mertens here. The BC includes a violoncello, bassoon and organ and also sounds perfect. The much faster tempo of 2:01 still sounds good. Also one of my first choices!
Jan Leusink ( Nov-Dec 1999): Dutch bass and conductor and music teacher, Bas Ramselaar (see BCW) is also very good technically and in terms of dark timbre. In the BC I hear a violoncello and the organ but no bassoon. The main problem here is the very slow tempo of 2:57. Not my first choice.
Gardiner (July 2000): French bass, Nicolas Testé (see BCW) is not as well-as all the three basses above. He has a very forceful and dark voice. The BC sounds heavier and the tempo is also fast at 1:57. My third choice, similar to Lutz.
Lutz (June 2007): German baritone, Markus Volpert (see BCW) sings many bass solo parts with Lutz, but is not technically fluent here. The BC instruments played are violoncello, violone, organ AND harpsichord (played by Lutz himself) The tempo of 2:07 is comparable to most of the other recordings discussed here. Compared with all the other excellent solo basses, I need to give Lutz the last place here.
Preferences: with all these excellent bass soloist a fair ranking is not easy:
(1) and (2) Suzuki= Koopman– (3) and (4) Gardine = Leusink – (5) Lutz
Movement 6: Chorale S, A T, B (soloists or choir) Violino 1 as 5th voice (Trumpet and Oboe in Leipzig version)
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘The concluding chorale, sung in four parts, is expanded to five-part texture by an independent violin part that lies above the soprano.’
Koopman (Nov 23-Dec 3, 1994): although not an OVPP interpretation, the choir sounds very transparent. The 5th voice violin and BC are well played (violone, bassoon and organ). The tempo is a good average with 1:24. I like this performance very much.
Suzuki (June 1996): the choir OVPP soloists sounds much more transparent. The BC uses violoncello, violone, bassoon and organ and the tempo at 1:26 is practically the same as above. The 5th voice violin sounds crustal clear in the forefront.
Gardiner (July 2000): the large choir (6 S, 4 A, 4 T and 4 B) sounds too heavy to me in this chorale. The 5th voice violin is prominent, and the BC uses violoncello(s?), violone(s?), bassoon and organ and the tempo at 1:21 is also practically the same as all of the above. Not my first choice!
Lutz (June 2007): with the OVPP scoring, this is the most intimate and transparent recording of this chorale. Lutz uses violin as 5th voice with a special placing at the right of the orchestra to distinguish the additional voice better. The BC comprehends violoncello, violone, bassoon and organ and the tempo at 1:06 is somewhat faster than all the above. Clearly my first choice!
My personal preferences:
(1) Lutz– (2) Suzuki– (3) Koopman - (4) and (5) Gardiner = Leusink
Final Ranking: with all the different nuances in all movements (soloists, choir size, instrumentation, key, pitch and temperament) a fair ranking of these interpretations is not easy. My final judgement is:
OVPP: (1) and (2) Lutz = Suzuki
HIP: (1) Koopman - (2) Gardiner – (3) Leusink |
