|
|
Cantata BWV 63
Christen, ätzet diesen Tag
Discussions - Part 5 |
|
Continue from Part 4 |
|
Discussions in the Week of August 13, 2026 (5th round)
Cantata BWV 63 ‘Christen, ätzet diesen Tag’ by Rudolf Lutz compared to 13 other HIP and 1 OVPP recordings. |
|
Frits V. Herbold wrote (August 13, 2026):
For this first Christmas cantata, the BCW shows 47 recordings so far, starting with many early interpretation from the 50ies and 60ies (by Michael Gielen, Günther Ramin and Diethard Hellmann) and ending with very recent renditions (2026!), some of them only very good but only available on YouTube. As an example, I recommend a performance with Marcus Creed with the Netherlands Bach Society, see YouTube, although not discussed in detail here because of the lack of performance details.
BWB 63 is the 20th cantata of Rudolf Lutz’s cycle, recorded live at the Evangelic Church in Trogen, on Friday, December 19, 2008 - 6 days before the respective first Christmas day 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/2; BC: A8 and Bach Digital: Bach Digital
Sopran solo, Alt solo, Tenor solo, Bass solo, Sopran, Alt, Tenor, Bass, Tromba I, Tromba II, Tromba III, Tromba IV, Timpani, Oboe I, Oboe II, Oboe III, Bassono, Violine I, Violine II, Viola, Basso continuo.
Remarks:
1. The NBA I/2 with its ‘Kritischer Bericht’ (critical report) was published already in 1957 (Alfred Dürr), meaning that it was available to all conductors of the recordings discussed here.
2. The ‘Kritischer Bericht’ (critical report) mentions the original extant parts, kept at the library of the university of Tübingen, Germany and the missing original, only extant as copy (Franz Hauser). Among the original parts are doublets for alt and tenor as well for both violins I and II (added for the later Leipzig performance(s). The 4 brass instruments are written originally for clarino’s 1 and 2 and trumpets (tromba’s) 3 and 4. The additional new parts for organ (transposed) and violone has been added later (probably also for a late Leipzig performance?). The ‘critical report’ also dedicate a whole chapter to the composition dates. There is a consensus that this is a Weimar composition (probably 1714-15) with a 2nd. performance: in 1723 and probably 1729 (with the new organo obligato part instead of the oboe in movement 3) both in Leipzig.
3. The original Weimar key is in C Major (not sure about the pitch) and later played at the Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch a’ = 415.
4. Regarding all 3 performances, there is an interesting article (in German) by Marc-Roderich Pfau, Berlin, see: BCW [PDF]
Introduction Cantata BWB 63 by Alfed Dürr (from ‘ The Cantatas of J. S. Bach’ )
‘This cantata, composed in Weimar for Christmas 1714,7 was formerly thought to be based on a libretto by the Halle pastor Johann Michael Heineccius, though there is no solid evidence to connect him with the text. Without doubt the work has a decidedly festive character, but not one specifically associated with Christmas. All the pieces typical of Christmas music are absent: the music of the shepherds, the cradle song, the ‘Glory be to God on high’ of the angels, the Christmas hymns (indeed, there is no chorale at all). This could be mere chance— a whim of the librettist with which the composer concurred. Or perhaps we should conclude that the cantata originated as the parody of a secular original, though further support for this rather vague hypothesis has not so far been found. The structure of the work is remarkably symmetrical: around a central secco recitative, ‘so kehret sich nun heut’ (no. 4), are grouped two duets (nos. 3 and 5), two accompanied recitatives (nos. 2 and 6), and, as an outer frame, two tutti choruses (nos. 1 and 7). And among the individual movements the similarly symmetrical da capo structure predominates: nos. 1,3 and 7 exhibit it in its pure form (ABA), whereas in no. 5 a free reprise of the opening section suffices (ABA7). Time and again the recitatives consolidate rhythmically and motivically into arioso, in accordance with Bach’s Weimar style. Not quite so typical of Bach’s early period is the large-scale design of the individual movements or of individual themes— for example, the oboe melody in the third movement. This represents a substantial departure from the small-scale articulation of Bach’s earliest efforts. Yet the choruses, in particular, with their thematically independent middle sections, betray their origin in the sectional form of the motet, for the unifying technique of choral insertion, which Bach used in almost all his concertante choruses from Advent 1716 onwards, is altogether absent. Bach revived this cantata on several later occasions: at his first Christmas in Leipzig in 1723 and at least once more thereafter. At one of these later performances he replaced the obbligato oboe of the third movement with obbligato organ, entering the music himself in the organ continuo part. This version differs materially from the oboe part only in certain altered ornaments and in its broader articulation, added to which it lacks any dynamic marks. It should hardly be regarded as a ‘last will and testament’, a replacement of the oboe version, but rather as an alternative solution. In accordance with the practice of the time, both scoring possibilities should, in any case, be considered available for today’s performances.’
Remark: Total times vary considerably between the fastest at 26:06 (Philip Pickett) and the slowest 29:50 (Greg Funfgeld).
Movement 1: Chorus, A, A, T, B, Tromba I, II, II and IV, Timpani, Oboe I, II and II, Strings and BC
Introduction Cantata BWB 63,2 by Suzuki (from liner notes): The opening chorus, lively and joyful music (C major, 3/8 time), is at a level equal to that of the introduction to the Christmas Oratorio. Brass, woodwinds, strings and voices join in a grand competition to proclaim this day. In the middle section, which speaks of ‘the light of grace', the trumpets give way, and for a while the music moves into a gentler A minor.
Remark: Total times vary a full minute between the fastest at 4:48 (Koopman) and slowest 5:55 (Vladimir Jurowski).
Greg Funfgeld (02-1988): apart from a ‘Note on the recording’, that basically says that ‘multi-miking … has been precluded from the outset ….’, the liner notes are not very detailed. Regarding the size of the Bach Choir of Bethlehem (see BCW ), the link as well as the provided illustration shows an enormous choir of more than 30 choristers for each voices (the sopranos and basses are divided in I & II). I am not sure how many of these are effectively participating in this opening choir, but still, the sung parts and their entries sound well. Although not all instruments and their players are mentioned, I can hear the 4 trumpets, timpani and 3 oboes, as well as a midsize string section. For the BC are mentioned violoncello, bass (or double-bass?), bassoon and – interestingly – both positive organ and great/church organ, but I am not sure which instrument is playing in this movement. This recording is performed at C Major, but at the modern pitch (a’ = 440 Hz). Because IMHO far too big choir, not my first choice but average.
Koopman (09-1995): In comparison to the choir size above, Koopman uses 5 sopranos, 4 altos, 5 tenors and 5 basses – closer to Bach’s choir in both Weimar and Leipzig. The string section compris4 violins I, 4 violins II and 2 violas as well as all other instrumental parts: 3 oboes and 4 trumpets and the BC 2 violoncellos, double-bass, bassoon, and chair organ (played by Koopman himself?). This recording is performed at the Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major. This Very joyous and transparent with excellent instrumental playing (oboe I with Marcel Ponseele) and exact entries makes this recording one of my first choices.
Philip Pickett (10-1995): with 3 voices per part, this choir probably comes closest to Bach’s choir in both Weimar and Leipzig. The instrumentation is also very modest, but nonetheless adequate, although the parts have (later) doublets for the violins : only one instrument for violin I, violin II and viola. The liner notes also inform details of the (historic) instruments, including the 3 oboes, 4 trumpets and timpani, as well as violoncello, double-bass, bassoon, archlute and both chest organ and harpsichord in the BC. I can’t hear the harpsichord in none of the movements recorded here. This is also a very fresh, joyous, transparent interpretation with exact entries. This recording is also performed at the Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major. Among my first choices.
Suzuki (07-1997): the liner notes of this recording are very detailed and complete. Suzuki’s choir has 4 voices per part, one more voice compared to Philip Pickett (above), but still of a good size. All other instruments are present according to the original parts (and copy of original score): 3 violins I, 3 violins II and 2 violas, as well as the 3 oboes, 4 trumpets and timpani. 2 violoncellos, double- bass, bassoon and organ. (Although the liner mentions also harpsichord, it’s not present in none of the 7 movements. As usual with Suzuki, this recording is also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major. Also very transparent with exact entries, joyous style and adequate tempo, this performance is also among my first choices.
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): the renowned Monteverdi Choir is one of my favorites. In this recording the liner notes inform their size for this performance: 7 S, 5 A, 5 T and 5 B. The instruments comprises 5 violins I, 4 violins II and 3 violas, 3 oboes and 4 trumpets, timpani and the BC 2 Violoncellos, Double- Bass, Bassoon, Organ and Harpsichord, although I can’t hear the latter in none of the 7 movements. To get a better idea of choir and orchestra, there is a DVD launched a year later by ArtHaus Musik 100292, ‘In Rehearsal with John Eliot Gardiner (Bach Cantata No. 63)’ that can be viewed on YouTube, see links from the BCW at: BCW or YouTube (several parts) . This is the rehearsal from this same recording and it is very instructive and exciting to see Gardiner’s views and instructions as well as the performances of soloists, choir and instruments. Recommended! This recording is also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major and is among my first choices.
Gardiner 2 (12-1999): this is Gardiner’s second recording of BWV 63 launched with his own label Soli Deo Gloria. Both Monteverdi Choir and English Baroque Soloists haven’t changed within the distance of a year between both recordings and I don’t have a clear preference comparing both excellent recordings. The soloist, though, changed and will be discussed in the following movements as they appear. This recording is also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major and is among my first choices.
Leusink (03 & 04-2000): although I generally prefer boy’s choirs compared to mixed choirs, I am somewhat disappointed with this performance by Leusink. I am not sure if it’s the recording technique or the choir size (11 S, 6 A, 5 T and 7 B), but the clear and crisp sound I heard with both Gardiner’s recordings is gone here. The string section size is exactly the same as with Gardiner 2 and both woodwinds with 3 oboes and bras with 4 trumpets (and timpani) also. I am not sure of the size of the BC, since the liner notes inform too many instruments to be playing simultaneously: 4 violoncellos, 4 double-basses and 2 bassoons. I like the use of the church organ from the St. Nicolaschurch, Elburg, the Netherlands, although its sounds comes forward better in movements 2, 3 and 4, see below. This recording is also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major but not among my first choices.
Herreweghe (12-2002): Herreweghe’s Collegium Vocale Gent are at the same level of other superb mixed choirs (as with Koopman, Suzuki etc.…). His string section with 4 violins I , 4 violins II and 3 violas is relatively modest. The first of 3 oboes is played by Marcel Ponseele. Natural trumpets (and timpani) and a BC with 2 violoncellos, double-bass, bassoon and chest organ complete the festive instrumentation. This performance is not as festive and crisp as with Gardiner 1 & 2, but perfect regarding transparency, exact entries and tempo. This recording is also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major and is among my first choices.
Michaela Prentl (12-2006): The Chorgemeinschaft St. Sebastian (Choir Community St. Sebastian = CGSS; renamed: Sebastian Chor München) in Munich Schwabing, Germany counts today about 50 young, music-inspired singers. It has the same problem IMHO as Leusink’s choir: too large with over 40 (mixed) choristers. See BCW. Although the string section is also relatively small with 4 violins I , 3 violins II and 2 violas and very close to Bach’s performances in Leipzig as well as the other instruments (3 oboes, 4 trumpets (with timpani) and regular BC (Violoncello, Violone, Bassoon, Organ) the sound of this movements is not ideal: too blurry, hazy and foggy. Interestingly, although not mentioned in the very sparse liner notes, the organ mentioned here is the church organ of the St. Sebastian Church, built in 1987 by Georg Jann (see Wikipedia. Since this recording is also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major, I presume that this instrument is tuned to the ‘classic’ organ pitch of a’= 465 and that the organist played the transposed (original) part, 2 semitones lower than C Major at B Flat Major (German B). Because of the size of the choir, not my first choice.
Rudolf Lutz (12-2008): Lutz choir size of 4 S, 4 A, 3 T and 3 B is almost ideal in size compared to Bach’s choir in Leipzig as is his string section with 3 violins I, 3 violins 2 and 2 violas. All other instruments are according to the original parts, with 3 oboes, 4 trumpets (and timpani) and a BC consisting of violoncello, violone, bassoon and chest organ (in some movements played by Lutz himself). As informed above in the introduction, all cantatas performed by Lutz can be heard and seen at YouTube (see link above). I am a huge fan of Lutz’s recordings and this recording is no exception. This is a very brilliant, crisp and transparent performance, also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major. Among my first choices, probably at the top.
Vladimir Jurowski (12-2009): I haven’t appreciated many Bach cantata recordings with big choirs like the London Philharmonic Choir (see: BCW) and full modern symphonic orchestras as the London Philharmonic Orchestra (see: BCW). The result is the same as with many similar ‘big’ choirs discussed (see above). I guess that the choir has at least 6 choristers per part; the (modern) instruments are all there but the string section alone is also too big, with probably 6 first and second violins each and 3-4 violas. As a consequence, this movement also sounds too blurry, hazy and foggy. As expected, instruments and voices play at the modern pitch of a’ = 440Hz, in C Major. Not my first choice.
Georg Christoph Biller (01-2011): this is also a ‘big’ choir recording, but with the Thomaner (boys) Choir (see: BCW) and the Gewandhaus Orchestra Leipzig (see: BCW) . This interpretation was recorded during the weekly cantata services at Thomaskirche, Leipzig, Saxony, Germany, in the frame of Thomaskirche Leipzig: Church Services, Motets & Concerts. Many details (see other movements below) remind Bach’s own performance with the exception of choir size and full symphonic orchestra playing at the modern pitch of a’ =440 Hz. I like this recording better as compared to most other ‘big’ choir performances but compared to the other HIP / OVPP recordings not my first choice. My ranking is average.
Philippe Pierlot (11-2012): I am a fan of most OVPP recordings because of the transparency and crispness of the choir movements. In this case the instrumental strength is also very close to Bach’s own performances with (only) 4 first, 3 second violins and 2 violas. The other (original) instruments of the Belgian instrumental ensemble, Ricercar Consort (see: BCW) sound very joyous and crisp, also played at the original Leipzig ‘Kammerton’ pitch of a’ = 415 Hz, in C Major. Among my first choices, very close to Lutz and John Butt (see below).
John Butt & Dunedin Consort & Players (07-2014) this Scottish performance recorded at Greyfriars Kirk, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. Is one of the most remarkable interpretations of this cantata IMHO. The liner notes are very detailed, so one has a clear idea of choir and instrumental sizes. Butt uses the (Bach’s original naming) of concertists and ripienists for the choir, meaning 2 voices per part. The string section has (only) 2 first violins, 2 second violins and 1 viola and all other instruments are in conformance with the original parts: 3 oboes, 4 trumpets (with timpani) and a BC consisting of violoncello, violone, bassoon and organ, probably the church organ of the Greyfriars Kirk (church), see: Greyfriars Kirk. For some reason the harpsichord one can hear in movements 2,3 and 4 is not mentioned! But the really interesting difference is the informed pitch of a’ = 392 Hz, which is the so called ‘tief-Cammerton’ (lower-chamber tone) , ‘Französischer Thon’ (French tone) or ‘Operathon’ (opera tone) described by many Bach scholars as originally related to French woodwind instruments, tuned a further semi tone lower than the usual ‘Cammerton’ in Leipzig. Bach has certainly been used to such tuned instruments mainly in his early and Weimar cantatas and possibly needed to transpose its parts depending on the pitch used for the other instruments. For more details, I recommend Bruce Haynes’ ‘A History of Performing Pitch / The Sory of A’ (Scarecrow Press, 2002). In Chapter 6 ‘Johann Sebastian Bach and Pitch’ he shows the great variations in pitch of Bach’s instruments in Weimar, Köthen and Leipzig – especially in the case of woodwinds.
Another distinction in this recording is the use of a non-equal temperament (as does Lutz), in this case the Werckmeister III tuning), see also BCW [PDF] and BCW. Since this pitch is 5 semitones apart (lower) from the modern pitch of a’= 440 Hz, the pitch finder software I am using indicates correctly the transposed key of F major.
I am not sure why Butt used this pitch since this original composition was probably composed for the normal ‘Cammerton’ of a’= 415 Hz. But the liner notes also inform the collaboration of a ‘Keyboard Technician’, who certainly helped with the correct tuning of both organ and (not mentioned) harpsichord.
As does Gardiner (see Gardiner 1), Butt also used a ‘Language Coach’ to help with the correct German pronunciation. The whole first movement sounds very joyous, crisp and transparent and is certainly my first choice, at the same level as Philippe Pierlot and Lutz.
Ranking:
Best: Philippe Pierlot, Lutz, John Butt, Philip Pickett, Suzuki, Koopman, Gardiner 1, Gardiner 2, Herreweghe,
Average: Greg Funfgeld, Georg Christoph Biller
Last: Leusink, Michaela Prentl, Vladimir Jurowski
Movement 2: Recitativo A, Strings and BC
Introduction Cantata BWB 63,3 by Suzuki (from liner notes): ‘
Remarks:
· Total times vary around a minute between the fastest at 2:31 (Herreweghe) and the slowest 3:46 (Greg Funfgeld and Leusink).
· I am commenting only on the alto soloists performances, not on the strings but in some cases also on the composition of the BC
Greg Funfgeld (02-1988): Canadian contralto, Janice Taylor, see BCW, has been acclaimed as 'one of the great contraltos in the world today' and hailed as 'one of Canada's national treasures'. Her timbre and declamation in this too slow interpretation is far from my ideal Bach soprano soloists, meaning too operatic, too ‘romantic’ and far away from ‘slim’ . Not among my first choices for CA.
Koopman (09-1995): Austrian mezzo-soprano, Elizabeth von Magnus, see BCW is a well-known and established soloist in many cantata recordings, starting with Harnoncourt. I like her technique strong voice and timbre, but for some reason the whole movement also sounds a little too ‘overdone’ in declamation. Average in my ranking for MS.
Philip Pickett (10-1995): Scottish counter-tenor, Christopher Robson, see BCW, is today widely regarded as one of the foremost exponents of the counter-tenor voice, with a repertoire ranging from Medieval monody to the Avant-Garde. I like his technique and especially his ‘neutral’ timbre which I imagine very close to the CT’s of Bach’s time. Unfortunately, his declamation is also somewhat exacerbated IMHO. As with Koopman, average in ranking for CT.
Suzuki (07-1997): Japanese counter-tenor Mera Yoshikazu , see BCW sings in many recordings as alto soloist with Suzuki. I admire his good German pronunciation, technique, balanced declamation and pleasant timbre. Among my first choices for CT.
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): Italian contralto, Sara Mingardo, see BCW has the perfect contralto timbre in this short recitative. I like her technique, declamation and sensible timbre. One of my first choices for CA.
Gardiner 2 (12-1999): Argentinean mezzo-soprano, Bernarda Fink, see BCW has also performed in many other recordings with Harnoncourt, Herreweghe and René Jacobs. I like her as much as Mingardo in Gardiner 1 regarding technique, declamation and timbre Also among my first choices for MS.
Leusink (03 & 04-2000): Dutch counter-tenor, Sytse Buwalda, see BCW is seldom my favorite CT because of his timbre, but performs well in declamation and technique in this recitative. Average in my ranking for CT.
Herreweghe (12-2002): German mezzo-soprano (and contralto), Ingeborg Danz, see BCW has a longstanding career as Bach soloist, also singing passion music’s with Rilling, Koopman and Georg Christoph Biller. Her perfect technique and adequate declamation as well as pleasant timbre (in this performance as MS) makes also one of my first choices.
Michaela Prentl (12-2006): German mezzo-soprano, Stefanie Früh, see BCW might not me as well-known as many other MS’s discussed here but has a perfect technique and balanced / reservedeclamation as well as ‘neutral’ (not too slim nor operatic) timbre. Also among my first choices for MS.
Rudolf Lutz (12-2008): Swiss counter-tenor, Jan Börner, see BCW is a good example as an excellent CT from a younger generation. Although performing mostly with Lutz, he also performed with Philippe Pierlot in a recording of the St. John Passion. I like everything about him: timbre, forceful volume, declamation and technique. One of my first choices for CT.
Vladimir Jurowski (12-2009): Romanian mezzo-soprano Ruxandra Donose, see BCW, I don’t like her declamation and operatic – sometimes even shrill timbre. My last choice for MS.
Georg Christoph Biller (01-2011): German counter-tenor and former boy alto, Stephan Kahle, see BCW certainly has a long experience singing Bach as boy alto with the Thomaner choir, which makes him an excellent CT in this recitative. Interestingly, the BC is enriched with a viola da gamba. One of my first choices for CT.
Philippe Pierlot (11-2012): Spanish counter-tenor, Carlos Mena, see BCW. His performance is technically good but his declamation somewhat exaggerated. Not my first choice for CT.
John Butt & Dunedin Consort & Players (07-2014): English mezzo-soprano Clare Wilkinson, see BCW might not be as well-known as other soloist discussed here. Her declamation is also somewhat exaggerated, but her technique is and timbre as well as German diction is not bad. The harpsichord in the BC (no organ) is a specific detail of this performance. Average in my ranking.
Ranking:
Best: Lutz, Suzuki, Gardiner 1, Gardiner 2, Herreweghe, Georg Christoph Biller, Michaela Prentl
Average: Koopman, Philip Pickett, John Butt, Leusink
Last: Greg Funfgeld, Philippe Pierlot, Vladimir Jurowski
Movement 3: Aria S, B, Oboe I obligato (later Organ obligato) and BC
Introduction Cantata BWB 63 by Suzuki (from liner notes): ‘The beautiful duet for soprano and bass (A minor, 4/4 time) bears the marking Adagio. An oboe obbligato (for the 1723 performance, obbligato organ) represents the sorrows of the world of men; in canon, the soprano and bass sing in acknowledgment that such sorrows are in fact the work of God's providence. 1n the middle section, the bass moves with certain steps as trust in God's mercy becomes unclouded.
Remarks:
· Total times vary around a minute between the fastest at 5:54 (Philip Pickett) and the slowest 7:58 (Michaela Prentl).
· I am commenting only on the soprano and bass soloists and the obligato playing either oboe or organ.
Greg Funfgeld (02-1988): American soprano, Sylvia McNair, see BCW sounds to operatic for my taste, although she masters the higher tones very well. Canadian bass-baritone and teacher, Daniel Lichti, see BCW sounds better and at the end both voices mix well. The introduction and ritornello playing of the oboe is relatively loud in the forefront, but technically perfect. Average in my ranking.
Koopman (09-1995): English soprano, Ruth Holton, see BCW is my favorite Bach soprano, mainly because of her boyish and ‘slim’ timbre, but also perfect technique. This leads to a perfect match with the warm timbre and technical perfection of German bass-baritone, Klaus Mertens, see BCW. In addition, the oboe I is performed by Marcel Ponseele, one of the most experienced Bach (oboe) player. This is a recording difficult to match and certainly one of my first choices.
The same goes for Koopman’s second version with organo obligato (played by Koopman himself), although I don’t think this a better option compared to the original oboe version. I strongly believe that Bach changed to the organ in lack of a satisfying oboe player at the time (1729?). Certainly also among my first choices.
Philip Pickett (10-1995): English soprano, Catherine Bott, see BCW has sung in some other Bach recordings with Stephen Cleobury, Philip Pickett and Jeffrey Thomas, but – although technically perfect sounds too operatic in some instances. Michael George, is established as one of Britain’s most versatile bass-baritones, see BCW. He has performed Bach’s church music with many other conductors, among them Harry Christophers, Stephen Cleobury and Paul Hillier. Unfortunately he is not at his best in this recording, and the mix with Bott is not well balanced since the latter is mostly too loud in the forefront. The oboe playing is regular. All this makes it only average in my ranking.
Suzuki (07-1997): German soprano, Ingrid Schmithüsen, see BCW also performed as a soloists with Herreweghe, among others. She has a very brilliant and clear voice, technically also good in the high registers. The mix with experienced bass Dutch bass, Peter Kooij, see BCW makes this a good mix and the oboe playing is also perfect. Although this movement’s tempo is far too slow, among my first choices.
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): American soprano, Ann Monoyios, see BCW. In concert engagements, Ann Monoyios has collaborated with the leading Baroque specialists of the world including Gustav Leonhardt, Frans Brüggen, Christopher Hogwood, John Eliot Gardiner, Trevor Pinnock, Philippe Herreweghe and Reinhard Goebel, among others. Her voice sounds very similar to Schmithüsen’ s (above) and I would rate her similarly. German bass, Stephan Loges, see BCW might not be as well-known as Mertens or Kooij, but I like his performance although the volume of his voice falls behind Monoyios. The oboe playing is good. Not my first choice but a good average.
Gardiner 2 (12-1999): I believe that Gardiner has had many better sopranos than American soprano, Claron McFadden in his many recordings, see BCW. She sounds too operatic and shrill in the higher tones – right in the beginning of her entry. German bass-baritone, Dietrich Henschel, see BCW doesn’t impress much neither, I would have preferred a stronger volume and declamation. The mix of these voices itself and the oboe playing is not bad, but I certainly prefer Gardiner’s first recording, see above. Not my first choice.
Leusink (03 & 04-2000): I don’t like Dutch soprano, Marjon Strijk, see BCW as much as Ruth Holton, who mostly sings the soprano solos with Leusink, but her technique and higher notes are good, although I miss the ‘slim’ and ‘boyish’ timbre of Holton. Dutch bass and conductor and music teacher, Bas Ramselaar, see BCW is not my preferred Bach bas soloist but mixes very well with Strijk in this recoding. The oboe playing is expressive but not exaggerated. Average In my ranking.
Herreweghe (12-2002): English soprano, Carolyn Sampson, see BCW has a long experience as Bach soprano soloist, among others with conductors as Frans Brüggen, Rudolf Lutz, Paul McCreesh and Suzuki. I like her timbre and technique very much combining perfectly with German baritone, Sebastian Noack, see BCW. This is a good mix although Noack’s also volume seems too low as many of the other combinations discussed above. With Marcel Ponseele’s perfect oboe playing this interpretation is among my first choices.
Michaela Prentl (12-2006): German soprano, Susanne von Sicherer, see BCW. Her declamation tends somewhat to the operatic, but I like her technique and timbre. German bass-baritone, Thomas Hamberger, see BCW mixes well but the problem in this interpretation is a too slow tempo and the oboe sounds as positioned too far away. This might be a recording technique problem – nevertheless not my first choice.
Rudolf Lutz (12-2008): Swiss soprano, Eva Oltiványi, see BCW although technically perfect, tends to a somewhat shrill timbre in the higher notes but blends perfectly one of my favorite German baritones, Markus Volpert, see BCW , a full and articulate soloist from a newer generation. The obligato oboe part is played very well. Among my first choices, especially because of Volpert.
Vladimir Jurowski (12-2009): Scottish soprano, Lisa Milne, see BCW definitely sounds too operatic for my taste. English baritone, Christopher Maltman, see BCW sounds well but the combination of both voices is not ideal, mainly because of the exaggerated declamation of Oltiványi. The oboe playing is ok, but not my first choice.
Georg Christoph Biller (01-2011): This recording is the only one with a boy soprano, Friedrich Praetorius (Soloist of the Thomanerchor, see Wikipedia (only in German). I like this performance very much, considering his perfect mastering of the higher notes. This boy voice mixes ideally with German baritone, Matthias Weichert, see BCW leading to a very balanced interpretation. Biller uses the organ as obligato part, played in a very delicate manner. This creates a very ‘intimate’ atmosphere with a viola da gamba and violoncello in the BC. One of my first choices.
Philippe Pierlot (11-2012): Swedish soprano, Maria Keohane, see BCW covers a wide range of music, from the baroque to contemporary compositions including chamber music, opera and oratorios. She also performed with Herreweghe and her technique and declamation are perfect. Her timbre mixes very well with veteran Swiss bass-baritone, Stephan MacLeod, see BCW. The oboe obligato sounds a little too loud for my taste and the BC is also to ‘heavy’. Nevertheless, because of the excellent singing of both soloists, one of my first choices.
John Butt & Dunedin Consort & Players (07-2014): I am a fan of English soprano, Joanne Lunn, see BCW mainly because her slim and ‘boyish’ timbre. Her technique, especially in the higher registers, is perfect. Her voice mixes very well with English bass-baritone, Matthew Brook, see BCW. He enjoyed long collaborations with many conductors, including: Harry Christophers, Gardiner, Matthew Halls, Herreweghe, Paul McCreesh and Philip Pickett among many others. I like his full dark timbre and perfect technique. The oboe playing is ok, a little too loud as well as the BC, in this case with harpsichord and violoncello. One of my choices.
Ranking:
Best: Koopman, Herreweghe, Suzuki, Rudolf Lutz, Biller, Philippe Pierlot, John Butt
Average: Greg Funfgeld, Philip Pickett, Gardiner 1, Leusink
Last: Gardiner 2, Michaela Prentl, Vladimir Jurowski
Movement 4: Recitativo, T and BC
Introduction Cantata BWB 63 by Suzuki (from liner notes): ‘On Christmas Day, suffering is transformed into salvation. The tenor sings of this conversion in a recitative (No. 4), in which the Lord is referred to as the Lion of David, making reference to his bow and sword. The continua at this point reflects the flight of an arrow launched from the bow.’
Remarks:
· Total times vary around slightly around a minute between the fastest at 0:42 (Gardiner 2) and the slowest 1:00 (Greg Funfgeld and Leusink).
· I am commenting only on the tenor soloists and in some cases the BC.
Greg Funfgeld (02-1988): North American tenor, David Gordon, see BCW has established a distinguished international reputation among the top ranks of classical vocalists, and he is regarded as one of the finest Bach tenors of our time. I like his forceful timbre and very convincing declamation. I don’t hear an organ but only violoncello and violone in the BC. One of my first choices.
Koopman (09-1995): I consider Scottish tenor, Paul Agnew, see BCW one of my favorite Bach tenor’s, also as evangelist with Stephen Cleobury and Paul McCreesh. I like his sensitive declamation, warm timbre and technique. The expressive musical painting of the BC sounds perfect, with organ and violoncello and or double-bass. Also one of my first choices
Philip Pickett (10-1995): this is also an excellent performance with Agnew (see above). Although I like him better with Koopman, this is also one of my first choices.
Suzuki (07-1997): Japanese tenor, Makoto Sakurada, see BCW sings many of the tenor solo parts with Suzuki and is perfect here, with surprisingly good German diction, warn timbre and excellent technique. The BC with organ (played by Suzuki himself), violoncello and violone are very expressive. Also among my first choices.
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): German bass, Stephan Loges, see BCW. He performed also as evangelist with Paul McCreesh and Peter Seymour. His has a perfect German diction, good declamation and technique and relatively ‘warm’ timbre. Among my first choices.
Gardiner 2 (12-1999): German bass-baritone, Dietrich Henschel, see BCW sounds very similar to Loges and both soloists and BC sound equally good. Among my first choices.
Leusink (03 & 04-2000): Dutch tenor, Nico van der Meel, see BCW has an excellent German diction, good declamation, pleasant timbre and good technique. Also among my first choices.
Herreweghe (12-2002): English tenor, Mark Padmore, see BCW has a vast experience with Bach having recorded with other conductors such as Harry Christophers, Gardiner, Koopman and Paul McCreesh. His professional technique, declamation and timbre are perfect. Among my first choices.
Michaela Prentl (12-2006): young German tenor, Wolfgang Frisch -Catalano, see BCW might not be as well-known as many other tenors discussed here, I don’t like his timbre although his technique and declamation are ok. Average in my ranking.
Rudolf Lutz (12-2008): I am a huge fan of German tenor, Julius Pfeiffer, who mostly sings with Lutz. His timbre is ‘fresh’ and clear and has a good volume. He has also performed as evangelist in Bach’s St John and St. Mathews passion music’s. His declamation is also very adequate to the text of this short recitative. One can hear (and see) a violoncello and chest organ in the BC. At the top of my first choices.
Vladimir Jurowski (12-2009): English tenor, Andrew Staples, see BCW. I don’t like his timbre as much as many other tenors discussed here. He sounds somewhat ‘uptight’ without much warmth. Average in my ranking.
Georg Christoph Biller (01-2011): German veteran tenor, Christoph Genz, see BCW has performed with many other conductors, among them Herreweghe, Frans Brüggen, Marcus Creed, Koopman, Kuijken. Although technically perfect, his voice also lacks some of the ‘warmness ‘ I appreciate as an example with Mertens. Average in my ranking.
Philippe Pierlot (11-2012): German tenor, Julian Prégardien, see BCW might not be as well-known as other ‘veteran’ Bach tenors, but everything is perfect here in this short recitative: technique, declamation, timbre and volume. Among my first choices.
John Butt & Dunedin Consort & Players (07-2014): English tenor, Nicholas Mulroy, see BCW has a very peculiar timbre – somewhat ‘shallow’ and I don’t like his declamation as well as with other recordings discussed here. Butt also uses a cembalo in the BC. Average in my ranking.
Ranking:
Best: Lutz, Greg Funfgeld, Koopman, Philip Pickett, Suzuki, Gardiner 1, Gardiner 2, Leusink, Philippe Pierlot
Not as good: Michaela Prentl, Vladimir Jurowski, Georg Christoph Biller, John Butt
Movement 5: Aria A, T Strings and BC
Introduction Cantata BWB 63 by Suzuki (from liner notes): ‘Movement 5 is a duet in G major (3/8 time) for alto and tenor. It calls Christians to the heavens in a shout of joy, moving with the impetus of a dance. Clear musical structure reveals a powerful unity, and the work gives an extremely modem impression.’
Remarks:
· Total times vary slightly around a minute between the fastest at 3:15 (Gardiner 2) and the slowest 4:18 (Greg Funfgeld and Leusink).
· I am commenting only on the mix and balance between both soloist. The alt soloist, already discussed and ranked in movement 2 (see above) and the tenor, already discussed and ranked above). I am not commenting on the strings section nor on the BC.
Greg Funfgeld (02-1988): Unfortunately the too operatic timbre and declamation of Canadian contralto, Janice Taylor doesn’t mix well with tenor David Gordon IMHO . I don’t like the very slow tempo either. Among my last choices.
Koopman (09-1995): Mezzo-soprano Elisabeth von Magnus and tenor Paul Agnew mix very well in this performance. The tempo is very adequate. Among my fist choices.
Philip Pickett (10-1995): CT Christopher Robson’s too operatic doesn’t combine well with excellent tenor Paul Agnew; the resulting mix is not among my first choices. Average in ranking.
Suzuki (07-1997): Suzuki’s both male Japanese counter-tenor and tenor (see movements 2 and 4) mix very well together in this recording. The movement has the typical spirited, joyous and transparent atmosphere as mostly with Suzuki. Among my first choices
.
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): apart from the fact that both soloist are very good (better as in their individual performance in movements 2 and 4, this interpretation is too fast IMHO, ‘killing’ the atmosphere expected here. Average in ranking.
Gardiner 2 (12-1999): although wit good both soloists even faster, this interpretation has the same problem as with Gardiner 1: too fast IMHO, ‘killing’ the atmosphere expected here. Average in ranking.
Leusink (03 & 04-2000): in this much too slow recording, I don’t like counter-tenor Sytse Buwalda and the resulting mix is not ideal IMHO. Among the last in my ranking.
Herreweghe (12-2002): the mix of excellent mezzo-soprano and contralto Ingeborg Danz and tenor Mark Padmore (both individually among my first choices, see movements 2 and 4) is perfect here. This is also a very spontaneous, joyous and transparent interpretation. Among my first choices.
Michaela Prentl (12-2006): mezzo-soprano Stefanie Früh and tenor Wolfgang Frisch are also better here as individually (especially the tenor part, see movement 4). Average in my ranking.
Rudolf Lutz (12-2008): both men’s voices counter-tenor Jan Börner and Tenor: Julius Pfeifer mix well regarding timbre. The very joyous and transparent interpretation makes this also among my first choices.
Vladimir Jurowski (12-2009): mezzo-soprano Ruxandra Donose and tenor: Andrew Staples are not a perfect match, although better together as individually in movements 2 and 4. Average in my ranking.
Georg Christoph Biller (01-2011): alto Stefan Kahle (Soloist of the Thomanerchor Leipzig) and Tenor: Christoph Genz are a good mix; the tempo is too fast IMHO. Average in my ranking.
Philippe Pierlot (11-2012): counter-tenor Carlos Mena and tenor: Julian Prégardien combine very well in this duet; as good as their individual movements 2 and 4. This is also a very joyous, crisp and transparent interpretation with a good mix of both men’s soloists. Among my first choices.
John Butt & Dunedin Consort & Players (07-2014): mezzo-soprano Clare Wilkinson and tenor Nicholas also mix very well in this fresh – almost jumpy and transparent recording. Also among my first choices.
Ranking:
Best: Suzuki, Herreweghe, Koopman, Lutz, Philippe Pierl, John Butt
Average: Philip Pickett, Gardiner 1, Gardiner 2, Michaela Prentl, Georg Christoph Biller
Last: Greg Funfgeld, Leusink, Vladimir Jurowski
Movement 6: Recitativo B, Oboe I, II and III , Strings and BC.
Introduction Cantata BWB 63 by Suzuki (from liner notes): ‘At this point the bass, accompanied by the oboes and strings, commands the faithful to build up the flames of devotion (No. 6, Recitative). The latter half of the recitative repeats gratitude io God.
Remarks:
· Total times vary slightly around a minute between the fastest at 0:53 (Gardiner 2) and the slowest 1:12 (Greg Funfgeld and Leusink).
· I am commenting only on the bass and bass-baritones in this movement, not on the strings, oboes nor the BC. See also my comments on their performances in the duet, movement 3.
Greg Funfgeld (02-1988): Canadian bass-baritone and teacher, Daniel Lichti, see movement 3 is perfect in this short recitative. His deep timbre and declamation places him among my first choices.
Koopman (09-1995): Mertens’, see movement 3, perfect warm timbre, and perfect declamation also places this performance also among my first choices.
Philip Pickett (10-1995): bass Michael George, who sounded too operatic movement 3, is better here, although I don’t like the almost ‘ staccato’ accompaniment of the oboes and strings. Average in my ranking.
Suzuki (07-1997): veteran bass Peter Kooij is at the same level as Koopman, and also among my first choices regarding timbre and declamation.
Gardiner 1 (12-1998): bass Stephan Loges, see movement 3, sounds better here in this solo. Average in my ranking.
Gardiner 2 (12-1999); bass Dietrich Henschel sounds a little exaggerated in this very strong and loud declamation, although I like his timbre. Also average in my ranking.
Leusink (03 & 04-2000): bass Bas Ramselaar sounds as good as in movement 3. I like his performance better as above. Among my first choices.
Herreweghe (12-2002): bass Sebastian Noack, see movement 3, is very versatile in his declamation. I like his forceful declamation and timbre. Among my first choices.
Michaela Prentl (12-2006): bass-baritone Thomas Hamberger, see movement 3, sounds very similar to Noack, above. Also among my first choices.
Rudolf Lutz (12-2008): baritone Markus Volpert, is one of my preferred Bach bass soloist among the newer generation. His warm timbre and forceful declamation is at the top of my first choices.
Vladimir Jurowski (12-2009): baritone Christopher Maltman, see movement 3, has a forceful declamation, but I don’t like his timbre that lacks ‘warmth ‘and is somewhat shrill. Average in my ranking.
Georg Christoph Biller (01-2011): baritone Matthias Weichert is as good as in his participation in movement 3. Among my first choices.
Philippe Pierlot (11-2012): bass-baritone Stephan MacLeod, is as good as in movement 3. Among my first choices.
John & Dunedin Consort & Players (07-2014): bass-baritone Matthew Brook , is as good as in movement 3. Among my first choices.
Ranking:
Best: Greg Funfgeld, Koopman, Lutz, Leusink, Herreweghe, Suzuki, Michaela Prentl, Georg Christoph Biller, Philippe Pierlot, Matthew Brook
Average: Philip Pickett, Gardiner 1, Gardiner 2, Vladimir Jurowski
Movement 7: Chorus, A, A, T, B, Tromba I, II, II and IV, Timpani, Oboe I, II and II, Strings and BC
Introduction Cantata BWB 63 by Suzuki (from liner notes): ‘The closing movement does not make use of a chorale but is a splendid free-form chorus (No. 7, C major, 4/4 time). It seems fairly traditional in form, incorporating a combination of contrasting block-sections within a da capo (ABA) structure.
Remarks:
· Total times vary slightly around a minute between the fastest at 6:04 (Philippe Pierlot) and the slowest 7:13 (Koopman).
· Since the scoring is exactly the same as in Movement 1, I am giving this final movement the same ranking.
Ranking:
Best: Philippe Pierlot, Lutz, John Butt, Philip Pickett, Suzuki, Koopman, Gardiner 1, Gardiner 2, Herreweghe,
Average: Greg Funfgeld, Georg Christoph Biller
Last: Leusink, Michaela Prentl, Vladimir Jurowski |
| |
|
|
