Thanks for this episode! I'm currently learning this fugue. I started one month ago and I think I have two months left. Looking forward to listening to this again at the digital piano.
Excellent pod; I've been a fan since the first hour.
Your rant was spot on and the argument deserves more airtime. I think you’re touching on something deeper than just what the instrument dictates.
In my mind, your point is about something bigger which I can only describe as: lack of taste.
I’ve experienced exactly what you’re describing. I studied jazz bass at the conservatory (I did finish, haha, many Bach cello suites on the bass guitar!) At the conservatory, I saw "mediocre" students with incredible musical taste, and "excellent" students who had none. Of course, there’s that rare group who possess both: e.g., Brad Mehldau (who led me to your pod), Glenn Gould, and Keith Jarrett. Their Bach interpretations might be unconventional, but my god, they are tasteful.
This "social aesthetic understanding" (for lack of a better term) seems to be at the root of your argument (where you say that the old masters understood the old models so well, they were “connected” to what was happening around them). Our training systems tend to celebrate "gymnastics" while undercutting "taste."
The tragedy is that we lose young musicians who are profoundly tasteful but don't fit the rigid technical mold. Take the first four bars of the Goldberg Variations: my "crow fingering" would make a conservatory committee turn in their graves but I think I'm playing more and more tasteful every year. My point: should we deny a kid a musical career because of an unconventional fingering or even a mistake if they possess incredible taste?
Your rant was excellent, but the core issue might be about taste even more than instrumental interpretation.
Hi Bob, many thanks for this comment, thanks for listening. I appreciate you thinking about the ideas underlying the rant. I'll try to develop the idea into something more coherent. Taste might be the key point. Thanks!
Great episode and very thought-provoking! One suggestion: I really enjoy hearing the examples where you split the versions/voices etc. in different speakers, but since I listen to the show on a bluetooth speaker it's difficult to hear the separation—it would be great to hear some of those examples using different synth patches for each side to further bring out the difference. Just a thought and thank you!
Went to listen to a couple versions of these pieces this week on YT before I had time to listen to the episode this week, and my takeaway was basically what you are saying about the ancestral instruments here. Listening to the version by a very famous concert pianist was pretty okay and then when the version on a double harpsichord from the Nederland Bach people started to play the whole piece sprang to a much more coherent and refreshing dimension of life! So it was really cool to hear your rant at the beginning of the episode a few days later. I’m no pianist though thoroughly enjoy playing Bach and the guitar and realizing it’s time to check out more lute players. Needless to say would be interested in an episode on the lute suites and/or what the hell a “lautenwerk” is.
Thanks, Adam! Glad you're listening with other performances, excellent. I believe I touched on the question of the lute suites and lautenwerk in the episode called 'Performer's Commentary Vol. 2' that, and I also discuss the question in the subtitles of the YT videos, found in the post "BWVs 991-1000." Let me know if those posts lend you some insight!
Holy Moly! Thank you so much for these fantastic versions and commentary , just what I was looking for. Apparently the lute harpsichord is well-suited to maximum shredability. Also good to know that at least 140% of the Bach I’ve managed to memorize so far was likely written expressly for the lute harpsichord.
One of the amazing aspects of JSB's fugal writing is his ability to hear unexpected harmonic structures to the same subject. I'd like to hear more about that. Along the same lines, I've noticed that some subjects end in an apparent cadence, but others (like this one) don't. What is then remarkable is when the first type of subject suddenly shows up without a cadence, or when the second type does -- as in this fugue. This must say something about Bach's way of crafting fugue subjects, with an eye towards the unexpected. Would that be worth exploring in future episodes? (I know, I know, there's plenty to say, and I'm sure you have your own priorities as to what to cover.)
Thanks for this! I agree. I'm playing a concerto right now (the E major, BWV 1053) and I've been marveling at how he uses the initial motif on both the tonic AND the subdominant within the scale. They create entirely different feelings. The subject of Bach's subjects is endlessly fascinating. Consider his sprawling Weimar organ subjects to his trite mature ones post 1730... where does one begin?
I thoroughly enjoyed this episode. But your dismissive comment about ukuleles did put me off. This instrument is the voice of the Hawaiian culture and represents a rich tradition of Hawaiian music. Of course, Bach was a genius and his music is revelatory but this small 4 string instrument in the hands of a capable master can be used to create inspiring music as well. For example, Jeff Peterson, a master player from Hawaii has transposed classical pieces (which I believe includes Bach) in 2 volumes in Graded Repertoire for Classical for Low G tenor ukulele. I don't know if your musical interests extend to jazz, but there are numerous players who use the ukulele (correctly pronounced oukoulele) to play standard classics as well as innovative works on this instrument. Examples would be Lyle Ritz, Herb Ohta, Jake Shimabukuro, Neal Chin, and Brian Tolentino, among others.
Thanks for this comment, Howard. Sorry if it put you off: I was more joking about the cliché where owning a uke and playing three chords qualifies you as a musician. Indeed I'm aware of the rich tradition and I featured Herb Ohta's Bach playing in episode 112. Thanks for bringing this up.
That concerto reading is totally convincing to me. I’ve found that owning a two-manual harpsichord leads to suspicions like these in a lot of music. Your comparisons among the versions were helpful, too.
You asked about feelings on the slight chord thinning from early to later versions. I shared your feeling that the fuller texture seems better. So, a question: In a composition like this, would you think it legitimate to voice those chords more fully than written on the page? This is a place where I’d be tempted to add a bit of “realization” to intensify the concerto effect.
Thanks for this excellent question. The re-voicings (if we can call them that) in the various stages of WTC1 are fascinating, aren't they? It's worth a post showing a collection- they usually go from full to thin, so what does this indicate for JSB? I would think it's well within your right as an interpreter to add fuller chords if it fits the style, but the question is, why does Bach bother to make such a change? I wonder if maestro @roberthill06106 could weigh in on this issue.
I like the suggestion of a concerto texture in the prelude, and the question of piano vs harpsichord and other keyboards is instructive. Maybe you could do some more demos of selected passages back-to-back on piano then on Bach’s keyboards in future podcasts ..
Thanks for this episode! I'm currently learning this fugue. I started one month ago and I think I have two months left. Looking forward to listening to this again at the digital piano.
Hi Evan –
Excellent pod; I've been a fan since the first hour.
Your rant was spot on and the argument deserves more airtime. I think you’re touching on something deeper than just what the instrument dictates.
In my mind, your point is about something bigger which I can only describe as: lack of taste.
I’ve experienced exactly what you’re describing. I studied jazz bass at the conservatory (I did finish, haha, many Bach cello suites on the bass guitar!) At the conservatory, I saw "mediocre" students with incredible musical taste, and "excellent" students who had none. Of course, there’s that rare group who possess both: e.g., Brad Mehldau (who led me to your pod), Glenn Gould, and Keith Jarrett. Their Bach interpretations might be unconventional, but my god, they are tasteful.
This "social aesthetic understanding" (for lack of a better term) seems to be at the root of your argument (where you say that the old masters understood the old models so well, they were “connected” to what was happening around them). Our training systems tend to celebrate "gymnastics" while undercutting "taste."
The tragedy is that we lose young musicians who are profoundly tasteful but don't fit the rigid technical mold. Take the first four bars of the Goldberg Variations: my "crow fingering" would make a conservatory committee turn in their graves but I think I'm playing more and more tasteful every year. My point: should we deny a kid a musical career because of an unconventional fingering or even a mistake if they possess incredible taste?
Your rant was excellent, but the core issue might be about taste even more than instrumental interpretation.
Hi Bob, many thanks for this comment, thanks for listening. I appreciate you thinking about the ideas underlying the rant. I'll try to develop the idea into something more coherent. Taste might be the key point. Thanks!
Great episode and very thought-provoking! One suggestion: I really enjoy hearing the examples where you split the versions/voices etc. in different speakers, but since I listen to the show on a bluetooth speaker it's difficult to hear the separation—it would be great to hear some of those examples using different synth patches for each side to further bring out the difference. Just a thought and thank you!
Thanks Ian. Your comment arrived just in time for today's episode where I've tried to make that happen. Let me know if you appreciate a difference!
Went to listen to a couple versions of these pieces this week on YT before I had time to listen to the episode this week, and my takeaway was basically what you are saying about the ancestral instruments here. Listening to the version by a very famous concert pianist was pretty okay and then when the version on a double harpsichord from the Nederland Bach people started to play the whole piece sprang to a much more coherent and refreshing dimension of life! So it was really cool to hear your rant at the beginning of the episode a few days later. I’m no pianist though thoroughly enjoy playing Bach and the guitar and realizing it’s time to check out more lute players. Needless to say would be interested in an episode on the lute suites and/or what the hell a “lautenwerk” is.
Thanks, Adam! Glad you're listening with other performances, excellent. I believe I touched on the question of the lute suites and lautenwerk in the episode called 'Performer's Commentary Vol. 2' that, and I also discuss the question in the subtitles of the YT videos, found in the post "BWVs 991-1000." Let me know if those posts lend you some insight!
Links:
https://wtfbach.substack.com/p/performers-commentary-vol-2?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
https://wtfbach.substack.com/p/bwvs-991-1000?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
Holy Moly! Thank you so much for these fantastic versions and commentary , just what I was looking for. Apparently the lute harpsichord is well-suited to maximum shredability. Also good to know that at least 140% of the Bach I’ve managed to memorize so far was likely written expressly for the lute harpsichord.
One of the amazing aspects of JSB's fugal writing is his ability to hear unexpected harmonic structures to the same subject. I'd like to hear more about that. Along the same lines, I've noticed that some subjects end in an apparent cadence, but others (like this one) don't. What is then remarkable is when the first type of subject suddenly shows up without a cadence, or when the second type does -- as in this fugue. This must say something about Bach's way of crafting fugue subjects, with an eye towards the unexpected. Would that be worth exploring in future episodes? (I know, I know, there's plenty to say, and I'm sure you have your own priorities as to what to cover.)
Thanks for this! I agree. I'm playing a concerto right now (the E major, BWV 1053) and I've been marveling at how he uses the initial motif on both the tonic AND the subdominant within the scale. They create entirely different feelings. The subject of Bach's subjects is endlessly fascinating. Consider his sprawling Weimar organ subjects to his trite mature ones post 1730... where does one begin?
I thoroughly enjoyed this episode. But your dismissive comment about ukuleles did put me off. This instrument is the voice of the Hawaiian culture and represents a rich tradition of Hawaiian music. Of course, Bach was a genius and his music is revelatory but this small 4 string instrument in the hands of a capable master can be used to create inspiring music as well. For example, Jeff Peterson, a master player from Hawaii has transposed classical pieces (which I believe includes Bach) in 2 volumes in Graded Repertoire for Classical for Low G tenor ukulele. I don't know if your musical interests extend to jazz, but there are numerous players who use the ukulele (correctly pronounced oukoulele) to play standard classics as well as innovative works on this instrument. Examples would be Lyle Ritz, Herb Ohta, Jake Shimabukuro, Neal Chin, and Brian Tolentino, among others.
Thanks for this comment, Howard. Sorry if it put you off: I was more joking about the cliché where owning a uke and playing three chords qualifies you as a musician. Indeed I'm aware of the rich tradition and I featured Herb Ohta's Bach playing in episode 112. Thanks for bringing this up.
That concerto reading is totally convincing to me. I’ve found that owning a two-manual harpsichord leads to suspicions like these in a lot of music. Your comparisons among the versions were helpful, too.
You asked about feelings on the slight chord thinning from early to later versions. I shared your feeling that the fuller texture seems better. So, a question: In a composition like this, would you think it legitimate to voice those chords more fully than written on the page? This is a place where I’d be tempted to add a bit of “realization” to intensify the concerto effect.
Thanks for this excellent question. The re-voicings (if we can call them that) in the various stages of WTC1 are fascinating, aren't they? It's worth a post showing a collection- they usually go from full to thin, so what does this indicate for JSB? I would think it's well within your right as an interpreter to add fuller chords if it fits the style, but the question is, why does Bach bother to make such a change? I wonder if maestro @roberthill06106 could weigh in on this issue.
I like the suggestion of a concerto texture in the prelude, and the question of piano vs harpsichord and other keyboards is instructive. Maybe you could do some more demos of selected passages back-to-back on piano then on Bach’s keyboards in future podcasts ..
Thanks, Dave! As soon as I have a good space where I can mic various instruments, this will certainly be a feature of the show.