Handel vs Bach cont.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
I agree entirely - if you look at the score of the 48 there are no dynamics, articulation markings or phrasing, which is how many pianists play them! Personally I find the Preludes more satisfying in general than the fugues, some of which are rather dry and academic.

Given the nature of the dynamic capabilities of the keyboard instruments Bach would have been familiar with (ie nothing like the Steinway's that were used to play the '48' on BBC2 recently!), can you tell me what Bach may have had in mind in this respect?

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Rod]

Originally posted by Sorrano:
Technical skills are not enough. One could play a Handel or Beethoven piece perfectly, but without expression the performance is virtually worthless. You have complained (and justly) about the many poor performances of Beethoven. I think Bach is largely misunderstood as well.

Considering they (my friends as mentioned above) were experiencing 'joy' from the very same interpretation that I regarded as somewhat detached, I think the quality of the performance is not an issue in this case. Clearly they are locking onto something that for me is more an intellectual quality than musical, but they regard it as musical. That is, for me it may be cleverly written, but seldom lasts in the memory as a musicaly satisfying piece overall. The trick is to balance the intellectual element with the aesthetic element. Beethoven is supreme in this respect. I'm not sure if Bach was always interested in this balance. Perhaps he didn't need to be, but for composers regularly in the public domain this balance is essential for some semblance of success.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin



[This message has been edited by Rod (edited December 14, 2002).]

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by Rod:
Considering they (my friends as mentioned above) were experiencing 'joy' from the very same interpretation that I regarded as somewhat detached, I think the quality of the performance is not an issue in this case. Clearly they are locking onto something that for me is more an intellectual quality than musical, but they regard it as musical. That is, for me it may be cleverly written, but seldom lasts in the memory as a musicaly satisfying piece overall. The trick is to balance the intellectual element with the aesthetic element. Beethoven is supreme in this respect. I'm not sure if Bach was always interested in this balance. Perhaps he didn't need to be, but for composers regularly in the public domain this balance is essential for some semblance of success.

It's hard to know what Bach's interests were in his own music as the majority has little dynamic or interpretive markings if any. The performer has to figure that out on his or her own.

[spaceray]

Originally posted by Sorrano:

It's hard to know what Bach's interests were in his own music as the majority has little dynamic or interpretive markings if any. The performer has to figure that out on his or her own.

I'm wondering if dynamic or interpretive markings might have been lost in the copying?

[Rod]

Originally posted by spaceray:
I'm wondering if dynamic or interpretive markings might have been lost in the copying?

Probably not, in those days even the choice of instruments was often left to the disgression of the performer/s.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[spaceray]

Who exactly were the copyists? were they musicians ,scribes or clerks was it a stand alone profession?I seem to remember reading in Barry Cooper's book on Beethoven that there were often mistakes that were not corrected and not discovered until after publication.

[Rod]

Originally posted by spaceray:
Who exactly were the copyists? were they musicians ,scribes or clerks was it a stand alone profession?I seem to remember reading in Barry Cooper's book on Beethoven that there were often mistakes that were not corrected and not discovered until after publication.

Certainly in Beethoven's time I think it was a profession in its own right. A good (accurate) copyist was worth his weight in gold to a composer like Beethoven (though I doubt he would have been paid in this manner!).

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited December 15, 2002).]

[spaceray]

But the copyist could make a decent living at it ?

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
Given the nature of the dynamic capabilities of the keyboard instruments Bach would have been familiar with (ie nothing like the Steinway's that were used to play the '48' on BBC2 recently!), can you tell me what Bach may have had in mind in this respect?

How can I tell you what he had in mind? If you look at Czerny's edition of the 48 which he claimed was based on Beethoven's interpretations it is very heavily edited with all sorts of dynamic and articulation markings. All I can say is that a musical phrase has a natural rise and fall - as you would sing it so you should play it is a good rule! So the only way to interpret a Bach prelude is through analysis - determining the lengths of phrases and the centre of phrases and of course the harmony. Then their is the question of touch, which is based on the character of the piece. We can do no more than that, but even if Bach would have disagreed with the result, he would have at least respected an attempt at a musical realisation rather than simply playing the notes.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:
How can I tell you what he had in mind?

You previous comment inferred (to me) that you had some ideas on how Bach's music should be interpretated. I was getting more at the point of the nature of the instruments used rather than dynamic notes on paper. What Czerny wrote I presume was for the piano, but I'm sure the harpsichord would have been the 'instrument of the day' for Bach's exercises.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
You previous comment inferred (to me) that you had some ideas on how Bach's music should be interpretated. I was getting more at the point of the nature of the instruments used rather than dynamic notes on paper. What Czerny wrote I presume was for the piano, but I'm sure the harpsichord would have been the 'instrument of the day' for Bach's exercises.

Well Bach did not specify Harpsichord for the 48 - they are written for Clavier, which is a deliberately chosen general term meaning for keyboard. I really don't think the nature of the harpsichord is an issue when playing the 48 - much of Bach's music was arranged by himself for different combinations. It certainly wasn't an issue for Beethoven, nor according to Czerny's edition was the way he played them influenced by the harpsichord manner of playing, as the markings look straight out of a Beethoven sonata complete with the odd sforzando thrown in!

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
You previous comment inferred (to me) that you had some ideas on how Bach's music should be interpretated.

I do have ideas on that which I explained in the earlier thread.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by spaceray:
I'm wondering if dynamic or interpretive markings might have been lost in the copying?

Musicians in those days understood how the music was to be played--when to include ornamentation such as trills and turns--and in many cases had to know the chordal progression as all they had was a single note bass line.

[Sorrano]

Originally posted by spaceray:
Who exactly were the copyists? were they musicians ,scribes or clerks was it a stand alone profession?I seem to remember reading in Barry Cooper's book on Beethoven that there were often mistakes that were not corrected and not discovered until after publication.

I suspect that in many cases the composer was the copyist. Remember that Bach went blind from copying scores. Or so they say.

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by Peter:
Well Bach did not specify Harpsichord for the 48 - they are written for Clavier, which is a deliberately chosen general term meaning for keyboard. I really don't think the nature of the harpsichord is an issue when playing the 48 - much of Bach's music was arranged by himself for different combinations. It certainly wasn't an issue for Beethoven, nor according to Czerny's edition was the way he played them influenced by the harpsichord manner of playing, as the markings look straight out of a Beethoven sonata complete with the odd sforzando thrown in!

I didn't realize that Beethoven valued the '48' so much as to labor over dynamic markings. We should remember that (as far as I know) Beethoven knew none of Bach's mighty church music except for perhaps a few simple motets and chorales. The bulk of Bach's surviving music was in a trunk in some attic. To repeat the remark with which I began this dispute some months ago, I think that if Beethoven had known the B Minor Mass, the Passions and Canatas, that he would have been stunned, his music would have been more polyphonic, and Handel would have shared the throne with Bach in Beethoven's estimation.