The Organ Music of Bach

[Rodrigo de Sá]

This is almost the same text posted at HFC.

THE RECORDED ORGAN MUSIC OF BACH

It is very intimidating to try and be fair to all the organists. They belong to different schools, they had different recording means at their disposal, and more ancient artists couldn't use the DDR organs (the Silbermann, and some others) and most Bach contemporary organs can only now play played. But even so, I think the main approach of the main organists can easily be grasped.

There are not many integrals. M.C. Alain recorded Bach's integral for three times, Lionel Rogg (also two, I think), André Isoir (once), Olivier Vernet (a recent one), Werner Jacob, Wolfgang Rübsam (twice), Bernard Foccroule (once). Helmut Walcha has three near integrals and Simon Preston one. Koopman has also two quasi integrals. There must be more, but I don't recollect them or don't know them.

I find it impossible to say which one I prefer in totto. But perhaps the last recording of MC Alain comes closer. Let me explain why.

MC ALAIN
The style of MC Alain matured slowly. She knows the organ as most of us know our hands, and she plays Bach from youth. Her father was an organist (an also a kind of organ builder) and all her family is musical and 'organistical' (Jehan Alain was her brother). Seeing MC Alain play is a fantastic experience. She is rather small, and has a very candid appearance; yet she manages the most incredible tempi without any signs of stress: the organ is just an extension of herself.

She is a very self effacing person. She plays Bach and not MC Alain, in all humbleness. The results are, at best, just marvelous. The chorale settings are often very moving, the preludes and fugues are usually extraordinarily interesting and thrilling, and I don't know any better version of the utmost difficult (to play, because they are a joy to listen to when well played) triosonatas. The music shines when Bach himself makes it shine.

The organs she chose for the last integral are all but one (for reasons of compass) ancient ones. You can listen to the marvelous Alkmaar Schnitger organ, the beautiful Silbermanns, the marvelous Trost, and many others. Old organs are like very old port: rich, sweet, warm but still vibrant (all is relative: a Schnitger plenum is never warm!). So you can rely on the beauty of the sound.

I would say if someone wishes to approach Bach he might well start with Marie Claire Alain. Sometime ago there was an interview in Diapason, which was titled: 'Comme Bach' - as Bach. I liked that title.

With MC Alain Bach's music is very human; it is perhaps religious in the sense that religion is a human emotional experience, but it is not transcendent.

HELMUT WALCHA
For a really deep and structural view of Bach music you must turn to Walcha's sublime recordings. It is a great pity that DGG only provides westerners with the last integral, made at Alkmaar and Strassbourg. In Japan you can get hold of the Cappel integral, which is perhaps more interesting (I don't have it, alas). There is also a fantastic recording (1947) of some Bach pieces -- it is my most treasured organ record.

Be that as it may, the style of Walcha is very austere and is not easily approachable. He never plays for effect, uses sparing registration, and all registration changes are structural, that is, connected to the musical sections of the works. He uses terraced registrations - as Bruckner does in his orchestral works - and this is most effective if not most spectacular.

His tempo management is also quite different from that of the other organists; Walcha concentrates on the phrases and their connection; therefore you cannot expect him to emphasize a beat or a turn just for 'affekt'. He addresses the structure and not the detail.

I must say every time I want to study a piece of Bach I refrain from hearing it played by Walcha altogether: I always feel forced to work with him or against him such is the strength of his vision. That doesn't happen with other interpreters.

Try the Toccata and Fugue in F M, the preludes and fugues in A m, C m and the Passacaglia. Also his Leipzig chorales. His Art of Fugue is just sublime: nothing comes close to it.

To my mind, Walcha remains the most important organist of the XXth century, and his vision (this is not a pun - he was blind) is the most powerful of all the ones I know. Intimidating? Yes, a bit. But marvelous.

OTHERS
Lionel Rogg was very influenced by Walcha; his records, which I do not possess any longer, are very good, if somewhat lacking the sparkle of Walcha and the naturalness of Alain.

(I'll be briefer from now on). Bernard Foccroule's version is also very natural. The Leipzig Chorales are very beautiful, as are the earlier works of Bach. Foccroulle is an introverted interpreter of Bach, he was affected by modernism and its sparing way of expression but doesn't depend on angles. A very beautiful integral, with a sober expression, never spectacular but deeply felt.

Olivier Vernet's recently finished integral was much acclaimed in France. He was a kind of protégé of MC Alain, and one really understands why: he is technically extraordinary. Musically he is very consistent. He has a very severe (but rather fast and sometimes almost brutal) approach to Bach. I could do with a little more serenity, but it is really very good. Very recently a record from the integral came out, consisting of preludes and fugues. It is very compelling. I personally would like a little more spirituality in the chorale settings. But I can only recommend it. Try perhaps 'The Leipzig years', four records for the price of two (perhaps three?).

I rather like Werner Jacob's integral. He plays in all kind of ancient organs and I was extremely touched by the small Silbermanns (in which he plays the Orgelbüchlein). Alas you have to buy the whole, but it is rather cheap. He is somewhat brusque, almost rude, but very frank, and I rather like that.

André Isoir's has beautiful moments (the chorales, some preludes and most fugues) but it is slightly 'larmoyant', too weepy or at least overtly romantic for my taste in the chorales. Off course, in terms of integrity, I can only praise him.

Rübsam has a Philips version, an objective, fast, reading, very entertaining and impressive, and a Naxos version, rather slow and introspective, sometimes very difficult to follow in terms of attention span.

Last mention to Ton Koopman. A concert by Ton Koopman is an unforgettable experience. Once, after a concert, I was introduced and told him 'C'était fantastique!' (it was fantastic). He smiled and just said: 'Oui'. 'Comment, oui??!!' (how come plain 'oui'?) 'Oui', he repeated. We then laughed.

I tell this story not to boast of knowing him (he certainly doesn't remember me, and I know many other famous musicians in the same superficial way) and not to show he is a vain man: I mean he just knew he gave it all - he ran all sorts of risks - but it paid. Sometimes it doesn't, and he gets into terrible problems.

He is brave, very frank, and I admire that. But his approach - all rhythm, drive and strong colours - doesn't always please me. Again, I prefer a more introverted Bach. But if you want a colourful Bach you must at least know Koopman's versions. There are some single records by Archiv and DDG.

This is rather long, I know. But I love this music, you see, and get quite carried away.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

I know Herricks's work relatively well. I had a couple of records with the big preludes and fugues and the Passacaglia.

I remember he was very high spirited - if that means anything. I mean not an introvert, very sound playing, but also a total lack of imagination and a certain dullness.

I left these records with a girl I used to date - and never bothered to get them back. So you see the extent of my enthusiasm...

That said, the triosonatas were OK, although a little uninspired, too. Best recordings of the triosonatas is MCAlain's - by far, IMO.

I agree with you: Koopman is too flourished. I had his record of the TSs, but gave it to a friend... Again.

[titian]

Meanwhile I have the complete Bach's organ-work with Walcha, M-C. Alain, Kraft, Jacob, Hurford and the latest Rogg.
Today I started to hear Rogg's version and I am very impressed on the light way he plays Bach.
Up to know I have heard the Sonatas BWV 525-530, Passacaglia, Präludium & Fugue 534, 542, 537, 543 & 545 (first 4 LPs) and I am not at all tired :eek: .
It is true that I am listening to these records while I am working on the computer but the volume level is certainly as high as in the church here in the town where I am living. Actually it is difficult for me to concentrate on my work (not too important anyway) because the interpretation is very dynamic, somewhat light and the recording quality is quite high (or is it the new cartridge Magic Diamond from MicroMagic?). No, it is the way he plays...

Just smoothly through the notes without big, complicated thoughts and emotions. Of course I am just now in the mood to accept this kind of interpretation. Walcha would be at this moment for me too intelectual
:confused:.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Titian:

I think you are being a bit condescendet towards Rogg. His versions are VERY good, and he just lets the music through. Yes, he is somewhat characterless in some pieces, but his version (assuming that it is the one I know, played on the Arlesheim Andreas Silberman organ) is, imo, a very commendable one.

Perhaps you can listen to it without effort because the organ is sweeter than the Schnitgers, Trosts and the like so often used to record Bach. The high stops are not very high and the pipes are very large, producing a very mellow sound.

AND NOW FOR REALly EARTH SHATTERING NEWS :


http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/home.htms?NOFLASH=1


From what I know this will be the organ event of the decade. :eek: :) :) :)

[GrahamN]

Originally posted by RdS
AND NOW FOR REALly EARTH SHATTERING NEWS :


http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/home.htms?NOFLASH=1


From what I know this will be the organ event of the decade. :eek: :) :) :)

What are we supposed to be looking at? All I see is the DG home page.

BTW - saw that Minkowski and Les Musiciens du Louvre were in the studio in June recording his arrangement of dance music from Rameau's operas. This should be a must, if it comes out anything like his Proms performance. As one of the reviewers said, maybe it should be titled "NOW that's what I call obscure 18th century opera - 1". Maybe one for Domfjb to add to his NOW collection? :D

[Herman]

Originally posted by GrahamN
What are we supposed to be looking at? All I see is the DG home page.


Perhaps the release of Elvis Costello on DG?

My guess, however, is RdS is referring to the release of a DG Collector's Edition of Walcha's Bach Organ Works.

Herman

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Graham:

Sorry, I messed up - it spoilt the effect of the VERY LARGE text...

Herman:

Spot on. DGG is releasing the Walcha records from 1947-1952. I have heard some interpretations from that period and they are quite outstanding; nay, absolutely stunning.

[Herman]

Originally posted by RdS
DGG is releasing the Walcha records from 1947-1952.

And yet it is the organ event of this decade?

Herman

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Originally posted by Herman
And yet it is the organ event of this decade?

Herman

Yep. These recordings have been unavailable since the early vinyl days (except in Japan), and they are mythical. The fact that they are finally being released is an important event.

These recordings are the foundation on which most modern organists (Chapuis, Rogg, to a lesser extent MC Alain) based their work. And, in several aspects, Walcha's Bach is yet to be bettered.

[tones]

I've just indulged in the Walcha Bach organ set, going cheap in Musik Hug, Zürich,where Titian believes I live. So far, great stuff. I love the Passacaglia in C, if you can get someone to keep the tension up and not let it flag. Walcha does this - a thrilling version. What I've heard so far has impressed me mightily. I must do some side-by-side comparisons with Marie-Claire Alain's latest set, which I also have.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Originally posted by tones
I've just indulged in the Walcha Bach organ set, going cheap in Musik Hug, Zürich,where Titian believes I live. So far, great stuff. I love the Passacaglia in C, if you can get someone to keep the tension up and not let it flag. Walcha does this - a thrilling version. What I've heard so far has impressed me mightily. I must do some side-by-side comparisons with Marie-Claire Alain's latest set, which I also have.

I agree with you 100%. That was Walcha's secret: he managed to maintain the tension at will, without ever sounding boring. As a matter of fact, his interpretations are all based in the increase/release tension of the mucical 'arch' - the structure.

The Passacaglia is superlative, but listen repeatedly to the a minor Pf (played at Alkmaar) and to the g minor PF (played at Strassbourg). Then try the chorales, perhaps the Leipzig ones first.

If you liked it, try this one:

http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004UT8G/qid=1069521722/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1_1/402-8497843-4399341

Best Goldbergs ever, one of the really great versions of the WTC, bust version ever of the Inventions and Symphonies.

Also, for a more relaxed view - he was past seventy:

http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004VBGK/qid=1069521963/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_1_5/402-8497843-4399341

http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004VBGL/qid=1069521963/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_1_6/402-8497843-4399341

[TonyL]

I’ve been listening to a fair bit of Bach recently, though I have nothing even approaching the knowledge of others here. I’ve had access to a lot of high quality and absurdly cheap second hand classical vinyl over the past couple of months and have built up a collection just over 4 foot long, amongst this lot are a few nice Bach items…

Bach Orchestral Works including Brandenburg Concertos - Imusici / English Chamber Orchestra Raymond Leppard (Philips 9LP box). This is absolutely wonderful, I’ve played the whole thing through a couple of times so far, it is so good to hear the whole works for pieces I was barely familiar with – this box is certainly teaching me that I love Bach!

Bach Brandenburg Concertos - Academy of St Martins in the Fields / Neville Marriner (Philips 2xLP box). Its really interesting to compare this version with the same pieces on the above set. I can’t really decide which version I prefer, both seem equally excellent.

Bach Brandenburg Concertos - Berlin Philharmonic / Karajan (DG 2LP box). This sounds really different to the above two versions, and so far I prefer either of the above. This one seems to lack some of the magic, but I really struggle at putting what I mean into words. In a way it sounds heavy handed, but as I don’t know what its all meant to sound like so who knows!

I'd be very interested in other peoples impressions on the above - i.e. are any 'known good versions'. I find classical music pretty baffling as there are just so many takes on a given piece, and they often seem so different to one another that it can be the difference between liking or disliking the actual music dependant which you hear first!

Tony.

[tones]

Hi, Tony, just some comments on the Brandenburgs. Herbie von K's are quite old, done with the full Berlin Philharmonic. Beautifully played, as one would expect from what is probably the world's premier symphony orchestra, but much too heavy for my liking. Herbie von K. was really a man for the 19th. century Romantics and not really in tune with the baroque era. As a result, the Berlin Phil. versions are staid and uninteresting, lacking the sparkle of the better versions.

Depending on which ASMF, you might have hit on a real gem. The ASMF's first venture was with an odd edition prepared by musicologist Thurston Dart, and with quite different instrumentation than that to which we're used. For example, he dumped the stratospheric F trumpet in No.2. (This is the only known instance of such a trumpet, and many people have thought that it's some sort of mistake - but nothing is more thrilling than that trumpet part, the most difficult Bach ever wrote).

The second one is a whopper, in my opinion, the best non-original instrument version ever recorded, and a strong candidate for the best of any kind. As well as the ASMF on top form, it features a stellar cast of soloists (Henryk Szeryng, Michala Petri, George Malcolm, André Bernard, Jean-Pierre Rampal). The playing is wonderful, and Nev, Iona and the ASMF are on full bounce and a joy to listen to. I suspect that this is your one, as I also have the 2 Philips vinyl set (except that I didn't get them cheaply!). It's my favourite version. In my opinion, the only thing that competes is the original instrument version of Musica Antiqua Köln under Reinhard Goebel.

Both I Musici and the ECO always give solid, reliable performances, but I don't know these versions.

Personally, I find the variety of interpretation of classical great - you always have to be prepared to listen to different interpretations, because they appeal (or don't appeal) in different ways.

[TonyL]

Depending on which ASMF, you might have hit on a real gem.

Its Philips 6700 045 and dates from 1971 and has Thurston Dart credited on the cover, so I guess is the one with the ‘weird trumpet’. I will pay closer attention to the trumpet part on No. 2.

The 9LP box is Philips 6747 098 and comprises recordings spanning from 1961 to 74. The Imusici Brandenburgs date from 1965.

The karajan / BPO set is DG 2707 112 and dates from 1980.

Tony.

[TonyL]

Herbie von K. was really a man for the 19th. century Romantics and not really in tune with the baroque era.

I’ve got the Beethoven symphonies fairly well covered! I’ve got two copies of Karajan’s 60s cycle on DG (so if anyone wants to make me an offer for one….), I’ve also got his late 70s cycle also on DG, the Klemperer cycle from the late 50s on HMV and also the vintage Toscanini cycle on RCA! I haven’t even started to form an impression on this lot...

Another current fav is Anda’s Mozart piano concertos on DG, this is a 12LP box and has really opened this work up for me.

Tony.

[tones]

The Karajan DGG '62 and '75 (I think) cycles are among the greats (he made another one during the '80s and it's not in the same class - Herbie was going downhill at that stage). Otto Klemperer's cycle is very grand and majestic, but quite slow - often v-e-r-y slow. But that's how he liked it. When famous engineer Walter Legge complained about the too-slow tempo, Klemperer said, "you'll get used to it" - and to add insult to injury, he'd ring up Legge from the podium periodically to ask, "Are you used to it yet, Walter?"

Arturo's versions are fiery, like the man himself, and among the great classics.

And the Anda Mozarts are great (my father-in-law had that boxed set).

[Rodrigo de Sá]

I received the Walcha 47-52 yesterday. Listened to about half of it and will report - not at length - soon.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

THE FIRST BACH ORGAN INTEGRAL OF HELMUT WALCHA

I waited for these records for more than 15 years. I knew they were available in Japan, but I could never get hold of them. They are here, now.

Being a first integral it is impossible not to compare it to the second one. But, in fact, there are at least three very definite periods of recording, and four different organs to consider. There is a rather long preface, here, that gives you the historical background. If you do not want to read it, skip to THE APPRAISAL, below.

PRELIMINARY NOTICE ABOUT HOW AN ORGAN WORKS; TO BE SKIPPED IF ONE IS LAZY, BUT NEVERTHELESS RATHER IMPORTANT.

When talking about organs one has to remember that an 8’ sounds at diapason pitch; a 4’ is the octave; the 2’ is the double octave, the 1’ is the treble octave; the 16’ is a suboctave stop. The mixtures are artificial harmonics, mainly composed of fifths and octaves, sometimes with a third that adds piquancy to the sound. There are also reeds, often very bright and rasping (not so in the Pedal, where they tend to be booming and thunderous), and flutes, soft and prompt of speech; the basic organ tone is given by the principals. The art of registration lies in the mixing of several tone colours and different heights of tone at the same time: a given note may sound, at once, a suboctave stop, a diapason one, the octave, the quint (3rd harmonic) the double octave, and mixed very high quints and octaves – that gives you the common plenum sound; or you could use say a flute 8’ and a flute 2’ – a piquant but nevertheless soft sound.

THE BACH OEUVRE

The organ music of JSBach was composed, for a great part, in his early years. It may be classified into four groups of works. First, the praeludium and fuga: a long Prelude is followed by an equally long fugue in the same key. Second the Chorale Prelude: a more or less free piece that is based on a hymn; they can be very long or rather short. Third, the Chorale Variation: a set of variations is based on a choral (a hymn). Fourth and last, the trio sonata: a dauntingly difficult exercise of how to play two completely independent treble voices (with two hands on two keyboards) on an often lively pedal line. To be exhaustive one must deal with each of these genres but I won’t be thorough. I’ll only mention them.

THE VERSIONS

There are two versions, as we have seen. The first one (the one under analysis) was made on the Lübeck and the Cappel organs; the second one (the stereo one) was done in the Alkmaar Laurenskerk and the Strasbourg Silberman of Saint Pierre de Jeune.

*Lübecker Dom

The first batch of recordings was started in 1947, in the Lübeck Dom klein organ. This is a very old organ – the only Lübeck organ surviving the bombing during the war. Its character is very odd: a very old (Renaissance) Hauptwerk, almost surely made mainly of lead pipes, and an early 16th century addition by Stellwagen: a piercing Rückpositiv, a clear Brustpositiv and a gracile Pedal. At the time of Walcha’s recordings the pedals had been enlarged, featuring a strong reed battery (16’, 8’, 4’) plus the pulldowns from the Hauptwerk and soloist voices (4’, 2’ and even 1’).
Sound taking is rather good: the microphones were located somewhere near the Rückpositiv, which therefore sounds very bright and present whereas the Hauptwerk sound broad and distant (as it should). Reverberation seems less important than it actually is, but it is still present.

*The Cappel Schnitger

When Archiv wanted to pursue Walcha’s recordings LP had imposed itself as the medium par excellence, and on its less noisy surface the traffic sound of the Lübecker Kirche could be heard (as it can now, sometimes, in CD). They therefore had to search for a new organ. The choice fell on a wonderful instrument – the work of Arp Schnitger no less – in a very small chapel. The sound is very beautiful but it is too big for the church (it was purchased from a much larger church) and there is almost no reverberation. The very dry acoustics let everything through – you actually listen to everything the organist does and all irregularities of pipe sound. It is not the popular view of organ sound but I, for one, like dry acoustics very much when Bach is to be played: all the counterpoint is listenable.

*The Alkmaar recordings

With the advent of stereo Archiv started all over again; the Cappel organ having been ruined by central heating (cracks in the windchests). Now the organ of Alkmaar is a very big one, provided almost only with principals and reeds, with very strong mixtures. It is good for the free Praeludia and the fugues, but awful for the chorales, because they often require flutes upon which a stronger stop intones the hymn.

The sound engineer messed up badly on these records. Being a very broad (even if it is rather clear) acoustic, an organist is obliged to take the music slowly. However, reverberation time is almost non existent and the microphones were placed too close to the organ. Walcha therefore seems to play ponderously in many an occasion; truth is, he is only respecting the acoustics of the place, but what you actually listen to may seem sluggish and pachydermic (the great C major and G major Preludes are impossibly slow).

*Saint-Pierre-le Jeune

Walcha preferred a less aggressive instrument to play the chorale settings, and, therefore, the Archiv crew went in search for another historic instrument. One possibility was the very large Arp Schnitger organ in Zwolle, Holland, but it was discarded by the Archiv directors because it was tuned a tone higher than A=450. This was undoubtedly the most stupid decision. The Zwolle organ is magnificent, it had just undergone restauration, and had everything one might need. Instead, Dr. Gerd Ploebsch (I think it was him, I’m not sure) insisted that a Silberman instrument be used. Now there are several different Silbermans. They were two brothers, Gottfried, a friend of Bach’s, whose work was behind the iron curtain and therefore impossible to record. And Johann Andreas, often referred to as Jean-Henri, who worked in Alsace in the French tradition (which is completely different from the North German one Walcha preferred – the sound is round, the mixtures are rather low and weaker, the reeds aren’t deep or bright, but rather sonorous and clamorous.

Archiv wanted an Alsatian Silberman (God knows why!). Walcha tried some, but they were all impossible – compass limitations prevented playing Bach. The choice therefore fell on the Saint-Pierre-le-Jeune one. It is not really a Silberman. Just the Grand Orgue; the rest was made chiefly by Alfred Kern. The organ stands in the middle of the church, and is, therefore, drowned in acoustic reverberation. This comes across in the recordings: the treble is rather less present than it should be; and the softer and less precise French sound guarantees that you don’t get the polyphony. It is rather beautiful, but I would have preferred a more manly organ; this sugary thing is both a compromise (it is a French organ built by a German builder) and a historical error (the organ was really made up by Kern, and it was not originally intended for such a huge space).

THE APPRAISAL – STOP: HERE I ACTUALLY BEGIN TO COMMENT ON THE RECORDINGS!!!!!!

Welcome to those who skipped the preceding information. How does he fare?

* Walcha’s style

Walcha is unique. He plays as no one else. And, judging from his principles (he published them in his edition of the 6 voice Ricercare, at Peters Verlag) one would say he would play rubbish: all depends on the strict maintenance of pulse, on not altering or even bending any rhythmic pattern, and on the precise duration of the silences between the notes. Theoretically, this is achieved by singing each voice and determining the articulation points, which are, therefore, different in every voice (which is rather difficult to do when playing a really difficult piece).

However, the results totally transcend these maniac intentions. It is true that he is rather square; but as every voice is actually played by itself, there is never any overall squareness: you just listen to every voice he plays. If you like counterpoint, you will love it.

The overall intention is the transparency of every voice. He therefore uses rather bright (but not piercingly so) registrations and used a very odd system of detached style. It is not bizarre as in Gould, and it is rather less marked and more thought out, but the result is that you have very distinct rhythmic patterns in one voice that sparkle through the harmony (the other voices being played slightly detached, as is the basic organ touch) making every voice listenable.

Although he claims he doesn’t introduce rubatto, this is quite false. He doesn’t do it over a few bars, that is true (as Leonhardt and his school do); but there are very long stretches of music that are very slightly (but detectably) bended, so you have an incredible structural view of music. There are no ‘effects’: just the stating of the structures. This produces, as it were, very tense arches of music, which build up to form the overall structure. It is not easy to grasp at first audition, but one can become totally addicted to it.

His style did slowly change. His first recordings were very intense (up to the Art of Fugue and the Alkmaar recordings) but later he became somewhat appeased. He played faster, with less accentuation and perhaps more fluidity but less relief. Therefore, when comparing the chorale works, this comes as a pleasant surprise: they are almost always more expressive in the early days.

*The recordings

Well, the Lübeck recordings are different from the Cappel ones: they are freer, and the organ imposes a very impressive contrast between the Positiv and the Hauptwerk. This is very clearly seen in the Variations on Sei gegrusset, Jesu Gütig. The penultimate variation, very impressively sounds ond the piercing Rückpositiv plenum, and the chorale (the hymn tune) sounds, in canon, on the Haupwerk trumpet and mixture; the bass has the 16’ Trombone. It is the most beautiful – perhaps I ought to say tragic, impressive, spine chilling – version of this work I have ever heard. I would say that just for that it is worth buying the set. (Comparisons can be made to both the Alkmaar and the Saint-Pierre versions; they were all issued on CD).

Also, the Organ Mass is extremely taking: he plays rather slower than the Saint-Pierre version, and is therefore, much more poetic.

He recorded most Preludes and Fugues at Cappel. This was a very good decision, because in fugues is where you really need transparency. All the polyphony sparkles and his tempos are rather well chosen. In a few cases I prefer the more recent recordings (I prefer the g minor, BWV 535, Saint Pierre version; I prefer the great A minor at Alkmaar, and I definitely prefer the Doric fugue at Alkmaar, although the toccata is too slow there).

The early preludes in particular are much more interesting than those of the later edition (where they are played at Saint-Pierre). In absolute terms, they are *very* good indeed. If I disregard sonic considerations (the sound is not always perfect at Cappel, tending to congestion when the third sounding cymbal is added, as it often is in the finales), they are top notch, and easily outplay everybody else.

The greater preludes and fugues really shine: rhythmic precision and bounce in the preludes, incredible polyphony transparency in the fugues). The Passacaglia, for instance, is sublime – even better than the Alkmaar one.

The chorale settings played in Cappel are very different from the Saint-Pierre ones. Although he is playing in an unreverberated space he is *slower* and freer in Cappel than in the huge acoustic of Saint-Pierre, where he is perhaps too cold. This is obvious both from the Leipzig chorales and the Orgelbüchlein (although I could see several pieces of the Orgelbüchlein more freely – for instance, O Mensch bewein dein Sünde gross; in this kind of music, MC Alain is the undisputed master, I think – the human side of Bach’s music).

The trio sonatas are much better than the more recent edition: faster, livelier and perhaps more expressive.

CONCLUSION

Do I recommend this set? Well, it depends on what you like in music. If you like counterpoint and don’t object to a clearly dated sound, I surely do. If you like Walcha, this is an absolute must. If you are more romantically oriented and prefer the beautiful reverberated sound of more recent versions, avoid this. It’s pointed, modernistic, almost mondrianesque. A Bach of steel and glass.

LAST WORDS

I would be omitting something that touched me deeply. When you place CD1 on the tray and press ‘play’, instead of an organ, you listen, in a marvellously clear Hochdeutsch accent and a ringing soprano voice, to : ‘Quintadehn Acht’. And then you listen to a short improvisation by Walcha using that stop. Several other stops are demonstrated and several combinations of stops.

I don’t know who is the ‘Dichter’ – that is, the person to whom the voice belongs – was, but I hope it was his wife, Ursula Walcha, née Koch, who used to help him with the registers and with the memorizing of the partitions (she played every voice twice on the harpsichord and he built it up on his brain, memorized it, and started to study the architecture, the articulation of every voice, the fingering and the registration).

[bat]

Does anyone know the Knud Vad recording of Bach's complete
organ works? I just ordered it for 20 Euros.

[tones]

Welcome to the Forum, Bat.

I certainly don't, but if anyone does it'll be resident organist and organ expert RdS. He'll be along just as soon as he can tear himself away from his new harpsichord...

Read this thread too

http://www.zerogain.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20

RdS inadvertently omitted the "organ" from the title.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Welcome to ZeroGain, Bat.

As always, Tones was being kind. No I don't know the interpreter. Can you please post some links?

[bat]

The organist is presented in
http://www.santeustorgiomusica.com/htm/schede/organo4.htm

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Bat:

He was a pupil of Anton Heiller (he is given as Anton Heller, but I think it is a misspelling). His activity reminds me a little of Helmut Walcha - he built his career playing for the same people again and again, and is a true Director Musices.

All that suggests that he is a committed musician. Nevertheless, I've never heard him.

Having been a pupil of Heiller, who was a truly outstanding Bach expert, I would be tempted to listen to his playing.

But I cannot contribute more than that.

Thank you for posting the link.

EDITED TO ADD: It is Anton Heiller all right; I had just read the Italian part - only when I browsed thye link again did I find the English translation :rolleyes: .

Anyway, for 20 Euros it will certainly be a bargain. Marcussen organs are usually very clean sounding and rather sharp; so the organ is probably adequate, even if modern research has shown Bach liked organs quite different from the Marcussen kind - which were inspired (rather freely) by Arp Schnitger organs.

[bat]

The CDs arrived, 18 of them. So far I am very pleased with them.
Excellent recordings, virtuoso artist, the Marcussen organ sounds clean, sharp, somehow neutral, perhaps with a touch of Silbermann sound. The organ is miked relatively close which reduces echo and enhances clarity of lines. Occasional wrong note or two in the difficult trio sonatas but not disturbingly. I think this must be one of the best digital sets around. Question to RdS: are you sure that Marcussens are influenced by Schnitger, to my ears at least the St. Jacobi/Hamburg Arp Schnitger sounds much harder and more steely than Marcussen organs.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Hi Bat,

I'm glad you liked it. About the MArcussen. This is rather a long story and I'll try to make it short.

The Marcussen, Anderson, Flentrop and chiefly, the Ahrend organs were all make in the spirit of the organ reform movement, which took inspiration in the north European organs, chiefly the Schnitgers.

But, of course, all interpretations of what they thought a well restored Schnitger would sound like. The Anderson's, particularly, are totally different, smooth and very euphonic.

It is also important to know that we don't exactly know how Schnitgers sounded like. The Ahrend restored Schnitgers sound very Ahrend like, the Beckerath restored Schnitgers sound Beckerath like and so on.

The only contemporary description I know of a Schnitger organ (the Jacobi one) states that it was enormously powerful, dark and rather high in the mixtures. But that is too broad - many really big German organs from the baroque period (except the Gottfried Silbermans) correspond to that description.

More important is that we don't actually know a lot about how to restore an organ. I spoke to many organ builders and systematically got different answers. Harald Vogel claims that Ahrend is a genius; but he himself admitted that there is too much left to be known, and that we don’t really know how the façade principals were made, as so few of them survived (most were given to the State to make canons during the 1st word war!!!!).

So, the Marcussens of about 1970 were, in fact inspired by north European tradition, and the epitome of north European tradition is Arp Schnitger. But there was always a lot of personal taste disguised under the ‘Schnitger influence’. Chiefly, many organ builders thought that the powerful, hard sound of a Schnitger was a consequence of changes perpetrated during the 19th Century, and they made their organs sound more silvery. That may be the case with the Marcussen you are listening.

However, I doubt that Marcussen emulated a Silberman. They are very different from Schnitgers (chiefly in the composition of Mixtures, Cymbels and Sharffs). If you have the specification you can find that out. If the Hw mixture is something like V-VI, VI or even VI-VIII, if there is Cymbel III, if you have a Gedackpommer or a Quintadena 16’ in the Hauptwerk, if there are many reeds in the secondary keyboards (Dulzian, Fagott, Krumphorn, Regal , Tretcherregal, Apfelregal or Vox humana), if there is a trumpet 16’ on the Hw or even if you have a Bombarde or Posaune 32’ in the pedals, the influence is North European, Even if you have a Rückpositiv (Rp) as the first keyboard, the influence cannot have been Silberman.

A typical big Hw Silberman composition would be:

Bourdon 16
Prinzipal 8
Röhrflöte 8
Viola di Gamba 8’
Octave 4’
Flöte 4
Quinte oder Nasatt 3
Superoctave 2’
Tertia 1 3/5
Mixtur IV
Sharff III
Very seldom, Trompete 8’

Whereas a typical Hw Schnitger composition might be

Prinzipal 16 (perhaps missing)
Quintadena 16 (almost sure to be there)
Octave oder Prinzipal 8’
Hohlflöte 8
Octave 4’
Spitzflöte 4
Quinte oder Nassatt 3
Superoctave 2
Rauschpfeiffe II
Mixxtur VI (or VI-VIII if teh Prinzipal 16 is present)
Cymbel III
Trompet 16 or, in a smaller organ, 8’
Voz humana 8’ (perhaps in another manual)


If you could post the composition (I mean, the actual stops) of the organ, I’ll tell you what kind of instrument it is. If you’d like to attach a scan, please pm me.

[bat]

The 1942 Marcussen organ in Sorö ("voiced in a style based on the rediscovered pipe-measurements from ca. 1520"):
Hw:
Gedaktpommer 16'
Principal 8'
Spidsflöte 8'
Gedakt 8'
Oktav 4'
Rörflöte 4'
Quint 2 2/3'
Oktav 2'
Mixtur V
Trompet 8'
(H-R)
(H-B)
Rp:
Rörgedakt 8'
Quintatön 8'
Principal 4'
Gedaktflöte 4'
Gemshorn 2'
Sesquialetra II
Sharf III
Dulcian 16'
Krumhorn 8'
(P-R)
(P-H)
(P-B)
Bw:
Trägedakt 8'
Nathorn 4'
Spidsgedakt 4'
Gedaktflöte 2'
Nasat 1 1/3'
Cymbel II
Vox Humana 8'
(Tremulant)
Pedal:
Principal 16'
Subbass 16'
Quint 10 2/3'
Oktav 8'
Gedakt 8'
Oktav 4'
Nathorn 4'
Blokflöte 2'
Mixtur IV
Fagot 16'
Trompet 8'

[Rodrigo de Sá]

This is a very typical organ reform movement organ. As you see, the Werkprinzip is maintained - each department has its own casing; therefore, there are 4 separate sections: Haupwerk, main case, 2nd keyboard, Rückpositiv, behind the player, 1st keyboard, Brustwerk, 3rd keyboard just above the player and Pedal, two main towers flanking the Hauptwerk.

This is a typical setting of North German organs. Silberman usually used to make all the pipes fit into a single case, even if they were separated inside. He never used a Rückpositiv -- it sounds too shrill and doesn't blend well (because it sounds several meters under it, with the Haupwerk. Also the Brustwerk is a specialty of the organ reform movement; this one seems very sweet sounding - cymbel II, no principals all the stops are very delicate; they weren't necessarily sweet sounding in 17th Century North Germany.

Another clue is the Rückpositiv. Here you have the typical arrangement of reeds and tierce mixtures: if you use Dulcian 16, Krumhorn 8, Principal 4' (this is probably very sharp) Sexquialter II and Sharff III you get a typical Buxtehude like sound: very sharp, rasping and aggressive and yet sinister. It has also a typical feature of the early Reform movement: there is no principal 2' in the Rückpositiv, but the similar, but smoother sounding Gemshorn 2' (a conical open pipe). This is because the original Rückpositiven were really quite sharp: usually they intoned the choral and all the solo parts. In an original Schnitger, if one plays the full Rp against the full Hw, the positive is usually brighter and sometimes even stronger. In Schnitger's days, the Hp was usually coupled with the Brustwerk or the Oberwerk (if there was one) and not with the positive. The positiv was of a contrasting, not blending nature.

Then, the Hw specification is typically Schnitger; instead of the Quintadena he had a Gedackpommer, which is less sharp than the Quintadena 16' (it is played with all the principals (octaves, quints), mixtures and perhaps the trompet 8 - it is the famous quintadena plenum of Arp Schnitger). There is no IIIfach zymbel, though. It is true it is unbearably sharp and was seldom used by XX century organists.

Two further points of interest. In the Pedals, there is a 12' Quint (10 2/3), which works downwards and produces an acoustic 32', but rather soft.

I suppose the organ is rather softly voiced. The organ reformers believed that power grew out of sweetness, as Arnold Dolmetsch claimed (rather incorrectly) old organs did. Therefore, the organs of this kind were brilliant, but sweet sounding and rather transparent - very good for Bach, as a matter of fact.

All in all, the sound is probably light, very transparent, penetrating without being shrill. A typical organ reform 'Arp Schnitger - of course, it is completely different. Schnitger's organs are extremely strong and loud, not particularly transparent and rather dark sounding in spite of the very strong mixtures: a deep red copper sound.

The sound of this organ is most probably very beautiful. I once played a similar (but somewhat larger) instrument and the effect was a marvel.

Could you tell me how you came across this record?

[bat]

After some more listening I would describe this organ striking, bright, sharp, very beautiful, but not soft. The Silbermann organs that I have heard are much softer, delicate, flute-like, less powerful. This Marcussen organ is striking and some pieces could wake up the dead when played loudly. It is certainly a masterpiece. The artist uses often a reedy-sounding pedal stop (Fagot 16' ?)This organ is less neutral and less warm than the Marcussen organ that Kevin Bowyer uses in his Bach records.
RdS, thanks for fascinating information. Is there a book, net resource or CD from which I could learn more about organ building, voicing etc.?
I ordered my set from Amazon.fr, I have seen this set also elsewhere at a significantly higher price.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

dear bat.

Sorry for not answering before, but I had a totally useless 100 page report to write and very litle time for doing it. So I didn't visit the forum.

It is probably the Fagott, yes, perhaps with the trumpet 8' and certainly something more. This particular kind of Fagott is really a narrow trumpet. It has a very rasping, strangely hollow sound. It is very beautiful and is essential to play the free pieces (i.e.: Preludes and Fugues) of Bach.

As to books, there used to be many. Peter Williams had a couple of interesting ones (although rather barren in style and perhaps not sufficiently technical.

There is a very good book by Poul-Gerhard Anderson (an organ builder himself, and an important actor of the organ reform movement). It was translated into English as Organ Building and Design. It is very interesting because it describes meticulously all the stops and their acioustic properties (but you have to know some acoustics). More than that, he actually explains with great detail one of the most fascinating things of the organ: the mixtures.

There are two rather good sites ij the Net. One is this (http://www.arpschnitger.nl/schnit.html) , on Arps Schnitger's organs. There are some interesting articles, but some of the most interesting are in Dutch.

There is another one about Gottfried Silbermann, here (http://www.baroquemusic.org/silbeng.html)

However, neither of them is really technical.

About the organ reform movement, there is a recent book (it has a CD, too, with registrations in the book), by Kerala Snyder (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0195144147/qid=1077940061/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_0_2/026-7250531-6754852) , a specialist of Buxtehude.

In fact, there are many organ pages in Internet, but are not necessarily very good.

Of course, there is the enormous treatise by George Audsley (republished by the Dover Press). It is interesting, but it was written in the late 19th century, and his opinions are very different from the organs we like now.

If I find or remember something more, I'll let you know.

Good hunting!

If I think of something interesting, I'll let you know.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

For those who can bear with organ talk.

I posted more or less the same text on the first Walcha release of the organ works at Naim's. My main club is here, but I sometimes visit the music room.

It had very interesting reactions. So, may I call your attention to them?

See
here (http://naim-audio.infopop.net/1/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=67019385&f=38019385&m=2701937396) . Scroll down my text, and then read the reactions of other members.

[bat]

Your worst fears are coming true...

the disgusting Keith Jarrett-friendly bat is emerging from his filthy cave...

to temporarily break his vow of silence and ask if anybody is familiar with Hans Helmut Tillmanns´s Bach organ recordings?

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Originally posted by bat
Your worst fears are coming true...

the disgusting Keith Jarrett-friendly bat is emerging from his filthy cave...

to temporarily break his vow of silence and ask if anybody is familiar with Hans Helmut Tillmanns´s Bach organ recordings?

I see you went into the cave as a man end came out as a vamp ... bat.

:JOEL:

If that is the case, you *must* listen to a good Buxtehude record. For instance, this (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000028AMY/qid=1081909909/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_8_2/026-7250531-6754852) and this (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000028AMY/qid=1081909909/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_8_2/026-7250531-6754852) .

If you didn't live in a cave I'd borrow it to you.

But I don't know if it is safe to meet you in the flesh...

[JOEL]

:D

No, I don't know about Tillman. Got a link?

[bat]

Check out

http://www.danacord.dk/frmsets/records/608-r.html

The "fuge g-moll" sample is typical Tillmanns. Soft Walcha-influenced legato touch. Idiosyncratic. His hypnotic performance of the F major toccata & fugue BWV 540 is in my opinion by far the best available.

His other recordings are listed at

http://www.danacord.dk/frmsets/artists.html

DACOCD 528 and DACOCD 599 are perhaps the best ones.

I will check out the Vogel samples someday.

[bat]

On the other hand, all Tillmanns performances are not good, he is uneven. Always maximum legato.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Bat:

I listened to several samples. They are not long enough to allow me to make an opinion. Nevertheless, some comments:

First. I don't think he is playing very legato. Neither did Walcha, anyway. He uses what is normaly called 'common organ détaché' - a quasi-legato but with silence enough between the notes to make them stand out clearly. The effect that one gets is one of legato. Even so, he articulates the fugue themes quite clearly. For instance, the g-moll you mentioned has a clearly articulated ending. So does the C major (from the tocata).

As I could only listen to the first exposition of the fugues, I can't tell how well he played them.

But I listened to quite a bit of the An Wasserflüssen Babylon chorale. There I think I detect a certain ponderosity - as if he was wearing very heavy boots.

He seems to like bright registration.

That's all I can say.

It seemed OK to me.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Originally posted by bat

I will check out the Vogel samples someday.

Well. Some day may be too late. They are not very often reissued. If I were you, I'd get, at least, volume 4. I think you will really like teh Praeludim in g minor.

[bat]

Well if I some day get some money, I'll sure get the Vogel discs.
And I wish I had some day also some time to listen to my collection too - each new purchase makes some old record obsolete because I don't have the time to listen to everything - I have a bunch of small bat kids running around.

So it's not legato that Tillmanns does! Interesting. What I like about T is that he seems to play with his heart and there is none of that common 'Mama look how fast I can play this piece'-attitude. He's no Walcha but according to booklets 'he follows the style of his great example and teacher of H.W'. Good or not, I find myself playing these records often.

Are you familiar with Pamela Ruiter-Feenstra's Franz Tunder record? I find it a pleasure, great sound and a new (2000)Schnitger-type organ.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Bat:

Tillmann could do worse than follow Walcha's example! I did not say it was not good - just that I cannot know from short samples.

Being Walcha's student explains the bright registration and the kind of articulation he uses.

I don't know Pamela Ruiter. Tunder is interesting although he is no Buxtehude, or even Lübeck or Bruhns. But I must say I don't know his music very well. I have no scores and, as far as I remember, no outstanding record with his music. I'll investigate her. Thanks for the suggestion, and a link would be appreciated.

Regarding organ recordings in general, I sometimes think it is not very good to buy 'integrals', at least at first. This is because one cannot truly listen to the whole attentively. Now if one buys just a record, one can listen many times to it and pay a lot of attention to it.

That is why I suggested that you buy Vol 4 of Vogel's Buxtehude; If you like it, after that you might buy Vol 7, then Vol 2. And if you are convinced, then perhaps buy the rest.

Even if I don't like to have 'incomplete' sets, I often do just that. For instance, I bought two records of the Olivier Vernet Buxtehude integral and stopped there. The same with Helga Schauerte's. I got one record of Chapuis Bach integral and stopped there. Then I got one record of his Buxtehude integral and eventually (but rather slowly) bought them all.

Integrals are very expensive and are always a risk.

Just my two cents.

[bat]

Here is a Tunder review link:

http://www.lafolia.com/archive/grieve/grieve200303goteborg.html

In my opinion Chapuis Bach is a nightmare although some consider it the best. I saw a cheap complete set, bought it, tried to listen to it and soon got rid of it. Great player but not to my taste.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Bat:

Looks delicious. I just ordered it. Thanks a lot.

[bat]

The Alessio Corti 17-CD Gesamtaufnahme won't disappoint.

Super digital sound, two OK modern Italian Tamburini organs, super player (Rogg's pupil and successor at Geneva conservatory).

His Orgelbuchlein is particularly good.

Probably the best digital set available. (For reference get the Walcha mono set, too.)

just my 0,000000000000000002 cents.

[GrahamN]

Damn - just missed a s/h copy (by a day or so - wasn't paying enough attention to my email) of the Rubsam/Philips integral for £40. So what characterises this Corti set? I would really have liked to hear the Rubsam set, as it sounds rather up my street - fairly lively and up-front. I did have a listen to the stereo Walcha set when I bought it on behalf of a friend - and found it really rather dry and sterile for my tastes. I do have a 2CD set from Koopman (the Warner Bach 2000 set) of the 'dubious' Bach pieces, concertos + arrangements, and think it really works for what is basically Vivaldi, but I suspect that approach would really not work in the more reflective pieces.

[bat]

IMHO the Corti set has a killer sound and the artist is a virtuoso with good taste.
It never irritates me. In fact, the more I listen to it the better it sounds.
There are absolutely no wrong notes.
His instruments are perhaps not great masterpieces but they are good enough.

[bat]

But if someone is looking for a new relelatory way to play Bach, this isn't it. I think it's just well played. Besides, it includes the Art of Fugue (but omits the Neumeister chorales found in 1985).

[bat]

If someone is interested, this is my current overall impression (which is probably incorrect and could change after more listening):

Corti vs. Walcha:
Corti: much better sound, better fingers
Walcha: arguably more artistic vision, better instruments (mono version), better registrations

I prefer Corti at least with headphones.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Originally posted by bat
Corti vs. Walcha:
Corti: much better sound, better fingers

I would be greatly surprised by that... Have you noticed how Walcha keeps his articulations exactly the same in whatever voice and however awkward the intervals? - he does it even in stretti when the two voices in question are taken by the same hand! That gives the impression of irregularity, but that is precisely what he wanted. If you listen partition in hand you will understand how and why he does it. Also, bear in mind that the Lübeck, Cappel and Alkmaar versions were captured in one take - no editing whatever - and that all of those keyboards are beast to manage: playing an old suspended action keyboard is a weird experience: it all trembles and shakes and the touch can be quite hard. Now with Tamburinis…

Still I'm talking without having listened to Corti. The Tamburini organs don't sound that appealing to me, though...

I'll now vanish into my internet non-existence.:eek:

[bat]

Walcha is probably better but who wants to hear this music played always the same way? This is why we need alternatives to Walcha's set(s) and AC suits my (bad) taste well. He is a very neutral player without any gimmicks, and the music comes through nicely.

Besides, some claim that Walcha's feet lag behind the manuals. I believe this is a complete misunderstanding?

From Geneva AC got 1st price in virtuosity with distinction, so I think his technique should be OK.

I insist that Tamburinis are good enough - I think it is music that should be the main emphasis here.

If RdS returns before year 3000, I would like to ask him what is his opinion on Hurford's Bach recordings.

Now back to my coffin.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Hello Bat

A direct question deserves a direct answer.

Walcha's feet lag behind the manuals???

That is a complete misunderstanding of how an organ works and of how pedals should be played.

First, the very low notes (bottom 16 foot and all the 32 foot range) do lag behind the manuals, but that is just because the wind needs time to set the huge pipes into vibration. That will be true of ANY organ, and it is especially noticeable in the Alkmaar one. The effect is, to a certain extent, musical and one can exploit it. If you listen to a Cavaillé-Coll this effect is so pronounced it even affects the manual 8’ principal: your left hand will seem to lag behind the right hand.

Second, when a theme appears (in the pedals or elsewhere if it begins an important section) Walcha may delay its entry by some milliseconds. But then that is just agogics. If you criticize that you'll probably like a computer's rendering of music... Which of course you don't.

Peter Hurford. I now very little about him. He published a very interesting (if also very technical book on Making Music on the Organ which I like. But I don't particularly like the results of his principles. Too monotonous, registration is unimaginative, tempi too dull and agogics close to absent.

I've been thinking about Walcha for a long time now. I don't play the way he does. When I compare results I always find we had different things in mind when we studied the piece (I mean, before actually playing it). But I cannot but admire his results (and I don’t mean technically: of course he is superior; I mean musically). Often they are absolutely marvelous. There are many pieces he recorded I think have never been bettered in recording.

Finally, about his virtuosity. I once asked Harald Vogel what he though about Walcha. The answer was a very strange one, and I won't repeat it. But he said he though Walcha had 'a very strong sense of Bach' but 'the details are all wrong' (verbatim). He also said when one listens to Walcha's records one is witnessing organ playing at the very peak of virtuosity - he said (and Vogel is an extraordinary virtuoso himself) he never heard or saw anyone play with such an absolute control over the instrument.

Did you know he was totally unrivalled (both musically and technically) when playing Max Reger (that's the Listz of the organ)?

You only have to listen to a fugue played by him (take the 5th Counteroint from the Art of Fugue, or the big a minor one or the ‘doric’ from the Preludes and Fugues) or, if you prefer, to the triosonatas. It is unbelievable: every voice is shaped as he wants it to be, breathes, and has a life of itself.

Now whoever tried to play a really difficult Bach fugue knows that is almost impossible - it requires you to know the music totally by heart and to concentrate on all the voices at the same time.

Somehow Walcha managed it. As much as I like and respect Marie Claire Alain, she seems unable to do that; as is Koopman, Leonhardt (he comes very close) and everybody else I've heard.

My relationship with Walcha is a difficult one. I don't completely like the way he plays, but cannot help acknowledging his genius (now I do hate this word: but in Walcha's case I am obliged to use it).

I also think you must know the scores (and the difficulty of playing an organ) when you pass judgments on him.

Sorry to be so abrupt, but when you face greatness you must acknowledge it.

All the best

[bat]

What a fantastic reply.
Btw, on second thoughts avoid Corti - the Tamburinis are not the best organs in the world.
Knud Vad records and a good subwoofer would make a nice combination.

[pe-zulu]

As a newcomer to this site I have read your contributions
with great interest, especially the devoted and informative letters from RdS.
He quotes without further comment Harald Vogel for saying that "Walcha had a strong sense of Bach" but "all the details were wrong". I think some comments would be useful.
My first encounter as a young boy with Bach was the Walcha 6th partita, which I remember as a quite extraordinary experience. In the meantime I got or heard
almost all his recordings, so I know his style wery well.
Walcha grew up in the shadow of the organ movement.
This was a reaction against romanticism, and it told more about how not to interprete Bach than how to do it.
So Walcha was in a sort of stylistic vacuum.
From structural analysis of the scores and contemplation,
as it seems to me, he created his own comprehensive Bachstyle, original, impressive. He was his own autonome authority, and made the choise to stay "uninformed" all his life, and this explains perhaps why the "details all were wrong".

Tempo: Rather uniform tempo with really minimalistic agogics. Only some small ritardandi between the by him defined sections mostly in fugues and rather mannered in excecution. No trace of a retoric point of view. He probably newer wanted to hear about stylus phantasticus.Well there is small exceptions to this, fx his Partita 6 and Fantasia Chromatica. On the other hand his often relentless tempo
and insisting articulation in many cases led to some sort of extasis fx in the gigues of the English suites. But often when the counterpoint becomes more dense with strettos and chromatism he just plays through in an stiff and cool manner as if nothing had happened. Did he ever hear about Frescobaldis recomandations fx. Or did he quite simply choose to close his ears. And what about notes inegales or doubledotting.

Articulation: Best heard in the harpsichord recordings.
He often played non legato, thanks for that,
but his use of legato was motivated by considerations of phrasing, and he often played wery many notes in one bow for that reason. The theme of the Dorian fugue fx he divides in two halves, an ascending bow and a descending bow and plays each of these in strict legato, with a demonstrative and a bit exaggerated cæsura in between.
He always uses a characteristic articulation of fuguethemes, surely to make them easy recognizable,
some of his rules of articulation though being rather ridiculous, especially his tendency to start the theme with an overtied upbeat, creating an inadvert feeling of synkope. In other places accentuating single notes with extreme staccato.

Ornaments: As a rule mecanical executed, no agogics here.
In repetitions of suitemovements no extra ornaments, on the contrary he repeats always quite literally. In the French
suites which are played in a very ponderous manner he takes all repeats, the same in the Goldbergs.

Registration: Fortunately he usually aimed at transparency,
and fx his 8+2 feet is good in that respect, but in the harpsichord recordings he uses very often not
suitable 16 foot, though his clear articulation tends to compensate for this. In organ plenums as I hear it in Alkmaar he often muds the sound with a Terz or Sesquialtera. His sense for structure made him change registrations between sections all to often, the most ridiculous example being his busy changes of manual in the great e-minor prelude BWV 548.
So I think Walcha shows us only one side of Bachs genius.
The fascination with Walcha is surely his unique structural breadth of view, his unequalled virtuosity and the sheer concentration of his playing, and the fact that the music of Bach stands well up to different interpretations. Scarlatti fx
played in that way would kill the music.

Cheers

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS
How can you say that the Fagott 16 ft. is essential to the playing of the free pieces of Bach. You certainly never heard the Sorø Fagott which is penetrating, snarring, like an overdimensioned Vox humana and blends very badly with the plenum. Knud Vad uses it all too often. The great Silbermanns and Schnitgers usually
have got milder sounding 16ft. reeds in the pedal (Basuin).
Cheers

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Pe-Zulu:

You are right - I don't remember listening to its sound. From what you say it is a kind of Dulciaan. The Basuins, Posaunen and such like by Schnitger and Silberman are actually quite alike: deep, dark and strong - just as Bach liked them (in a report about, I think, a Scheibe organ he complains about the brash and harsh sound of the Posaune 16 and recomends a thorough reharmonization to get a deep and pure tone). (by the way, I wouldn't call Schnitger and Silberman Posaunen 'milder': they are VERY strong and get a lot of wind. They just are not very bright so as to act as the bases for the whole of the harmony).

But of course, when the Organbewegung took flight a tendency to use only mild voicing set in - hence the reliance on Schnarrwerk - the regals, Schalmeys, Dulcians and such like.

But, even so, if one uses the Principal and the Subbass 16 plus a Dulcian, one usually gets a tolerable 16' foundation.

Now a Trombone 16 is essential to Bach music - but I agree, not a spicy Dulcian. In such cases, I would use both 16' flues, the subquint 12 and both 8' flues plus the trompete. That usually works (unless the trompet itself sounds like schnarrwerk, which, in the pedals, it sould not).

So thank you for the correction.

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS
Yes, the volume of a great Silbermann Posaunbass 16 e.g.Dom zu
Freiberg is imposing, but the sound quality is mild, compared to the Sorø Fagot 16, and this says a lot about the Sorø Fagot. A dulcian 16 would blend better in the plenum, as you describe it. You have to hear this Sorø Fagot to believe it.
Even if the Knud Vad Bachcycle as to interpretation is far from the best I have heard (a bit too conservative to my taste as a whole) I think it is worth to hear, considering the relative low price.
Cheers

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Pe-Zulu:

You made me curious about that Fagott! I reread your previous message: an overgrown vox humana! I may well buy the records just out of curiosity for that Fagott!

Thanks for the information.

[bat]

The price I paid was a joke - even nine empty jewel boxes must be worth something.
Marcussen was considered #1 about 50 years ago, so it´s odd that they goofed with that Fagott - or perhaps that was the way Bach liked it??? He was known to favor unusual registrations.

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat
You see, I am a member of a danish music-club owned by the editor of Knud Vads Bachcycle, and I got it new and just released for 360 Dkr.. That is ca. 48 Euro. and this is still wery cheap .
I think it is full value for the money. Knud Vads style is a bit
"preautentic" 1960 style, but the result is still very beautiful listening, especially the choralworks. And apart from the
Fagot16 this is a most appealing sounding organ in the postorganmovement neobaroque style. The fagot is rather special - I have heard it in the church - it is a Marcussen special without much reference to Bach. He should have preferred a
Basun 16 with a less rattling sound, and not this which sometimes sounds like motorcycle.
Cheers

[Rodrigo de Sá]

In very small organs (say about 13 stops and very mild voicing with a soft but bright mixture) I like the effect of a Regal 16 (plus Subbass and principal chorus coupling) in the pedals, or even the combination of a Subbass and a regal 8 (and, of course, in certain chorales, a regal 4' in the pedals works very well). A PedalDulzian 16 (Ahrend style) also sounds very well.

In a big organ have the sole 16' reed sounding as schnarrwerk is incomprehensible to me.

Of course there are all sorts of bassoons - some are really shaped like narrow trumpets and sound more fundamental than a real trumpet which can be good - but a motorcycle! I must listen to it!

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat
Having listned to most of the Alessio Corti Bach integral by now, I feel inclined to write a word about it, considering your remarks about him above.
After the variable Ton Koopman, the decidedly unsophisticated Simon Preston and the egomanic Andre Isoir, Corti comes as a sort of relief. A very sympatic player with stylish articulation and phrasing, and well considered tempi and registrations. Not surprisingly reminding much of Lionel Rogg. What I miss is some personality, an agogic driven by internal artistic need,
more stylus phantasticus. Listen fx to Martin Sander or Hartmut Rohmeyer to know what I think of.
But the real problem with Corti´s integral is his organs and the recorded sound. The choice of Tamburini organs can only be explained, if the organfirm p(l)ayed an important part. The organs are completely unsuited to Bachs style. I remember a church with an electronic organ
sounding much like this. And a recording quality that probably makes the organs sound even more synthetic, given the rumbling acoustics and lack of perpective. The small organ (Chiesa Cristiana Protestante, Milano) has been recordet just acceptable, but not more than this, whereas the great organ (Chiesa di S.Maria Segreta, Milano) , which Corti - alas - uses for the most pieces , sounds the worst, the sound seeming to come at the same time from everywhere and from nowhere. Let us hope that Corti will be given the chance to rerecord the works when he has matured a little, and on another organ. After all Lionel Rogg has until now been allowed to record the Bachcycle three times, and his first recording was made on the relatively unsuited giant Metzler-organ in the Zürich-Münster.
As to the Knud Vad integral, I have been told that it is a live recording. I think this makes his achievement even more remarkable and excuses for some wrong notes.
I have not decided whether to aquire the Radulescu-integral or not. I fear it is terribly boring. If you
gets it you may let me know.
Venlig hilsen

[Rodrigo de Sá]

As a newcomer to this site I have read your contributions
with great interest, especially the devoted and informative letters from RdS.
He quotes without further comment Harald Vogel for saying that "Walcha had a strong sense of Bach" but "all the details were wrong". I think some comments would be useful.
My first encounter as a young boy with Bach was the Walcha 6th partita, which I remember as a quite extraordinary experience. In the meantime I got or heard
almost all his recordings, so I know his style wery well.
Walcha grew up in the shadow of the organ movement.
This was a reaction against romanticism, and it told more about how not to interprete Bach than how to do it.
So Walcha was in a sort of stylistic vacuum.
From structural analysis of the scores and contemplation,
as it seems to me, he created his own comprehensive Bachstyle, original, impressive. He was his own autonome authority, and made the choise to stay "uninformed" all his life, and this explains perhaps why the "details all were wrong".

Tempo: Rather uniform tempo with really minimalistic agogics. Only some small ritardandi between the by him defined sections mostly in fugues and rather mannered in excecution. No trace of a retoric point of view. He probably newer wanted to hear about stylus phantasticus.Well there is small exceptions to this, fx his Partita 6 and Fantasia Chromatica. On the other hand his often relentless tempo
and insisting articulation in many cases led to some sort of extasis fx in the gigues of the English suites. But often when the counterpoint becomes more dense with strettos and chromatism he just plays through in an stiff and cool manner as if nothing had happened. Did he ever hear about Frescobaldis recomandations fx. Or did he quite simply choose to close his ears. And what about notes inegales or doubledotting.

Articulation: Best heard in the harpsichord recordings.
He often played non legato, thanks for that,
but his use of legato was motivated by considerations of phrasing, and he often played wery many notes in one bow for that reason. The theme of the Dorian fugue fx he divides in two halves, an ascending bow and a descending bow and plays each of these in strict legato, with a demonstrative and a bit exaggerated cæsura in between.
He always uses a characteristic articulation of fuguethemes, surely to make them easy recognizable,
some of his rules of articulation though being rather ridiculous, especially his tendency to start the theme with an overtied upbeat, creating an inadvert feeling of synkope. In other places accentuating single notes with extreme staccato.

Ornaments: As a rule mecanical executed, no agogics here.
In repetitions of suitemovements no extra ornaments, on the contrary he repeats always quite literally. In the French
suites which are played in a very ponderous manner he takes all repeats, the same in the Goldbergs.

Registration: Fortunately he usually aimed at transparency,
and fx his 8+2 feet is good in that respect, but in the harpsichord recordings he uses very often not
suitable 16 foot, though his clear articulation tends to compensate for this. In organ plenums as I hear it in Alkmaar he often muds the sound with a Terz or Sesquialtera. His sense for structure made him change registrations between sections all to often, the most ridiculous example being his busy changes of manual in the great e-minor prelude BWV 548.
So I think Walcha shows us only one side of Bachs genius.
The fascination with Walcha is surely his unique structural breadth of view, his unequalled virtuosity and the sheer concentration of his playing, and the fact that the music of Bach stands well up to different interpretations. Scarlatti fx
played in that way would kill the music.

Cheers

Dear Pe-ZULU:



I think you characterized Walcha's style very well. I agree with almost all you wrote.


THIS PARTICULAR BIT IS ORGANIST TALK - JUST SKIP IT IF YOU ARE NOT AN ORGANIST OR AN ORGAN BUFF: THE REST IS QUITE INTELLIGIBLE

Only, the problem with the Alkmaar plenum is that the terzian and the sexquiaters (and the mixtures too - except the one from the Bovenwerk) are all 16' ones. If I remember right, the two sexquialteras are built as:

3' - 1 3/5
3 1/5 - 3
6 - 3 1/5

The terzian, if I am not mistaken, is rather high, but I think it goes down to 6 (5 1/3) in the treble. (I can check all this, if you want)

I personally never liked to register on a 8' bases with a 16' mixture: the treble becomes metallic and harsh (of course, because one listens to chords, not harmonics).

ORGANIST SPEAK OFF

I also agree that his 6th partita is one of the most the most impressive recordings of the piece, even if it is quite wrong; for instance, all the arpeggios in the mind boggling sarabande are missing. But the final gigue! That is a true ending to the most magnificent of all the partitas... And I still rank his Chromatic fantasy as one of the best (together with Leonhardt's on the Zell and Gilbert's miraculous one).

By the way, they are available on CD in Amazon.de - I'm expecting to receive them next week. Let's see if they stand the test of time.

But yes, Walcha's Bach is not the whole Bach. In a way it is a reductive, but also an illuminating way of playing Bach. I'm not sure about the indifference to the stretti and such things, though. I'm thinking of the triple stretto in the WTC II c minor fugue (a magical moment: the theme is presented unmodified, in augmented form and inverted: the whole world is unified in that single moment).

His fingering and articulation rules are laid out in his edition of the 6 voice ricercare of the Musical Offering. It is a very interesting thing to read, and I can send you a copy of the text (in German or in English). After reading it, I just thought: luckily his playing is much more that he wants us to believe; otherwise it would have been horribly boring.

I also agree that his e-moll fugue is silly (moreover, he muddles the triplets and the fast upward and downward sweeps) - it is, perhaps, his worse recording. And the constant chopping of parts by registration changes makes things rather worse, and totally unnecessary - just consider the magnificent 3rd version by MC Alain, on the Martini organ: the plenum is used throughout and the dynamic nuances are provided by the reduction or augmentation of the number of voices.

So yes, listening to Walcha's Bach is a rather odd experience. But an enlightening one. My personal favorites are his extraordinary a-moll (a minor, of course) fugue (I mean the big one) where manual changes are justified and the doric fugue (both at Alkmaar) where he reaches almost mystic heights.

You mentioned stylus fantasticus. Walcha actually recorded some music by Bruhns (not very convincingly), a very good choice of Lübeck's praeludia and a superlatively good Buxtehude selection of the Preludes (the Peters edition - he would not play the modern editions!). It is nothing like Buxtehude. But it is agogically subtler than his Bach and, if you have the patience to listen to it carefully, you may be convinced. His g minor is odd but totally convincing, the e minor (the one with the octave leaps in the last fuge) is absolutely marvelous and the e major is ravishingly sunny and transparent.

Finally, Harald Vogel. I cannot really elaborate further. It came up during a conversation we had over a few beers (well, I had one, he had several - but then he is a huge man). But I dare not repeat what he said to me about Walcha. It is not insulting, and he has great respect for Walcha: 'he had a very strong sense of Bach' - quoted verbatim. 'But the details are all wrong', also verbatim. We did not elaborate much further, because I knew what he meant - indeed, you explained it very well.

Thank you for your very interesting and informative post.

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS

On your request I have listened to Walchas last recording, the 4 LP set "Organ masters before Bach" from 1977.I got it already in 1977, but didnt listen much to it, since for the most part I didnt like it then.

It is a mixed bag though. Interesting to hear the Cappel-organ restaurated and better recorded than in his early Bach- recordings on that organ.

There is certainly much more stylus phantasticus here than we are used to with Walcha, but indeed there should be, and I think there should be even more. But the most annoying thing is his articulation - almost in a demonstrative anti-informed style. He should or could have known better in 1977 if he had wanted to. I should be very glad to read his principles.
His Bruhns is not wery interesting, much better is the two coralvariations of respectively Scheidt (Warum betrübt du dich) and Tunder (Jesus Christus ,unser Heiland) , where he uses the quintatons and reeds to splendid effect,
and the Fantasia Cromatica of Sweelinck with its wonderful cumulative effect. His Pachelbel chaconne is a little tame, this is the usual way of playing Pachelbel, whom most people, I think, regard him as a nice, perfect and a litlle harmless composer. But have you heard Wolfgang Rübsams Pachelbel CD (Naxos) ? Full of drama and passion from the first note - a totally different composer. Walcha appears to be a little relaxed in his Buxtehude, the mild character of the E-dur very nice,
and the mysterious character of the passacaglia well carried through - maybe the piece describes the four phases of the moon, wery plausible in his rendering.
Though the d-minor prelude has much drama and the e-minor as well. But I frowned a bit rehearing his f-dis dissonance in the final cadence of the first fugue (e-minor),
a little point showing his attitude to the score.
His Lübeck on the other hand is splendid especially the d-minor (really much retoric here) and the g-minor.
If Buxtehude must be played in the old style I much prefer the ill-fated but exceedingly charismatic Walter Kraft, even if he is given a rather bad recording-tecnique (Vox). I heard him in the real life many times, and his agogics were outstanding expressive. But of course Buxtehude must be played in the informed way, so Walter Kraft is history.

I have not before been aware that the tertian and the sesquialteras of the Alkmaar-organ were low, and thanks for drawing my attention to that. Usually the disposition is referred short as Sesquialtera II, and you dont se the composition. A normal sesquialtera (2 2/3, 1 3/5) is useful
for underlining - or rather overlining - a solo voice in a choralprelude, or as a part of a composed cornet, but what can a low sesquialtera be used to. To create a feeling of
16 Ft in a plenum? Like the 10 2/3 Ft in the Pedalsection in some organs? Certainly not, and I think these Alkmaar-recordings show why not. The low tertz is quite annoying and muddles the texture.

I listened to the Alkmaar BWV 538 and 543 too and agree
with you that this is something of the best of the set. I
would add Die Kunst der Fuge and the BWV542 to the top list. At last I listened to the Chromatic Fantasy and some
WTC. His Chromatic fantasy will stand the test of anytime, full of energy and drama.The long passage of arpeggiated chords leading to the recitativ is marvelous,
and the fugue, which he sees as a concertfugue with tutti and soli is splendidly cummulative. Here is any talk about
informed style irrelevant, but his squarehanded renderings of many WTC pieces may be subject for critique. The ponderous es-minor prelude bd.I, the stiff rythm in the fis-minor piece bd.II fx.

Surely I am not hifi-freak either, my actual amp and speakers being fully satisfactory (Naim-amp.,Ruark-speakers),- it is the music that matters.

Venlig hilsen

[bat]

Dear pe-zulu,
in your review you have captured the essence of the Corti set. With headphones the synthetizer-like Tamburini sound is probably better than with loudspeakers. Did you listen to his die Kunst der Fuge as well?

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat
Yes i did, and just Die Kunst der Fuge is the worst recorded part of the set. I do not use headphones but two floorspeakers with a subwoofer in the midst - usually resulting in a very clear, direct sound. As to the Knud Vad set I think you are right when you wrote that the sound is excellent with a subwoofer.
Venlig hilsen

[bat]

Perhaps this set could be nicknamed the "Dr Corti and Mr Tamburini" set.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Here is the composition of mixtures of the Alkmaar organ

Rugpositief Sexquialtera II:
C 1-1/3 4/5
c0 2-2/3 1-3/5
c' 5-1/3 3-1/5

There is no 16' foundation, either flue or reed.

Rp Mixtuur V-VI:
C 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/6
G 1 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4
c0 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/3
g0 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2
c' 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 2/3
g' 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 1
c'' 5-1/3 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 1/3
c'''5-1/3 4 2-2/3 2-2/3 2 2

The same...

Rp Cimbel III:
C 3/16 3/20 1/8
F 1/4 1/5 1/6
c0 3/8 3/10 1/4
f0 1/2 2/5 1/3
c' 3/4 3/5 1/2
f' 1 4/5 2/3
c'' 1-1/2 1-1/5 1
f'' 2 1-3/5 1-1/3
c'''3 2-2/5 2

A ringing bell, not a mixture

Groot-Manuaal Tertiaan II:
C 4/5 2/3
c0 1-3/5 1-1/3
c' 3-1/5 2-2/3

Gm Mixtuur VI:
C 1 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/4
G 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/3
c0 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/2
g0 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 2/3
c' 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 1
g' 5-1/3 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1-1/3
c'' 5-1/3 4 2-2/3 2-2/3 2 2

Notice the low mixture: no 1 1/3 ranks in the treble

Bovenwerk Sexquialtera II:
(same as Rugpositief)

Again, there is no 16' stop on this department...

Bw Scherp IV:
C 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/6
G 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4
c0 1 2/3 1/2 1/3
g0 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2
c' 2 1-1/3 1 2/3
g' 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1
c'' 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3

Bw Cimbel III:
(same as Rugpositief)

Another zimbelstern

Pedaal Ruyschpyp III:
2-2/3 2 1-1/3 throughout

Ped Mixtuur VIII:
C 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/6 1/6
G 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/4 1/4
c0 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/3 1/3
g0 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 2/3 1/2 1/2
c' 4 2-2/3 2 1-1/3 1 1 2/3 2/3

Beautiful pedal mixture; and the 16' posaune (Trombone) is a marvel. Also, there is a 24' combination tone (an accoustical 64')

This means a plenum (16') oriented planning of the organ, with Haupwerk/Rückpositiv/Bovenwerk coupling.

Quite difficult to make out if you mean to play Bach (and quite impossible with Buxtehude and previous music). Of course, if you accept, as many do, that "organo pleno" means a 16' manual plenum (as I think it does with Bach, trompet 16 included) and 32' in the pedal (in this instance, an awesome resultant 64'), you might like it. But how to use this in a choral?

I personally think Bach would like the mixtures of the Haupwtwerk (with the Rauschpfeiffe), but I strongly doubt he would accept the 16' sexquialteras and terzians.

Anyway, any attempt to call this a 'Schnitger-organ' is misleading. The mixtures of Arp Schnitger are quite different (8' plus Quintatön 16' or Principal 16' oriented) and they are higher (usually 1 1/3 in the treble, with several 1 1/3 ranks).

Here is the overall organ composition:

RUGPOSITIEF (I)

8' Praestant I-II 1645/1725/1782
8' Quintadena 1645/1782/1986
4' Octaav 1725
4' Fluit 1645/1725, with chimneys
3' Quintfluit 1645/1983, cylindrical
3' Nasaat 1725, conical
2' Superoctaav 1725
2' Waldfluit 1645/1725/1986
1 1/2' Quintanus 1725/1986
II Sexquialtera 1725, 1 1/3'
V-VI Mixtuur 1725, 2/3'
III Cimbel 1725, 1/5'
8' Trompet 1725/1782
8' Fagot 1725
8' Vox humana 1725
Tremulant

One would expect the Fagot to be 16' or a Quintadena 16'. Anyway, not a 16' mixture and sexquialter... Solos are available only with flutes and reeds. The Praestant 8 I-II is rather strong, and this is a Dutch tradition. Usually quite beautiful when used solo.

GROOT-MANUAAL (Hoofdwerk; II)

16' Praestant 1645, C-F# stopped, from G in facade
8' Praestant 1645
6' Praestantquint 1645/1782/1986
4' Octaav 1645
3' Quinta 1986
2' Octaav 1645
2' Flachfluit 1645/1725, C-B stopped, rest cylindrical
II Ruyschpyp 1645/1725, 2'+ 1 1/3'
II Tertiaan 1725, 4/5'
VI Mixtuur 1986, 1'
16' Trompet 1725
8' Viool di Gamba 1725 (reed)
4' Trompet 1725/1986

This means the trompet 8' must come from either the Rp or the BW. An indication this is a coupling organ. And what function has the Flachflöte 2'? Clearly a 16' oriented plenum. You cannot really use the octave 8 as a foundation stop.

BOVENWERK (III)

8' Praestant 1645
8' Baarpijp 1685
8' Rohrfluit 1725
8' Quintadena 1645/1725
4' Octaav 1645/1725
4' Fluit dous 1645/1725, stopped
3' Spitsfluit 1725, conical
2' Superoctaav 1645
2' Speelfluit 1725, conical
II Sexquialtera 1725, 1 1/3'
IV Scherp 1725, 1/2'
III Cimbel 1725, 1/5'
8' Trompet 1725
8' Hautbois 1725
8' Vox humana 1725
Tremulant

Except for the sexquialter and the cymbel, this is a normal 8' plenum werk. You can also have a good and beautiful solo, either with flute chorus or the Vox humana plus Octave 4' and tremulant. The Sexquialter 16' is a clear indication it is meant to be coupled to the 16' plenum.

PEDAAL

22' Principaal 1645, sounds 21 1/3' G on C, 64' resultant
16' Praestant 1645
12' Rohrquint 1645/1725/1782/1986
8' Octaav 1645
6' Quinta 1645/1725/1986
4' Octaav 1645
2' Nachthorn 1725, narrow-scale, with chimneys, quite strong, and not flute like at all: a plenum stop.
III Ruyschpyp 1725, 3'
VIII Mixtuur 1725/1986
16' Basuin 1725 (= Posaune)
8' Trompet 1725
4' Trompet 1725
2' Cornet 1725

A monsters 64'. But quite beautiful. A marvelous Basuin 16'.

COUPLERS

RP/GM, BW/GM, BW/RP (original!), RP/P (added), GM/P (added). This means the plenum, from the beginning, was meant to be played with all the werks coupled on the Rp. It also means there is no autonomous Rp plenum. Quite unlike Arp Schnitger.

In case you did not notice it, the cymbels are just a sort of replacement of the zimbelstern... Not usable in normal music making because they are accoustically wrong... A weird organ indeed.

I'll post further on harpsichord (although post-festum, I agree), and on Walcha and his toucher technique.

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS

Thank you very much for kindly sending me the complete dispositionlist of the Alkmaar organ as well as your small useful comments, enabling me to listen to it with more analytical ears.
I have never heard the organ live and listening to a recording about 40 years old should otherwise result in much more guesswork. I think that Erich Thienhaus is to blame a bit, because the mikes are so close to the Rp, and the recording so shrill, that the annoying character of some of the RP-stops is intensified. This applies to the sesquialtera but also to the Superoctav. Perhaps these things could have been modified with more clever enginering. But as you probably know, when recording Walchas Ammer harpsichord, Thienhaus placed the mikes just beneath the sounding board, resulting in an actual rather aggressive sound.So his style was close sound.

By the way, why Walcha never published his registrations is a mystery to me. Think of how readily Marie-Claire Alain, Lionel Rogg and Gerhard Weinberger fx publish all details. Perhaps Walcha was afraid of being accused of not being a scholar, but
on the other hand, why did he publish his articulation-rules, running the same risk? All the same, I am wery interested to read them, and if you prefer to send them with post, I can write my address to you via Zerogains e-mailfunction.

Back to Walcas registrations: In the dorian Toccata I suppose the following: HW 8F plenum to mixtures alternating with RP "plenum" with sesquialtera. Fugue starting on RP plenum
founded on Trumpet 8F, later HW 16F plenum to mixtures, and at
last HW and RP coupled, perhaps with some more mixtures from OW - the sound is wery sharp. Pedal 16F plenum all through, I am not sure if he uses the fake 32F, and I dont think he uses the fake 64F.

Thank again for you very interesting and informative post, I
have much to learn from you.

Venlig hilsen

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS
PS:
Schnitger and Schnitger are many things - just as Silbermann.
I understand that F C Schnitger was responsible for the low sesquialteras and the low tertian (1725). But why did he make it in that way?
Venlig hilsen

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear pe-zulu:

I am very pressed for time, so I'll answer fully as soon as I can. The registration of the doric fugue has been a mystery for me from boyhood... I'll give it a hard listen asap.

I tried to pm you, but I failed. So if you would be so kind as to pm me your address, I'll send you a copy. The odd thing is, he actually published his registrations (all very piquant as expected) for the Dreikönigsorgel. He also published them in his edition of the Art of Fugue (which I don't have - it is actually simpler to play it without the pedals as there is no pedal line and one has to have an acrobatic foot technique).

The beauty of these fora is that we all learn from each other: your posts have tought me a lot - I thought your analysis of Walcha’s technique was masterful -, and most regulars here know a lot - I have learnt from all of them.

I only wish I could be a more devoted poster - as I was some time ago. But at this moment, there are so many problems and tasks to sort out that I can hardly visit here. Anyway, I will reply fully to your thought provoking posts (and to everybody else's, of course - but we seem to be in the same vein of musical preferences).

Thank you for your words and posts.

[bat]

Dear experts
Very interesting posts. Chronic lack of time here, too. Maybe quitting classical completely would release some time for other purposes? Music is like gourmet food - you can have too much. I just listened to Rainer Oster's St Jacobi recording of Doric Toccata und Fuge. The last minute of the Fuge is spectacular as Oster makes use of the 32' Principal - it is not a motorcycle but a V12 engine. I wish I had a subwoofer!

[bat]

The hands down greatest Bach organ set of all has yet to be mentioned... Hans Fagius's (17 CDs)

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat

Oster is a favorit of mine. The Dorian fugue is played rather slow with dignity and authority, Bach might have liked it so. The Dorian Toccata though a little disappointing, too fast and a little nervous in character.
The other works on the same CD are wery fine too. The BWV 547
Fugue also played with HW 16F Plenum and PED 32F plenum. On a marvellous organ - to say the least.

Oster recorded at the same time on the same organ a CD with works of Buxtehude. This stands well up to the BachCD, con-taining almost exclusively free organworks, ending with the dramatic Toccata d-minor (Buxtehude!) played really exciting. And again: A marvellous organ. If you dont know it, get it, it is worth every penny.

I know the Bach set of Hans Fagius wery well, and I like it much.
It does not include Die Kunst der Fuge, which he recorded later on an organ in Copenhagen.

But what about Wolfgang Stockmeier, nobody has said a word about him, and there are many others.

Venlig hilsen

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Fagius:

I know his records well. Very sober but very efficient. A very good set. His Art of Fugue is perhaps not quite on the same league as Walcha's. I think I briefly reviewed it in this forum. If I find it I'll post a link.

I ordered the Oster records today. I'll report later.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

I think it is here (http://www.zerogain.com/forum/showthread.php?t=117)

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS
Despite all Walchas wrong details I find only two organists in the same league when it is about Die Kunst der Fuge, and these are Marie -Claire Alain (both recordings) and Wolfgang Rübsam
(both recordings). Even if I regard Die Kunst best suited for organ performance, I al in all prefer the recording of Leonhardt
(his second recording DHM).
I know the recording of Fagius, a little cold i think, in contrast to the glowing performances of Walcha and especially Rübsam I.

Venlig hilsen

[bat]

Fagius may be cold but in my opinion it is cool, pure Bach, I mean that his style really suits Bach, for example the first trio sonata (at the Cahman organ) is beautiful beyond words. I have heard Fagius play the Leipzig chorale preludes live in 1991, he is an impressive artist and I shall never forget that I heard that concert. About Rübsam's Naxos records there are horror stories in the web... I had once his (Naxos) Die Kunst der Fuge records which I quickly traded in... they were S-L-O-W, perhaps I should have taken diazepame or something first. Maybe pe-zulu means that he likes Rübsam's earlier Philips recordings?

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Pe-Zulu:

It is difficult to say which I like most. If I would be really pressed for it, I'd say Gilbert. Only, his version is different from the BWV 1080... Interesting, but many differences and we lack the marvelous counterpoint IV and, of course, the last fugue (I have an obsession with that! After having read the 'fragment x' theory of Ch. Wolff, I even dreamt about it).

[Rodrigo de Sá]

OSTER RECORDS

I listened to the Buxtehude closely. I was a bit disapointed with the e-minor chaconne, but then as I played it (I mean, I really studied it, to the point of performing it live) that is only natural, because I have very strong views on it, and he plays it in a totally different way. The abrupt phrasing at first sounded a little strange (somewhat like Goebel) but as I grew accoustumed to it I really began to enjoy the recordings. The f#minor Prelude is incredible. I was explaining it to my wife and I stood up to comment on the registration: I just froze and listened until the end.

The Bach is also good, but I was interrupted and so did not get a clear picture. I'll listen to it today if I can.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Mmm... The Bach record I bought is not the same Pe-Zulu mentioned. It has the D major Prelude, A minor Concerto, the C major tocata, a few chorales and the 6th triosonata. The specification of the organ is not given.

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS

The OsterCD you mention is his first for ArteNova, played on a (to me) unknown Mühlheisen-organ. The one I mentioned is his second for ArteNova played on the Schnitger,Sct.Jacobi,Hamburg and contains BWV 547,590,572,527,545 (with the 2. movement of 529 in the middle ,654 and 538. Arte Nova 74321 63644-2. Both are in my opinion very good, but the HamburgCD the most personal and expressive . Add to this the splendid organ. Osters frasing and agogics reminds of Rübsam (Philips-set 1977), I think Oster learnt it from him.

The missing last fuge is of course also the sad point in Leonardts Kunst der Fuge for DHM, but it is included in his recording for Amadeo(1952) reedited by Vanguard. This older recording is
more calm and more legato than the newer, so I prefer the newer.

Venlig hilsen

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat

I know Fagius´ complete Bachcycle wery well, and I would not call him very cool on the basis of this, but his Kunst der Fuge, recorded ten years later on a modern organ is disappointing in content in relation to his complete set.

Bach is not cool at all, even if many performers seem to think so, stressing the intellectual part of the music. But listen to Wolfgang Rübsams first integral (Philips) or Marie-Claire Alains
second integral(1980) or third integral(ca 1992), or Anton Heiller, and it is clear, that Bachs music is much more . In my opinion it contains the ideal synthesis between intellect and emotion, and constitutes a bridge over the gap between our cerebral and physical nature. You must be able to listen to Bachs music with both parts of the brain at the same time to experience his true greatness.

Rübsams second integral for Naxos is not radical different from his first integral, but it is more reflective, with attention to all details ( the slower tempo to realize that), without loosing the overall view, and it deserves great contration from the part of the listener, but what a wonderful journey through the music. You are left in no doubt that Rübsam really loves this music, like Marie-Claire Alain, an they are both instrumental in transmitting this passion to us.

Venlig hilsen

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS
See page 4 of this thread.
Venlig hilsen

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear RdS
See page 4 of this thread.
Venlig hilsen

Dear Pe-Zulu:

Thank you (I suppose you mean the Arte Nova record). I can't seem to get it from amazon... I'll search a little more.

P.S.: I agree about Anton Heiller: He was one of the great Bach organists of last Century. I have a few CDs by him (4, I think) and he is indeed brilliant. His Leipziger Chorales are amont the very best, IMO.

[bat]

At least amazon.de has the Oster CD. The Finn Håkan Wikman recorded also a CD with the Jacobi which includes the Doric toccata & fuge. It is fun to compare that one with Oster (if you really have the time)

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat

Incidentally Ton Koopman has also recorded the Dorian on the Jacobi-organ (a part of his integral for Teldec).

As to Wikman: I own his Kunst der Fuge, and always wanted to hear his Dorian, since I read about it some time ago. Do you know where to get it.

Venlig hilsen

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat

I just found the Wikman-Cd at Amazon.de, and ordered it instantly (as well as the Perotin/HilliardCD).
Thanks for mentioning Wikman.

Venlig hilsen

[bat]

I know the Perotin record, Viderunt omnes is great, the rest is not as good.
Is anyone else familiar with van Oortmerssen's Bach organ records? If I had to choose something with me to that desert island, or nuthouse, just now I would choose the Fagius set, those 7 van Oortmerssen CDs and some Sibelius. And Wagner! And the Who! Happy with (Walcha-influenced?) Wikman? At least his Dorian toccata isn't rushed.

[pe-zulu]

Dear Bat

Viderunt Omnes SHOULD be the best, it is surely the best from the hand of Perotin, even if Sederunt Principes is only a little inferior . I will find out , when I get it.

I have one van Oortmerssen Cd, the one from Roskilde (hurrah-here in Denmark, wonderful restored organ) containing among others the Dorian. I find him a little dry, and find Fagius much more inspired. If there were no Alain and Rübsam,I surely would prefer Fagius and Heiller(but not Fagius´Kunst der Fuge).
I like Wikmans Kunst der Fuge, it is really natural and unfussy, not like typical Walcha, but I must add, that Walchas Kunst der Fuge is more emotional and expressive than Walcha uses to be. Indeed I find it mandatory for anyone interested in Kunst der Fuge. I am very curious to hear Wikmans Dorian.
So I have to wait untill I receive it.

Venlig hilsen

[pe-zulu]

I have now listened to parts of this (Helmut Walcha Bach integrale MONO) Doc bargain release

http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/detail/-/hnum/6348063/rk/classic/rsk/hitlist

and compared it to the (about two years old) Archiv reissue as well as to the original LPs from the 1950es, of which I own a major part.

The source material for the latest bargain release from Doc can´t be the LPs, but seems to be the two years old Archiv release. This ( the Archive)has certainly got more transparency than the original LPs, and more presence. The Doc release is very similar (only the grouping of the works on the individual CDs differs), but I think a discrete amount of ambience also has been added, most notably in the pauses, where the reverberence "blows in the wind" a tad differently, and if it is teoretically unsatisfying, it is in practice not that bad, considering the extraordinary dry acoustics in the church of St. Peter and Paul in Cappel, which here have got some modification.

All in all the Doc release is very much more than full value for money, price only 10 Euro for 10CDs.

I can add, that Archiv in the 1970 released the Leipzig Chorales and Canonic Variations on two LPs in electronic stereo remastering, but the new Doc release is very much superior.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

RÜBSAM

Let me begin by characterizing, overall, his playing style. Even if I listened to his playing several times, I cannot overcome a sensation that the pieces do not breathe. This functions to perfection is such pieces as the Passacaglia, the Concerto in a (Vivaldi) or even the triosonatas, which sparkle and are very alive in long phrases.

In chorales, this may work, even if he takes quite a different approach to them. I chiefly mean the ornamental chorales, here (one of the voices plays the cantus, the other play a complex intertwining of voices.

On the whole they are all right. But I cannot understand the way in which he plays the flourishes. He seems to think of them in terms of a string of notes that rapidly lead to the main note. This I cannot understand: I tend to like the flourishes to be expressive.

Also, there is not a great deal of breathing between the phrases, and this bothers me, too. So, I would say that many of the big preludes and fugues are splendid, but I would like a more human or even mystical approach to the chorales.

Finally, I do not understand his articulations. The same phrase, in different voices, may be quite differently articulated – pa’ram’param’’pam or pararararam. I do not understand this. Finally, there are some cases where he clearly lets some voices go faster than the rest (when one voice is played in crotchets and the other in longer notes).

So there is a lot I do not like. This is odd. I think I did not understand his playing. It seems straightforward, but then there are odd things.

I must mention the organ he plays. It is a more or less organ reform movement organ: brigthish, with very small weight, even if the Great Organ is based on a Principal 16. But the octave 8 is so much stronger, that the plenum (16, 8, 4, 3, 2, Mixture, Cymbel) really seems an 8’ plenum, perhaps with a soft bourdon 16. This I must say I detest: it only muddles the sound and does not in fact lower the octave. It is senseless to build a Principal 16 in this way: a Bourdon would have sufficed and it is much cheaper to build, and a quintadena would be better. The pedals are stronger, but, even if there is a subquint present (12 or, more exactly, 10 2/3), the trombones are, as Bach would put it “overweak”.

But this is not my main criticism: the organ is, to my taste, ugly. There is no colour: everything is grey, even the flutes and the reeds. There is an interesting 8, 4, 2 flute chorus in the Brustwerk, but otherwise it is all grey. Even the Ranckett 16 is colourless.

On the plus side, the organ is rather precise: all ranks are quick speaking. Again, a plus in the plenum pieces, a very definite minus in the subtler ones.

Having listened to these records, I might have said that I hoped that I could listen to more recent records. Well, this puzzles me even more, because the recent records of Rübsam are completely different. I plainly do not understand them. So, probably, I did not understand Rübsam’s old recordings too. The problem is that I did listen repeatedly to them, so I really do not know what to think.

Some thoughts?

[bat]

About those old Cappel recordings: the instrument is unaltered (?) Arp Schnitger, but somehow we still don't know how the Schnitgers were meant to sound?

[Rodrigo de Sá]

The instrument was altered, but not very much. We do know, in general terms, how the Schnitgers sounded. Only, there are many kinds of Shcnitger, because he used previous pipework very often.

It seems that his interventions on new organs almost always reinforced the mixtures and the low pedal range.

There is a very interesting comment in Audsley (I can find the exact reference) in which, during the 18th Century, an Englishmen visited Hambourg and compared three organs: Reinken's Katharinenkirche; St.Nicolai (Schnitger, Vincent Lübeck's organ) and the huge Hildebrandt.

Hildebrandt's instrument was the most powerful; Katharinenkirche was brilliant and very quick - silvery. Schnitger's Nicolai was very dark, very powerful. One is bound to think of Ahrend's restoraution of ST Jacobi: it does sound deep and impressive, with a dark-red and gold sound. Ideal for Buxtehude, really.

His smaller organs are different. Principals are rather sweet but powerful; mixtures are always strong; the trombone is always very dark.

A specific feature of Schnitger's organs is that there is a very important element, the trompete plenum. In bigger organs, this is achieved by trumpet 16' plus octaves, aliquots and mixtures. In smaller organs the quintadenas 16 underscore the trompet line and the result is a rather dark sound, reedy and very powerful.

Another really interesting feature is that, usually, the positiv is actually more brilliant that the Werck (Great, or Haupt). The great (Manual II) may be coupled (and in big organs is intended to be coupled) to the brustwerk or the oberwerk (above the HW and behind the façade 16' pipes).

But even if one uses the couplers (HW+OW+BW) the sound is never as piercing as that of the positive. The positive cannot usually be coupled to the Haupwerk. There are no pedal couplers.

So: dark sounding, rather cavernous, strong, against all the piercing Sharffs of the positive.

[pe-zulu]

Dear RdS

Interesting comments about Rübsam. I can see your point much of the time but not all the time. And I think, it is a matter of taste more than of understanding, - if you like him or not.

What fascinates me is the great variation in the conception from one organist to another, and all have some important to say in their own way.

In my opinion Rübsam views Bachs organ music from the rethorical angle. And he looks at most of the music as instrumental music (chamber music) for organ, and not as vocal music for organ. This is surely the reason why he phrases shorter than e.g. Walcha, but I don´t know of any golden standard, so his point of view may be justified. He made this recording in the early hip- days, and all his choices are not necessarily lucky, much like the recordings of Leonhardt before 1965. I think his articulation is very chamber music like in general. I would forgive him a few inconsistencies; almost all organists are a bit fallible in this question. His way of treating flourishes in chorales is very rethorical, but it can´t be named inexpressive for that reason. I think he demonstrates that expressivity is possible without dwelling much on the notes. This is another kind of expressivity, but it talks (pun intended) to me as much as the more singing kind.

Trying to get through my listening pile, I haven´t listened to Rübsam for some time, but yesterday I listened to his AoF. The force of suggestion is strong, and indeed I found some of the Contrapuncti a bit rushed, especially Cpt. I and X. As if he has choosen an uncomfortable fast tempo and isn´t able to realise his intentions fully. His registrations on the other hand I find very convincing in the AoF, using the organ most often as some sort of chamber organ (predominantly 8F and 4F). I consider the AoF to be a harpsichord work, which can be played on organ, and should be played on a small organ, without - or at least with discreet - use of the pedal.

Surely the Metzler organ lacks both character and gravity, and it is for that reason relatively unsuited to Bachs great free organ works. I think the AoF and the Triosonatas and the intime Chorals work sufficiently well on this organ as to balance, but even here the lack of character is annoying. Many of these so called neo-baroque organs from Metzler as well as Marcussen and modern German builders seem to lack character and individuality. Of course they haven´t got any patina yet. I suppose that Arp Schnitgers organs also lacked patina when they were newly-built, but they certainly didn´t lack character. Sometimes though I find the distinction between patina and character vague, when it is about old restored organs.

Regards,

[revahi]

What I really wanted to do was to start a new thread in this class but I cannot.
Does anyone know where I can buy the above?

[pe-zulu]

Revahi,
wellcome to the forum.
Have you got any particular interpretation of the BWV 565 in mind?

[bat]

One possibility is Kevin Bowyer's first disc of his long Bach cycle, on Marcussen organ - fine recorded sound!

[Rodrigo de Sá]

A short post on the Hildebrandt organ built, it is said, to Bach's specifications and that we know that he liked (Naumburg, Wenzelkirche).

Pe-zulu pointed the record to me: Elisabeth Ullman. There is a magnificent doric Toccata, but for the rest the record is a bit boring.

This is because the organ lacks refinement. It is strong, but does not have enough color and most stop combinations just fail to excite. It is as if Hildebrandt tried to promote volume but did not really care for beauty of tone.

The organ is precise - I mean, the stops speak promptly, but even the flutes are coarse.

Which brings me to one of my deepest doubts concerning Bach.

Did he have a good hear for timbre? I somewhat doubt it. I say this because, in most of his organ works, he does not seem to rely on color or on the sheer beauty of sound. What he wrote for organ may very well be played in the orchestra. The same almost applies to his harpsichord music.

Buxtehude knew how to compose for the organ: his works offer the most staggering possibilities, as Vogel, for instance, has noted. In Bach this is not the case: a couple of principals, a sexquialtera, perhaps a trumpet or a Fagot and normal fluework are quite enough to play all his lighter chorales. For Preludes and Fugues, it seems to me that a plenum is sufficient, perhaps with a secondary one.

We know he liked strong mixtures (he considered Silbermann's mixtures 'overweak') and very deep sound (32' range). So are we to play his works with a 16' plenum in the manuals and a 32' in the pedals? It may be done... And I often think 'why not'?

Emmanuel Bach said that no one could draw the stops as he did, but I really am not convinced. Perhaps he just used fuller registrations than usual (this is borne out by the critique made to his son's playing: the church council feared that he had broken the organ...) and the liberal use of reeds (which was not customary in central Germany: see Adlung and such advice).

With harpsichords the same thing seems to be implied. The Mietkes he affectioned seem to sound rather horrible, flat and dull (but reconstructions of the Mietkes are based on guesswork because we do not know how they were strung). He liked a 16' tone in the harpsichord, too - again a strong, heavy, tone.

He was said to play the violin with a penetrating tone: again, clarity and strength..

So, did Bach prefer sheer brute amount of sound over beauty and delicacy?

[Marc]

So, did Bach prefer sheer brute amount of sound over beauty and delicacy?

Interesting question, but unfortunately I don't know anything really about the organ and about organ playing. But, who knows, that might change because I do have some acquaintances who play the organ, and they will be paying me a visit somewhere in august. Something to look foward to, we'll be listening to some organ CD's, I guess.

Nevertheless, maybe it's possible to ask your final question regarding Bach's total work?

Was Bach aiming for beauty and delicacy, in the way we are used to regard this nowadays?

Should the violoncello suites be played like Rostropovich or like Anner Bylsma? Bylsma finally decided that the way Anna Magdalena Bach (only her copy of the works survived) is asking the cellist to play the phrases is correct, while almost every other interpreter considers them as 'wrong' and 'ugly', caused by the 'fact' that she had to write it down in a hurry, and wasn't secure enough. Bylsma wrote a book about his research: Bach, the fencing master.

Should the cantates be performed like Herreweghe or like Harnoncourt?
Harnoncourt also wrote a disputed book about baroque music: Musik als Klangrede. The problem with this book is that he doesn't say where he assembled his ideas from. Harnoncourt claims that in the late baroque, music melodic lines were approached in a more fragmentary way, because music really was 'speaking in notes'. Consequently this meant avoiding legato lines by using heavy accents, dividing long phrases into many short ones, allowing sudden stops at the end of each little melodic phrase, which resulted in final notes that are almost inaudible, and many other 'non-beautiful' things.
Harnoncourt stated that we should perform Bach's music like it is some kind of a speech, instead play it like it is some kind of a painting. The latter way of playing is a 19th-century approach.

I remember on another forum a discussion about the cantatas, and people were complaining about the Leonhardt/Harnoncourt set: it doesn't sound melodic, it doesn't sound beautiful. Other members of that forum asked: are you sure they are supposed to sound like that?

Is it possible that Bach's penetrating tone is just the way music was played in the late Baroque, as Harnoncourt claims? Does this also mean that it is correct that the organ is precise, the stops speak promptly and the flutes are coarse?

And do we really have to care about that, when listening to Bach? Or do we agree with people like Herreweghe and Koopman, who decided to mingle the lessons of Leonhardt and Harnoncourt with their own views about melodic lines? Which means that their performances are more singing like the way we are used to sing nowadays?

[pe-zulu]

Dear Rodrigo

It is true, that it is possible to grow ear-tired of the insistent plenum sound in Bachs great organ works. But the dogme, which forbids changing of registration during one piece, shouldn´t forbid changing of manuals with contrasting plenum sounds during the playing. I think the problem is, that we tend to listen to too many great organ works in one sitting, whether at home or at recitals. But probably like you, I get more ear-tired by one hour of Naumburg plenum than by one hour of Ponitz plenum or Sct.Jacobi, Lübeck plenum. By the way I find many places in Bachs music, which ask for more delicate instrumental timbre e.g. the organ Triosonatas, much of the violin-harpsichord sonatas, many movements in the Cantates. But he certainly doesn´t ask for delicate timbre in the romantic style (much vibrato, excess of changing dynamic effects or almost inaudible pppp). But I don´t miss it. I generally prefer my Bach to be played audible and clearly articulated.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

If we take baroque painting and decoration as indications of the kind of movement that ws in fashion at the time, Harnoncourt is dead wrong.

During the 50ies the aesthetic was glass and steel. You can listen to it in Boulez, and also in the way Walcha played - it is not for nothing that he was so popular then.

Baroque aesthetics is all about curves and ruptures. This is very clear in Buxtehude or Froberger.

With Bach, flow is certainly present - you need only to see his monogram - and rupture is nowhere to be found. Also, he professed a cantabile style and his contemporaries described the way he played as legato. This does not necessarily mean legato in the romantic sense - I take it as flowing. Indeed, you cannot very well play Bach legato on an old keyboard because the hand must shift every so often, but you can give it a sense of flow. Gilbert is a master at such and he has very small hands.

As pe-zulu said, I too don't like overly romantic playing, even if I can love certain Karl Richter interpretations (his first St. Matthew, for instance). I detest too much vibrato, I don't even like the sound of piano playing Bach, and I much prefer a good 18th century organ over a romantic one.

But still, the Naumburg sound is ugly even without mixtures. Even flutes are 'penetrating'.

Schnitger organs, in contrast, have many different colors (not so with Silbermann - but then I don't think I like Sibermann organs...), and the same may perhaps be said about Trost's. However, the link with Naumburg is strong and we know that Bach always suggested Hildebrandt as the organ builder. Perhaps it was a business arrangement, we don't know, but still...

Couperin (both), Clérambault and so on, knew how to make a harpsichord sound beautiful. Did Bach? Perhaps in the partitas and the suites one can find the answer: he did know, but usually chose not to. Music first, sound a second consideration?

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Interesting (http://www.soundfountain.com/amb/marieclairealain.html)

[tones]

Interesting (http://www.soundfountain.com/amb/marieclairealain.html)

Indeed. Not only a great musician but also a charming and gracious person. When she visited Melbourne some years ago, the rather small Organ Society of Victoria (an acquaintance was a member) asked her if she would be the guest of honour at a dinner. Not only did she accept, but she was also a delightful guest. The membership took some time to come back to earth.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

I unfortunately never met her. I saw her play a couple of times, but I never had the chance to actually meet her. I would have loved to tell her about the many moving and even exhilarating moments her records afforded me. But then I would only be repeating what many people already told her, and I doubt I would have the nerve to speak so freely about emotions.

From her playing and from the interviews I have read, she seems a very kind, very human and very true person.

There was a very long interview in Diapason about 10 years ago, which was very moving because of her absolute candour.

When playing Bach (her Buxtehude doesn't really convince me) she infuses the music with humanity – Christian humanity – which is absent in all other major players. I find this a plus, as I do not really think Bach was a mystic. For such emotions we have to go back to the 17th or 16th Centuries (not mentioning the Middle Ages).

I will venture to say that, among all the great performers, she seems to be more at ease with Bach: she just expresses Bach through herself, no masks, no cognitive a priori: just the music, seen by a humble person who thinks Bach should be heard and not her.

[Griffy]

Just bought this and love it!

http://hmv.com/hmvweb/displayProductDetails.do?ctx=280;-1;-1;-1;-1&sku=864353

Any recommendations for more organ music on cd that I can easily buy in the UK?

[Marc]

Any recommendations for more organ music on cd that I can easily buy in the UK?

Sorry for this late reaction. Haven't visited this thread for a long while.

If you're still visiting the forum, maybe you want to take a look at this one (2cd-set with organ works of Bach):
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Organ-Masterpieces-2CDs-Johann-Sebastian/dp/B00005BIK3

Here's a review:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classRev/2001/Aug01/bachorganmasterpieces.htm

One mistake in the review: the Dreifältigkeits organ in Ottobeuren is not Dutch, but German.

There are also many interesting samplers of Bach works, f.i. played by famous organ players like Helmut Walcha (Bach: Great Organ Works, 2cd, Deutsche Grammophon) and Lionel Rogg (Bach: Preludes, Toccatas and Fugues for Organ, 2cd, EMI Classics - Gemini).
Hope you'll find something interesting!

[Marc]

Right now I'm listening to the Trio Sonatas, played by Marie-Claire Alain on the Schnitger-organ in the Der Aa Kerk, Groningen, Netherlands.

B-e-a-u-t-i-f-u-l s-o-u-n-d!

:)

And I already was in a certain blessed mood, because I backed the 100/1 winner of the Grand National last saturday!

:redrum:

:D

[Marc]

Any recommendations for more organ music on cd that I can easily buy in the UK?

Sorry for this late reaction. Haven't visited this thread for a long while.

If you're still visiting the forum, maybe you want to take a look at this one (2cd-set with organ works of Bach):
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Organ-Masterpieces-2CDs-Johann-Sebastian/dp/B00005BIK3

Here's a review:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classRev/2001/Aug01/bachorganmasterpieces.htm

One mistake in the review: the Dreifältigkeits organ in Ottobeuren is not Dutch, but German.

There are also many interesting samplers of Bach works, f.i. played by famous organ players like Helmut Walcha (Bach: Great Organ Works, 2cd, Deutsche Grammophon) and Lionel Rogg (Bach: Preludes, Toccatas and Fugues for Organ, 2cd, EMI Classics - Gemini).
Hope you'll find something interesting!

Another very late reaction: maybe this site would be an idea to visit?
http://www.blockmrecords.org/bach/index.htm

Free downloads of Bach organ works, sponsored by the University of Michigan School of Music, Theatre & Dance (a.o.).

[Brabo]

... I don't even like the sound of piano playing Bach ... Couperin (both), Clérambault and so on, knew how to make a harpsichord sound beautiful. Did Bach? Perhaps in the partitas and the suites one can find the answer: he did know, but usually chose not to. Music first, sound a second consideration?

Much as I like the primitive keyboards, such as the harpsichord, especially for contemporary music to the instruments, but once I heard Bach played on a pianoforte (and I can recommend Angela Hewitt on Hyperion) the colours Rodrigo seems to miss in Bach's keyboard works are all there. May I humbly suggest that he listens to pianoforte interpretations of Bach and perseveres a bit longer? It paid off for me after a while... I am sure that he will ultimately agree. Period organs is another matter, and I too prefer a Schnitger over a Silbermann for The Master.
Brabo

[Marc]

Hallo Brabo, welcome to the forum!
Hopefully we can bring back some 'life' to this thread.

BTW: I've listened to an awful (NO NO: splendid!) amount of Bach organ cd's for the last six months or so, and I still can't decide what performer or organ sound I prefer the most. I'm afraid that, when organ is concerned, I'm prepared to like almost anything.

Only thing I'm sure of: Michael Murray is boring. :SLEEP:

(Sorry, Michael.)

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Much as I like the primitive keyboards, such as the harpsichord, especially for contemporary music to the instruments, but once I heard Bach played on a pianoforte (and I can recommend Angela Hewitt on Hyperion) the colours Rodrigo seems to miss in Bach's keyboard works are all there. May I humbly suggest that he listens to pianoforte interpretations of Bach and perseveres a bit longer? It paid off for me after a while... I am sure that he will ultimately agree. Period organs is another matter, and I too prefer a Schnitger over a Silbermann for The Master.
Brabo

But I did persevere: to the point of buying several records and listening to Bach played in piano live.

I did not like Hewitt's version (I bought it, and then gave it to a friend) but the reason had mainly to do with an excess of expression (to many loudness progressions, which I find alien to Bach's music).

The problem I have with the piano is the lack of high harmonics. This lack of bite and brilliance has annoyed me from when I was a boy: I studied the piano but did not like it and that was the main reason I changed to the organ. Even at the organ I could never really find a gedackt beautiful, I always liked bright sound. Beautiful harpsichords were a revelation to me: even today, I cannot conceive of a more beautiful sound than that of a well regulated, bright and mean tone tuned harpsichord.

Now, I'm not teasing you, but in fact a Silbermann is a better choice for playing Bach than a Schnitger, the reason being that the very high and multi ranked mixtures do confound polyphony, whereas in a Silbermann all is clear. Silbermann principals, too, are much brighter than Schnither's, and much more polyphonic: to achieve the effect of a Silbermann principal 8 you must have principal+octava in a Schnitger.

Thank you for your comment.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Hallo Brabo, welcome to the forum!
Hopefully we can bring back some 'life' to this thread.

...
Only thing I'm sure of: Michael Murray is boring. :SLEEP:

(Sorry, Michael.)

Alas, yes. It seems he just plays the notes and makes every beat audible. I had many records by him and gave them all to a friend...

[pe-zulu]

But I did persevere: to the point of buying several records and listening to Bach played in piano live.


Well, I have done this several times, but every time I have regetted it. Either you get a romanticized Bach out of style, or an excentric Bach, or you get a "stylized" Bach, which on the other hand fast becomes boring because of the dull sound of the piano. Strange enough I have found, that the Bach keyboard work, which stands a stylized interpretation on piano (but not a romantic interpretation) the best, is The AoF.

[pe-zulu]

....a Silbermann is a better choice for playing Bach than a Schnitger, the reason being that the very high and multi ranked mixtures do confound polyphony, whereas in a Silbermann all is clear. Silbermann principals, too, are much brighter than Schnither's, and much more polyphonic: to achieve the effect of a Silbermann principal 8 you must have principal+octava in a Schnitger.


I think it depends somewhat upon which Bach-works you are thinking of. For the early works (eg BWV 532,535,565) which are cast in the Buxtehude idiom, Schnitger kind of instruments seem the natural choice IMO, whereas Silbermannn kind of instruments are more appropiate for the later works (eg Clavierübung III and BWV 544, 547, 548).

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Yes, of course you are right. The Buxtehude like pieces (which they are not: when copying Buxtehude Bach is a far lesser musician that the Dane) benefit from the high mixtures.

But in almost all of the fugues (and even in some of the preludes: I'm thinking of the great c minor, with the opening chords) a more homogeneous mixture makes the music much clearer.

Also, the big Silbermanns usually lack one or two ranks for Bach, but my preferred organ for Bach might be the Saint George organ, the one with the Bourdon on the Hauptwerk.

The large Trost organ that Olivier Vernet uses for the greater works seems to be very fine too. But perhaps it is too strong; and then there is the Hildebrandt (Wenselkirche, is it not?), but it has a somewhat coarse tone. Bach liked it, though.

[Marc]

I've listened to an awful (NO NO: splendid!) amount of Bach organ cd's for the last six months or so, and I still can't decide what performer or organ sound I prefer the most. I'm afraid that, when organ is concerned, I'm prepared to like almost anything.

Only thing I'm sure of: Michael Murray is boring. :SLEEP:

(Sorry, Michael.)

Alas, yes. It seems he just plays the notes and makes every beat audible. I had many records by him and gave them all to a friend...

Checked this site for the first time in about two months and lo .... our Forum Friend Rodrigo is back!
Happy to see you're still around. No matter if we agreed or not, I always read your contributions with great interest. I hope this forum will remain a place to do so, once in a while.

2009 is my organ year up to now, and I'm enjoying it intensely. And of course Bach's music plays an important role in that. It's still impossible to name my favourite organists or even compositions, but the last months I have been listening a lot to Ewald Kooiman (Coronata), Bram Beekman (Lindenberg Books & Music) and Piet Wiersma (EuroSound). They're all Dutch (yes, I'm a chauvinist 'pig' :p). Two of them are R.I.P. alas (Kooiman & Wiersma) and the discs are all officially OOP, but there are some lucky chances on the internet. I think these three are quite marvellous.
Another one I really begin to admire is Michael Murray's fellow countryman George Ritchie. Kooiman, Beekman and Ritchie are very straightforward IMHO, and that's what I seem to prefer. (But not in the way Murray plays, of course. His playing is lacking of any inch of poignancy.)
Wiersma brings in a welcome warmth of the barren North-Netherlands countryside of Groningen province. I know, it's a paradox, but .... this is my opinion, which I share. :D

Unfortunately, Wiersma died before he could finish his integral Bach in Groningen, and the discs were only distributed by the foundation Groningen Orgelland, which stands up for the preservation of the historic organs in the northern parts of the Netherlands. I've been so lucky to find 6 of the 7 volumes this year, and also got a copy of the long-time-OOP Volume 1.

But there are so many other names ... Walcha, Alain, Vernet, Stockmeier, Weinberger, Rübsam, Fagius, Koopman, Isoir, even E. Power Biggs ... they all have something to say in this immense and grand oeuvre. Luckilly, the oeuvre always wins. Even musicians that I appreciate less are still able to gain my attention, just because Bach's music is so wonderful.

One of my favourite pieces during the last weeks: BWV 533 in e minor. It's overwhelming, especially when the organist remains the pleno tension from the very start of the Fugue. This Fugue is a whirlpool, and I just love to drown in it. The piece works very well in spatial acoustics IMO, like Stanislas Deriemaeker playing the Metzler organ of the Onze Lieve Vrouwekathedraal in Antwerp.

[Marc]

Yes, of course you are right. The Buxtehude like pieces (which they are not: when copying Buxtehude Bach is a far lesser musician that the Dane) benefit from the high mixtures.

But in almost all of the fugues (and even in some of the preludes: I'm thinking of the great c minor, with the opening chords) a more homogeneous mixture makes the music much clearer.

Also, the big Silbermanns usually lack one or two ranks for Bach, but my preferred organ for Bach might be the Saint George organ, the one with the Bourdon on the Hauptwerk.

The large Trost organ that Olivier Vernet uses for the greater works seems to be very fine too. But perhaps it is too strong; and then there is the Hildebrandt (Wenselkirche, is it not?), but it has a somewhat coarse tone. Bach liked it, though.

Actually this is not a subject on which I should say too much. I'm still experiencing my own taste, so to speak. But .... I slightly prefer the expression of the Schnitgers. Although the Silbermanns have this 'granular' sound which is maybe more charming.

About homogenity: I've listen two times this summer to the local organist Wim van Beek at the Agricola/De Mare/Schnitger/Hinsz organ in the Martini church Groningen. Van Beek was quite impressive in creating a homogenuous polyphonic sound. More clearness in his playing compared to f.i. Bernard Foccroulle and Jacques van Oortmerssen, whose concerts I also attended in the Martini church and who were very good too, btw (no offense meant to them).

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Hello all

Just to set things in motion and to talk to you about a growing liking for Marie Claire Alain's Bach.

I've been trying to recapture the feeling I had for a given record when I was an adolescent. When I was a youngster, I dind't have any money (my parents were very strict) and all I managed to get (I used to translate texts and get some pay for it) went into books and records.

So when I bought a record, it was a real feast. I listened to it non stop for weeks on end, compared it to other discs and so on.

As I am experiencing some problems with my cd player (it will only play certain cds) I usually listen to the same cd over and over again, and the idea of recapturing the feeling of 'a new record' came to me.

I chose Marie Claire Alain's bach recordings from the late 80ies, in the Metzler in the Jesuit church in Lucerne and one of my all time favourites, the recording in the Schwenkedel organ in Saint Donat.

Those two records are, in my view, fabulous. I am yet to listen to a better rendering of the toccata and fugue in d, of the great g minor fugue (from the Fantasia, bwv 542), and of the great A minor Concerto.

I am always flabbergasted by the ease with which Alain is able to make the musical lines flow, with a subtle expression and concern about the harmonic whole, and also to the absolute marvel of listening to someone who chose to show Bach and not herself (and she could do it!).

Later I tried the last 'intégrale' (complete works) but most of the organs put me off. In Bach I prefer modern instruments, done according to the old tradition. Even the Silbermann organs are a bit either out of tune or uneven, (although I think that Silbermann principals and, in small churches, mixtures, are close to ideal for Bach; and also the extraordinary 16' Posaunenbass, unequaled in my taste).

So there are many seeds for argument here: Marie Claire Alain here (I will defend her if any of you chose to attack her) :) Also the choice of modern instruments for Bach playing; and the Silbermann sound itself.

I hope you take the bait! ;)

[Rodrigo de Sá]

And a ps to Marc. I didn't notice your two previous posts. I will just say that, in organ matters at least, you are quite right to be a chauvinist pig ;)

An I do understand what you say about the Plat-Pays warmth...

[Marc]

Hello all

Just to set things in motion and to talk to you about a growing liking for Marie Claire Alain's Bach.

I've been trying to recapture the feeling I had for a given record when I was an adolescent. When I was a youngster, I dind't have any money (my parents were very strict) and all I managed to get (I used to translate texts and get some pay for it) went into books and records.

So when I bought a record, it was a real feast. I listened to it non stop for weeks on end, compared it to other discs and so on.

As I am experiencing some problems with my cd player (it will only play certain cds) I usually listen to the same cd over and over again, and the idea of recapturing the feeling of 'a new record' came to me.

I chose Marie Claire Alain's bach recordings from the late 80ies, in the Metzler in the Jesuit church in Lucerne and one of my all time favourites, the recording in the Schwenkedel organ in Saint Donat.

Those two records are, in my view, fabulous. I am yet to listen to a better rendering of the toccata and fugue in d, of the great g minor fugue (from the Fantasia, bwv 542), and of the great A minor Concerto.

I am always flabbergasted by the ease with which Alain is able to make the musical lines flow, with a subtle expression and concern about the harmonic whole, and also to the absolute marvel of listening to someone who chose to show Bach and not herself (and she could do it!).

Later I tried the last 'intégrale' (complete works) but most of the organs put me off. In Bach I prefer modern instruments, done according to the old tradition. Even the Silbermann organs are a bit either out of tune or uneven, (although I think that Silbermann principals and, in small churches, mixtures, are close to ideal for Bach; and also the extraordinary 16' Posaunenbass, unequaled in my taste).

So there are many seeds for argument here: Marie Claire Alain here (I will defend her if any of you chose to attack her) :) Also the choice of modern instruments for Bach playing; and the Silbermann sound itself.

I hope you take the bait! ;)

Thread alive again! :cool:

I have to go to bed, Rodrigo, and I'm almost too tired to think, but who knows what the (nearby?) future will bring. :D

In short I would like to say this: it's funny you've mentioned Marie-Claire Alain's Schwenkedel recording of BWV 565, 578, 593, 542 and 582 (although it was first issued already in 1983, I do believe that's the one you're referring at). Why? Because that one happened to be my first organ vinyl purchase in my early studying years. After that, I taped it for my walkman and took it with me for many train & bus travelling.
I certainly tend to agree with your very positive remarks concerning the Vivaldi concerto arrangement in A minor. I absolutely love her performance in that one. I haven't listened to the disc for a while, but in general I do recall rather long closing chords in BWV 565, 542 and 582, which I didn't appreciate that much. Therefore I checked the library collection and finally decided to exchange listening to Alain with listening to Gustav Leonhardt, playing the historic Müller organ of the Amsterdam Waalse Kerk. Together with a sampler disc of E. Power Biggs (Flentrop's Harvard organ), those were probably the only three Bach organ recordings that I listened to for about 10 to 15 years. Well, I still think: it could have been worse. ;)

But now things have changed a little :o. I turned into a monomanic completist. With loads of favoured performers and only a few that I don't like at all .... if any. (This making my life very expensive, as you might understand.)

Post Scriptum: I forgot that in my younger years I also bought Rübsam's Naxos disc with the Schübler chorales et al, but in those days I absolutely disliked his playing. But in the last year I've grown more used to him. Although I've discovered I prefer the young Rübsam, during his Philips years, with a fresh sounding Bach integral that's alas been OOP for some years right now.

[pe-zulu]

Hello all

Just to set things in motion and to talk to you about a growing liking for Marie Claire Alain's Bach.


I chose Marie Claire Alain's bach recordings from the late 80ies, in the Metzler in the Jesuit church in Lucerne and one of my all time favourites, the recording in the Schwenkedel organ in Saint Donat.


Later I tried the last 'intégrale' (complete works) but most of the organs put me off. In Bach I prefer modern instruments, done according to the old tradition. Even the Silbermann organs are a bit either out of tune or uneven, (although I think that Silbermann principals and, in small churches, mixtures, are close to ideal for Bach; and also the extraordinary 16' Posaunenbass, unequaled in my taste).

So there are many seeds for argument here: Marie Claire Alain here (I will defend her if any of you chose to attack her) :) Also the choice of modern instruments for Bach playing; and the Silbermann sound itself.



Dear Rodrigo

I am certainly not going to argue with you about Marie-Claire Alain, and especially not about her second integrale, which by far surpasses the her first and third integrale. In the first integrale she had not yet found her own style, and the playing is often stiff and unmemorable, And in the third integrale her playing is less concentrated and accordingly more routinier. Though the third is memorable because of the use of some important historical organs. But relistening to the third yesterday told me, that her registrations are almost always too thick and heavy and that the engineering is a catastrophe, resulting in annoying and diffuse sound. Fortunately I have often heard these organs much better recorded.

But the question of modern organs contra well restored historical organs is another point. I will always prefer the latter. Of course modern organs lack patina, but they also lack character and especially the specific national character I associate with Bach´s organ music (North German / Middle German), in the same way which I associate Grigny´s music with French organ sound. Instead the modern usual Marcussen / Metzler organs have got an international and rather pale character, but it must be admitted, that they often sound very transparent and blend well and may be strictly in tune (equal - of course). Really the organ builders of to day are creating a completely new sound ideal, and of course it is possible to play Bach´s organ works historically informed on such organs, but I must admit that I prefer the sound of the historical instruments. And not necessarily the greatest of these. Most of Bach´s organ works sound best on relatively small organs. Theoretically the most transparent sound is created by a synthetisizer playing pure sinus waves. But would we like the sound even if the counterpoint could be heard impeccably?

Kindest regards,

[pe-zulu]

But now things have changed a little :o. I turned into a monomanic completist. With loads of favoured performers and only a few that I don't like at all .... if any. (This making my life very expensive, as you might understand.)


I do not hope, that my bad influence has got something to do with this.

:(:cool::):)

[Marc]

[....] the question of modern organs contra well restored historical organs is another point. I will always prefer the latter. Of course modern organs lack patina, but they also lack character and especially the specific national character I associate with Bach´s organ music (North German / Middle German), in the same way which I associate Grigny´s music with French organ sound. Instead the modern usual Marcussen / Metzler organs have got an international and rather pale character, but it must be admitted, that they often sound very transparent and blend well and may be strictly in tune (equal - of course). Really the organ builders of to day are creating a completely new sound ideal, and of course it is possible to play Bach´s organ works historically informed on such organs, but I must admit that I prefer the sound of the historical instruments. And not necessarily the greatest of these. Most of Bach´s organ works sound best on relatively small organs. Theoretically the most transparent sound is created by a synthetisizer playing pure sinus waves. But would we like the sound even if the counterpoint could be heard impeccably?

In general, I agree with this.
I admit I sometimes have to get used to the specific sound of one or another historic organ, but indeed in many cases the impact is more satisfying in the end. Therefore I'm able to listen to them for quite a long time. If i'm really in the mood: for hours and hours ....

OTOH: I like Rübsam's first integral (Philips/OOP) very much, but after one hour or so I'm getting kinda bored, and this has got nothing to do with his playing.

Some days ago a friend of mine was visiting da house, and he knows nothing about organ music, although he's always interested in other music to listen to. Especially now his son is playing keyboards, and developing himself rather skillfully.

I was in a very mild mood that evening and only served my guest BWV 533 (Kee, Van Hagerbeer/Schnitger, Alkmaar, NL) and - on his request - BWV 565 (Rübsam, Metzler, Frauenfeld, CH), both at a rather loud volume, despite the neighbours. Well, he certainly liked it! :D

But he also found the sound of the historic organ at the Laurenskerk in Alkmaar more striking than the Metzler instrument. The latter reminded him more of an electronic organ, which wasn't really a problem for him though .... again BWV 565 doing the trick. ;)

What is it with that piece? :rolleyes:

[Marc]

I do not hope, that my bad influence has got something to do with this.

:(:cool::):)

No. I'm a monomaniac by nature. :D

And your bad influence isn't costing me all that much .... ;)

It's just a matter of some self-discipline. Which means that I frequently turn to the library instead of some cd- or internet shop. :)

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Marc and dear pe-zulu:

Let’s start with the Alkmaar-Metzler comparison. Now of course I prefer the Alkmaar instrument. In fact, this particular organ has a character that I never found in other organs, even the ones by Arp Schnitger. The Mixtures, the unbelievable sexquialteras and perhaps, even more, the unique Posaune 16, all have a marvelous sound. But remember that the perfection you hear today was never heard in the past: the organ was somewhat problematic and if I am not mistaken (I may check) there was a plan to rebuild it.

But many historic organs are not enough for Bach. I don’t mean that the composition is wrong. It is the lack of perfection that bothers me. It may be that I am completely addicted to BAch’s music, and therefore feel it as ageless (well, not always), but it seems to me that, with a few exceptions, Bach never really composed for a given kind of sound, and therefore that the sound must be nice, beautiful (which for me means brilliant) but forgetable. In old organs it is impossible to forget about the sound, because of the irregularities, the wind problems and so on.
In Bach like organological perfect functioning, not organological conditioning of the music.

Therefore the Metzler would not have been my choice (I agree it is somewhat characterless), but the Schwenkedel is a marvel: brilliant, well voiced, quick, polyphonic.

In Grigny or Buxtehude this is completely different. They had specific instruments in mind when they composed; so Buxtehude’s music sounds best in a large Schnitger and Grigny’s in a large French 3+Pedal. As those musicians (chiefly Buxtehude) used actual sound effects (pauses for effect are obvious) we must use the kind of organ he wanted to have (we know it is a large Schnitger).

With Bach that doesn’t happen; we only know that he liked tuttis and a low sonority; he was said to like reeds and to have been creative in registation (did he use manual reeds in the tutti, which as usually proscribed? probably, as Buxtehude and Reiken certainly did; what other function can the 16 foot trompet in the Hauptwerk have?); he certainly used sexquialteras and flutes, probably the violas of his time. The only instrument that I know which is related to Bach’s influence is the Wenselkirche’s in Naumburg; it is not a very beautiful organ; impressive yes, but somewhat vulgar in tone; the plenum is rather good, even if it is somewhat coarse.

For me, Bach in a Müller sounds opaque (because of the Müller voicing, which I find a bit dull); in a cathedral Silbermann the manuals sound too soft (because of the mixtures, which were somewhat low); in a Schnitger, I feel the wind is not stable enough.

But there is also another fact. Current research claims that organs and harpsichords of the 18th Century were less brilliant than the early versions (and again, some early Dutch and German organs are not brilliant at all: the Frietsche’s are very ‘round’ in sound); the haprsichords are being reviewed. Modern iron strings make the sound less brilliant. We are currently experiencing (in harpsichords) the influence of a very questionable interpretation (because we really don’t know how they were strung) of how a Mietke sounded like (in its modern incarnations it sounds dull, for me); also, the Silbermann harpsichords are very odd: silvery and apparently not strong at all, not very brilliant.

So there is a tendency for a more fundamental sound either in harpsichord or organ building, which I very strongly dislike. This is a personal question. I like very brilliant but not forced sound. For me the beauty of a ringing chiffy principal and of a high mixture (I mean really high, possibly with the marvelous high thirds) is impossible to surpass; a thinly reeded regal marvels me; and I hate hollow or quinty sounds (from childhood I hated the clarinet). So I would like Bach (a-organological music, I think) to be played in perfect instruments with the kind of sound I love. Historic organs are too imperfect for Bach, they are not all that subtle and brilliant, and they sometimes make polyphony murky (I know polyphony was not really meant to be heard, but nevertheless I like to be able to spot the voices).

So there you are.

[Marc]

Rodrigo, you know so much more about the instruments and organ playing, that I would feel presumptuous to say much about this topic.

My feelings, as expressed before, are more general impressions after only 12 or 13 months of more or less thorough organ listening .... mainly cd's, and a few concerts here and there.

I would like to say this though (maybe I've mentioned something like it before): I wouldn't be surprised if it's also a matter of the musician's skill to make polyphony heard at historic instruments. I've been to about 6 or 7 concerts last year in the Martinikerk in Groningen, NL, and there were rather striking differences to be heard.

For instance: Jan Hage, who himself is organist of the Kloosterkerk, The Hague, and plays a 'modern' Marcussen organ there, wasn't really able to make Bach's polyphony clear in the Martinikerk. But Jacques van Oortmerssen (playing mainly historic organs all the time) and especially 'home-organist' Wim van Beek were. Maybe this was caused by the fact that the latter two are far more experienced with older instruments. Maybe it takes a serious amount of time to make such an instrument your 'own'.

I also once read the story about the spectacular American organist Virgil Fox, who flabbergasted his listeners with his Bach across the ocean, but once he came to Europe and tried to play a baroque instrument he utterly failed.

A modern instrument has got all kinds of tools which make life much more easier for the organist. Combined with a refined sound it is not hard to imagine that lots of musicians and listeners prefer such an instrument. But I have to admit: when I hear a tough old cookie ;) moaning and sighing during a piece like f.i. BWV 562, it really moves me whilst listening. To me, these sounds almost make the organ a living being .... but then again: to each and everyone his/her own.

BTW: I agree about the Schwenkedel that's played by Alain in some of her Bach discs. I like the sound of that one, too!

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Rodrigo, you know so much more about the instruments and organ playing, that I would feel presumptuous to say much about this topic.

My feelings, as expressed before, are more general impressions after only 12 or 13 months of more or less thorough organ listening .... mainly cd's, and a few concerts here and there.

I would like to say this though (maybe I've mentioned something like it before): I wouldn't be surprised if it's also a matter of the musician's skill to make polyphony heard at historic instruments. I've been to about 6 or 7 concerts last year in the Martinikerk in Groningen, NL, and there were rather striking differences to be heard.

For instance: Jan Hage, who himself is organist of the Kloosterkerk, The Hague, and plays a 'modern' Marcussen organ there, wasn't really able to make Bach's polyphony clear in the Martinikerk. But Jacques van Oortmerssen (playing mainly historic organs all the time) and especially 'home-organist' Wim van Beek were. Maybe this was caused by the fact that the latter two are far more experienced with older instruments. Maybe it takes a serious amount of time to make such an instrument your 'own'.

I also once read the story about the spectacular American organist Virgil Fox, who flabbergasted his listeners with his Bach across the ocean, but once he came to Europe and tried to play a baroque instrument he utterly failed.

A modern instrument has got all kinds of tools which make life much more easier for the organist. Combined with a refined sound it is not hard to imagine that lots of musicians and listeners prefer such an instrument. But I have to admit: when I hear a tough old cookie ;) moaning and sighing during a piece like f.i. BWV 562, it really moves me whilst listening. To me, these sounds almost make the organ a living being .... but then again: to each and everyone his/her own.

BTW: I agree about the Schwenkedel that's played by Alain in some of her Bach discs. I like the sound of that one, too!

How I envy you! You listen to the Martini organ when you like! Your remark is very cogent: an old organ must be induced to sound well. But then the Martini isn't exactly an old organ: the case is old, but it was almost built again by Ahrend. But that said, it is certainly true that old organs have to be learned. I am not speaking from experience, here. I did play old organs, but never for long enough to really know. But Marie Claire Alain says that one must adapt to old instruments and that the process is not automatic at all.

As for polyphony, it is true that if you play more or less legato in a Marcussen, the result will be good, whereas in an old organ, you often have to be more creative and experiment a lot.

Now I'd like to say that listening to the old organs trembling and almost moaning I feel impressed, too. But, again, not with Bach.

Let me say that, in terms of organ building, I am what might be called an iconoclast. It is all very well to have the Schnitgers, the Silbermanns, the Trosts. But we need to get out of this despairing trend that maintains that only the 17th Century methods are good.

With the advent of electronics and the computer chips I am almost certain that the mechanical action could be forgotten, that organists would be able to listen to what they are playing (I mean, the could sit not hidden from the sound but in the nave) and still modulate the sound from the keyboard, and I completely fail to see the so called advantages of the slider system made from oak when we have all the fabulous materials of a technological age. Also, I am not completely against the idea of Jean Guillou, that the Werkprinzip is dead.

This general approach applies to harpsichords, too, although I cannot really say what kind of experiments may be made (I know there were experiments with metal soundboards, but I don't know how they sound).

I am not being provocative, but I think my good friend pe-zulu will not agree with me! In fact, having listened to historical organs and marveled at their sound, most people think I am being either provocative or plain mad. I can understand, but, again to quote Jean Guillou (I read his book, L'orgue: souvernir et avenir 30 years ago and it did impress me, and later had the rare chance of talking with him). But the organ community is extremely conservative...

P.S.: Edited to add. American organists are used to electric keyboards that are as light or lighter than a harpsichord's, to perfect wind and to an extremely homogeneous voicing. When they play old European organs they cannot get used to irregular and heavy keyboards, unstable wind and even, sometimes, to the siting height of the benches. Apart from Brumbaugh and a few others, America is another planet concerning organs. This from an organist friend who toured thorugh America.

[pe-zulu]

Dear Rodrigo

From where do you know, that Bach did not have a specific organ sound in mind for his organ works? Why should he distinguish himself from e.g. Buxtehude and de Grigny in that respect?

My earliest experience with Bachs organ works (as well as the organ works of other baroque composers) was not through recordings but by several organ recitals in and around Copenhagen mainly on modern Marcussen organs. I did not know better for some years, but when I began to get hold of several recordings made on more or less properly restored historical instruments, I began to realize and to appreciate the sound of these instruments, finding most of the Marcussen organs neutral, blend and colourless compared to the old organs. Maybe the omnipresent equal tuning has something to do with this.

A look at the Marcussen disposition might lead one to think, that these organs are built in North German style, but the actual sound is far from it. And this is not only because they lack patina. In a way lack of patina is more authentic, since the relatively new Schnitger and Silbermann organs in Bachs time probably lacked patina as well. But the sound of these Marcussen organs (and many others, not the least Metzler) is directed towards universality - towards the option of being able to play all organ music from the earliest time to our day upon them. And the result is, that everything sounds alike, and nothing sounds as it should including the specific national and historical character of the sound. So one could compare the results to black-white reproductions of colour paintings of the great painters. So you can see that I favour colour very much, and lend transparency a lower priority. Even in fugues I think the "search" for transparency often has gone too far.

In all fairness it must be stressed, that there are organ builders who try to build organs inspired by specific styles (e.g. Aubertin), and they often achieve excellent results, but the price is, that the application of the organ is limited, an unasked for fact in our cost-benefit concerned age. But the most convincing sounding results are IMO achieved when an old organ is conscientiously restored, and the Schnitger/ MartiniKerk/ Groningen instrument contains, as far as I know, more than 50% pipes dating from Bachs time or earlier, and the remainder are made so as to fit into the whole.

Of course an organ loft can be constructed more ergonomically than usually is the case to day, and I have no objections against modern materials and technique of construction, so far it does not change the sound of the instrument. Historically seen manual tracking has been the rule, and IMO with good reason. I think that equally sensitive "digital manual tracking" is music of the far future. At least digital pianos feels a bit stange under the fingers, as if someone else is playing.

Concerning Jean Guillou: The Werkprincip is not dead as to old music where changes of manual is prescribed or implied. Maybe it is dead as to future organ compositions. BTW I have heard most of Guillou´s Bach recordings. Enough to say that I do not like them. He seems to me to be an obcessive excentrical kind of musician - like Glenn Gould - who wants his playing to differ from everybody else´s at any cost. Essentially a rather unmusical argument. Maybe he is a better author than musician.

Regards,

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear pe-zulu

First, Jean Guillou. I don't very much like his options, and I agree that he has affinities with Gould (not stylistic, but, as you say, the desire to play different). Sometimes it works very well, other times not so.

But I was not claiming that the Werkprinzip should be banned: Buxtehude, Reinken, Lübeck and Bruhns absolutely require it. But for that there are the Schnitgers and other organs.

I won't go as far as to say that Bach did not have a specific sound in mind: I listen to his music and find it medium-indifferent, I mean, Bach sounds well in a Rückers, in a Taskin, in a Schudi, and even in an Italian harpsichord; the music sounds well in several kinds of clavichord and several kinds of organ. I don't like Bach on the piano because piano sound and technique are so alien to Bach's music as to force the interpreter to play in a certain way (example: the e minor Sarabande, 6th Partita, is impossible to play 'brilliant' on the piano, unless you play it very loud, and that perhaps does not make a lot of sense – or does it? I would certainly try). As for organs it is, I think, more or less the same. While I would not go as far as to suggest that Bach would sound well in a Clicquot and it sounds rather bad on Italian and Iberian organs, I don't feel Bach requires a specific kind of organ. If I would be forced to choose a historical organ, I think I might choose the Trost: strong, bright and deep. As far as I know, Bach found the Silbermann organs in larges churches 'overweak'; he liked an Untersatz 32 and probably a Posaunenbass 32; he like sexquialteras, probably to go with the mixtures; he favoured reeds, but we know not exactly how: a Fagott 16 in the manual for 'new inventions' (rather than a trumpet 8 – which is very telling –, a Shalmey 8). We also know he liked a steady wind and that the sound of the posaunenbass 16' be deep and pure rather than rattling and raucous. As far as I know (or as far as I remember) there are no other particulars.

So I would say the Trost suits Bach, and perhaps that the smaller Silbermann organs (not the famous Freiberg one, which is too French) suit Bach well.

The Schintgers are too odd, or too specialized for Bach, mainly for three reasons. First, they are too unstable. You have only to listen to the Norden positiv to agree with me: other than 8+4, everything above sounds trembling and shaky. This also happens in the Martinikerk. The second reason is that mixtures are too high; if you play the big C minor in such a mixture, the chords will sound at about the same octave. Finally, the positivs are too strong and bright.

That said, it is of course possible to play a convincing bach in such organs.

Another issue I have with old organs is authenticity. Most of the pipes have been severely tampered with in the 18th, 19th and 20t Centuries. Equal temperament has been introduced; pipes have been either shortened or lengthened; several ranks have been modified. We usually only pay attention to the missing ranks, but the fact is that when you drop or raise a semitone (by either cutting or lengthening the pipes) the voicing changes: when shortened, the tone colour may change from aaa to ööö, or even ëëë; when lengthened, the colour will be more sombre: from aaa to ooo. The patina, too, is a result of tampering, I think: you tinker with the mouth of the pipe, the turbulence will be changed; all this tampering softens the metal, and the sound will have less bite. This is quite obvious in organs I know: when awakened from sleep after 200 or even 300 years, the are out of tune but they chiff very prominently; after restoration (done by understanding people) this chiffing often changes.

Now I understand one might prefer softer pipes (I don't, I love chiffs), but what is the authentic state? (I don't know, this is not a rhetorical question).

Of course, Marcussens, Andersens and the like are not at all similar to the Schnitgers on which they were based: the Schnitgers are deep and brilliant (I say the sound in black and red, as in Medieval paintings of hell), and the Marcussens and the like sound more like highly polished aluminium. In part it's the voicing and the wind pressure; in part it's the temperament (equal temperament is harder on harmony, because thirds beat so much they produce the horrible 'white noise' of mixtures, so the mixtures have to have less harmonics (and often less ranks), and so there are less inharmonics [and therefore less beatings] in the plenum). But in part it is a better knowledge of harmonics, too: no one would dream of the following plenum composition: principal 8, 6, 4, 3, 2, Mixture; or even of principal 8 4 2 and mixture that in the treble drops to 6 4 3 2 (6 and 3 for simplicity: 5 1/3 and 1 2/3). The resulting sound is horrible, because every note becomes a chord and the sound is quinty and hard. Nevertheless, this was used in the baroque, and was even liked. It has been stated that the 22 foot quint in the Alkmaar organ is a mistake (it was said to be a mistake in the 18th Century; I don't know if it sounds right when you are there)

Now I am not condemning old organs: I love then and their defects move me, as Marc so beautifully put it; regarding Iberian music, I usually hate it when played in a modern instrument. But I do think Bach is too universal to be played on old instruments; and, further, as we really don't know in what kind of instrument we ought to play Bach, we really are in the dark. Perhaps his sound ideal was the Wenzelkirche? In which case, you and I have to get used to it...

So my point, as usual, is this: there are no fast rules. Everything that is musical is permissible, but with care and good taste. Now is a Marcussen musical? That's the question. I think so...

Too long (southern Europeans are always long: Hall said that we like theory and abstraction too much), but I hope it is not too badly written.

Thank you both, Marc and pe-zulu, very much for such interesting answers and for embarking, once again, in these discussions. :)

[Marc]

Old and new combined:
Jürgen Ahrend talks about the organ of the Groningen Martinikerk, with short episodes of Sietze de Vries improvising and playing Böhm:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eml6w6-tsH4

[Marc]

[....] But I do think Bach is too universal to be played on old instruments [....]

I almost entirely agree with that, with a slight add-on though ;): I do think Bach is too universal to be played on old instruments only.

Hence I have no personal problems with listening to f.i. Ivo Janssen playing Bach on a Steinway, or to Gillian Weir playing on a modern Phelps organ. Or to a saxophone quartet playing the Fugue in G minor BWV 578 (which I heard a couple of months ago in the Martinikerk).

But I also know that I do have my own preferences. For instance: I have not yet experienced problems whilst listening to the organs of Norden (a.o. 2 MDG-discs with Agnes Luchterhandt & Thiemo Janssen), nor Groningen (from Rübsam to Koopman). And this evening I listened to the so-called Orgelmesse, played by Simon Preston on the Joachim Wagner & Peter Migend organ (1738-1741) in the Trondheim Cathedral. Preston is not my fave organist, but IMO he's good in the Trio Sonatas and also seemingly more involved in the chorales than in the great free works. Apart from that & back to the organ: I like listening to this one by Wagner & Migend. A fine both expressive and cosy humming instrument. :)

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Matteo Messori and the Dritter Theil der Clavier Uebung (Brilliant Classics)

Interesting recording. Messori is Italian, and as such has a very specific kind of introversion. I almost fully understand his tempo and agogic options (a kind of far away poetics coupled with a very strong need of individual expression through music) but I think many Bach lovers prefer a less personal reading and rather less tempo fluctuations.

As, for instance, Isoir (another southern European), he is somewhat bipolar: very fast and brisk tempi alternate with the remoteness and somewhat mystic (southern European mysticism) vagueness and misty expression. All that is part of the southern European soul searching, and I really would like to know the opinion of northerners.

For my taste, the chorales are very poetic – really beautiful – and the organs are wonderfully interesting. He chose the famous Goslar Treutmann, the Walterhausen Trost and the Zschortau Scheibe. All are very interesting, and Messori uses very deep registrations. The plenum always has a 16' (which seems historically accurate) and most often the pedal has a 32'. The effect is quite stunning, chiefly because the Trost has such a strong Posause 32, but also because the Bach plenum really seems too thin when played at 8/16.

In Dies' sind die heil'ge zehen Geboth he uses the carrilion (a kind of tubular bells) with a reed for the canon (I really wish he had not, but it is historically correct and I understand that he tried to make the canon heard).

In the terrible De profundis (Aus tieffer Noth) he uses the Posaune 32. I had only listened to this in CD in Koopman's version, and I again think it is well advised: the chorale is clearly heard (well, almost).

The playing technique seems impeccable, but most young organists are perfect in terms of tecnhique. What is, in my view, noteworthy is that Messori manages to be technically perfect and, at the same time, extremely expressive. He clearly knows this music by heart and loves it.

Now, I don't believe in God, but I am sensitive to a God image. In this record God is a terrible, distant, powerful, dark, God. An old testament (or a Catholic) God; the Chorales are either the voice of this God or the voice of the sinner in search for meaning and salvation.

A remarkable recording.

I only wish the registrations and the date of the recording were given. It is stated that Messori is now recording the Art of Fugue.

[Marc]

Rodrigo, thanks for informing us. I'll keep this one in mind, although I already purchased and gathered an insane amount of Orgelmessen since springtime 2009, and I (still) need some cooling down right now.
:student:

Apart from that: I'm trying to listen to other stuff than organ music since about a month. It almost feels like I'm starting a brand new life again! :D

About this collection (my favourite Bach, if organ is concerned): I've listened to so many different performances .... I don't know which one I favour any more .... interpretation-wise probably Ewald Kooiman in Weingarten (Gabler-organ), although the Coronata sound engineers didn't cope very well with the (difficult) recording situation IMO. Compared to f.i. Isoir's interpretation on the same instrument (Calliope), the Coronata recording is rather sharp and brutal.

Second problem with the Coronata issue: it's OOP. :(
Ewald Kooiman died unexpectedly in January 2009, whilst he was planning to record another Bach integral .... this older box set should be rereleased, as a mark of honour!!

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Marc

I don't know Kooiman's records. I know the Gabler from recordings, but I must say I don't like the instrument very much, perhaps because I always feel the mixtures are impossible to tune well; and also, the principals and flutes are not that beautiful.

I'm still listening to the Messori records. I think they are truly very good. In fact, the registrations are so beautiful I would recommend the disc just for that.

Recall the discussion we had before about the importance of being historical. I claimed that Bach sounds not very well in a Schnitger. This recording makes me wonder.

But it is not only the sound, per se. The interpretations is extremely profound. Indeed, I find myself liking this version better than most of all the others I have.

(Note: Messori does play what is written; it is nothing like Isoir, for instance, not to mention Jean Guillou).

Here is a link to Messori's home page.

http://www.matteomessori.com/discography.html

[pe-zulu]

Dear Rodrigo

Well, at least you know Kooiman´s Dorian T&F. I recall that you found it over-articulated.

BTW I listened to day to Messori´s Clavierübung III for the first time since my first listen when I acquired it nearly two years ago. Nobody can honestly deny the beautiful and balanced sound of the organs he has chosen, nor the excellent recorded sound. That said I am not quite convinced by his interpretation. which in my ears is tedious slow and "sempre tempo elastico". Indeed I find it rather similar (in that respect) to Vartolos Art of Fugue. Can I say, that I find it too romantic, and that I get the impression that Messori is projecting his own emotions into the music instead of searching the innate affects of the music? I do not think that the "Northern" way (e.g. Kooiman) of interpreting Bach is "colder" than the southern way, but it is more introvert, expressing itself on another level, but certainly not without passion, a passion which IMO is more in harmony with the spirit of the music. Bach was after all a northener himself.

Regards,

[Marc]

Not Kooiman .... but another Dutch musician ....

I did try to upload some soundclips of Dutch organist Piet Wiersma (1946-2003), playing Bach on the Schnitger/Hinsz/Freytag organ of the Village church in Noordbroek, NL.
Part of the (now OOP, except for some rare copies) EuroSound series Bach in Groningen, which was left unfinished after Wiersma's sudden death, only hours after he completed the recordings for Volume 7.

Wiersma was a popular figure in the northern regions of the Netherlands and started with this Bach integral at the end of the 20th century, all works to be played on historic organs in the province of Groningen: therefore the title Bach in Groningen. This initiative was supported by a.o. the Foundation Groningen Orgelland and several companies.

Personally, I like Wiersma's recordings very much. I would discribe 'his' Bach as spiritually patient.

I hope all links work well .... I'm not an experienced uploading guy.

http://i42.tinypic.com/2roqj3m.jpg

BWV 551:
http://www.mediafire.com/?odn3jmqky2z
BWV 709:
http://www.mediafire.com/?jzwnytjjxwo
BWV 731:
http://www.mediafire.com/?0zvmmnwonng
BWV 535:
http://www.mediafire.com/?0ynkyjynikh

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Rodrigo

Well, at least you know Kooiman´s Dorian T&F. I recall that you found it over-articulated.

BTW I listened to day to Messori´s Clavierübung III for the first time since my first listen when I acquired it nearly two years ago. Nobody can honestly deny the beautiful and balanced sound of the organs he has chosen, nor the excellent recorded sound. That said I am not quite convinced by his interpretation. which in my ears is tedious slow and "sempre tempo elastico". Indeed I find it rather similar (in that respect) to Vartolos Art of Fugue. Can I say, that I find it too romantic, and that I get the impression that Messori is projecting his own emotions into the music instead of searching the innate affects of the music? I do not think that the "Northern" way (e.g. Kooiman) of interpreting Bach is "colder" than the southern way, but it is more introvert, expressing itself on another level, but certainly not without passion, a passion which IMO is more in harmony with the spirit of the music. Bach was after all a northener himself.

Regards,

Many thanks, pe-zulu, for listening to Messori and for your comments.

I recall the dorian toccata very well. Indeed, as I told you at the time, I found it cold and a little effete, but then it is true that there is a difference in temperament between Southern and Northern Europe. I did not like it because it did not seem to delve deep enough into Bach (as Walcha does, for instance) and seemed to concentrate on the surface (the rhythmic details) of the music.

That said, while I fully agree that Bach would never have played like Messori, I must also say that southern introversion is no less introverted than the northern variety, but that it seems to be rather different.

Thinking about the Northern writers that I know and from the Northern composers (excepting Buxtehude, perhaps), there is a contemplating quality in the north, even if it can be extremely intense (as in Ingmar Bergman, for instance) that translates into Self expression in the south.

Perhaps because of this in the south music is a way of expressing oneself. The fluctuating tempo – sempre tempo elastico – is a very apt description of the way most southerners play. It is not a defect, it is a wanted effect. Good (musically rather questionable) examples of it are Blandine Verlet's Partitas or André Isoir's Art of Fugue and Triosonatas. The idea is that there are strong points in the music, and that these points should be stressed; this stress is done by releasing energy (emotional energy) at these points, which translates into tempo fluctuations. This leads to the tempo elastico, which is a way of stressing the 'turning points' of the music. It is indeed very akin to romantic 'rubato'.

Therefore, in many ways, southerners play the inner feeling of tension and release and that leads to the notion that they are showing off, which may be the case but often is not.

I think you (pe-zulu) condemn the Ego surplus that the musician brings into the music. Am I correct? I ask it out of curiosity. I have a very good friend that is German (from Lübeck, no less), but he is not very musical and, either way, he is by now not very German-like in many aspects. I have some German cousins, but they react the way I do, perhaps because they are really mongrels (no disrespect for the word).

As it is difficult to express the meaning of what I want to say in musical terms alone, I will say that what distinguished both Messori, Vartollo, Isoir or Verlet and, indeed, many other southern musicians is the *quantity* of Ego that goes into the music.

So might I ask all Northern Europeans that have listened to either Messori or Vartollo and, in general, to southern interpreters, to honestly say what they feel about the music they make? (I know this is a tall order and almost impossible to fulfil; after all Pollini's Beethoven comes from a southerner). I am really interested.

Please don't take this as a South/North contest. It is nothing of the kind. After all, as most of you know, I love Walcha's Bach and Buxtehude, and music making doesn't get any more German than that... It is just a wish to know and to understand.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Not Kooiman .... but another Dutch musician ....

I did try to upload some soundclips of Dutch organist Piet Wiersma (1946-2003), playing Bach on the Schnitger/Hinsz/Freytag organ of the Village church in Noordbroek, NL.
Part of the (now OOP, except for some rare copies) EuroSound series Bach in Groningen, which was left unfinished after Wiersma's sudden death, only hours after he completed the recordings for Volume 7.

Wiersma was a popular figure in the northern regions of the Netherlands and started with this Bach integral at the end of the 20th century, all works to be played on historic organs in the province of Groningen: therefore the title Bach in Groningen. This initiative was supported by a.o. the Foundation Groningen Orgelland and several companies.

Personally, I like Wiersma's recordings very much. I would discribe 'his' Bach as spiritually patient.

I hope all links work well .... I'm not an experienced uploading guy.

http://i42.tinypic.com/2roqj3m.jpg

BWV 551:
http://www.mediafire.com/?odn3jmqky2z
BWV 709:
http://www.mediafire.com/?jzwnytjjxwo
BWV 731:
http://www.mediafire.com/?0zvmmnwonng
BWV 535:
http://www.mediafire.com/?0ynkyjynikh

Dear MArc

Many thanks for the contribution. Indeed it is quite enlightening of what I wrote in my previous post.

I understand the 'spiritually patient' epithet. The Bach links are exceedingly beautiful. As pe-zulu would say, the organist completely lets the music speak for itself. As I said many times before, I very much like that approach and Wiersma totally succeeds in presenting only the music in all its beauty and emotional deepness. This is true, I think, for the chorales but also for the very beautiful g minor PF. This is waht I called the 'contemplative introversion'.

His Buxtehude I liked less. Perhaps I have a mental representation of Buxtehude that is too passionate. So I think that even if it is well played it is a bit boring. I don't think Buxtehude can be presented quite so humbly: I think Buxtehude requites an effort from the interpreter to make him/herself the central character of the music. It requires what I called the 'Ego tension/release' introversion.

So tell me if you agree, please.

[Marc]

Dear MArc

Many thanks for the contribution. Indeed it is quite enlightening of what I wrote in my previous post.

I understand the 'spiritually patient' epithet. The Bach links are exceedingly beautiful. As pe-zulu would say, the organist completely lets the music speak for itself. As I said many times before, I very much like that approach and Wiersma totally succeeds in presenting only the music in all its beauty and emotional deepness. This is true, I think, for the chorales but also for the very beautiful g minor PF. This is waht I called the 'contemplative introversion'.

His Buxtehude I liked less. Perhaps I have a mental representation of Buxtehude that is too passionate. So I think that even if it is well played it is a bit boring. I don't think Buxtehude can be presented quite so humbly: I think Buxtehude requites an effort from the interpreter to make him/herself the central character of the music. It requires what I called the 'Ego tension/release' introversion.

So tell me if you agree, please.

I'm not sure about to Buxtehude recording of Piet Wiersma you're referring .... unless you're absolutely convinced that BWV 551 is composed by good old Diderik instead of good youthful Sebastian .... :)
(I know it's part of those more or less 'spurious' works in the Schmieder catalogue.)

If so, I'd like to say that at least I understand what you mean, without entirely agreeing. I still think that Wiersma's approach is a very good rendering to have.

About the North-South 'contradictions' between the various musicians: it's a delicate matter, I think. What about the organ performances of f.i. Andrea Marcon or Alessio Corti? Marcon's reading of youthful works of JSB (for the Hänssler edition) is marked with encarving 'Tiefernst', and Corti (in his entire integral) isn't very 'ego releasing' either. And how should we 'classify' Marie-Claire Alain? Or Benjamin Alard?

Btw: of all 'northern' organists playing Bach, I think Piet Wiersma is rather personal and individual in his interpretation. Compared to f.i. Jacques van Oortmerssen or Bram Beekman I would say that Wiersma is (much?) more intense and emotional .... mmm, as I write this I would like to add: no offense meant to them! Especially Beekman is beautiful and impressive in the chorales .... :)

In the Dutch HIP-influenced organ scene Wiersma wasn't really considered as 'one of us'. Some even called him (too) romantic .... which I think is (too) exaggerated. Listening to him really gives me the idea that the man truly loved every bar of Bach. And he loved to spread the warm colours of old instruments with excellent registration IMO.

I might upload some more stuff in the future. Just for listening enjoyment. Comments are very welcome of course!

[Marc]

I promised some more .... all taken from OOP issues (although there might still be some copies around on the net):

Piet Wiersma playing the Lohman organ (1817) of the Reformed Church of Eenrum, NL. His last recordings, only a few hours before his sudden death.
Fantasia & Fugue in C-minor BWV 562/574
http://www.mediafire.com/?mmma2yyzdnm

To compare: Alessio Corti playing the neo-classical Tamburini organ della Chiesa Christiana Protestante in Milano.
Fantasia & Fugue in C-minor BWV 562/574
http://www.mediafire.com/?n12jnnzhzlu

(I myself did the coupling of BWV 562 & 574, the Legrenzi Fugue. Why? Well, simply because I like it that way :) .... but I think that f.i. Corti would agree with that. In his integral, BWV 562 and 574 are separate, yet successive tracks. The same goes for Walter Kraft btw.)

Two chorale arrangements:
Bram Beekman playing the famous Van Hagerbeer/Schnitger organ in Alkmaar.
Wir glauben all' an einen Gott BWV 740
http://www.mediafire.com/?lnwmytedtey

Alessio Corti playing the Tamburini organ della Chiesa di Santa Maria Segreta in Milano.
Erbarm' dich mein, o Herre Gott BWV 721
http://www.mediafire.com/?02iwtwz2mkd

Both these chorales are considered spurious by some scholars. But I love them anyway.
BWV 740 might be composed or arranged by Johann Ludwig Krebs, one of Bach´s most talented pupils.
From the first time I heard BWV 721, it reminded me of the Erbarme dich, mein Gott aria from the Matthäus-Passion. To me, there's a striking resemblance in the idea of teardrops falling in the bass.

If the links aren´t working or creating problems, please let me know.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Marc

Rereading my post and noticing my mistake I would like to be able to say that I had had too much to drink when I wrote the post. But no, I was plain sober (I hardly ever drink). Was I tired?

Because:
Toscanini versus Furtwängler;
Casals versus Bylsma
MC Alain versus Leonhardt
Rousset versus Koopman

and many others

I was trying to make sense of the fact that pe-zulu did not like the Messori records, and I do. And in the process, in the middle of an exhausting period of thinking about the philogenetic origin of the I and the Me, I pressed these concepts into the music.

Thank you for all the uploading. I do not know how to do it (I am becoming a computer idiot very fast; I don't even know how to record a CD even if I follow the instructions correctly). But if you know of any simple way (I use a Mac), please let me know and I'll try and post some interesting stuff.

I'll listen and then report.

My schizophrenic post had, at the very least, the merit of your downloads! Many thanks :)

[Marc]

Dear Marc

Rereading my post and noticing my mistake I would like to be able to say that I had had too much to drink when I wrote the post. But no, I was plain sober (I hardly ever drink). Was I tired?

Because:
Toscanini versus Furtwängler;
Casals versus Bylsma
MC Alain versus Leonhardt
Rousset versus Koopman

and many others

I was trying to make sense of the fact that pe-zulu did not like the Messori records, and I do. And in the process, in the middle of an exhausting period of thinking about the philogenetic origin of the I and the Me, I pressed these concepts into the music.

Thank you for all the uploading. I do not know how to do it (I am becoming a computer idiot very fast; I don't even know how to record a CD even if I follow the instructions correctly). But if you know of any simple way (I use a Mac), please let me know and I'll try and post some interesting stuff.

I'll listen and then report.

My schizophrenic post had, at the very least, the merit of your downloads! Many thanks :)

Gosh, Rodrigo, you're harsh towards yourself!

:banghead:

Schizophrenic? :rolleyes:

You know, I've been watching some sports on the telly lately: cycling. The Giro d'Italia was in the Netherlands and I love this sport.
(At school I was the only one who liked to give the dreaded obligatory lecture, because it gave me the chance to blabber an entire hour about the history of the Tour de France. :D)

During the last days, almost everyone (especially the Dutch sportsmen, both retired and still active) spoke on the telly with warmth about this event, and about the emotional, warm, meditarranean attitude of the Italians. Apparently they also experienced a difference between north and south.

I think the differences aren't that large in reality. Deep down inside the Vikings and Germans are as emotional as the Meditarraneans. But the latter are maybe more extravert, and the first groups needs a couple of drinks to get loose. You know those dreaded Vikings: don't give them too much beer!
:beer:
:D

If such a silent sober Viking or German is entering a cold church, climbing up the stairs and beginning to play the organ, then his soul opens and he can be as emotional as your 'average' Italian or Spaniard in the works.

To make the last expression more clear, here's a link with a wink:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Spaniard_in_the_Works

Cheer up!

[pe-zulu]

Dear Rodrigo and Marc

To illustrate my point of view I have uploaded some examples of keyboard music by Bach and Böhm. The recordings I have chosen represent how I think these works ideally should be played. In order not to bias you I shall withold the information about who is playing until you have told me how you value the style of interpretation. Rodrigo will probably think that it is too introvert and "cold".
The files are large (wav), and downloading takes some time, but you will be able to burn them to a CDR and listen to them via your HIFI gear in a decent SQ.


1) Böhm Preude, Fugue and Postlude g-minor

http://www.mediafire.com/file/3x3tyrjn2zv/01 - Ukendt titel - Ukendt kunstner.wav


2) Bach Fantasia a-minor

http://www.mediafire.com/file/i4mcxgmi2jo/02 - Ukendt titel - Ukendt kunstner.wav


3) Bach Toccata e-minor

http://www.mediafire.com/file/znn5em4tvua/03 - Ukendt titel - Ukendt kunstner.wav


4) Böhm Prelude, Fugue and Postlude g-minor

http://www.mediafire.com/file/tdmdtrjr1ry/01 - Ukendt titel - Ukendt kunstner.wav


5) Bach Prelude and Fugue g-minor

http://www.mediafire.com/file/cjdqy4mly52/02 - Ukendt titel - Ukendt kunstner.wav

[pe-zulu]

Corti´s integral is not OOP, it is available from jpc.de

http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/search?interpret=bach&rubric=classic&tracks=alessio%20corti&pd_orderby=score&advancedsearch=1

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear pe-zulu

I'm downloading them. Thanks.
But just to be precise, introverted and cold are not the same thing. Leonhardt is both introverted and 'uncold'; Walcha is introverted and 'not very hot'; Alain is introverted and 'human'; Koopman's way of playing I would say is extrovert, although the person is introverted. And you can an extrovert and quite cold, although I don't know any example in music.

The typical extrovert in music is, for me, Leonard Bernstein.

I'll report asap.

[pe-zulu]

But just to be precise, introverted and cold are not the same thing.

Agreed. This was the reason why I put quotation signs around "cold".

[Marc]

Corti´s integral is not OOP, it is available from jpc.de

http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/classic/search?interpret=bach&rubric=classic&tracks=alessio%20corti&pd_orderby=score&advancedsearch=1
Ha!
OK, but it's not easy to find, compared to many others. Maybe it's because a small label? Maybe JPC got hold of some remnants? I asked in the local music shops here to no avail. And there are no copies at f.i. Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk, and the only copy on Amazon.de (and Amazon.fr) is very expensive.

Two months ago there were 2 copies still available at Amazon.de .... I purchased the other one (thanx to your advice) for around € 100 less than the JPC-price. :cool:
The discs were in good condition, but the box was covered in dust and the disc-sleeves were turned yellow. Apparently it was dug from some far away store. :D

About the Ukendt downloads: this is a crazy world. After months of struggling I'm finally able to upload files at Megafire, but now I'm getting all kinds of troubles with downloading, varying from everlasting 'preparing download link' messages to all kinds of JavaScript errors. :confused:

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Gosh, Rodrigo, you're harsh towards yourself!

:banghead:

Schizophrenic? :rolleyes:

You know, I've been watching some sports on the telly lately: cycling. The Giro d'Italia was in the Netherlands and I love this sport.
(At school I was the only one who liked to give the dreaded obligatory lecture, because it gave me the chance to blabber an entire hour about the history of the Tour de France. :D)

During the last days, almost everyone (especially the Dutch sportsmen, both retired and still active) spoke on the telly with warmth about this event, and about the emotional, warm, meditarranean attitude of the Italians. Apparently they also experienced a difference between north and south.

I think the differences aren't that large in reality. Deep down inside the Vikings and Germans are as emotional as the Meditarraneans. But the latter are maybe more extravert, and the first groups needs a couple of drinks to get loose. You know those dreaded Vikings: don't give them too much beer!
:beer:
:D

If such a silent sober Viking or German is entering a cold church, climbing up the stairs and beginning to play the organ, then his soul opens and he can be as emotional as your 'average' Italian or Spaniard in the works.

To make the last expression more clear, here's a link with a wink:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Spaniard_in_the_Works

Cheer up!

Yes, I am hard on myself. But that's a long story and it is actually related to the question in hand.

———Off musical topic: you may jump it

I agree that Mediterraneans and Vikings are the same people fundamentally: it's just a question of light, probably, but also some interesting cultural differences. I mean, the emotions are the same, and I agree it is a question of beer or of organ :)

There are some difference, whoever, in the way emotion is expressed.

The main difference, as I see it (and I might be wrong) is that in the South the Ego is freer to express itself, and in the North it is more often 'canalized' into a more coded system. Thus Southerners are often said to be more emotional and Northerners 'colder' (which, I think, is not true). Showing emotion is OK (up to certain limits).

There is a difference in the attention you are supposed to pay to the other people: in the South you must be friendly (not appear, but actually be) with someone that works with you, and you cannot just tell a person 'Sorry, I'm busy right now, come back later' when that person starts to talk about something that is important to her. In fact, when this happens, you have to postpone work (this happened to me no longer than today!). Also, as in Poland, complaining is a national hobby, and you have to listen to people complaining and take an interest in it.

But then, and this may seem paradoxical, there is the 'opposite' difference in the amount of intimacy, in the sense that, in the Mediterranean, intimacy is far more fiercely defended than in the North (for instance, sex is a far more intimate thing in the South, and that is not only because of Religion).

Therefore I do not think Mediterraneans are more extrovert. They may seem so, but they are extremely secretive, they seldom open their hearts to others unless they consider them very close friends (and even then this is extremely rare; as in the North, wine and organs help a lot).

As an example of this, my Northerner friends here in Portugal always say that the Portuguese are devilishly reserved, that it is extremely difficult to make friends with them, and that they are very kind but inscrutable. A person's real emotions are his or her own, people will not put them to words publicly (it is considered obscene) but many people keep diaries. So there is a very real difference between the inner emotion and the expressed emotion.

Another example, although literary, is the recent book Nachtzug nach Lissabon, by Pascal Mercier. While the book has a lot of inaccuracies, the main character is the typical highly cultured and freethinking Portuguese (of course, not all Portuguese people are highly cultured and freethinking; but then that is, unfortunately, a general trait).

Of course I am generalizing and these things are difficult to measure. There are tests, but they address perhaps 'open apparent sociability' rather than 'introspection', that is, the degree in which one examines and even represses oneself.

Another unexpected difference is that Southerners usually 'introspect other people', I mean, all kinds of non verbal cues are routinely interpreted as emotions, representations and beliefs. This is not because Southerners gesticulate a lot (indeed, gestures are, mostly, codified culturally and only Italians gesticulate a lot, the gesture usually having a precise meaning – this has indeed been objectively studied), but is part of a very dense (and somewhat oppressive) interpersonal climate in the South.

———End of 'offtopicness'

Now for the music. I would never be able to say who is the Southerner and the Northerner in the Corti example. I would venture to say that Corti seems to be from a younger generation of players than Wiersma, but that is about all. Beekman, by the example given, seems objective but very warm. So... I was probably wrong. I liked Wiersma chiefly in the chorales, but the Fantasia was marvellously terse, expressive, and poignant. The fugue I did not like so much (see below). Corti's interpretations are very poetical, too. I did like his Legrenzi fugue a little better, because it had more flow, but that is not to say that I did not like Wiersma's. (On quite a different note: it is impressive to have Wiersma's last musical thoughts; moving and disturbing).

Concerning now pe-zulu's delightful mysteries :)

I liked all the interpretations you 'posted'. I would never dream of calling them cold. None of them are cold, and they are all introverted (but then are there any extrovert baroque organists?)

Piecewise:
Bach's PF g minor. Beautiful interpretation, expressive and emotional. The only thing I did not like (but it is a question of personal preference) is that I found the fugue too articulated, as in Wiersma's Legrenzi fugue. Although I understand that the theme itself suggests a clear articulation, I would rather have a somewhat more flowing, more legato and with more 'elastic tempo'. But then the elastic tempo I am thinking about is Walcha's who, in this fugue is, I think, unbeaten.

Bach's fantasia in a is certainly well played, passionately enough although I find the work itself impossibly boring (a kind of harmonic and fingering exercise).

Bohm's PFP. I never really liked the work on the organ. But both interpretations are very good. I would say that the organ interpretation in spite of the beauty of the interpretation, does not manage to convey the bouncing of the fugue. But this really has only to do with the instrument. The theme, I suggest, is as if 'thrown'; I think the organ does not do justice to that.
This is precisely what the harpsichord version manages. Not only is the praeludium magnificently rendered through the harpsichord, but the fugue manages to capture the beautiful gesture.
It reminded me of the memory I have of the first interpretation I ever listened of that piece. I only listened to it for a short period, but it struck me as plain marvellous. It was by, I think, Elizabeth de la Porte and is, I think, unavailable (pe-zulu, who knows everything about recordings, may know).

But really, all the interpretations are superb, I don't find them cold at all. They are all sparing and very precise, but that is not a defect, it is an aesthetic choice that does not hinder emotion. But it is true that I tolerate and even like some imprecision and overall mist, which those versions seem to shun.

I have more to say on this, but I don't want to commit another huge post (rereading: too late!).

This thread is wonderful. It also proves the value of error: to correct my rubbish you have both produced beautiful evidence!

:D

[Marc]

Interesting stuff to read, Rodrigo. But, since I'm relaxing right now and listening to .... pop muzik (:o) my mind isn't sharpened enough for a 'decent' reaction. ;)

About Wiersma: I understand your opinions about the BWV 562/574: the Fantasia impresses me more than the Fugue. Mind you, though both were recorded on the same day, BWV 562 are his definite final thoughts. I myself merged them together.


This thread is wonderful. It also proves the value of error: to correct my rubbish you have both produced beautiful evidence!

:D
Glad to be of any help! :D

[pe-zulu]

Dear Rodrigo
So your post confirms my view that the Northerners and the Southerners mainly differ on the surface, and only in a general sense.

The Bach/Böhm examples are in fact played by a Southener (Lorenzo Ghielmi) and I agree with you, that the interpretation is rather introvert and very expressive, but IMO in a refreshing measured and scholary way. Both Ghielmi (the Bach/Böhm examples) and Vartolo (AoF) offer introvert interpretations, but the difference is, that while Ghielmi´s expression is more general (and also foreseeable to someone knowing the style), Vartolo´s is more "private"- bordering the state, where it looses general interest becoming a kind of interpretation where the musician often seems to loose spiritual control, and everything can happen in the holy name of spontaneity (who think of Blandine Verlet now?). This kind of interpretation is also in great contrast to Wolfgang Rübsam´s approach in his second integral (for Naxos). His playing is on the contrary hypercontrolled and almost too analytical for practical listening. And where Rübsam demonstrates the connection and context of the elements of the music and uses the time necessary for this, Vartolo just drift along. IMO Vartolo is more at home in his Frescobaldi recordings, music which is more suited to his style.

[pe-zulu]

Marc, did you ever succed in downloading these Ghielmi recordings. If you did not, we must use plan B.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Dear Rodrigo
So your post confirms my view that the Northerners and the Southerners mainly differ on the surface, and only in a general sense.

The Bach/Böhm examples are in fact played by a Southener (Lorenzo Ghielmi) and I agree with you, that the interpretation is rather introvert and very expressive, but IMO in a refreshing measured and scholary way. Both Ghielmi (the Bach/Böhm examples) and Vartolo (AoF) offer introvert interpretations, but the difference is, that while Ghielmi´s expression is more general (and also foreseeable to someone knowing the style), Vartolo´s is more "private"- bordering the state, where it looses general interest becoming a kind of interpretation where the musician often seems to loose spiritual control, and everything can happen in the holy name of spontaneity (who think of Blandine Verlet now?). This kind of interpretation is also in great contrast to Wolfgang Rübsam´s approach in his second integral (for Naxos). His playing is on the contrary hypercontrolled and almost too analytical for practical listening. And where Rübsam demonstrates the connection and context of the elements of the music and uses the time necessary for this, Vartolo just drift along. IMO Vartolo is more at home in his Frescobaldi recordings, music which is more suited to his style.

Dear pe-zulu

So you are telling me that all the uploads were by Ghielmi?
While I generally agree that I was mistaken in the difference between North and South (and I'll add more examples: in terms of the difference I made previously, Harnoncourt seems a Southerner; so does Leonhardt. Lena Jakobsen simply looks un musical, to me. Kempft sounds like a Southerner, again. Reihardt Göbel is, again, untypical, Biondi is definitely Southern, and Pinnock is definitely English!

But I was wrong. The reason for that being that great musicians defy any classification because the are, necessarily, very personal. Take Walcha. Now Walcha always reminded me of Bauhaus, but then it is a humanized Bauhaus, quite alien to the original spirit.

I don't have as many records as you (lucky you!) and, what is more, I tried to upload some pieces and failed (I'll give it another try when I have the time).

Nevertheless, Messori is not, in my view (I don't know Vartollo's Art of Fugue), disorganized or too private (but isn't 'privacy' introversion?). I can understand every stressing, every change in tempo; what is more, the slowness also makes sense to me.

That said, Rübsam is, as you say, too analytic and also too personal to 'practical listening', and I don't exactly understand why you like his more recent interpretations: his Passacaglia is, for me, unlistenable; the Art of Fugue is interesting, but, again, it defies our notions of time.

If you want we may talk about why, and about what I think you like in 'controlled' interpretations, because I think I have an idea.

But rest assured: I like them, too. For instance, I find Maria João Pires' Chopin almost obscene, even if I deeply respect the courage of so much personal exposure. This is also why I cannot listen to Berstein's interpretations and, indeed, that is why I usually detest Mahler and, when I was a boy, I was deeply shocked by ... Gustav Leonhardt.

As I say, if you are interested and if I get the time, I may post an hypothesis on your taste. I hope you won't consider this intrusive or cocky on my part: I just want to understand different points of view.

If you'd like to download other pieces, you and Marc will make this the very best thread we had!

A deep thank you to you both.

[Marc]

Marc, did you ever succed in downloading these Ghielmi recordings. If you did not, we must use plan B.

I tried it about four times to no avail. Sometimes Java acts funny on my PC.

But, if it is a.o. disc Böhm & Bach: works for organ, WDR production Stradivarius STR 33559, there might be plan C = Dutch library, too. :)

This also goes for the harpsichord/clavichord disc Über J.S. Bachs Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke, labelno. Winter & Winter 910 105-2.

I have to return some other discs next week, and then I'll be able to order these.

[Marc]

Re Rodrigo:
I entirely agree with you about Rübsam's second attempt at the Passacaglia. I listened to it three times and then gave up. :rolleyes:

But I love Mahler (hope you'll forgive me for that), and even though I wouldn't have Lenny each and every day, his interpretations can really move me. AFAIK, his first Mahler integral was less 'over the top' (recorded in the sixties).

Mahler deeply admired Bach btw, and his friends loved him to play the Grandmaster at the piano.

[pe-zulu]

But, if it is a.o. disc Böhm & Bach: works for organ, WDR production Stradivarius STR 33559, there might be plan C = Dutch library, too. :)

This also goes for the harpsichord/clavichord disc Über J.S. Bachs Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke, labelno. Winter & Winter 910 105-2.


Zeer goed ontdekt, Marc . :) Het is juist deze twee.
Laten we dus wachten, maar zeg mij wanneer dit niet lukt.

[pe-zulu]

Dear pe-zulu
As I say, if you are interested and if I get the time, I may post an hypothesis on your taste. I hope you won't consider this intrusive or cocky on my part: I just want to understand different points of view.


This will certainly interest me, so feel free to write what you think.

[Marc]

Zeer goed ontdekt, Marc . :) Het is juist deze twee.
Laten we dus wachten, maar zeg mij wanneer dit niet lukt.
:D

Not bad.
Het zijn precies deze twee. (Es sind genau diese zwei; [plural].)

To include other members in this very interesting conversation, too, I'll continue in plain English. (Also I'm afraid to post some non-Vikingish Danish, too.) :)

[pe-zulu]

Dear pe-zulu
If you want we may talk about why, and about what I think you like in 'controlled' interpretations, because I think I have an idea.


A controlled interpretation is in my opinion a performance in which the performer displays control of the relevant performance practice as well as full technical control, but even displays a high degree of "expressive" control in order not to "overload" the music, which in my opinion is just as bad as playing in a cold and inexpressive manner. The expressive bursts must be put into an adequate musical context. I suppose that we are talking first and foremost about playing Bach, and I can not say, that I prefer interpretations which are controlled in every small detail, - of course there must be room for some liberty, since a completely foreseeable interpretation may easily appear boring in the long run. But there is a huge difference between a recording and a live recital in this respect. I can accept a relatively spontaneous interpretation at a live recital, maybe governed by the "interplay" between artist and audience, whereas a recording must be more controlled in order to stand repeated listening. There is less room for spontaneity in a recording, since the efffect of any recordings possible spontaneous elements is weakened with repeted listening. Maybe they may even begin to appear mannered, when you know them too well.

[Marc]

Out of print, as mentioned before: Wolfgang Rübsam's first integral (Philips).
Therefore I hope you all enjoy these three chorale arrangements for Pentecost, played on the Metzler organ of the St. Nikolauskirke, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.

Dedicated to a certain board member; he or she knows why. :)

BWV 651:
http://www.mediafire.com/?nth4224ywzt

BWV 652:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ttgrttzkjyh

BWV 667:
http://www.mediafire.com/?uqtzjqntqzq

Happy Whitsun!

[pe-zulu]

Having uploaded a recording of the Dorian T & F my favorite Bach organ work, I would very much like to know, if this is a Northener or a Southener playing. Introvert or extrovert? Expressive or superficial. Controlled or not? And who is playing (a well known name for sure) and what is the name of the well known organ builder?

Toccata:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/tynmwmdcomh/28 -

Fuga:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/25xy4w4mwrm/29 -

[bat]

The idea of count Dracula playing Bach at night in his huge castle fascinates me...
which recording best recaptures the image of Dracula playing Bach?

[Marc]

The idea of count Dracula playing Bach at night in his huge castle fascinates me...
which recording best recaptures the image of Dracula playing Bach?

IMO, questions like these should be taken very seriously.

First suggestion: BWV 542 (Fantasia part). Also played by ze lunatic Dreyfus ("he's out of his mind, that's what he's out of") in ze movie The Pink Panther strikes again.
Maybe the Michel Chapuis recording (part 5 of his integral for Valois), played at the Schnitger organ in Zwolle, will do. Sound quality isn't all that good: rather shrill, which makes it even better for your purpose.

:JOEL:

Second suggestion: Thiemo Janssen playing BWV 565 on the Schnitger organ in Norden. Labelno.: MDG 906 1502-6. Especially Janssen's Toccata-playing has got those bat-fluttering qualities.

[pe-zulu]

I vote for Ton Koopman, on the first volune of his 6 CD Novalis set, playing BWV 565 and 542 on the Müller organ of Oude Kerk, Amsterdam.

[Marc]

Having uploaded a recording of the Dorian T & F my favorite Bach organ work, I would very much like to know, if this is a Northener or a Southener playing. Introvert or extrovert? Expressive or superficial. Controlled or not? And who is playing (a well known name for sure) and what is the name of the well known organ builder?

Toccata:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/tynmwmdcomh/28 -

Fuga:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/25xy4w4mwrm/29 -

Well, Premont, I personally do not really believe in these North-South 'classifications'. And it's also risky to anwer such questions. ;)
One might be getting stigmatized for ever as an ignorant layman.
But, since I only started to listen to organ music (mainly by Bach) seriously some 15 months ago, I thought I should take this risk. :D
It's just nice to make some kind of a 'summary' for one selves.

My first idea was: we're listening to a 'Anglo-Saxon' influenced organist. The Toccata performance reminded me of Kevin Bowyer's reading. Fast, skillful, not introvert, but also not digging very deep. But the Fugue wasn't very Bowyer-like. It was played rather laid-back and too cautiously registrated, which caused a lack of tension IMO. Not to my likings, really.

The recording was a bit hollow and maybe that caused the rather impersonal sound of the instrument. My guess would be: not a historic organ, but a neo-baroque one. Made me think a bit of the Tamburinis played by Corti.

But I really couldn't mention a name or an organ builder. Who knows, maybe I own this reading myself.
And maybe it's a 17th century instrument played by a hot blooded Spaniard. So: make fun of me. There's nothing wrong with having fun. :D

[pe-zulu]

Nor do I believe in classifications like these, especially not the Northener-Southener distinction. But Rodrigo brought them with him, and I am very curious to see him use the distinctions in practise.:)

You describe the interpretation and recording very much in the way I think of it, and it was a great disappointment to me, given the name of the performer. I shall wait to reveal the name until Rodrigo has told us his opinion. By the way: I would never make fun of you in these issues.

[Marc]

Yes, but Rodrigo already withdrew this categorization.

All right, I'll give you a name: M-C Alain? :o

[bat]

Maybe this is ok... my sound card does not work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JQXgn-cubQ

[pe-zulu]

Yes, but Rodrigo already withdrew this categorization.

Or modified, or rather elaborated it.


All right, I'll give you a name: M-C Alain? :o

Fortunately not.:)

[Marc]

Re pe-zulu: Olivier Latry?

(Around 2014, I will have mentioned them all :D.)

Re bat: sure it's OK. But I still think Janssen's Toccata is more bat-like.
Or try something different than BWV 565 or 542:

Prelude & Fugue in E-minor BWV 533, played by Stanislas Deriemaeker on the Metzler organ of the Onze Lieve Vrouwekathedraal in Antwerpen, Belgium.

http://www.mediafire.com/?kbmiwwjahzy

[pe-zulu]

Re pe-zulu: Olivier Latry?

(Around 2014, I will have mentioned them all :D.)



Fortunately not. :)

[bat]

http://nch01.fortunecity.com/images/organ1.jpg
Shocking truth...

[pe-zulu]

http://nch01.fortunecity.com/images/organ1.jpg
Shocking truth...

"Was is Wahrheit?"

[Grothendieck]

I don't mean to interrupt, but I came across a recording of Walcha which might be of interest. It's a 1967 recording of Walcha playing live Bach's 6-voice Ricercare. The recording can be heard at the NCRV (Netherlands Public Broadcasting) website. I'm not familiar with posting links, but if you google Walcha + NCRV + Ricercare you should be able to find it. Walcha also performs live the unfinished fugue from the Art of Fugue with his completion.

[Marc]

I don't mean to interrupt, but I came across a recording of Walcha which might be of interest. It's a 1967 recording of Walcha playing live Bach's 6-voice Ricercare. The recording can be heard at the NCRV (Netherlands Public Broadcasting) website. I'm not familiar with posting links, but if you google Walcha + NCRV + Ricercare you should be able to find it. Walcha also performs live the unfinished fugue from the Art of Fugue with his completion.
Yes, me already discovered there are some interesting gems on that NCRV archive website. Thanks for the link!

[Rodrigo de Sá]

I don't mean to interrupt, but I came across a recording of Walcha which might be of interest. It's a 1967 recording of Walcha playing live Bach's 6-voice Ricercare. The recording can be heard at the NCRV (Netherlands Public Broadcasting) website. I'm not familiar with posting links, but if you google Walcha + NCRV + Ricercare you should be able to find it. Walcha also performs live the unfinished fugue from the Art of Fugue with his completion.

Dear Grothendieck, welcome.

I think this has been posted before, but it is always a pleasure to listen to it again. It is a pity Walcha never recorded this work.

About the northern southern distinction: You are wrong, pe-zulu, I actually withdrew the distinction. As I explained before, I have been thinking about the question of the 'I' and of the 'Me', which varies according to culture and to historical period. But from there to say that all southerners and all northerners differ in this dimension is wrong.

If I may add yet another counter example, it would be Lena Jacobsen.

The toccata and fugue: Good interpretation of the toccata; but if the player is the same, why on earth has he (I suppose it is a he?) opposed a massive toccata and a frail (but not really poetic) version of the fugue, almost as if it were a completely different piece? The toccata is massive and muscular; the fugue is almost 'chamber music' like and the result seems to me somewhat flippant (but then I listened to it only once, and on the lousy sound of my laptop).

I don't think I like the result.

I have no idea of who would play in such a mannered way. Dutch school, perhaps?

PS: Edited to add. Superficial, extravert and decorative view of the dorian t&f. The contrast between the p and the f is almost perverse.

To Marc: No hot blooded Spaniard would play like that! It would be much harder :)

[Rodrigo de Sá]

The idea of count Dracula playing Bach at night in his huge castle fascinates me...
which recording best recaptures the image of Dracula playing Bach?

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JyFP-s_ZQc), perhaps?

[Marc]

[Isoir at the Abbey of Weingarten]

Talking about a coincidence!
Found that link recently, too, and had the same 'count' associations.
Not my fave reading, but I prefer this one to Isoir's recording that belongs to his Bach integral (Calliope), especially because of a bolder played fugue.

BWV 533 is one of my personal (not so) secret Bach gems. :)
Three of my preferred performances:
Piet Kee on the Van Hagerbeer/Schnitger organ, St. Laurenskerk, Alkmaar, NL (Chandos).
Marie-Claire Alain on the Schwenkedel organ, Collégiale de Saint-Donat, Drôme, France (Erato).
Stanislas Deriemaeker on the Metzler organ, Onze Lieve Vrouwekathedraal, Antwerpen, Belgium (René Gailly) -> link posted on May, 29th.

[pe-zulu]

About the northern southern distinction: You are wrong, pe-zulu, I actually withdrew the distinction. As I explained before, I have been thinking about the question of the 'I' and of the 'Me', which varies according to culture and to historical period. But from there to say that all southerners and all northerners differ in this dimension is wrong.

If I may add yet another counter example, it would be Lena Jacobsen.


There is IMO a big difference in the attitudes of Messori and Vartolo on the one hand and Leonhardt and Jacobsen on the other hand. While the tempo and pace of the former is almost completely "free" - just depending on the spontaneity of the performer, the playing of the latter is only partially free, as it seems to vary according to some rather strict rules (agigoc give-and-take rubato). Observing these rules is part of what I see as stylistic understanding in the playing. I admit that some southeners have learnt these rules so well as to make them their own (Ghielmi, Corti, Alessandrini). But generally I think that Northerners obey these stylisitc demands in a more convincing way, than Southeners do. And this probably reflects some cultural difference in the way we learn to express ourselves. But of course the emotions as such do not differ.

And concerning Southern (in the widest sense) legato contra Dutch style (even Koopman plays in Dutch style) I find that detailed and pointed articulation is a crucial part of the style and not an expression of some kind of pedantic mind. Cantabile playing of course implies detailled articulation, which must mimic the way you sing one or more notes on every syllable. The distribution of notes on syllables in Bach´s voal works offers a very good guide to how he probably wanted his instrumental works articulated, and corresponds rather well to the actual but all too sparse articulation signs in his chamber music.

[pe-zulu]

The toccata and fugue..
I don't think I like the result.

I have no idea of who would play in such a mannered way. Dutch school, perhaps?

PS: Edited to add. Superficial, extravert and decorative view of the dorian t&f.

Nor do I like the result, - a big disappointment IMO. I was questioning my own judgement, but you confirm it.

The player is Scott Ross on the Beckerath organ (1961) of the Immaculée-Conception church, Montreal, recording date unknown.

[pe-zulu]

I don't mean to interrupt, but I came across a recording of Walcha which might be of interest. It's a 1967 recording of Walcha playing live Bach's 6-voice Ricercare.

Welcome. A relevant post like yours can never be called an interruption.

[pe-zulu]

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JyFP-s_ZQc), perhaps?

Well, he looks a bat like an imaginary count Dracula, though I do not find the playing diabolic at all, but pedantic and tedious. I am well aware, that this organ invites to that kind of playing.

[Marc]

Well, he looks a bat like an imaginary count Dracula, though I do not find the playing diabolic at all, but pedantic and tedious. I am well aware, that this organ invites to that kind of playing.
Pe-zulu, interpretation-wise you hit this one right on the spot.
I guess I was trying to be friendly (again). :)
But indeed: there's definitely no fluttering and flapping the wings in this one.

From what I remember (to lazy to check) these pedantic tempo choices are more or less the same on Isoir's Calliope recording, except on that one he opts for a more 'poetic' and softer fugue, which I dislike even more. He's playing that one on a rather different (much less interesting) organ though: Grenzing, Saint-Cyprien, Périgord, France.

[Marc]

Nor do I like the result, - a big disappointment IMO. I was questioning my own judgement, but you confirm it.

The player is Scott Ross on the Beckerath organ (1961) of the Immaculée-Conception church, Montreal, recording date unknown.
Thanks for clearing up the mystery.
I wouldn't guessed that one in a thousand years.

Is this also the organ used by Bernard Lagacé for his Bach integral?
And, if you know him, do you think Lagacé's playing would be more interesting to investigate?

[Rodrigo de Sá]

There is IMO a big difference in the attitudes of Messori and Vartolo on the one hand and Leonhardt and Jacobsen on the other hand. While the tempo and pace of the former is almost completely "free" - just depending on the spontaneity of the performer, the playing of the latter is only partially free, as it seems to vary according to some rather strict rules (agigoc give-and-take rubato). Observing these rules is part of what I see as stylistic understanding in the playing. I admit that some southeners have learnt these rules so well as to make them their own (Ghielmi, Corti, Alessandrini). But generally I think that Northerners obey these stylisitc demands in a more convincing way, than Southeners do. And this probably reflects some cultural difference in the way we learn to express ourselves. But of course the emotions as such do not differ.

And concerning Southern (in the widest sense) legato contra Dutch style (even Koopman plays in Dutch style) I find that detailed and pointed articulation is a crucial part of the style and not an expression of some kind of pedantic mind. Cantabile playing of course implies detailled articulation, which must mimic the way you sing one or more notes on every syllable. The distribution of notes on syllables in Bach´s voal works offers a very good guide to how he probably wanted his instrumental works articulated, and corresponds rather well to the actual but all too sparse articulation signs in his chamber music.

As I said, I don't know VArtolo's AoF, and your remarks do not make me eager to spend the money.

But I disagree in your view of Messori as far as the Chorales of the 'Organ Mass' are concerned. I will go a little into my own reaction to the record.

I listened to it in the shop (just about a minute of each piece, or even less); it told me nothing, but I wanted to know the organs, they sounded very 'big' and I was always drawn to deep sounding organs.

Listening at home I had exactly the same attitude you mention. The Prelude (to which I have not listened properly yet – I listened to the chorales first, and slowly) seemed too 'unbuttoned' in the sense that each section ended with too big a ritardando.

Yet, in the chorales, I felt a great deal of poetry. I never felt the metronome ticking (a feature that I truly loath), the phrasing was very 'broad' (long phrasing) but yet every structural part was there. The tempo is maintained throughout even if it varies; variations in the tempo are natural, you'll find that in Walcha, in Anton Heiler, and in MArie Claire Alain (but, I agree, not in Leonhardt).

The music flows, I agree on the edge of too much freedom, but every voice is respected (more or less, but in a very different way, as in the harpsichord version of the Art of Fugue by Sebastien Guillot).

As I see it, Messori views the music as a flux between important harmonic points; that is, indeed, the way in which Beethoven or Brahms is played: in long phrases between crucial harmonic points. Between those points, everything belongs to a 'gesture', as if throwing the music from point A to point B. In Messori theses gestures are, most of the time, controlled.

It may be argued that this is not the proper way to play Bach. Buxtehude perhaps, but not Bach. I actually agree: if you analyse the fingering of some of Bach's keyboard works (mainly his pedagogic fingerings of easy pieces) you will come to the conclusion that Bach played cantabile on relatively short phrases.

Yet, as Walcha, Heiller and Alain have shown, Bach's music, mainly his organ pieces, has a structural quality that encourages the stressing of very large phrases and building the whole as oppositions of these phrases. There is almost a sonata-form like structure in those long pieces that will never be revealed if you concentrate only on very short phrases (as Koopman and, indeed, in some instances Leonhardt, do; and that is indeed why, to my view, they utterly fail as conductors in, say, the introductions to the Passions: everything is taken step by step, and rhetoric is confined to the beat: as everything is stressed, it becomes deadly monotonous; the same may be said, I think, about Dantone's WTC).

I know it has been defended that Bach's music is not to be played as a whole, but beat by beat. The proof that this is wrong is the awful recording by Monica Hughet (spelling?) of the sonatas and partias and, to my mind, the superiority of Szeryng over Kuijken on the same works. Also, the ghastly recording by Leonhardt of the Von Himmel hoch variations or his very first recording of the Art of Fugue, which is truly horrible, show that this is musically the wrong approach.

So I am claiming that Bach's music, as indeed all music except perhaps dance music, is to be played into a coherent architecture in which details matter rather less than the whole.

In this sense I defend Walcha, Heiller, Alain, Messori, Kempff and Perhaya (spelling, again) against Leonhardt, Koopman, Suzuki.

Some may think I am clustering the unclusterable: Alain, Walcha and Messori don't belong together. They do in the sense that architecture precedes detail.

I'll come back to this later. I hope this makes sense.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

So I tried to learn to upload and download, etc. This is an example on how not to play a canon:http://www.mediafire.com/?oymfyg0iy01
All the stress is on short phrases, on the beat, and this is the result: like a student reading from the score.
I hope you can listen to it.

[pe-zulu]

So I tried to learn to upload and download, etc. This is an example on how not to play a canon. All the stress is on short phrases, on the beat, and this is the result: like a student reading from the score.


Quite agreee. This is indeed pedestrian and ovearticulated. Leonhardt I guess, without "controlling" it. His Bach organ recordings were not entirely successfull, and much of it makes an impression of being experimental, at least upon me.
But I do not think that the Dutch style per se includes overarticulating. And pointed articulation does not exclude long phrases.

Here are three different organists playing more or less detached.
I do not need to tell what the music is.


The first very detached but full of energy and very clearly articulated. I am not sure, that I have been able to delete the name, but the playing is IMO a great surprise.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/4ntwzzx23qw/1,9.mp3


The second playing what I would call balanced non-legato, the way I more or less prefer. And long phrasing.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/hm3zztwkwoy/2,1.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/file/yzhmnkdymtm/2,7.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/file/tjciz1rhzo2/2,9.mp3


The third playing more legato, the discrete detached playing just discernible. And long phrases too.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/jzk5n4z3rng/3,1.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/file/lzikmiqgwoz/3,9.mp3

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Quite agreee. This is indeed pedestrian and ovearticulated. Leonhardt I guess, without "controlling" it. His Bach organ recordings were not entirely successfull, and much of it makes an impression of being experimental, at least upon me.
But I do not think that the Dutch style per se includes overarticulating. And pointed articulation does not exclude long phrases.


You are right, it is Leonhardt. And I agree that the Dutch school does not forbid long articulation; indeed, in some organ recordings (for instance, of Sweelinck, and most of the later ones), Leonhardt himself uses it.

About your downloads:

The first one is Gould, I suppose. Only he would use the Fagott and plenum in such a fugue and no one else would hammer the organ like that. I don't like it, but of course the organ is much less forbidding of excessive articulation than the piano, and that particular fugue agrees with that approach.

I agree that the second set of recordings is the most convincing. Counterpoint I is very expressive, beautifully articulated. The augmentation fugue is marvelous, even if I would have it with the mixture; and C.ix is very expressive; rather more than is usual. I agree that in the organ, this is the right kind of touch to do. It reminds me of Fagius, but perhaps a little more expressive.

The third recording is a beauty: the organ sounds a marvel, and the idea of using the reed in the pedal (pull down from an upper manual, I think?) works wonders (but is a trifle overdone, because the theme appears too often; it is, I think, meant to mingle with the rest of the work in a less clear way). But it is too legato, and all one hears is the upper voice and some harmonic support vaguely theme-related. The many extraneous sounds during the recording make wonder if this a home made recording? If it is, hearty congratulations to the player.

That said, the counterpoints of the art of fugue are perhaps too short (excepting the double and triple fugues) to have an idea of the overall approach of the organist. As i said, the large organ fugues give us a better idea of the structural approach of the musician.

I don't have half the records you have, so I cannot really compete in downloading, but I will try to find something interesting.

Very good thread :D

[pe-zulu]

From what I remember (to lazy to check) these pedantic tempo choices are more or less the same on Isoir's Calliope recording, except on that one he opts for a more 'poetic' and softer fugue, which I dislike even more. He's playing that one on a rather different (much less interesting) organ though: Grenzing, Saint-Cyprien, Périgord, France.

That´s right. I just relistened to vol.4 of the complete set (including the BWV 533) and found it dreadful. The entire vol 4 is unmemorable.

[pe-zulu]

Is this also the organ used by Bernard Lagacé for his Bach integral?
And, if you know him, do you think Lagacé's playing would be more interesting to investigate?

Right again, and Lagacé´s integral is of course more interesting than Scott Ross´Dorian. I acquired it a few years ago, but I have not listened to more than about one third of it - there has been so much else to listen to. :)

Lagacé´s touch is a bit more detached than Stockmeier´s, but else I think he reminds a lot of him, being a rather uninterventional kind of artist. And his Beckerath organ is adequate, but not specially interesting. On the contrary I find the different Kreienbrink organs, Stockmeier uses, very interesting.

[pe-zulu]

.. I agree that the Dutch school does not forbid long articulation;

This is not quite, what I wrote. I wrote, that pointed articulation does not exclude long phrases = long phrasing. My intention is to find some well-working examples of this.


The first one is Gould, I suppose. Only he would use the Fagott and plenum in such a fugue and no one else would hammer the organ like that. I don't like it, but of course the organ is much less forbidding of excessive articulation than the piano, and that particular fugue agrees with that approach.

Completely agreed, except that I like it. Actually this is the only Bach recording of Gould´s I can stand, even if his idea of some of the other CPt.´s is dreadful.


I agree that the second set of recordings is the most convincing. Counterpoint I is very expressive, beautifully articulated. The augmentation fugue is marvelous, even if I would have it with the mixture; and C.ix is very expressive; rather more than is usual. I agree that in the organ, this is the right kind of touch to do. It reminds me of Fagius, but perhaps a little more expressive.

Completely agreed here too. The organist is Rudolf Scheidegger (pupil of Eduard Müller and Marie-Claire Alain among others, and later harpsichordist in the Hans-Martin Linde Consort and since 1987 resident organist in Grossmünster, Zürich).
The organ is the Martin Pflüger organ (1984) of St. Corneli in Tosters near Feldkirch, Austria. One 8´ manual with ten stops and pedal with two stops.


The third recording is a beauty: the organ sounds a marvel, and the idea of using the reed in the pedal (pull down from an upper manual, I think?) works wonders (but is a trifle overdone, because the theme appears too often; it is, I think, meant to mingle with the rest of the work in a less clear way). But it is too legato, and all one hears is the upper voice and some harmonic support vaguely theme-related. The many extraneous sounds during the recording make wonder if this a home made recording? If it is, hearty congratulations to the player.

Despite the fact,that it is a live recording I find the sound is wery good displaying this organ to great advantage. I want to give Marc the chance to guess the name of the organist, but of course I shall reveal it later.


That said, the counterpoints of the art of fugue are perhaps too short (excepting the double and triple fugues) to have an idea of the overall approach of the organist. As i said, the large organ fugues give us a better idea of the structural approach of the musician.

Yes, and I will think of finding some better examples.

[Marc]

Right again, and Lagacé´s integral is of course more interesting than Scott Ross´Dorian. I acquired it a few years ago, but I have not listened to more than about one third of it - there has been so much else to listen to. :)

Lagacé´s touch is a bit more detached than Stockmeier´s, but else I think he reminds a lot of him, being a rather uninterventional kind of artist. And his Beckerath organ is adequate, but not specially interesting. On the contrary I find the different Kreienbrink organs, Stockmeier uses, very interesting.
Yes, the Kreienbrinks sound clear and crispy, I like that.
As I wrote before, the soundclip of the Montréal organ (Scott Ross) reminded me of the 'Tamburini' sound, a bit superficial really.

I found out that there are 6 volumes of Lagacé's set available at the Dutch library, so I added these to my favourites .... someday I'll borrow them. But my favourite list is very long - there's so much else to listen to. :)

[Marc]

[About his 3rd recent upload]
Despite the fact, that it is a live recording I find the sound is very good displaying this organ to great advantage. I want to give Marc the chance to guess the name of the organist, but of course I shall reveal it later.

I just downloaded and listened to these two clips .... with great pleasure .... and again I have the feeling that to me the organ might be the best suited instrument for Die Kunst der Fuge.
I know I should take another listen to the soundclips, but my first guess would be ..... Corti .... ??
On a nice, yet not flabbergasting Tamburini again (like his integral)?

[pe-zulu]

I just downloaded and listened to these two clips .... with great pleasure .... and again I have the feeling that to me the organ might be the best suited instrument for Die Kunst der Fuge.
I know I should take another listen to the soundclips, but my first guess would be ..... Corti .... ??
On a nice, yet not flabbergasting Tamburini again (like his integral)?

Right again, Alessio Corti on the Tamburini organ of the protestantic church in Milano. He also used that organ for his integral, but not for the AoF, which was recorded on the organ of Maria Secreta.

[Marc]

Right again, Alessio Corti on the Tamburini organ of the protestantic church in Milano. He also used that organ for his integral, but not for the AoF, which was recorded on the organ of Maria Secreta.
It was a rather lucky guess .... I found it 'suspicious' that you wanted to give me another chance .... it reminded me of some recent online blabbering elsewhere on the digital highway. ;)

Btw: just now, I checked the same highway (via Google) if this live-recording might be available on disc.
I used these parameters:
"die kunst der fuge" bach organ "live-recording" corti
I didn't find a link with a disc, but I did find something very interesting!

http://avaxhome.ws/music/classical/bach_kunst_der_fuge.html

http://rapidshare.com/files/226357060/ArteFuga.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/226370171/ArteFuga.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/226378753/ArteFuga.part3.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/331834167/Locandina.rar

I'm downloading right now .... man, I like this board! :D

[Rodrigo de Sá]

This is not quite, what I wrote. I wrote, that pointed articulation does not exclude long phrases = long phrasing. My intention is to find some well-working examples of this.


You are right, that is not what you wrote, but I understood you, it was just my mistake when writing.

I will try and get something curious.

[pe-zulu]

Dear Rodrigo, may I ask which organ your new avatar depicts?

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Yes, of course. It is the organ of the Santa Cruz (Holy Cross) Monastery in Coimbra. It was initially built by Heitor Lobo in 1530, and then progressively enlarged. It is a large 16' with three divisions that are playable from the same keyboard (as often happens in Iberia).

I have not yet played it but it has been recently restored. As I am coming more often to this forum (because of the excellent posting!) it occurred to me to change the avatar as the casework is fairly impressive.

Now Coimbra is relatively far from Lisbon and I did not make the trip yet, but when I do I will inform.

You may find more information here (http://www.meloteca.com/orgao-coimbra-mosteiro-santa-cruz.htm). As you know, «Flautado» is Principal, «baixo» is the bass half and «tiples» the treble half; the other names are easy to translate. The reeds, of course, have odd names, and except for the trumpet (trompeta or trombeta or also trompa) are somewhat different from the northern ones.

In fact it has occurred to me to begin a thread on Iberian organ music, now that I know how to download files (but I wonder about © issues!). This is a long due task I promised to fulfil, as you know.

Thank you for your interest. :)

[pe-zulu]

Thanks, Rodrigo, for the explanation of the organ. It seems to be an organ with a cornucopia of reeds.

Now three different versions of the BWV 582. Chosen to illustrate my words about articulation/phrasing. You are BTW wellcome to guess about the performers and organs.

No.1)
Very short articulated, often in a degree as to make the perception of the phrasing impossible. The passacaglia- theme is already at the first statement cut up into fifteen small pieces. But else an energetic, tense reading.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/3t5tzn5ktvn/01 Passacaglia.mp3


No.2)
Not quite so short articulated, just enough to be what I consider stylish, and not interferring with the phrasing. You are not in doubt, that the organist phrases the main theme right from the outset in two halves -as one should, IMO. Registrations are very consequential, without fussy changes. My favorite of the three.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/ie4kzijultm/02 Passacaglia.mp3


No.3)
More legato presentation of the main theme, played in one long breath. and I often find the phrasings too long. On the other hand the articulation seems a bit pianistic, the organist playing either legato or staccato and nothing really in between.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/dvzjmfyiaz2/03 Passacaglia.mp3

[bat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_RVm9BTUig
Forget Walcha, Heiller and Alain... here comes Keith Emerson!

[Marc]

[Keith Emerson on YouTube]
Forget Walcha, Heiller and Alain... here comes Keith Emerson!
Dear Bat, I appreciate your enthousiasm.
But to me, this is nothing but snobbish pop rubbish.
Clips like these remind me of my happiness and relief when Ramones & Sex Pistols arrived on the scene.

Ray Manzarek only rarely played a Hammond, but I'd prefer him to Emerson any time (The Changeling!). But then, I just love The Doors.

[pe-zulu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_RVm9BTUig
Forget Walcha, Heiller and Alain... here comes Keith Emerson!

:SLEEP::SLEEP::SLEEP:

Well, if it must be Emerson, I prefer the Emerson Quartet.:)

[ar-t]

Dear Bat, I appreciate your enthousiasm.
But to me, this is nothing but snobbish pop rubbish.
Clips like these remind me of my happiness and relief when Ramones & Sex Pistols arrived on the scene.

Ray Manzarek only rarely played a Hammond, but I'd prefer him to Emerson any time (The Changeling!). But then, I just love The Doors.


Well, can't agree with the Ramones, and Sex Pistols, but the rest is spot on. Emerson did have a tendency to pretentious, smarmy nonsense.