Cantata BWV 51 - Discussions

Cantata BWV 51
Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen!
Discussions - Part 6

Continue from Part 5

Discussions in the Week of July 20, 2008

Stephen Benson wrote (July 20, 2008):
Introduction to BWV 51 "Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen!"

...otherwise known as "Murder on the High C's".

The title of a CD featuring the "singing" of Florence Foster Jenkins, that designation seems to fit. There are three high C's in this cantata -- two in the first movement (with the repeat) and one in the third. Listening to my seventh (and last!) version this evening, the excruciating high-C shriek of the soprano, who shall remain anonymous, just about lifted me out of my chair. It was almost as if she, clearly close kin to Jenkins, knew that the only way she was going to achieve her goal was by forcing herself, in the first movement, to press on from the bottom of the run with the intention of getting to the top by sheer force of will. She did.

Unfortunately, she left me shattered in a ditch along the way. She is the perfect example of the soprano who feels that the higher she sings, the louder she has to sing. Maybe it's not a feeling. Maybe it's the only way she can physically get there.

All kidding aside, if the soprano can't cut it, it ain't gonna work! And, all the more kidding aside, it is my understanding that high C's should not pose that much of a challenge to a soprano. To my ears, they clearly did to this singer on this day.

BWV 51, the work itself, in previous years has proven to be a catalyst for discussion, much of it contentious, but all paying tribute to the magnetic effect it has on listeners. Last week, discussion included a version of a cantata (BWV 120a) for which there exists only a single complete recording. This week's boasts a list of 61. Links to the eight pages of recordings and the extensive five- part discussion can be found at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV51.htm . Perhaps it's the sheer profusion of material related to this cantata, both in recordings and in the literature, that provokes so much controversy. Perhaps it's the multiplicity of styles and contrasting ideas they represent. Perhaps it's the focus on a single individual who, for the most part, has to carry the burden of making this all work. Everybody seems to have his own favorite.

With so much already having been written and easily available, I'll keep these opening remarks brief: identification of the primary characteristics of the movements and a sampling of outstanding unresolved issues. For the past couple weeks, there's been ample activity on the List, but precious little devoted to the music itself. Please feel free to weigh in on this cantata. With all that's been said, what remains is still inexhaustible.

Determining the exact origins of BWV 51 has been complicated by several unusual characteristics. Ostensibly first performed in Leipzig on September 17, 1730, the Fifteenth Sunday after Trinity, indications are that the work may have been composed for an earlier unspecified occasion. The text and the celebratory style are unrelated to the scripture for that Sunday (which speaks of vanity and faithlessness), Bach originally indicated that the work could be adapted for general use ("et in ogni tempo"), and the designation "Dominica 15 post Trinitatis" only appeared subsequently. As Durr and others have pointed out, the writing is Italianate in its scoring.

As a vehicle for the soprano, BWV 51 in its outer movements is a rigorous test of a soprano's agility, range, and stamina, and in the middle movements of her ability to sing lyrically and with feeling.

Mvt. 1: A brilliant opening aria in C Major that takes the form of a da capo duet between trumpet and soprano. It seems to be generally accepted that the technically demanding trumpet part was written with Bach's favorite trumpeter, Gottfried Reiche, in mind,

Mvt. 2: A recitative that is more lyrical arioso than declamatory in nature. Note the word painting -- the lurching, staggering, uneven melisma -- on 'schwacher' (faltering) and 'lallen' (stammering).

Mvt. 3: A rapturous introspective dal segno aria with the soloist supported by an ostinato walking bass continuo set in triplets where the figures move constantly upward.

Mvt. 4: A chorale fantasia where the cantus firmus soprano melody -- a verse from Johann Gramann's hymn "Nun lob, mein Seel, den Herren" -- is accompanied by a lively and irresistible violin duet and continuo. That, in turn, leads directly into the closing fugato 'Alleluia', prompting the return of the brilliant trumpet accompaniment. It has been suggested that the writing for soprano here is quite instrumental in nature, and the character of the closing takes more the form of a trumpet duet, where the soprano voice plays more the role of a trumpet. That theory is bolstered by the presence of the almost textless closing.

Unresolved is the question of whom Bach had in mind while writing the challenging soprano part, which along with its technical difficulties in range, agility, and stamina, requires an enormous variety of affective color. Was it written for a boy soprano or for a professional female or castrato? Adherents of each position trot out their evidence, and there seems to be reasonable justification for all of them, depending on one's predisposition. There's even the suggestion, well-reasoned, and one that I find attractive, that the piece may have been written for Anna Magdalena Bach and a Bach family celebration in 1730. Anyone interested in that theory can return to the "Discussions - Part 3" on the website where it is detailed and argued.

Unresolved, as well, and linked to the previous question, is the intended site of the performance, whether hall, auditorium, or church.Also unresolved is the exact nature of the trumpet that was used in the initial performances, and the appropriate form of the trumpet and the style of playing to be employed in modern performances. Extensive argument and analysis, again, as with all these questions, is available in the earlier discussions.

Trying to compare recordings, with so many available, is a daunting task. For a long time I found myself listening almost exclusively to one version (Rilling/Auger [28]), but in expanding my listening, I began to appreciate more and more the felicities of other interpretations.

Sincere and technically secure performances are the rule, not the exception, and with so many performances available, the number that please is really surprising. I finally decided that the rating process involved too much nit-picking and that I would be better off being more indiscriminate in accepting what some might see as minor flaws. The less I criticized, the more enjoyment I gained from a larger number of recordings. Of the seven that I have, only one really disappoints me (the Florence Foster Jenkins impersonation of my first paragraph). The other six all make me happy, albeit for different reasons, perhaps. Whatever...

Listen. Enjoy. Respond.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 20, 2008):
BWV 51 "Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen!" FULL SCORE

[To Stephen Benson] And a reminder that the full score can be downloaded as a PDF at:
http://imslp.org/wiki/Cantatas%2C_BWV_51-60_%28Bach%2C_Johann_Sebastian%29

William Hoffman wrote (July 21, 2008):
Cantata BWV 51: Fugitive Notes (Provenance)

Thank you one and all for the prior, stiumlating discussions.

Fugitive Provenance notes:

Bach may have composed Cantata BWV 51 to fill a gap in his third annual cycle. The distribution of the Bach estate in 1750 shows that in the Third Cycle, beginning with the 13^th Sunday After Trinity through the last Sunday, the 23^rd after Trinity, C.P.E. received all the scores while Friedemann got all the parts, except for Cantata BWV 169, where Friedemann received both the score and parts. Cantata BWV 169, composed in 1726 for the 18^th Sunday after Trinity, opens with a sinfonia adapted from the first movement of the Clavier Concerto, BWV 1053. The adaptation was one of a series probably to showcase Friedemann's keyboard-performing talent. While Duerr's Chronology places Cantata BWV 51 in the third cycle, Wolff (JSB:TLM, p.285) places it in Table 8.12, Cantatas and Related Works outside the Annual Cycles, and lists no cantata for the 15^th Sunday After Trinity in Table 8.10, Third Annual Cycle.

There is a supposition in some quarters (I do not have a source) that between 1732 and 1735, Bach may have reperformed Cantata BWV 51, either for the 15th Sunday after Trinity or for the adjoining Feast of St. Michael, based upon adjustments in the text.

Finally, there is documented a Friedemann reperformance of Cantata BWV 51 in Halle, based upon trill additions in the parts for first violin and trumpet as well as two new parts for 2^nd trumpet and timpani. This performance may be dated before 1750 (Peter Wollny, Bach Perspectives 2, p. 203-12), while the particular service is not identified. Friedemann was required to present cantatas in Halle every third Sunday as well as feast days. Cantata BWV 31 may have been presented on Easter Sunday between 1746 and 1750, and Cantata BWV 34 possibly was performed on Pentecost Sunday in 1746 or 1747.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 21, 2008):
William Hoffman wrote:
< Finally, there is documented a Friedemann reperformance of Cantata BWV 51 in Halle, based upon trill additions in the parts for first violin and trumpet as well as two new parts for 2^nd trumpet and timpani. >
Yum, yum! I love Willi's additions to Papa's music! I prefer his edition with trumpets and timpani in Cantata BWV 80, "Ein feste Burg".

Is the music published?

Bradley Lehman wrote (July 21, 2008):
<< Finally, there is documented a Friedemann reperformance of Cantata BWV 51 in Halle, based upon trill additions in the parts for first violin and trumpet as well as two new parts for 2nd trumpet and timpani. >>
Christine Schäefer's recording of that version is excellent, with Goebel/MAK [52].

Stephen Benson wrote (July 21, 2008):
[To Bradley Lehman] The Goebel/Schaefer/MAK recording [52] was one I didn't listen to very often, and I think a large part of that was the WAY in which I listened to it. I think I too often get into the comparative mode, where I play several versions of the same music side-by-side, and when I do that I get too critical about insignificant details. In the case of this recording, I also found the shock of Goebel's tempo somewhat disorienting. Accustomed to the slower tempos of my other six recordings of BWV 51, Goebel's sounded, not just noticeably quicker, but aggressive, as well. After reading Brad's recommendation, I went back and listened to it all by itself, completely out of the context of the "normal" performance tempos for this work. (Goebel's is a good minute-and-a-half faster than the next fastest recording and more than three-and-a-half minutes faster than my longest.) Heard by itself, what I had previously experienced as aggression now became an expression of celebratory excitement.

Certainly, the additional trumpet part and tympani, in themselves a radical departure from the original scoring, may have contributed to the overall effect, but, for the first time, I was able to experience with fresh ears the clamorous exhiliration of the opening aria and the closing Alleluia. Being able to internalize that experience made it much easier to appreciate the beautiful job Schaefer does with the inner movements.

I do have one question, however. Others have commented on how pleased they were that Goebel had slowed things down for this recording. The tempo here seems challenging enough (which Schaefer handles with aplomb)! Could it -- and in particular the opening aria -- possibly be played any faster?

Bradley Lehman wrote (July 21, 2008):
Stephen Benson wrote:
< Accustomed to the slower tempos of my other six recordings of BWV 51, Goebel's [52] sounded, not just noticeably quicker, but aggressive, as well. After reading Brad's recommendation, I went back and listened to it all by itself, completely out of the context of the "normal" performance tempos for this work. (Goebel's is a good minute-and-a-half faster than the next fastest recording and more than three-and-a-half minutes faster than my longest.) Heard by itself, what I had previously experienced as aggression now became an expression of celebratory excitement. Certainly, the additional trumpet part and tympani, in themselves a radical departure from the original scoring, may have contributed to the overall effect, but, for the first time, I was able to experience with fresh ears the clamorous exhiliration of the opening aria and the closing Alleluia. >
When I played it most recently for my young son, he demanded to hear the two outer movements four times each. "Again!" "Again!" Love those drums.

I like the way this performance uses both harpsichord and organ, sometimes together, sometimes separately.

Stephen Benson wrote (July 21, 2008):
Bradley Lehman wrote:
< When I played it most recently for my young son, he demanded to hear the two outer movements four times each. "Again!" "Again!" >
We stubborn ole' Swedes, combined with ye stubborn ole' New England Yankees, take a little longer to come to our senses.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 21, 2008):
BWV 51 - Italian Influences

I know I'm a bit obsessed with Bach's connection with Dresden, but I'm wondering if there is specific Italian repertoire which was performed there which could have influenced Cantata BWV 51. For instance, Vivaldi's Concerto Grosso in C major ('in ogni instrumenti') has striking similarities.

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
Stephen Benson wrote:
< ...otherwise known as "Murder on the High C's".
The title of a CD featuring the "singing" of Florence Foster Jenkins, that designation seems to fit. There are three high C's in this cantata -- two in the first movement (with the repeat) and one in the third.
And, all the more kidding aside, it is my understanding that high C's should not pose that much of a challenge to a soprano. >
Right. Although in principle, if this cantata was performed in church, presumably the soprano would have to be male. And there are not a lot of male sopranos (juvenile or otherwise) out there who have a high C. I remember hearing a recording of such a person on an old web site which people who have been on list for a while may remember, but has been shut down. It was a boy soprano, tone quality OK but in terms of rhythm and expression... uneven. Not something I'd want to emulate.

< "Dominica 15 post Trinitatis" only appeared subsequently. As Durr and others have pointed out, the writing is Italianate in its scoring. >
Could I ask you to elaborate? The only difference that I've seen between it and other cantatas is that it uses a trumpet as the solo instrument, and the melodic aspect of the trumpet part strikes me as 'idiomatically trumpet'. So, obviously a bit different from the string or oboe solo parts that appear in the cantatas.

< As a vehicle for the soprano, BWV 51 in its outer movements is a rigorous test of a soprano's agility, range, and stamina, >
Yeah, your instrument does have to be in good shape physically to be able to do it properly.

< That, in turn, leads directly into the closing fugato 'Alleluia', prompting the return of the brilliant trumpet accompaniment. It has been suggested that the writing for soprano here is quite instrumental in nature, and the character of the closing takes more the form of a trumpet duet, where the soprano voice plays more the role of a trumpet. That theory is bolstered by the presence of the almost textless closing. >
I've always, ever since I was a child, had the impthat all the Baroque oratorio/cantata repertoire treats the voice as an instrument. Particularly when singing fast passages, I would 'pretend I was a violin', and presto, the articulation would come out properly. I must say, however, that there is a clear difference in the articulation of the voice part in this cantata. I definitely would say the above comments apply to the first movement as well as the fifth.

I remember listening to that boy soprano I mentioned earlier, and it seems this point had escaped him. I found him articulating certain bits in a distinctly un-trumpetlike manner, and frankly it was a little annoying. In particular, what stands out is the B section of the ABA form (namely 'Was der Himmel und die Welt / an Geschoepfen in sich haelt / muessen dessen Ruhm erhoe--------------------hen' etc.) there are some quite gymnastic leaps on that long syllable which I bet it would not even cross a trumpeter's mind to do with a legato articulation. And it never crossed my mind either, until I heard that recording...

Another thing I want to say about the matter of gender. This matter has been touched upon in private correspondence with someone off-list, and yes, I agree with the sentiments expressed by my correspondent that this piece is challenging for a female soprano. It is one of those pieces that has a definite 'male' feel to it, although given the high range it is far from obvious at first go. I'd say that for a woman to do it properly, she has to place her voice a little differently from usual, and it is more difficult to place it in a 'male' way given the register issue. Male alto placement is much easier to do.

When I talk about different types of placement, I mean setting up the organs involved in producing sound, in a particular way, to get a particular tone quality result.

< Unresolved is the question of whom Bach had in mind while writing the challenging soprano part, which along with its technical difficulties in range, agility, and stamina, requires an enormous variety of affective color. Was it written for a boy soprano or for a professional female or castrato? Adherents of each position trot out their evidence, and there seems to be reasonable justification for all of them, depending on one's predisposition. >
My disposition is that of a female soprano. I've already given my thoughts on the gender of the intended performer. My only question here is whether the person was to be a juvenile or an adult. I would lean towards a juvenile, because it seems to me an adult castrato might be a bit too unwieldy to manage the pyrotechnics. Although then again, can a juvenile produce an appropriate trumpetlike sound? You know what, when I practice tomorrow, if I'm feeling up to doing 'Jauchzet...' I will try it with a consciously 'adult' tone quality similar to what one might use for Mozart's 'Exsultate, jubilate' - which is very evidently written for an adult male - and see what I come up with. All for now.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 22, 2008):
BWV 51 "Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen!" - Castrati

Cara Emily Thornton wrote:
< My only question here is whether the person was to be a juvenile or an adult. I would lean towards a juvenile, because it seems to me an adult castrato might be a bit too unwieldy to manage the pyrotechnics. >
Castrati such as Farinelli were legendary for both their extraordinary range and quicksilver.

Some of the modern male sopranos make an extraodinary sound. The folllowing clip is the aria, "Se in Campo Armato" from Ferrandini's "Catone in Utica" sung by Robert Crowe. The coloratura of both voice and trumpet gives us a good context for "Jauchzet Gott":
http://www.robertcrowe.com/12%20Se%20in%20campo%20armato.mp3

And if curiosity gets the better of you, here's what the singer looks like:
http://www.robertcrowe.com/

The last castrato In the Sistine Choir was recorded in 1902. He was reputedly never a great singer and is recorded at the end of his career but you can hear many of the distinctive qualities of the castrato voice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbV6PGAWaIU&feature=related

Although it's pretty certain that neither male castrato or woman ever sang in St. Thomas'. Leipzig, during Bach's tenure, I'm curious about the protocols in Dresden. Castrati sang in the catholic Chapel Royal but did they also sing in the Lutheran chapels of the court and in the churches of the city? I suspect the Lutherans were probably not sympathetic.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 22, 2008):
BWV 51

Cara Emily Thornton wrote:
>My disposition is that of a female soprano. I've already given my thoughts on the gender of the intended performer. My only question here is whether the person was to be a juvenile or an adult. I would lean towards a juvenile, because it seems to me an adult castrato might be a bit too unwieldy to manage the pyrotechnics. Although then again, can a juvenile produce an appropriate trumpetlike sound?<
Ouch! I think we need to draw the line on specifically HIP practice at this point. Give it your 21st century best effort, boys or ladies.

Kim Patrick Clow wrote (July 22, 2008):
Douglas Cowling asks, regading Italian influences]:
< I know I'm a bit obsessed with Bach's connection with Dresden, but I'm wondering if there is specific Italian repertoire which was performed there which could have influenced Cantata BWV 51. >

Big time! Alessandro Scarlatti wrote quite a few cantatas for solo voice, basso continuo and a trumpet solo. Maybe Fux and Caldara's operas were an influence too? There are quite a few arias from their operas that have extremely difficult trumpet parts. Edward Tarr has a book that deals specifically with this material.

The connection between Fux/Caldara with Dresden would have been via Zelenka (he studied with Fux). Telemann also wrote a few cantatas in this vein for his "Harmony in God's Service" which he published himself.

William Hoffman wrote (July 22, 2008):
[Italian influences] My best source is the extensive notes in the recording Baroque Duet, Kathleen Battle and Wynton Marsalis (Sony 1992). Besides some very apporpriate and pertinent music -- Scarlatti, Stradella, Handel Predieri and JSB BWV 51/1,4 -- there are extensive, exemplary notes from Ellen T. Harris, including the famous Farinelli challenge as well as the composers' recorded music.

David Glenn Lebut Jr. wrote (July 22, 2008):
[To Douglas Cowling, regarding Italian influences] Actually, the Italian influence on Bach's music goes farther back than that--all the way back to his youth and young manhood. Some fruits of this influence were BWV 540, 588, 589, 590, 592-597, 592a, 574 (and 574a-b), 579, 972-987, 949-951, and 1046-1065.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 22, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote, regarding Castrati:
< Although in principle, if this cantata was performed in church, presumably the soprano would have to be male. And there are not a lot of male sopranos (juvenile or otherwise) out there who have a high C. I remember hearing a recording of such a person on an old web site which people who have been on list for a while may remember, but has been shut down. It was a boy soprano, tone quality OK but in terms of rhythm and expression... uneven. Not something I'd want to emulate. >
Personally, in my opinion there would be no reason why the matter of this cantata being performed in church would suggest a male personage. All of the great recordings I've heard vary, and some of the women have a more operatic approach, while some have a lighter pure tone. As a singer I always come back to the basics--a voice is simply a voice, and the variety of voices is wonderful. I am completely sure a female singer could be just as inspirational as a male singer, and I do not at all sense this piece to be one of male character...especially in the final Alleluia. Neither do I find the Exulatate Jubilate, which I can also singto be male in character. Alleluia is a great term of praise regardless of sex.

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
[Jean Laaninen, regarding Castrati] Of course I agree. But the fact of the matter is, we have evidence that the 18th-century crowd didn't - there was apparently a prohibition on women singing in church. As far as I know, if someone knows better they can correct me, they were in fact expected to be completely silent during the services. This was no doubt their interpretation of certain passages in I Corinthians 14 and I Timothy 2. To this day, in the Lutheran Church in Poland, furthermore, women are permitted to preach, they are permitted to sing non-liturgical sacred music during the service, they are even permitted to lead the service, but they are not allowed to be pastors and (with only one exception that I know of: a young lady who, in addition to being a seminary graduate, is studying to be a professional singer - but even that exception required a LONG conversation with the bishop) they are not allowed to sing their part of the liturgy if they are leading it. So there are vestiges of this attitude in Europe even today.

Jane Newble wrote (July 22, 2008):
[To Douglas Cowling, regarding Castrati]
What about this boy soprano?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzstMw2ZB30&feature=related
It seems to me that he would be able to sing 'Jauchzet' without too many problems.
One of the comments stated that this is Robin Schlotz from the Tölzer Knabenchor near Munich in Germany.

Neil Halliday wrote (July 22, 2008):
[To Jane Newble, regarding Castrati] Amazing. He is good even on the high F's (a 4th higher than the high C's in 'Jauchzet").

Also, have a listen to an excellent performance of BWV 51/1 with boy soprano Clint Van Der Linde [42], which can be accessed in the 'Files' section of this list (top left of this page - 2^nd item from the bottom).

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
[To Jane Newble, regarding Castrati] OH yeah. He'd do it without any problem, and with a proper trumpetlike sound too ;;) I wonder if he's done it already?

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
Douglas Cowling wrote, regarding Castrai:
< Castrati such as Farinelli were legendary for both their extraordinary range and quicksilver. >
No doubt the best of the lot had that.

< Some of the modern male sopranos make an extraodinary sound. The folllowing clip is the aria, "Se in Campo Armato" from Ferrandini's "Catone in Utica" sung by Robert Crowe. The coloratura of both voice and trumpet gives us a good context for "Jauchzet Gott":
http://www.robertcrowe.com/12%20Se%20in%20campo%20armato.mp3 >
Wasn't able to get this link to work. But I did manage to open another link, and while there wasn't any coloratura, the voice is evidently light enough to handle that sort of thing precisely.

< And if curiosity gets the better of you, here's what the singer looks like:
http://www.robertcrowe.com/ >
Yum! ;-)

< The last castrato In the Sistine Choir was recorded in 1902. He was reputedly never a great singer and is recorded at the end of his career but you can hear many of the distinctive qualities of the castrato voice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbV6PGAWaIU&feature=related
Although it's pretty certain that neither male castrato or woman ever sang in St. Thomas'. Leipzig, during Bach's tenure, I'm curious about the protocols in Dresden. Castrati sang in the catholic Chapel Royal but did they also sing in the Lutheran chapels of the court and in the churches of the city? I suspect the Lutherans were probably not sympathetic. >
The weird part is that the Catholics would be, given their views on procreation and such... I mean, it's one thing to be celibate and voluntarily not make use of one's procreative ability, but quite another to artificially get rid of this ability entirely. Isn't that sort of thing prohibited in the Catholic Church nowadays (except out of medical necessity)? Are there any Catholics on list who can tell us what the rules are now?

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
[To Ed Myskowski] I agree that gender doesn't matter, but tone quality does. What I'm saying is that to get the right tone quality, a female soprano might have to fiddle with the placement and do things a little differently from usual. Although that having been said, I must say that as the register gets higher and higher, the difference between male and female gets less and less. So it gets easier to cross the line if need be.

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
Neil Halliday wrote, regarding Castrati:
< Also, have a listen to an excellent performance of BWV 51/1 with boy soprano Clint Van Der Linde [42], which can be accessed in the 'Files' section of this list (top left of this page - 2^nd item from the bottom). >

Umm, I would beg to differ whether it's excellent. He does keep the rhythm even, and is for the most part in tune. I've heard much worse in this regard. The high C's are, however, very evidently the very top of his range. But there are three things that really bug me:

1) There's not enough expressive and dynamic contrast between the A and B sections of the ABA form.

2) There's a breathy quality suggesting his vocal cords are not closing properly. I hope he didn't injure himself by singing such material at such a young age. At any rate this breathy tone quality seriously detracts from any trumpetlike quality to the singing. And

3) I definitely prefer a much crisper articulation. Really - he slurs bits that I bet it would never cross any trumpeter's mind to slur. And to me, the effect is a bit sloppy... Any trumpeters on list want to comment?

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 22, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote:, regarding Castrati:
< Of course I agree. But the fact of the matter is, we have evidence that the 18^th-century crowd didn't - there was apparently a prohibition on women singing in church. As far as I know, if someone knows better they can correct me, they were in fact expected to be completely silent during the services. This was no doubt their interpretation of certain passages in I Corinthians 14 and I Timothy 2. To this day, in the Lutheran Church in Poland, furthermore, women are permitted to preach, they are permitted to sing non-liturgical sacred music during the service, they are even permitted to lead the service, but they are not allowed to be pastors and (with only one exception that I know of: a young lady who, in addition to being a seminary graduate, is studying to be a professional singer - but even that exception required a LONG conversation with the bishop) they are not allowed to sing their part of the liturgy if they are leading it. So there are vestiges of this attitude in Europe even today. >
Change does come slowly in some circles. But in the USA for most Lutherans these old boundaries do not exist, and I have taken the role of liturgist on occasion here as have many women. The ELCA has had many women as pastors for decades, but sadly unfortunately to my taste we do not have the cantatas on a regular basis for what are probably sufficient reasons...but that is another topic. I have to say I am glad that the old taboos have been broken.

Thanks for sharing this history, and I am hopeful that one day greater freedoms will exist in Europe where they do not yet.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 22, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote:, regarding Castrati:
< I mean, it's one thing to be celibate and voluntarily not make use of one's procreative ability, but quite another to artificially get rid of this ability entirely. Isn't that sort of thing prohibited in the Catholic Church nowadays (except out of medical necessity)? >
The Catholic Church has always officially condemned the practice of voluntary or coerced castration while continuing enjoy its musical benefits from the late 16th century until 1903 when Pius X reestablished the Sistine Chapel and introduced boys. Until that time, only falstettists and castrati sang in the papal choir.

"Incomplete" men have never been able to become priests, a prohibition which goes back to the earliest centuries of the church, long before the voice became a musical vogue. The Sistine Chapel choir was supposed to be all clerics -- Palestrina was dismissed because he was a married layman -- but the rules were "overlooked" as the popularity of the castrati increased.

Interestingly, both the Anglican and Lutheran churches seem never to have permitted castrati to sing in church although both maintained a no-woman policy which is still in evidence in the principal cathedral and collegiate choirs (St. Thomas is an all-male affair). Handel managed to slip in a few women at the Chapel Royal as soloists and there was a grudging acceptance of women as soloists in Bach's time, although never in his churches. Castrati did sing in Handel's oratorios but these were performed in theatres and never in churches -- the Bishop of London prohibited performances of "Messiah" in church.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 22, 2008):
Douglas Cowling wrote, regarding Castrati:
< Interestingly, both the Anglican and Lutheran churches seem never to have permitted castrati to sing in church although both maintained a no-woman policy which is still in evidence in the principal cathedral and collegiate choirs (St. Thomas is an all-male affair). Handel managed to slip in a few women at the Chapel Royal as soloists and there was a grudging acceptance of women as soloists in Bach's time, although never in his churches. Castrati did sing in Handel's oratorios but these were performed in theatres and never in churches -- the Bishop of London prohibited performances of "Messiah" in church. >
You've provided some interesting historical detail. In my era our choir was mixed, but perhaps to cater to varying tastes and history, we also broke into male and female choirs for a portion of our performance tour. I never did consider that the reason for this might also have a historical basis because by the 1960s many of the prejudices against women were beginning to disappear, and thankfully most of them are gone in this sector of the world. Jean Laaninen

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 22, 2008):
Douglas Cowling wrote, regarding Castrati:
< "Incomplete" men have never been able to become priests, a prohibition which goes back to the earliest centuries of the church, >
Even further than that. No doubt others on this list are more precisely familiar with the rules, but it seems to me that back in the days when there was a temple in Israel, the same applied to the priests who did (or didn't) serve there as well...

Stephen Benson wrote (July 23, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote:
<< "Dominica 15 post Trinitatis" only appeared subsequently. As Durr and others have pointed out, the writing is Italianate in its scoring. >>
< Could I ask you to elaborate? The only difference that I've seen between it and other cantatas is that it uses a trumpet as the solo instrument, and the melodic aspect of the trumpet part strikes me as 'idiomatically trumpet'. So, obviously a bit different from the string or oboe solo parts that appear in the cantatas. >
With respect to the scoring, Simon Heighes, in the Bach volume of the Oxford Composer Companions edited by Malcolm Boyd, states, "It is scored for a soprano, obbligato trumpet, and strings, a combination found in Italian cantatas, such as 'Su le sponde del Tebro' by Alessandro Scarlatti (1660-1725), but unique among Bach's cantatas, and with few if any direct parallels in the German cantata repertory as a whole." He goes on to point out: " 'Jauchzet Gott' is similar in structure to the Italian solo motet (da capo aria--recitative--da capo aria, leading into an 'Alleluja'), but Bach added a chorale before the final movement. The opening movement is related to the trumpet arias of contemporary Italian 'opera seria', dominated throughout by fanfare figures and virtuoso word-painting, though its heroic tone is here directed toward the praise of God...It [the chorale] leads directly into the final 'Alleluja', one in a long line of such coloratura movements typical of the Italian motet..."

With nothing other than a general impression on which to base it, I would also like to suggest that the arioso-like nature of the recitative might be more typically Italian than German. (For Ed's benefit, I would like to add that that observation is mere speculation on my part. Long live speculation!)

Stephen Benson wrote (July 24, 2008):
Douglas Cowling wrote [Castrati]:
< The Catholic Church has always officially condemned the practice of voluntary or coerced castration while continuing to enjoy its musical benefits from the late 16^th century until 1903 when Pius X reestablished the Sistine Chapel and introduced boys. Until that time, only falstettists and castrati sang in the papal choir. >
Compare this to Charles Burney's comments in his journals from his continental trip in 1770: "[I]t is my opinion that this cruel operation is but too frequently performed without trial or at least without sufficient proofs of a dawning and improvable voice -- otherwise there could never be found such numbers of them in every great town throughout Italy without any voice at all -- or at least without one sufficient to compensate for the loss."

A footnote (presumably interpolated by H. Edmund Poole, the editor of the 1969 Folio Society edition of Burney's journals) adds:
"According to Samber 'when they used to cut children in their most tender Infancy, there were 200 Eunuchs made, which proved to be good for nothing': the children were thus made doubly miserable, they were maimed in body and their voice was good for nothing 'and it is certain, nothing in Italy is so contemptible as a Eunuch that cannot sing'."

The reference to Samber is to Robert Samber's 1718 English translation -- "Eunuchism Display'd" -- of Charles Ancillon's 1707 "Traité des Eunuchs".

Jane Newble wrote (July 24, 2008):
After non-stop listening through the only 5 recordings I have of this cantata, I am quite ready to hear a bass voice, e.g. Klaus Mertens singing "Ich habe genug" :)

Elly Ameling [20] was really the only one I felt comfortable with, and Ruth Holton [54] came second. Maria Stader was surprisingly good, although I did not like her vibrato voice in the chorale.

While I was listening, I tried to figure out why this difficult soprano voice was written to these words. Ignoring any scholarly speculations, it suddenly hit me as I was reading along with the singing.

The words in the Recitativ belie the extremely wonderful and difficult praise in the music. It is as if even the most jubilant virtuoso singing is only a "schwache Mund" and "schlechtes Lob", when it comes to praising God's majesty and works.

It is possible that Bach would never have written those words himself, and puts this praise into the highest form a human voice can manage. Something like "I'll show you what a "schwaches Mund" can do".

On the other hand, he may have felt just the opposite - that even the highest notes are only reached with difficulty, and that he would have liked to write the music even higher without the limitations of the human voice.Just some musings.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 24, 2008):
Jane Newble wrote: ".
< On the other hand, he may have felt just the opposite - that even the highest notes are only reached with difficulty, and that he would have liked to write the music even higher without the limitations of the human voice. Just some musings.>
Generally speaking, even altos can vocalize up to a high 'C' in rehearsal. But only some voices have a vibrant ring at this peak. As a person who sings a few notes beyond and who knows other singers who do the same, climbing this mountain takes preparation, but I do not believe one must necessarily stand in awe of these notes. The climb up to that point is an exciting preparation anif the 'c' fits into the context of the whole voice that is great. In a light voice the high note will not ring so much, but will be in context with the scalar pattern. In an operatic voice, or the right acoustic the higher notes will ring more definitively, but they are very short really. I doubt Bach would have been as concerned about the range as with the motive that leads to the top of the mountain, as that is what builds the excitement musically.

John Pike wrote (July 25, 2008):
[To Bradley Lehman] Many thanks to Brad, who alerted us to the Goebel/MAK/Schaefer recording [52] of WFB's recording of this. It sounded too good to miss, so I ordered a copy and listened to it this morning. Personally, I found it absolutely thrilling at this speed and I loved the additional parts. I think I prefer the original but it's great fun to hear this version as well.

Jeremy Vosburgh wrote (July 25, 2008):
I don't know about any of you; but I've NEVER heard a satisfactory rendition of this piece; especially the last number. There's something about it that makes it very difficult to interpret convincingly. Even more so, on the high C: how are you supposed to interpret a boring arpeggio that ends with the most sacred of all words (ja) on the highest note Bach ever wrote for a sacred soprano piece???

If I have to listen to one more snidely sung rendition of this piece I'll probably throw the cd against the wall. Today it seems that it is recorded more to show off virtuosity then the proper interpretive reverence. I don't like the early recordings any more than the latter. That being said; I've only listened to five recordings (two old and three new). Perhaps someone here has listened to a recording they actually enjoy. If they have, I'd like to know. :)

I'd be interested in hearing some of the tenors of today have a go at it (an octave down, of course). At least we'd get more of a perceived variation in timbre. I know this is sacrilege, but I'd still be interested in hearing it.

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 25, 2008):
Jeremy Vosburgh wrote:
< I don't know about any of you; but I've NEVER heard a satisfactory rendition of this piece; especially the last number. There's something about it that makes it very difficult to interpret convincingly. Even more so, on the high C: how are you supposed to interpret a boring arpeggio that ends with the most sacred of all words (ja) on the highest note Bach ever wrote for a sacred soprano piece??? >
The Alleluia is definitely a movement where the singer has to imitate a trumpet. That kind of arpeggio sounds quite trumpetlike, don't you think? And especially since there is a trumpet to duo (duel?) with...

Joel Figen wrote (July 25, 2008):
Jeremy Vosburgh wrote:
< I don't know about any of you; but I've NEVER heard a satisfactory rendition of this piece; especially the last number. There's something about it that makes it very difficult to interpret convincingly. Even more so, on the high C: how are you supposed to interpret a boring arpeggio that ends with the most sacred of all words (ja) on the highest note Bach ever wrote for a sacred soprano piece??? >
Odd, I've always felt the most sacred word is "nein" for the following reasons:

1. It protects chastity
2. It aids in weight loss
3. It dispels charlatans and heretics

All in all, a most sacred word :)

I think you're being too hard on us poor singers here. I'm far from a score-fundy, but how much interpretation does it take? 4 notes, staccato on the first three. That about does it for me. This is absolute music, there's no plot. Nothing to convince. There's a text, but at this point, it's all one word over and over Just singing bach's glorious notes is enough to convince me.

Also, would Bach write a boring arpeggio? The"boring" arpeggio is answered by an inverse phrase in the orchestra, as if heaven were responding to the schlechtes Lob from a schwacher Mund with greater blessings (doubled notes). So it's a musical representation of the ideas presented in the recit. (And similar ideas are found throughout the epistles.)

I'm being a pissant here, but the word "ja" isn't really in there, it's al-le-lu-ja. The fact that it's all one word does a lot to stabilize the "interpretation"

< I'd be interested in hearing some of the tenors of today have a go at it (an octave down, of course). At least we'd get more of a perceived variation in timbre. I know this is sacrilege, but I'd still be interested in hearing it. >
Superb notion - all you ultra-authenticists take note: bach would have done the same, had his soprano come up lame that day.

Yes, yes, there's the issue of invertibility - when you change (some) fifths to fourths, you run afoul of some old harmony rules, but quite frankly, to my admittedly modern ears, a fourth is as good as a fifth except perhaps in the lowest register. The main problem therefore is that when an aria and an obligato part are inverted, sometimes the more interesting part is lower and therefore less salient. Country singers manage to make that work, so it's just a matter of rehearsal to make the lower part be more prominent.

I'd go further: transpose it for altos and basses as well. This will raise hob with the trumpet part, but some sort of horn or double reed will be able to step in.

I know it's singable, since I sing it in the bass range. This is one of those pieces that's not quite as difficult as it sounds. For some reason the notes lie in easy places for me to get to, rather like Telemann's fast recorder solos. One feature that makes it relatively easy to sing is that the fireworks of the Alleluja are interrupted by a nice little fugue for strings (probably the only place the viola part is needed) giving the singer plenty of time to rest up for those "boring" arpeggios.

Also, Bach's high c would be closer to what we'd consider a b flat.... when I was a boy I could easily manage an octave higher than a high c. How then should this be sung: effortlessly!

Stephen Benson wrote (July 25, 2008):
Joel Figen wrote:
< Country singers >
Isn't that an oxymoron? : )

< Also, Bach's high c would be closer to what we'd consider a b flat.... >
The answer to one of those questions I meant to ask -- thanks for reading my mind!

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 26, 2008):
Jeremy Vosburgh wrote:
< I don't know about any of you; but I've NEVER heard a satisfactory rendition of this piece; especially the last number. There's something about it that makes it very difficult to interpret convincingly. Even more so, on the high C: how are you supposed to interpret a boring arpeggio that ends with the most sacred of all words (ja) on the highest note Bach ever wrote for a sacred soprano piece??? >
Joel Figen responded:
< Odd, I've always felt the most sacred word is "nein" for the following reasons:
1. It protects chastity
2. It aids in weight loss
3. It dispels charlatans and heretics
All in all, a most sacred word :)
[...]
I'm being a pissant here, but the word "ja" isn't really in there, it's al-le-lu-ja. The fact that it's all one word does a lot to stabilize the "interpretation" >
Ed Myskowski (pissant extraordinaire?) adds:
The etymology of <hallelujah> (Mvt. 4/5) seems to be (OED), praise the lord, Jehovah, or Jah. The high c in Mvt. 1 is on <Jauch-zet>, praise (?). This from a quick look at score and references (and no pretense at expertise), and after listening to a few recordings. Corrections (courteous) welcome. The emphasis on <ja>, repeated from Mvt. 1 to Mvt. 4/5 is probably significant, and Bach at his most subtle and sublime, IMO.

JV:
< I'd be interested in hearing some of the tenors of today have a go at it (an octave down, of course). At least we'd get more of a perceived variation in timbre. I know this is sacrilege, but I'd still be interested in hearing it. >
JF:
< Superb notion - all you ultra-authenticists take note: bach would have done the same, had his soprano come up lame that day. >
EM:
<Bach might have done the same> is more accurate, and even so quite speculative?

JF:
< One feature that makes it relatively easy to sing is that the fireworks of the Alleluja are interrupted bya nice little fugue for strings (probably the only place the viola part is needed) giving the singer plenty of time to rest up for those "boring" arpeggios. >
EM:
Thanks for pointing out the fugue. The counterpoint throughout Mvt 4/5 is outstanding, and perhaps a bit overlooked in our discussions of the trumpet/soprano pyrotechnics? Or perhaps I just need to read a bit more. Either way, comment appreciated.

JF:
< Also, Bach's high c would be closer to what we'd consider a b flat.... when I was a boy I could easily manage an octave higher than a high c. How then should this be sung: effortlessly! >
EM:
<When I was a boy, I could hit a golf ball over that tree right to the green.
[kid hits shot into tree]
Of course, that was fifty years ago, and the tree was only a meter [three feet is the exact quote, I believe] tall back then.>
Paraphrase of USA financial planning commercial.

Apologies for the OT coda. Thanks to everyone, especially vocalists, for the informative BWV 51 posts, and to Steve Benson for the fine introductions.

And to JF: ja,ja, for stimulating ideas. I will leave it to the vocalists to comment on that effortless octave above high c.

Terejia wrote (July 26, 2008):
Stephen Benson wrote:
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/BachCantatas/message/28729
< Mvt. 1: A brilliant opening aria in C Major that takes the form of a da capo duet between trumpet and soprano. It seems to be generally accepted that the technically demanding trumpet part was written with Bach's favorite trumpeter, Gottfried Reiche, in mind, >
I suppose many are already aware of, and someone may well have already pointed out long before my writing, that the beginning notes are the same as K 299, Concert for Flute, Harp and Orchestra by Mozart, and that both in C-dur?

< Mvt. 2: A recitative that is more lyrical arioso than declamatory in nature. Note the word painting -- the lurching, staggering, uneven melisma -- on 'schwacher' (faltering) and 'lallen' (stammering).
Mvt. 3: A rapturous introspective dal segno aria with the soloist supported by an ostinato walking bass continuo set in triplets where the figures move constantly upward.
Mvt. 4: A chorale fantasia where the cantus firmus soprano melody -- a verse from Johann Gramann's hymn "Nun lob, mein Seel, den Herren" -- is accompanied by a lively and irresistible violin duet and continuo. >
I like violin duet here.

< That, in turn, leads directly into the closing fugato 'Alleluia', prompting the return of the brilliant trumpet accompaniment. It has been suggested that the writing for soprano here is quite instrumental in nature, and the character of the closing takes more the form of a trumpet duet, where the soprano voice plays more the role of a trumpet. That theory is bolstered by the presence of the almost textless closing. >
To my personal ears trumpet sounds like God's victory. Ascending Allelujah sounds like ascending to Heaven, with trumpet of, maybe angel? Just my personal feeling.

J. Laurson wrote (July 26, 2008):
Jeremy Vosburgh wrote:
< That being said; I've only listened to five recordings (two old and three new). Perhaps someone here has listened to a recording they actually enjoy. If they have, I'd like to know. :)
I'd be interested in hearing some of the tenors of today have a go at it (an octave down, of course). At least we'd get more of a perceived variation in timbre. I know this is sacrilege, but I'd still be interested in hearing it. >
Why would transposing Bach (Bach, of all composers - and by on octave, of all intervals), be sacrilege?? Who hasn't heard BWV 82 "'Nuff" in all its variations and found them all pleasing, especially the non-original alto transposition? Wherever there is singing, there will be transposing.

Most composers' attitudes are, were, or should have been like Poulenc's, who responded (per post-card) to Gérard Souzay's request simply with: "transposez-moi!".

Jeremy Vosburgh wrote (July 26, 2008):
Thanks for the inciteful responses, all.

I would say that Hallelu means to praise and yah, is the name of God. And perhaps the reason the high C (B and 1/3 flat) is so important to me is because God's name is the last in the arpeggio. I agree that it needn't sound forced or strained. I also remember being a boy soprano and being able to effortlessly hit a double high C. I also remember hitting high G's without the falsetto. :) I also remember dealing the envy of the choir master and the women, which positively choked my enjoyment of singing at a young age (10) (I only returned to it when I was 20). This is a shame because I was still vocalizing good regular high C's when I was 16; two years after my voice broke. :(

As for whether or not the the trumpet is supposed to be in a duet with the singer or a duel.... I would probably say it is not a duel because the trumpet doesn't sound particularly evil (I say "probably" because they could still be in a duel if they were both "good."). But then again, like I said, I've never heard a seamless performance of this piece. It always seems like either the instrument or the voice is winning. It might be nice, during a modern performance, to have both the singer and the trumpeter stand next to each; so as to appreciate each other's company and message more; and bring out the comraderie that is inherent in the score between the two lines. The piece seems to be slightly militaristic and the two lines seem like war buddies encouraging each other, or at the very least two brothers (the younger being the singer).

As usual, others have displayed a more formal knowledge of the piece in question, and so I would step to the side now. But again, I would ask; if anyone HAS heard a recording they genuinely were touched by.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 26, 2008):
Jean Laaninen wrote
<< Generally speaking, even altos can vocalize up to a high 'C' in rehearsal. >>
Jane Newble wrote:
< As an alto myself I would like to hear that, or perhaps on second thoughts I wouldn't. On third thoughts I might just be underprivileged. >
It's one thing to vocalize up so high and quite another to use the high C or higher as a 'public note.' :)

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 26, 2008):
Jane Newble wrote:
< As an alto myself I would like to hear that, or perhaps on second thoughts I wouldn't. On third thoughts I might just be underprivileged. >
I remember once upon a time hearing a recording of Janet Baker singing the Alleluia from Mozart's 'Exsultate, jubilate' WITH the high C at the end. Needless to say, my eyes about popped out when I heard it. For those who aren't intimately familiar with the piece in question, it was apparently written for a castrato whose name escapes me at the moment, and the score does not contain a high C anywhere (the highest note is A). However, there is an unwritten rule that if you have the high C (and aren't obsessive about doing everything exactly as written in the score), you transpose the final cadence up an octave, which gives you a high C. That means that almost every soprano good enough to be singing the piece in public at all puts it in, so that it is perhaps not even widely known that this is a deviation from the original. And like I said, Janet Baker had it as well. Probably it was the highest note in her range, but you have to her cheer her on for even trying...

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 26, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote:
< That means that almost every soprano good enough to be singing the piece in public at all puts it in, so that it is perhaps not even widely known that this is a deviation from the original. And like I said, Janet Baker had it as well. Probably it was the highest note in her range, but you have to her cheer her on for even trying... >
It seems to me that the excitement in Cantata BWV 51 comes from the technical aspects that stretch the human voice and psyche to the ultimate heights. Jeremy had written that none of the recor'touched him' in an emotional context, and also perhaps it was Jeremy who had written about a tenor doing these two (E.J.) works as a contrasting possibility. I think the message gets through quite well in some of the recordings, but knowing what we do before we listen sometimes can pre-condition us to listen in a different manner. We know quality performances take substantial preparation so we listen sometimes to see if the singer can 'cut' it. That aspect moves one away from the transcendental content at times I have observed. I remember during the years I sang in the Messiah chorus everyone was listening for those top notes, and in Lindsborg, Kansas the topic of the week was how well the soloists had done. So I guess what I want to say is that sometimes our response to music is conditioned by what we think we should be hearing, and now and then if it's possible perhaps setting those prejudices aside can add to the maximal quality of the performance we are able to hear. I think being at these events live often makes the story-telling aspect more believable, but I am sure glad I can listen at home, too.

Cara Emily Thornton wrote (July 26, 2008):
Jean Laaninen wrote:
> It seems to me that the excitement in Cantata BWV 51 comes from the technical aspects that stretch the human voice and psyche to the ultimate heights. <
The human voice, maybe. Although then again, there is a lady here in Krakow who can probably sing every note on the piano well enough to do it in public. I once saw a telecast of one of her concerts where she was hitting, for example, ultra-high e (e'''') with the ease with which everyone else hits high C. But yeah, that is the key - most people can't go much beyond high C...

And as for the psyche, I think that differs. Maybe there are people who get nervous about the high notes and it could even have a deleterious effect. Although I would say to these that they should try organizing the concerts themselves. THAT is stressful - to make sure all the i's are dotted and all the t's crossed, and not vice versa [wink].

There are others who just know that they need to pay closer attention to what they're doing at that moment because there's less room for error, they know what they need to be doing, they have it in mind, they pay attention to what they're doing, the note comes out, and the adrenaline rush that probably everyone gets from singing in public, does wonders for their articulation and maybe they convey the impression they're about to take off and start flying around the hall. Maybe that's just a different kind of height. But the latter, you can get even when you're not singing difficult material. It suffices to really believe in what you're doing.

> Jeremy had written that none of the recordings 'touched him' in an > emotional context, and also perhaps it was Jeremy who had written about a tenor doingthese two (E.J.) works as a contrasting possibility. I think the message gets through quite well in some of the recordings, but knowing what we do before we listen sometimes can pre-condition us to listen in a different manner. We know quality performances take substantial preparation so we listen sometimes to see if the singer can 'cut' it. That aspect moves one away from the transcendental content at times I have observed. <
Oh, this sounds so much like what one might say about the Paganini violin concerti... I've heard maybe one or two people who can do those and make them sound like real music, chief among them Viktoria Mullova, who incidentally is also a fine interpreter of Baroque music (and jazz, and just about anything she turns her hand to - her modesty about her abilities notwithstanding - and she does indeed turn her hand to almost anything...).

For some reason, people don't talk about, for example, the fugues from the Bach solo violin sonatas in quite the same way - though the one from the A minor in particular is in spots as tough as any Paganini I've seen. They're more likely to talk about the form, the counterpoint... Of course, someone who plays this material is going to wonder - are they going to fake their way through that chord progression in the cadence before the first episode, or they going to do it for real? Or if the soloist is using a modern instrument, they might think about how far the person will go to achieve a maximally Baroque sound, what they are going to do about bowings...

> I remember during the years I sang in the Messiah chorus everyone was listening for those top notes, and in Lindsborg, Kansas the topic of the week was how well the soloists had done. <
I admit, having written what I did about the Bach fugues above, that it almost seems weird that we often listen to Bach's vocal music differently. And all the more so that for the most part, the man treated the voice as an instrument...

> So I guess what I want to say is that sometimes our response to music is conditioned by what we think we should be hearing, and now and then if it's possible perhaps setting those prejudices aside can add to the maximal quality of the performance we are able to hear. <
It's true: being prepared beforehand (reading the score, etc.) before you go to a concert (to listen, I mean) is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, it may enable you to understand the form better, catch certain details that might otherwise have escaped you. And on the other, yeah, you might be distracted by that knowledge from the 'essence' of the work.

> I think being at these events live often makes the story-telling aspect more believable, but I am sure glad I can listen at home, too. <
Not to mention that when you hear it in public, you know you're getting the real deal, that they didn't splice bits of ten different run-throughs together to get the 'perfect' result. Plus recordings obviate the effect that under normal circumstances, the space you play in is part of your instrument, as it were, and if you are in a recording studio, well, the effect is something like a digital organ. It may be very high-quality, with a hundred stops and four manuals and huge, top-quality speakers built into the walls, but it is still digital...

All for now.

Aryeh Oron wrote (July 27, 2008):
BWV 51 - Provenance

Thomas Braatz contributed Provenance page for Cantata BWV 51 discussion.
See: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Ref/BWV51-Ref.htm

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 27, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote:
>> It seems to me that the excitement in Cantata 51 comes from the technical aspects that stretch the human voice and psyche to the ultimate heights. <<
____ I can listen at home, too.

> Not to mention that when you hear it in public, you know you're getting the real deal, that they didn't splice bits of ten different run-throughs together to get the 'perfect' result. Plus recordings obviate the effect that under normal circumstances, the space you play in is part of your instrument, as it were, and if you are in a recording studio, well, the effect is something like a digital organ. It may be very high-quality, with a hundred stops and four manuals and huge, top-quality speakers built into the walls, but it is still digital... <
My responses:--) Maybe context is almost everything. In live performance one can hear pitch fluctuations that are adjusted in even very high quality recordings. It's simply a case of concerts and recordings being different mediums, and as different elements I find evaluating them differently is wise. But my point about how we hear things is also related to the context of the message since I tend to be a text first thinker. Given there are fewer opportunities in Phoenix for live Bach cantata performances than opportunities to listen to recorded sound I maintain that both are amazing and I am grateful for both categories. As to your comment about organizing concerts there is much detail as there is in organizing any human endeavor, and of course we should not forget the working efforts of all musicians be they those who perform live or record. It takes a lot of work either way, and in the end serves different people in different ways. I think that's good.

William Hoffman wrote (July 27, 2008):
BWV 51 Voices

Many years ago I had the fortune to live in Fountainebleau, actually Avon, and audited one of Nadia Boulanger's classes, as well as attending summer concerts at the American Conservatory. She was a most gracious yet challenging person. She often told individual students to try harder but look for different approaches. Her favorite topics were composition and the human voice. I think some of her statements were meant in gest but would give pause. Some of her ideas: There is no true French alto voice, only mezzo sopranos, and they better be able, like Carmen, to sing those high notes and not stay down for safety. Castrati were not known just for their high notes and some of the best, based on their music, were altos. The best countertenors were usually baritones in falestto. Singing Solfeggio is an essential practice for all singers who want to be inherently, instinctively musical; this also applies to all composers, instrumentalists, and especially, conductors. She sometimes said the best voices, predictably and consistently by country, were Americans. She abhorred most church choirs, saying that older women should never sing tenor and older men an octave lower. She also didn't care for pensioned opera singers in the chorus, who could neither move nor blend their voices.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 27, 2008):
[To William Hoffman, regarding Voices] Thanks, William for these most interesting comments.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 28, 2008):
BWV 51 recordings

I am unable to recommend the single most satisfactory recording, not because there is none, but because I find many of them satisfactory (plus).. I gather that several other correspondents agree. Perhaps there is a misunderstanding as to whether satisfactory means perfect? Some brief thoughts follow, on several recordings I would not hesitate to recommend.

In general, I agree with the comments from the first round of discussions with respect to the recordings which were covered then, and which I have heard. I make no claim to be comprehensive. There is a lot of material re BWV 51, written and recorded, more than enough for a book (or BCML thesis), let alone a weeks worth of chat. My usual disclaimer, as well, perhaps timely to repeat here: I have no special expertise on either music or religion, other than ears and soul (god-given?).

Wintscherman/Ameling [20]. The vocal performance remains unequalled for clarity, purity, and for that special <effortless> quality. Trumpeter Maurice Andre is legendary. The accompaniment is (how shall I word it carefully?), <early post-romantic>. In plain language, a bit thick, but with harpsichord tinkling prominently (over-miked?). To my taste, the tempos are slow. That leaves the overall performance mainly of historic interest, but the vocal sets a standard which continues to be strived for. Not to be missed if you have the opportunity to hear more than one recording, but not my recommendation as the only one to own.

Huggett/Argenta [41]. If you absolutely have to make do with one recording, specific to BWV 51, this would be my recommendation (but see below, re Leusink). It is worth hearing, just for the baroque trumpet by Crispian Steele-Perkins. The textures throughout are simply perfect; violin duo in Mvt. 4 is especially outstanding compared to almost all other recordings. Nancy Argenta is not quite as effortless as Elly Ameling [20], reaching for those <high c> opportunities. One has to listen carefully to find even that detail to distinguish the performances, it certainly does not interfere with enjoying the recording. Most critical are the tempos in Mvt. 1 and 5, both very quick. I wonder if this is intentionally so, to emphasize the trumpet pyrotechnics. The cental Mvt. 3 is especially slow, for contrast. But for the tempo factor, and that Elly Ameling remains unequalled, I would rate this version <perfect> (satisfactory?). Pretty close, either way, but I am striving for accurate communication.

Rifkin/Baird [33]. Others have preferred Baird to Argenta, because of (as I read it), her effortless approach to the high cs. I agree, but there is a vibrancy (not quite vibrato) to Argenta which I find marginally preferable. Keep mind that we are trying to discriminate (for the sake of discussion) among the very best performances of the worlds best music. Others have also questioned the authenticity of the recording, compared to live performance. I am reluctant to mention the point, but it is in the archives. I am not qualified to comment further. The recording does indeed sound effortless, and it is among the best, for recorded sound. Not to mention the historic interest of the <R(education)i(n)f(orce)kin> hypothesis [credited as theory, at: http://www.bach-cantatas.com/BWV51-D4.htm]. The Huggett [41] is marginally preferable, but the curious will want both, plus the BCW reading.

Leusink/Holton [54]. Many of us (myself included) enjoy Ruth Holton, and find her tone and texture <boyish>. From that perspective, this recording could be a first choice. Or it could be poor imitation. In any case, if it is your only option, I find it very good, and the differences with both Huggett and Rifkin are subtle. If you do not have the Leusink available, do not bother with any other recordings. First, find your way to the complete Bach Edition, about US$100 for 160 CDs, perhaps free on-line?

Koopman/Petersen [57]. If the tempo extremes of Huggett are difficult to accept, this may be the best alternative. The tempos are perfect, IMO, and texture, trumpet, and vocal are all outstanding, if perhaps just a notch below Huggett. It is always difficult to suggest getting a full-price, three CD set on the basis of one cantata. Ultimately, this may be the version I come back to for repeat listening.

Stepner/LaBelle [59] Regional (New England USA) team makes good. The instrumental textures are as clear as Huggett, the tempos are as perfect as Koopman. The vocal line is more operatic than baroque, certainly not to everyones taste. I find the high notes effortless, in the style, but there are plenty of forceful (not to say forced) vocal effects throughout. I wonder if this is the recording that Steve Benson declined to identify, after he shut it off? Many friends here, I cannot be objective, but the vocal mellowed out for me, the second time through.

Gardiner/Hartelius [55]. You cannot go wrong with any issue from the pilgrimage series. Not every detail is superior, every time, but the performance recordings coupled with the project concept create a body of work which transcends critical analysis of the details. Essential for quite a few of us. Satisfactory? For me, yes. Ja, ja.

Stephen Benson wrote (July 28, 2008):
Ed Myskowski wrote [Recordings]:
< I wonder if this is the recording that Steve Benson declined to identify, after he shut it off? >
No, it isn't.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 28, 2008):
BWV 51 recordings (more)

I will post some details on timings/tempos in the coming day or so. In hurrying to beat the end of week deadline, I misrepresented the Stepner [59] tempos as about the same as Koopman [57]. In fact that performance has its own distinct character, better described as intermediate between Huggett [41] and Koopman. For those who do not care for quick tempos, Koopman might be preferable to either Stepner or Huggett.

John Pike wrote (July 28, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton wrote:
"For some reason, people don't talk about, for example, the fugues from the Bach solo violin sonatas in quite the same way - though the one from the A minor in particular is in spots as tough as any Paganini I'seen."
I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I think the A minor fugue is quite a bit easier (technically at least) than both the G minor and, especially, the C major fugues. I think the C major is the hardest piece in the book, harder than the Chaconne. I have never dreamt of looking at the Paganini concertos (and would never dream of drying to play any of the 24 Caprices) but they all sound very much harder, technically, than any movement by Bach.

I must say I was underwhelmed by Viktoria Mullova's Bach when she played 3 of the solo works in Bristol. I found her playing bland and unemotional. It was technically very assured, lacking in vibrato and very personal, but it just didn't speak to me. My favourite recording of these works is Julia Fischer on Pentatone. Not a baroque violinist but should be extremely satisfying to anyone. I think she is quite a bit better than baroque violinists Rachel Podger (?label) and Monica Huggett (on Virgin).

Jane Newble wrote (July 28, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton Wrote:
< The human voice, maybe. Although then again, there is a lady here in Krakow for example, ultra-high e (e'''') with the ease with which everyone else hits high C. >
I don't feel quite so optimistic about the 'ease with which everyone else hits high C'.

Of the five recordings I listened to, there was only one who seemingly effortlessly and with ease hit the high C, and that was Elly Ameling [20]. At the end she sounded as fresh as at the beginning, and I had the feeling that she could do it all over again quite happily.

Most of the rest of them gave the impression that it was jolly hard work, and that they themselves were wondering if they would get there. They appeared to breathe a big sigh of relief on the last 'jah', and had made me feel worn out in the effort of listening.

Greetings from Scotland, where it is warm!

John Pike wrote (July 28, 2008):
Cara Emily Thornton Wrote:
< I remember once upon a time hearing a recording of Janet Baker singing the Alleluia from Mozart's 'Exsultate, jubilate' WITH the high C at the end. Needless to say, my eyes about popped out when I heard it. For those who aren't intimately familiar with the piece in question, it was apparently written for a castrato whose name escapes me at the moment, and the score does not contain a high C anywhere (the highest note is A). However, there is an unwritten rule that if you have the high C (and aren't obsessive about doing everything exactly as written in the score), you transpose the final cadence up an octave, which gives you a high C. That means that almost every soprano good enough to be singing the piece in public *at all* puts it in, so that it is perhaps not even widely known that this is a deviation from the original. And like I said, Janet Baker had it as well. Probably it was the highest note in her range, but you have to her cheer her on for even trying... >
I heard Emma Kirkby doing that in Bristol Cathedral once. It was truly thrilling but I had no idea at the time that it was not, strictly speaking, Mozart.

John Pike wrote (July 28, 2008):
Jeremy Vosburgh wrote:
< I don't know about any of you; but I've NEVER heard a satisfactory rendition of this piece; especially the last number. There's something about it that makes it very difficult to interpret convincingly. >
Personally, I have heard plenty of recordings which I found joyous and thrilling. I don't sit there with a score waiting for the high C, wondering whether they will hit it or not and I don't lose any sleep if someone sounds a bit weak on the high C. I'm not really in to listening to several recordings one after the other to make comparisons and draw up a rank order. I just try and enjoy a particular performance while I listen to it. Sure, over time, I will end up with my favourite recordings, and I will inevitably develop some sort of rank order in my mind, but I don't listen with creating one as an objective.

It's the overall effect that I am interested in and I think there are plenty of singers out there who have given a very enjoyable account of this particular cantata in that regard.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 28, 2008):
[To Jane Newble] Elly Ameling [20] is a simply awesome vocalist. I have a number of her recordings and her energy does seem endless.

You're right--there should be no sigh of relief on the final note...that should happen after the performance and the recording session if at all.

Jean-Pierre Grivois wrote (July 28, 2008):
[To Ed Myskowski, regarding Recordings] Did you ever hear the Hans Grischkat and Margot Guilleaume Recording [4]: for me, it is a summit !

Jeremy Vosburgh wrote (July 28, 2008):
[Voice] I appreciated the post on Nadia. Hughes Cuenod was one of the tenors who worked with her and that is my only knowledge of her; but the Cuenod connection was quite broad. I felt in some ways like the description of Nadia was mirroring Hughes' views as well. Hughes was one of those tenors who was wonderfully expressive even at the top reaches of his tessitura. I suppose since you have less harmonics to play with at the soprano high notes, expressive abilities become more limited to volume and vibrato; whereas for the high notes for a tenor aren't all that high for them. Someday when time permits, I will get to studying Nadia more in depth.

I will say this about BWV 51. The greatest interpretive problem with it (and this hasn't been mentioned yet) is that in the final movement Alleluia is repeated over and over and over. Anyone familiar with the halleluja chorus (Händel) will know how difficult it is to give honor to the same word over and over again. The "praise" songs are always the hardest. How do you interpret praising an almighty creator? As if that wasn't hard enough, you are also saddled with the almost insurmountable duty of repeating the same word over 20 times. Its hard enough to give proper interpretation to a word when it is repeated once. But to give a word power and meaning over 20 times in a row is almost super-human. Its not the music that I blame for the difficulty of this piece and its difficulty to please me; its the libretto being a single word of praise.

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 29, 2008):
[Voice] Nadia Boulanger was quoted:
>There is no true French alto voice, only mezzo sopranos, and they better be able, like Carmen, to sing those high notes and not stay down for safety.<
Is Nathalie Stutzman not alto enough, not French enough, or simply not yet around at the time?

Ed Myskowski wrote (July 29, 2008):
[Voice] >I will say this about BWV 51. [...] How do you interpret praising an almighty creator? As if that wasn't hard enough, you are also saddled with the almost insurmountable duty of repeating the same word over 20 times.<
In many traditions, you praise the Creator by chanting his name, in repition. I do not know the Lutheran specifics, but is that a possibility?

You could also contemplate the Creator, contemplating his creation. In which case you might sing, <Hallelujah> while thinking <He has a weird sense of humor>. Come to think of it, some of those coloratura runs sound suspiciously like laughter. Ja, ja? Ha, ha.

Jean Laaninen wrote (July 29, 2008):
[To Ed Myskowski, regarding Voice] Ed, you have me laughing again.

When I learned the Alleluia I didn't think of any amusing angles, but I was fascinated with the structure of the piece and where the notes went, and the challenge to make nice lines. So I never became bored.

Repeating key words is not unusual.

In college we sang Randall Thompson's Alleluia...one word only and a very popular selection for Lutheran's of that era. The tension and excitement in that piece build, as one would also might hope to happen in the final movement of BWV 51.

Jane Newble wrote (July 29, 2008):
Jeremy Vosburgh wrote [Voice]:
< But to give a word power and meaning over 20 times in a row is almost super-human. Its not the music that I blame for the difficulty of this piece and its difficulty to please me; its the libretto being a single word of praise. >
The good thing about it is that it is a word with 4 syllables, every one of which can be accented, so that gives at least 4 different words, and more scope for variation.

Personally, I love those hymns where I can sing this word several times at the end of a verse. Somehow, it is a wonderful Hebrew word to sing. Is it because it is perhaps the only Hebrew word in most of Christian songs of praise?

I am not surprised that Bach made the most of it.

Douglas Cowling wrote (July 29, 2008):
Jane Newble wrote [Voice]:
< The good thing about it is that it is a word with 4 syllables, every one of which can be accented, so that gives at least 4 different words, and more scope for variation. >
One of the reasons that Handel's Hallelujah Chorus is so rhythmically arresting is that Handel constantly shifs the accent.

Take the opening:

HAL-lelujah, HAL-lelujah,
Halle-LU-jah, Halle-LU-jah,
Hal-LE-lujah.

Ending of course with a nuclear hit on "YEAH!

Bach has some measure of this playfulness in the syncopated Hallelujahs at the end of the first chorus of "Christ Lag in Todesbanden" (BWV 4).

Joel Figen wrote (July 29, 2008):
Jane Newble wrote:
< I don't feel quite so optimistic about the 'ease with which everyone else hits high C'. >
I think you/re all making too much of the high c. It's only one note in a totally spectacular piece. It's a fairly unimportant note to boot. It occasionally happens in singing that one or two high or low notes are outside a singer's best range.... so what? It's still possible to turn in a spectacular performance.

I'm thinking of Lotte Lenya's 1950s performances of parts Kurt Weill had originally written for her, before her voice got lower. She could no longer hit all the notes, so she, well, didn't. And he was no longer alive to rewrite them. She substituted notes she could still sing, and in many cases they weren't even notes from the same scale - just microtonal suggestions of <higher note>. But to this day the performances are memorable, because they're Lenya's final recorded thoughts on the parts. (and not because of her, uh creative intonation...:)

I'm not advocating such a cavalier treatment of Bach. But, really, how well madam x hits high c is such a minor aspect of the whole gestalt that I think I can say I really don't care if the performer hits it or not, let alone how well. It s only one note, after all. It would have a nice jazzy quality to substitute a high b. :) B flat would work to, as would a or g. No, none of these would be right, but it's over so quickly that it scarcely matters. (It's fun to think of what notes would bereally really bad here... f# for instance...)

Not to keep harping on Weill/Brecht, but

Gott sei Dank geht alles schnell vorüber
Auch die Liebe und der Kummer sogar.
Wo sind die Tränen von gestern abend?
Wo ist die Schnee vom vergangenen Jahr?

As in the old zen parable, just put the woman down on the other side of the river. When that note is over, clear your mind and move on to the next. The contrapuntal texture is so rich in the Alleluja that you must be missing something if you're still thinking about high c half a bar later.

John Pike wrote (July 30, 2008):
[To Joel Figen] I absolutely agree with this.

Mary Vinquist wrote (July 31, 2008):
John Pike wrote:
< My favourite recording of these works is Julia Fischer on Pentatone. Not a baroque violinist but should be extremely satisfying to anyone. I think she is quite a bit better than baroque violinists Rachel Podger (?label) and Monica Huggett (on Virgin). >
John, I'm absolutely in love with Podger's recording of the Bach Sonatas and Partitas and quite fond of Huggett as well. That's the joys of lots of choices. Something for everyone.

As far as "Jauchzet", I heard a stunning performace in the early '80s by a ringer! at Aston Magna when it was still in its fully glory. [:)] Kirkby doing this live should have been simply wonderful. [:">] Her voice is perfect for the piece.

Ed Myskowski wrote (August 4, 2008):
BWV 51 recordings (footnote)

In my post last weekend, I left some details for a subsequent post, regarding tempos in BWV 51. Clearly, the comparative details of recordings are not everyones favorite discussion topic. Note that I have carefully identified this post as a supporting footnote to previously expressed opinions. It is not intended as social chat.

First the data: total timings for a few key recordings, listed from quickest to slowest, as well as the timings for Mvt. 1 and Mvt. 5 in parentheses.

Koopman [57]: 16:07 (4:27, 2:20), Mvt. 3; 3:38

Gardiner [55]: 16:29 (4:07, 2:10)

Stepner [59]: 17:04 (3:59, 1:58)

Huggett [41]: 17:30 (4:17, 1:50), Mvt. 3; 5:30

Leusink [54]: 18:12 (4:26, 2:30)

All timings are as published, except for Koopman and Huggett. In those two instances the combined times for Mvt. 4/Mvt. 5 are published, I have provided my own timing of actual playing for Mvt. 5.

Huggett [41] gives the impression of a quick performance, but this is solely from Mvt. 5. OTOH, Koopman [57] gives the impression of a very balanced performance, despite the quickest total timing. This appears to be from the middle movement, which is moderate rather than slow, but does not leave an impression of quickness.

These are all excellent recordings. Stepner [59] and Huggett [41] are especially welcome as a change from the mainstream, modestly priced (if still available), and led by the first violinists.

Contrary to some other opinions, I enjoyed very much having some insight from the resident vocalists as to high note technique, and having the opportunity to pay special notice to this detail in the recordings. I did not find that it detracted at all from enjoying the overall performances, indeed just the opposite. Rather like adding a bit of spice.

BWV 51 Alleluia tempo and some other comments on singing Bach

Jean Laaninen wrote (September 27, 2008):
As some of you may already know I normally sing two Bach cantatas (BWV 51 and BWV 52) daily for maintenance. Today I was listening to BWV 82a by Nancy Argenta and making some notes for myself on the key structure of the work since I want to record this eventually, and after finishing that task I allowed the CD to continue to BWV 51. Before it really started I wondered about matching Argenta's tempos [41], particularly in the Alleluia which flies like the wind, and I decided to sing along. Bear in mind in my voice lessons last year I studied French exclusively and learned after long-last to sing rapidly in French, and with comprehension. From my listening experience I have taken the point of view that those who excel in singing in French (if not native Germans) sing German better than those who do not have training in French. This is partly a matter of diction and being able to keep the sounds forward, and falls into the matter of IMO or better yet IMHO.

To my exceptional delight for the first time ever I was able to attain Argenta's tempo [41] in the Alleluia. In the view of some conductors perhaps the tempo is in the extreme, but I found it exhilarating beyond words to be able to carry this forward at such a pace, light and without any strain and to keep the velocity even in the upward runs which go to the oft-discussed high notes. In fact, after a year studying with Courtney Gilson-Piercey, both the vocal quality and the agility supported the more rapid tempo very well. Courtney is a doctoral studentat ASU, studies with David Britton, and has held previous teaching positions in colleges in Michigan. She grew up as a stage kid in NYC, and is working on her dissertation in the area of French Romantic composers. She also sings Bach arias exceptionally well, though that is not her favorite area. I believe she will become well recognized as a teacher of voice when she takes up a new position following her graduation in 2010.

This experience today raised some thoughts in my mind about the matter of ideal tempos--a concept which I don't exactly follow, but one which in the case of greater ease and simpler breath management at the high tempo caused me to wonder if Bach would have had an ideal tempo for this particular part of the cantata. My objective in mentioning this is not to start a controversy, but to simply point out my discovery--the accelerated pace brings great results, though few would attempt the extreme, I think. And, of course I take into consideration the recording venue and so on as we discussed in the past at one point extensively. So I believe in mediating factors, but find tempo in this work quite interesting. Some have complained that a single word for a movement is boring, but at the accelerated tempo, I don't sense any boredom at all.

To be sure we all have and freely maintain our own points of view on such matters, as well we should. And I am so glad for the freedoms of today that allow us to maintain the music of the past without being slaves to the tyranny of who may or may not sing various works. Personal preference is certainly worth while as long as we don't impose it like law upon others.

Anyway, today was one of the best days I have had musically in a long time, and I wanted to share my experience with the group as well as to give my teacher some applause for making me a better singer.

Back to the Top

Last update: �September 28, 2008 �12:13:37