Background Information
Performer Bios

Poet/Composer Bios

Additional Information

About this Site
Feedback to the Bach Cantatas Website
Year 2000
Old Version (launched May 2, 2000 - replaced December 30, 2000)

Year 2000: April | May | July | October
Year 2009 | Year 2008 | Year 2007 | Year 2006 | Year 2005 | Year 2004 | Year 2003 | Year 2002 | Year 2001 | Year 2000
BCML: Year 2009 | Year 2008 | Year 2007 | Year 2006 | Year 2005 | Year 2004 | Year 2003


April 2000

Ryan Michero wrote (April 18, 2000):
Great news! Thanks for your work on this, Aryeh and Simon. I hated to think all of these great discussions would be lost in the ether, and now they won't!


May 2000

Kirk McElhearn wrote (May 10, 2000):
Great idea, excellent structure, I think it should be edited, and it doesn't bother me... When you get it finalized, will you have a central table of contents page? I would want to put a link to it on the list page on my site.

Ehud Shiloni wrote (May 11, 2000):
< Should we include everything on the list or should it be edited? >
Your thoughtful editing contributes a lot!! [although I realize that it must be quite time consuming]

< (Are you all willing to have your ramblings exposed on the web? >
I am certainly willing, but I won’t mind if my "ramblings" are routinely "edited away"... Keep up the great work, Simon [and Aryeh]!!

Ryan Michero wrote (May 12, 2000):
Simon Crouch wrote:
< But, finally there is something for you to take a look at and pass judgement upon. These are the write-ups that Aryeh has put together and I have (lightly) edited. [snip] >
Excellent work!

< I'm aware of a few issues - for example Aryeh has made much of the running in the group so far and these pages reflect that - but should we structure the pages that way? The html is a bit rough at the moment and I'll tidy it up if we decide to go ahead....
So, please let me know what you think:
(i) Is it a good idea to do something like this? >
BY ALL MEANS! I was thinking of setting up something similar for my humble reviews of the Suzuki cantatas, but this is a lot better because of all the different contributors and points of view, the comprehensiveness of the enterprise, and the link to Simon's established Bach cantata site. Keep up the great work.

< (ii) Is it a good idea to structure it the way we have? >
Reading through the pages, I like what you did with some of the pages a lot, some of them not as much. In my humble opinion, the best way to structure the pages would be to start the discussion with Aryeh's post followed by everyone else's posts in chronological order largely unedited below. I think the system of numbering different performances and referring to them in the posts below only by the numbers is a bit unwieldy. It causes you to do unnecessary editing and the reader to keep scrolling up and down the page to see which performance is being cited. (I'm assuming here that in the discussion over BWV 65 those names of conductors were replaced by numbers. I don't recall referring to numbers in our original posts--am I correct?)

Also, I'm not too fond of chopping out bits of posts to fit under a section devoted to each recording, as was done for BWV 82. If you'll notice, the closing sentence of my discussion of the Mertens/Kuijken version and the opening sentence of the Kooy/Herreweghe version make no sense when the paragraphs are separated. This method would also cause you to do a lot more editing work. Also (and no offence to Aryeh and his exemplary postings), if you chop up all of our messages to put under separate discussions of each cantata recording, why not do the same for Aryeh's messages? I'm not saying Aryeh's messages shouldn't be presented complete, but why discriminate? This method would also cause you to do a lot more editing work. I realize you are just trying to organize the information effectively and I appreciate your work, but I don't think this is the best way to go.

< (iii) Should we include everything on the list or should it be edited? >
I think the messages should be largely unedited. However, you are welcome to edit out parts that have nothing to do with the cantata or its recording, of course.

< (iv) Are you all willing to have your ramblings exposed on the web (remembering that they're available from Listbot)? >
Certainly, and I'm proud that my ramblings are considered worthy for posting on your site.

Marie Jensen wrote (May 12, 2000):
You have done an excellent job. Concerning the questions: Your lightly editing is fine. I am so impressed, that you have found time to do it.

Roy Reed wrote (May 12, 2000):
The archive seems like a very good idea. Being new to the conversation and able to contribute sporadically, due to travel, grandchildren, other projects, I have hesitated to express an opinion.

Ryan Michero wrote (May 12, 2000):
Aryeh Oron wrote:
< My idea is to leave the edited pages as an open basis for future updates and postings. New recordings may come up (Koopman, Suzuki, and Jan Leusink have not yet completed their cycles, more Gardiner's are planned to appear in the coming months, there are talkings about an American cycle, and we all hope for more), somebody would like to write to the group about his impressions from a Cantata, which has been already discussed, new members may join our group, etc. >
This is an excellent idea, Aryeh. I would personally like to add some comments on discussions I missed the first time around, and I would like to supplement some of my previous posts with comments about recordings I have heard since then.

Question: How would we do this? Would we just send a message to the list or e-mail the writings to you or Simon personally?

< I think also of adding: a. An opening page, which will describe the concept of these Cantata pages >

< b. An index to the Cantatas, which have already been discussed >

< c. Links to other reviews of the Cantatas and recording of them on the Web (there are not so many) >
Interesting! You'll have some searching to do...

< d. The planned schedule for future discussions. >
Very important. It might also be a good idea to post a run-down on the Lutheran church calendar and the cantatas Bach wrote for different occasions (or post links to such sources).

< e. Explanation how to join our group. Any more ideas? >
I had a thought: Whittle down a list of cantata recordings (ten?) for beginners to explore. The goal would not really be to pick the ten best cantata recordings on the market (everyone's list would be different, and we would never agree!) but to provide a sampling of the various kinds of cantata recordings available--the Ramin recordings, maybe some Karl Richter, the Hotter BWV 82, a Rilling, one Harnoncourt/Leonhardt, a Rifkin sampler, a disc or two of other OVPP advocates, a Suzuki, maybe a Koopman set, etc. It would make sense for the most enthusiastic fans of a particular performer to pick the disc and write a review--Aryeh could do the Ramin and maybe a couple of others, Matthew could do a OVPP recording or two, I could pick the Suzuki, etc. What do you all think? It might make sense to try and include the same cantata in two radically different performance styles. I showed my girlfriend how different Bach cantata performance styles could be by playing the opening choruses of BWV 61 by Richter and Thomas back to back. She was stunned--it didn't even sound like the same piece to her. This is the kind of thing that will give beginners an ideof what's out there.

< And I would like also to use this opportunity to thank Kirk for his initiation of the Bach Cantatas Mailing List and to Simon for his co-operation in preparing the Archive. >
I echo your thanks to Kirk and Simon, and I thank YOU for being the driving force behind our cantata discussions for many weeks now.

Aryeh Oron wrote (May 13, 2000):
(To Ryan Michero, regarding the last paragraph of his above message) An excellent idea, but when? Our hands (and ears) are full with the weekly Cantata discussions. And we are still at a very early stage. We have barely covered 10% of the Cantatas. I think that after we finish to cover all the Cantatas, it will be the best time to do it. At that time we shall have a fuller picture of the world of Bach Cantatas recordings. I also hope that we shall still have some energy left. Because we took on ourselves a gigantic task! But if somebody would like to try his hands with your idea right now, it is fine with me. I am sure that Simon will be glad to add such pages to the Archive.

Ryan Michero wrote (May 14, 2000):
(To Aryeh Oron) True, it is probably better to stick to the task at hand--analyzing Bach's cantatas one by one for now. It's probably a better idea to do this once we've finished discussing everything anyways, because by then we'll be so familiar with all of the available recordings.


July 2000

Yacov Bar-Haim wrote (July 2, 2000):
Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda, Toda,

Irit Schoenhorn wrote (July 4, 2000):
I visited your new site, which is great.


October 2000

Pierre R. Schwob (CEO, Classical Archives, LLC) wrote (October 10, 2000):
Great site.


About the Bach Cantatas Website: Year 2009 | Year 2008 | Year 2007 | Year 2006 | Year 2005 | Year 2004 | Year 2003 | Year 2002 | Year 2001 | Year 2000
BCML: Year 2009 | Year 2008 | Year 2007 | Year 2006 | Year 2005 | Year 2004 | Year 2003
Year 2009 | Year 2008 | Year 2007 | Year 2006 | Year 2005 | Year 2004 | Year 2003 | Year 2002 | Year 2001

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy | © 2000-2015 Bach Cantatas Website

Introduction | Cantatas | Other Vocal | Instrumental | Performers | General Topics | Articles | Books | Movies | New
Biographies | Texts & Translations | Scores | References | Commentaries | Music | Concerts | Festivals | Tour | Art & Memorabilia
Chorale Texts | Chorale Melodies | Lutheran Church Year | Readings | Poets & Composers | Arrangements & Transcriptions
Search Website | Search Works/Movements | Terms & Abbreviations | How to contribute | Sitemap | Links


Back to the Top

Last update: ęDecember 4, 2009 ę08:42:40