|
|
Cantata BWV 38
Aus tiefer Not schrei ich zu Dir
Discussions - Part 6 |
|
Continue from Part 5 |
|
Discussions in the Week of November 19, 2025
Cantata BWV 38 by Rudolf Lutz compared to other recent HIP recordings. |
|
Fritz V. Herbold wrote (November 19, 2025):
BWV 38 is the eight’s cantata of Rudolf Lutz’s cycle, recorded live at the Evangelic Church in Trogen on October 26, 2007– 2 days before the 21st. Sunday after Trinity in that year. See also the Bachipidia Bachipedia with links to the concert (YouTube), workshop and reflexion. The names of all performers, including all choristers can also be found there. See also my general comments about the Lutz cycle at Rudolf Luts - Discussions Part 1
I am comparing all movements with 6 other HIP recordings (Leusink, Gardiner, Koopman, Herreweghe, Suzuki and Christoph Spering.
This is a Chorale cantata first performed on October 29, 1724, in Leipzig’s St. Nicholas Church.
Scoring: see KB, NBA: I/25 and Bach Digital at Bach Digital
According to the KB of NBA I/25, the score is only available as a copy made by an unknown copyist, but the original parts are well preserved and detail an original scoring for Sopran solo, Alt solo, Tenor solo, Bass solo, Sopran, Alt, Tenor, Bass, Trombone I, Trombone II, Trombone III, Trombone IV, Oboe I, Oboe II, Violine I, Violine II, Viola, Basso continuo. As in most of Bach’s Leipzig cantatas, there are two parts for the BC in different keys for the BC strings at ‘Cammerton’ a’= 415 Hz, as well as a transposed part for the big church organa at ‘Chorton’ a’ = 468 Hz, a full tone lower. with many original autograph corrections and figuring remarks.
Important note: The NBA I /21 was published in 1997 and available at the time of all discussed recordings here.
Introduction Cantata BWV 38 by Alfed Dürr (from ‘The Cantatas of J. S. Bach’): ‘This chorale cantata, written for 29 October 1724, is based on Martin Luther’s hymn of 1524, a paraphrase of Psalm 130. In Leipzig, the hymn was assigned to this Sunday from of old, since it reflects the principal themes of the Sunday Gospel* reading: the nobleman’s call for help in time of need and the life that arises from faith and forgiveness. The anonymous librettist lays still greater emphasis on these associations. The outer verses, nos. 1 and 6, are as usual retained word for word and the inner ones freely paraphrased, verses 2 and 3 forming the like-numbered movements, and verse 4 the fifth movement. The fourth movement has no direct connection with Luther’s hymn; it follows up threads from verses 3 and 4 and establishes most clearly the relationship of the text with the Sunday Gospel. Its opening might be thought to reflect Luther’s lines ‘Therefore I will place my hopes in God and not depend on what I deserve’. 50 Much clearer than the link with Luther’s hymn, however, is the reference to Jesus’s words in the Gospel reading, ‘If you do not see signs and wonders, you do not believe’ (John 4.48). The words of Luther ‘… His precious Word, that is my comfort and faithful refuge’ are taken up repeatedly in the cantata text. The word ‘Trost’ (‘ comfort’) occurs altogether three times, and ‘Trostwort’ (‘ word of comfort’) twice. For ‘this single Word of comfort spoken by Jesus’ is again found in the Gospel reading (‘Go your way: your son lives’), and these words are felt as a guarantee that even today ‘Jesus’s Spirit and Word’ will work ‘new wonders’ and that for me, too, the ‘hour of deliverance’ will therefore arrive. Luther’s hymn and the Sunday Gospel are thus interwoven in this libretto in many different ways.’
Remark: the total times of the discussed interpretations here vary from 15:44 (Lutz) to 18:35 (Koopman). I will discuss tempo, soloists, choir and instrumentation (including the different composition of the basso continuo (BC) of each movement below. Regarding key, pitch and temperament, all recordings discussed here are performed in A minor at Leipzig’s pitch of a’= 415 Hz (Cammerton) at equal temperament, with the exception of Lutz who uses non equal temperaments following Young and Vallotti.
Movement 1: Chorale, S, A, T, B, Trombones I, II, III and IV, Oboe I and II, Strings and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ’In the opening chorus, as in that of Cantata 2, Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein, performed a few months earlier, Bach integrates the time-honoured Phrygian melody of Luther’s hymn, not in a concertante orchestral setting as in most of the other chorale cantatas, but in the tradition-bound form of the motet-style chorale arrangement. All instruments double the voice parts in unison, only the continuo becoming temporarily independent of the bass. Each chorale line is delivered in the same fashion. Prepared imitatively* by the three lower voices in the manner of a fugal exposition, it is then heard in doubled note-values in the soprano. A distinctive feature of this movement is that the counterpoint to each chorale line, developed in the lower parts, acquires special significance. This counterpoint, after its fugal function has been fulfilled in the passages of fore-imitation, is detached from the theme of the chorale line in the accompaniment to the soprano cantus firmus and takes on a thematic life of its own. Each chorale line begins afresh with only a few parts and then grows to full texture. Bach avoids opening each section with one part, however, by the independence of the continuo and sometimes by the immediate entry of the counterpoint to the chorale line. In line 6 (‘ Whatever sin and injustice has been done’) the counterpoint is chromatic and at times inverted as an illustration of the words. The entire movement forms a severe and antiquated impression. Nevertheless, it bears the stamp of Bach’s unmistakable personal style. This finds expression, above all, in the powerful chromaticism of line 6, already mentioned, and in the highly declamatory counterpoints to the words ‘Lord God, hear my calling’ (line 2) and ‘Who, Lord, could abide before You?’ (line 7). Fourteen years later, Bach employed a similar style when he arranged the same chorale melody for the organ in Part III of the Clavierübung. A comparison between the two movements shows the direction in which Bach had developed in the interim. The outstanding feature of the later piece is the still more flowing and more linear part-writing. On the other hand, the chief characteristic of the earlier, vocal movement— the varied character of each line-section in accordance with its textual content— recedes in the organ chorale.’
Note: this movement as well as the final chorale (movement 6) are both composed in the Phrygian church tone modes. The name "Phrygian" was applied to the third of these eight church modes; the authentic mode on E, described as the diatonic octave extending from E to the E an octave higher and divided at B, therefore beginning with a semitone-tone-tone-tone pentachord followed by a semitone-tone-tone tetrachord.
Although the original score is clearly notated in A minor, Dürr correctly sets both movements as in E minor, since the tonic of the Phrygian A minor scale is on E. (Extract from Wikipedia)
Remark: the tempos of this movement vary almost a minute, from Lutz (3:22) to Spering (4:15).
Leusink (March-April 2000): I included Leusink’s performance because of the participation of soprano soloist Ruth Holton (see movements 4 and 5) that I appreciate very much in many cantatas. I was very skeptical about the first movement though, since the enormous choir size (even for a Leipzig cantata) of 29 voices (11 sopranos, 6 altos, 5 tenors and 7 basses) is too extreme IMHO. Surprisingly the performance sounds better than expected and I don’t think Leusink is using his entire choir, since the individual voices are very clear and distinct. According to the liner noteand the information on the BCW, Leusink uses 4 natural trumpets (instead of trombones) doubling each of the 4 choir parts. They sound reserved and more equilibrated than other recordings with trombones. The oboes I and II also sound adequate but I am not sure how many strings are used here and the BC probably follows his default setting of 1-2 violoncellos, 1-2 double-basses, 1-2 bassoons, and the big St Nicholas Church organ in Elburg (better audible in the recitatives and arias) .I am never completely sure which organ Leusink is using and his interview (see An Interview with Pieter Jan Leusink) doesn’t help in this respect since he comments ‘… and then it is a very pleasant church to work in: spacious, sunny and with a lot of atmosphere. Moreover it disposes of two magnificent organs, which you can hear, besides the chest organ, in a prominent role in our recordings.’ I like this recording, although it is not my first choice.
Gardiner (November 2000): Gardiner’s experienced and excellent Monteverdi Choir (although relatively large with 6 sopranos, 4 altos, 3 tenors and 3 basses) perform with their usual perfection. The liner notes inform the use of ‘sackbuts’ instead of ‘trombones’. A sackbut is an early form of the trombone used during the Renaissance and Baroque eras. It has the characteristic telescopic slide of a trombone, used to vary the length of the tube to change pitch, but is distinct from later trombones by its smaller, more cylindrically-proportioned bore, and its less-flared bell. The doubling of the choral parts and the two oboes sounds perfect– not overshadowing the voices too strongly as in some other recordings. I am not sure about the strength of the string section but the BC plays with 2 violoncello, double-basses, 1-2 bassoon(s) and according to the booklet, both chest? Organ and harpsichord (see movement 4). One of my first choices.
Koopman (Nov 25-Dec 2, 2000): This interpretation is distinctly different from all other recordings discussed here. The ‘piano’ entries of each individual choir parts are very delicate and ‘soft’ as well as the accompanying 4 trombones and 2 oboes. The string section also sounds ‘light’. The BC is played by 2 violoncellos, double-basses, bassoon and chest organ (played by Koopman himself). Also one of my first choices
Philippe Herreweghe (12-2003): This performance sounds like a mixture of Gardiner’s and Koopman’s interpretation. Very transparent singing, trombones and oboes (oboe I played by Marcel Ponseele!) as well as strings similar to all of the above. The BC is played by 2 violoncellos double-bass and chest organ. Also one of my first choices
Suzuki (06-2004): Another excellent recording, very similar to Herreweghe’s. The main difference here is that the choir doubling brass parts are played respectively by cornetto (S), alt, tenor and bass trombones. Oboes and strings are very transparent and the continuo is played (according to the liner notes) by violoncello, double-bass, bassoon and chest organ. So far, I like all recordings of this movement discussed above as they are extremely similar in interpretations.
Note: this recording is available as SACD registration and very transparent if played on a multichannel equipment.
Lutz (10-2007): with the smallest choir (3 S, 4 A, 3 T and 3 B) this is the more intimate and very transparent interpretation among all others. The brass is played with 4 trombones positioned very well directly in front of each corresponding choir S, A , T and B sections which together with the 2 oboes and minimal strings (violin I & II, viola) guarantees a very equilibrated sound. The minimal BC is played by violoncello, violone, bassoon and chest organ. Certainly my favorite interpretation!
Christoph Spering (10-2015): I included this relatively new interpretation for 2 reasons: 1. I have not seen any remarks so far in the discussions group and 2., (according to the liner notes) Spering uses the great organ of the Melanchtonkirche in Cologne, Germany were this work was recorded. The relatively small mixed choir (4 voices for each part) of the ‘Chorus Musicus Köln’ reminds Lutz’ interpretation above in clarity and transparency, sounding more vivid and ‘present’ since the supporting 4 trombones also play somewhat louder. The liner notes inform the exact instrumentation used in this movement: oboe I & II, violin I and II, viola and a BC consisting of violoncello, violone, bassoon and (as mentioned before) the great church organ, build by the Willi Peter company, Cologne and restored in 2014 und 2015. The quality of this interpretation is comparable with all of the above but it became my first choice (choir size, transparency, orchestral playing and clarity).
Ranking: with all the different nuances in all movements (choir size, instrumentation – especially brass) a fair ranking of these interpretations is not easy. I like them all equally with a slight advantage for Spering
Movement 2: Recitative A and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ’ The second movement, a plain but forcefully declaimed secco recitative, is followed by the tenor aria, no. 3…’
Remark: the tempos for this movement are very similar, around 0:50, from 0:47 ( Gardiner and Spering) to 0:51 (Herreweghe).
Leusink (March-April 2000): Dutch counter-tenor, Sytse Buwalda (see BCW ) is not my favorite soloist for alt parts (sometimes too shrill in the high register) but is not bad in this recording. One can clearly hear the full sound of the big St Nicholas Church organ (Elburg, NL). Not my first choice.
Gardiner (November 2000): English counter-tenor, William Towers (see chapter ‘Pich’ in BCW) is much better and very precise in the high register. The accompanying organ in the BC sounds like a full church organ, although I believe that Gardiner would have commented on this in his liner notes, as he did for BWV 146 (Volume 24), where his top organist Silas John Standage describes the problems of playing the magnificent Trost organ at the castle church in Altenburg. See Rudolf Luts - Discussions Part 1). Although not sure, I hear a big organ playing here as with Leusink and Spering and one can hear a clear difference in volume compared to all other recordings of this movement. Among my first choices.
Koopman (Nov 25-Dec 2, 2000): German mezzo-soprano, Franziska Gottwald (see BCW) has a clear voice and excellent diction. For some reason, on the last note B to the text ‘tun?’ she ends with a drop by half a tone to B Flat, which is not notated in the score and/or parts of the NBA. It doesn’t bother me but it is a reading error. The organ BC part here is clearly played on a chest organ. Also among my first choices.
Philippe Herreweghe (12-2003): Canadian counter-tenor, Daniel Taylor (see BCW) is a favorite counter-tenor of mine but falls behind William Towers with Gardiner. The BC is played with violoncello and chest organ. One of my first choices.
Suzuki (06-2004): French counter-tenor, Pascal Bertin (see BCW ) might not be as well-known as the colleagues above but sounds very similar to Daniel Taylor (see above) here. His diction is not as good as William Towers (with Gardiner). The BC is played by both chest organ and harpsichord. Among my first choices
Lutz (10-2007): German mezzo-soprano, Ruth Sandhoff (see BCW ) has a somewhat darker timbre among the other mezzo-sopranos discussed her, but I like her perfect German diction and overall performance. The BC is played with violoncello and chest organ. One of my first choices.
Christoph Spering (10-2015): French contralto, Mélodie Ruvio (see BCW) has a somewhat shrill voice in the high registers. In the BC relatively ‘heavy’ BC with violoncello, violone and organ I believe to hear again the big church organ. Not bad, but not my first choice.
Ranking: I like both interpretations with the mezzo-sopranos and the counter-tenors:
Mezzo- Soprano / Contralto: (1) Lutz, (2) Koopman, (3) Spering
Counter-Tenors: (1) Gardiner, (2) Herreweghe, (3) Suzuki, (4) Leusink
Movement 3: Aria T, Oboe I & II, BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ’ The second movement .. is followed by the tenor aria, no. 3, which is scored with two obbligato* oboes moving in largely parallel motion. Curiously, the movement opens in an apparent 3/2 time; only later does the listener become aware of its regular meter. The syncopated rhythm— J J J— which is present from the outset, pervades the entire movement, lending it a joyfully animated character suggestive of the ‘Word of comfort’ of the text.’
Remark: tempo and duration varies considerably from 4:38 (Lutz) to 7:46 (Leusink).
Leusink (March-April 2000): Dutch tenor, Nico van der Meel (see BCW) sings most of the solo tenor parts in Leusink’s complete cycle. He performs Bach cantatas and passion music since many years, e.g. with Sigiswald Kuijken and Frans Brüggen. I like his singing mostly although he is not my first choice here. I think he might not be in his prime anymore. Both oboes I & II sound a little wobbly. The BC is performed by violoncello(s), double-bass(es), bassoon(s( ?. The organ doesn’t sound like the big church organ Leusink often uses, but I can’t really hear it. This is the slowest interpretation among all performances discussed here. Not my first choice.
Gardiner (November 2000): Scottish tenor, Paul Agnew (see BCW) has also made numerous appearances with The Tallis Scholars (Director: Peter Phillips), The Sixteen (Director: Harry Christophers) and the Gothic Voices, before finally striking out on his own as a soloist in the early 1990's. In addition to appearances with Les Arts Florissants, Paul Agnew has become much in demand as a soloist. I appreciate his experienced performance in many recordings but not here where he sounds too operatic IMHO. Both oboes and BC (violoncello(s), double-bass(es), bassoon(s)?) sound very equilibrated but this performance is not my first choice.
Koopman (Nov 25-Dec 2, 2000): this is the second recording with Paul Agnew (see above), but he is much better here! The whole movement sounds very delicate and I like the tempo of 7:20 better than both extremes (see above ‘Remark’). Oboes and BC are very similar to Gardiner’s performance. Among my first choices.
Philippe Herreweghe (12-2003): English tenor, Mark Padmore (see BCW) sounds more‘ dramatic’ compared to the other tenors. Marcel Ponseele plays the first oboe here and the BC is performed by violoncello(s), double-bass(es), bassoon(s) ? and chest organ. Also among my first choices.
Suzuki (06-2004): German tenor, Gerd Türk (see BCW) completed his training by studying Baroque singing and interpretation with René Jacobs and Richard Levitt at the Schola Cantorum Basiliensis and is one of my favorite Bach tenors. He does well here and the oboe / BC instrumentation is very equilibrated. One of my first choices.
Lutz (10-2007): German tenor, Johannes Kaleschke (see: BCW) might not been as well-known as the other tenors discussed here; his repertoire includes all the oratorios of J.S. Bach and Felix Mendelssohn, but also music from other periods, such as contemporary: he could recently been heard as the Evangelist in Sankt-Bach-Passion by Mauricio Kagel. I like his voice and clear German diction. The two oboes are somewhat loud here and the BC is performed by violoncello, violone, bassoon and chest organ. This is the fastest performance compared to all others, but I like this tempo and it is my first choice.
Christoph Spering (10-2015): German lyric tenor, Benjamin Bruns (see BCW) is overdoing it with too much pathos IMHO. The instrumental accompaniment including the BC are ok, but this is clearly my last choice.
Ranking: whenever I compare tenor performances in Bach’s oeuvre (especially as evangelist in the passion music’s) I tend to compare any tenor soloists to my favorite interpreter Kurt Equiluz (mostly with the Harnoncourt / Leonhardt cycle. My ranking here might be disputable to other fans:
(1) Lutz, (2) Koopman, (3) Suzuki, (4) Herreweghe, (5) Gardiner, (6) Leusink, (7) Spering
Movement 4: Recitativo S and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ’ As we have seen, the fourth movement departs furthest in its text from Luther’s hymn and refers directly to the Gospel reading. Perhaps by way of compensation, Bach forges a close link with the hymn by placing the chorale melody in the continuo part and having the recitative sung a battuta, or in fixed rhythm. After the first Stollen the chorale melody is transposed from Phrygian a to Phrygian d, but otherwise it remains unaltered (if we disregard the sharpening of the third degree of the scale, which was optional at that time). Nevertheless, it hardly dawns on the listener that this is a cantus firmus* movement, so skillfully does Bach combine the voice part— that is, the interpreter of the text— with the given substructure’.
Remark: tempos vary for this movement, from the fastest, 0:58 with Gardiner to the slowest 1:33 with Suzuki. The chorale melody in the continuo part is an interesting detail of this movement.
Leusink (March-April 2000): I have included Leusink because of this movement with my favorite ‘boyish’ sounding English soprano, Ruth Holton (see BCW). I am not sure if the organ part in the BC is played by the big church organ (see movement 1), but it sounds very delicate together with a very well-played violoncello. Clearly my first choice!
Gardiner (November 2000): English soprano, Joanne Lunn (see BCW) compared to the delicate singing by Holton sounds exactly the opposite: too aggressive, too loud/shrill. The (also very loud) organ part in the BC again reminds me of the sound of a bigger church organ (maybe the case here, see movement 1). Not my first choice.
Koopman (Nov 25-Dec 2, 2000): I like English soprano, Deborah York (see BCW) with an excellent performance here; her voice is well equilibrated with the more delicate part of the chest organ playing. Among my first choices.
Philippe Herreweghe (12-2003): English soprano, Carolyn Sampson (see BCW) sings a very similar performance as Deborah Yort (see above). Very delicate BC playing. Also among my first choices.
Suzuki (06-2004): German soprano, Dorothee (Blotzky-) Mields (see BCW) also reminds both York and Sampson but her diction is even better. Very delicate BC playing. Also one of my first choices.
Lutz (10-2007): Norwegian soprano, Guro Evensen Hjemli (see BCW) has also had lessons with Emma Kirkby, Jill Feldman and Barbara Schlick. She sings many soprano parts in the Lutz cycle and is also fantastic here. The BC is played delicately by violoncello, bassoon and chest organ. Her young voice wins when compared with all the above (with the exception of Holton)
Christoph Spering (10-2015): German soprano, Marie-Sophie Pollak (see BCW) might not be very well-knows but is surprisingly forceful and technicperfect here (as is the BC with the church organ). I put her at the same level as all other sopranos discussed here. Among my first choices!
Ranking: I like all sopranos discussed here and a fair rating is not easy. But my preference for non-operatic and ‘boyish’ / ‘slim; voices outs Holton and Hjemli in the first place.
(1) Leusink, (2) Lutz, (3) Spering, Koopman, Suzuki and Herreweghe, (4) Gardiner
Movement 5: Terzetto S, A, B and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ’ In place of a second aria the cantata contains a terzetto with continuo accompaniment, no. 5. The two sections of its bipartite form, A B, create a contrast which is characterized textually by the words ‘Trübsal’ (‘ tribulation’) and ‘Trost’ (‘comfort’). However, Bach’s setting also aims at unifying the two sections and forming a reciprocal relationship between them, since parts of the first recur in the second. After a continuo ritornello, whose sequential figures reveal a clear two-bar phrase structure (a a1 a2 a3) and lead us to expect some kind of passacaglia form, the voice parts unexpectedly enter with a new chromatic theme in an imitative texture— a style that recalls the first movement. This material pervades the A section, and only at the very end of it are ritornello motives once more allowed to emerge. The continuo ritornello follows, transposed to the dominant, as an articulating episode. Section B then introduces a new theme (‘How soon the morning of comfort appears’), whose sequel (‘After this night of distress and cares’), however, flows into the material of section A, within which ritornello allusions are further developed. As if this were not enough, in an expanded conclusion section B introduces the complete ritornello in bass and continuo before the end of the vocal section, and a purely instrumental reprise of the continuo ritornello closes the movement.
Remark: the tempos vary from 2:47 (Spering) to 4:05 (Koopman); most recordings are around 3:00 minutes.
Observation: I have already commented on the soprano and alt soloists above. I will only be discussing the bass soloist and the performance of the BC here.
Leusink (March-April 2000): Dutch bass and conductor and music teacher, Bas Ramselaar (see BCW) sings in most of the solo bass parts in the Leusink Cycle. His voice mixes well with both other soloists - again with a special mention of soprano Holton. The BC (with the big church organ?) sounds delicate – especially in the purely instrumental reprise. Among my first choices.
Gardiner (November 2000): I like the relatively ‘ dark’ timbre of German bass-baritone and conductor, Gotthold Schwarz (see BCW) that also mixed well with both other soloists – his voice is stronger at the forefront together with the soprano voice. All voices sound very vivid. The BC (again, the high volume of the organ suggest the use of the big church instrument, but I am not sure) is also stronger / louder than above. Also among my first choices.
Koopman (Nov 25-Dec 2, 2000): German bass-baritone, Klaus Mertens (see BCW) has his usual very experienced performance and mixes perfectly with his S and A colleagues. This interpretation is very ‘ soft/delicate including the very ‘reserved’ BC . A nice touch is the use of a lute in the BC – clearly audible in the instrumental reprise. Also among my first choices.
Philippe Herreweghe (12-2003): Dutch bass, Peter Kooij (correct spelling in Dutch) reminds Mertens with Koopman. The whole movement sounds as a copy of the Koopman interpretation, including a very ‘reserved’ BC. But all soloist mix better than most of the other performances. One of my first choices.
Suzuki (06-2004): Peter Kooij sings again in this recording and the whole movement again sounds like a copy of Herreweghe’s interpretation! All soloists are very good and their timbres mix well. Again, the BC is very ‘reserved’ and even ‘delicate’. Also one of my first choices.
Lutz (10-2007): Interestingly, both alto and bass soloists Jan Börner respectively Philippe Rayot are singers from the choir and join the excellent soprano Guro Hjemli (see above, movement 4) in a very ‘fresh’ and transparent performance. The full BC with violoncello, violone, bassoon and chest organ also sounds perfect, especially in the instrumental reprise. This is my first choice among other very good interpretations!
Christoph Spering (10-2015): German baritone, Thomas E. Bauer (see BCW) has a good diction but the predominance of the soprano and the dynamics (piano-forte) do not please me as much as the other recordings, although I like the very forceful playing of the church organ in the BC. Since all recordings are very good IMHO, this somewhat farther away from my taste.
Ranking: I like all trios discussed here and a fair rating is not easy. But my preference is for the more transparent interpretations:
(1) Lutz, (2) Suzuki, Koopman, Suzuki, Herreweghe and Gerdiner, (3) Spering
Movement 6: Chorale S, A, T, B, instruments and BC
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ’ The work ends with a plain chorale setting.’
Observation: What is a ‘plain chorale setting’ as referred to by A. Dürr? If you go to the discussions site of the BCW there is no lack of (somewhat overheated) contributions on how a Bach chorale at the end of most of his cantatas ‘should be played correctly’. I am not going into this discussion since I have sung the Luther chorales since my early youth at a traditional Dutch Lutheran School and have my own opinion about it (no shortenings in the bass line and fermata’s between the repetitions and/or individual stanzas). Most of the interpretations discussed here correspond to my perception how a chorale harmonized by Bach should sound and I like them all! The brass playing doubling the 4 voices is also perfect in all performances.
Remark: most tempos are around 1:10 to 1:30 and sound adequate IMHO.
Final Ranking: I like most of the performances here, with small specific differences in each movement, that are not very important to me. |
| |
|
|
