|
|
Cantata BWV 60
O Ewigkeit, du Donnerwort
Discussions - Part 7 |
|
Continue from Part 6 |
|
Discussions in the Week of May 31, 2025 (5th round)
Cantata BWV 60, Rudolf Lutz compared to other recent HIP and OVPP recordings |
|
Fritz V. Herbold wrote (May 31, 2025):
BWV 60 is the second cantata of Rudolf Lutz’s cycle, recorded live at the Evangelic Church in Trogen, 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 Rudoolf Lutz - Discussions Part 1
I am comparing Lutz (OVPP) with 3 other HIP interpretations, Koopman, Suzuki and Gardiner as well as 2 other OVPP interpretations, Kuijken and a recent recording with the Nederlandse Bachvereniging (Netherlands Bach Society 2021) under Shunske Sato as conductor and first Violin. I included this outstanding OVPP recording because of its performance in the Waalse Kerk in Amsterdam and especially because of the use of its great church organ. I have not found a Herreweghe recording so far. The main differences consist of instrumental scoring, tempo, soloists and choir size. Also, in this case, the BC instruments vary substantially.
I am not going into the already existing discussion about OVPP interpretations at the BCW, but IMHO this dialogue cantata BWV 60 justifies single voices.
Scoring: see KB, NBA I /27 and Bach Digital (Bach Digital)
Remarks: although Bach’s original score is lost, the original parts are preserved (see KB, NBA I/27) showing doublets for the violin I and II parts as well two BC parts, one transposed (certainly for the church organ) and the other not transposed (probably for the contrabass, and / or bassoon, and or violoncello). Accordingly, one can assume that at least two violin I and two violin II instruments were used at Bach’s first performance in November 1723.
Introduction Cantata BWV 60 by Alfed Dürr (from The Cantatas of J. S. Bach)
‘This cantata originated during Bach’s first year in Leipzig and was performed for the first time on 7 November 1723. The anonymous librettist refers to the Sunday Gospel read out before the cantata performance. As in the cantatas for the Sixteenth Sunday after Trinity the raising of the dead by Jesus is felt as a symbol of our own resurrection, which the person confronting death awaits with doubt and hope. This wavering between despair and confidence forms the theme of the cantata, which is fashioned as a ‘Dialogue between Fear and Hope’. In these two allegorical figures the divided soul of man is reflected. The text displays a systematic and symmetrical structure. It is framed by two chorales: the first verse of Johann Rist’s hymn ‘O Ewigkeit, du Donnerwort’ (1642) and the fifth verse of the hymn ‘Es ist genung, so nimm, Herr, meinen Geist’ by Franz Joachim Burmeister (1662). Two biblical passages also function as a frame: Lord, I wait for Your Salvation’ (Genesis 49.18) is the response of Hope to the chorale sung by Fear in the first movement; and ‘Blessed are the dead …’ (Revelation 14.13) in the penultimate movement is another response to the objections of Fear who, on the strength of it, casts aside his anxieties once and for all. Thus the first biblical text follows from the opening chorale, and the concluding chorale from the second biblical text. The middle movements are freely versified. At the center is a duet-aria, around which are grouped two recitatives (of which the second alternates with biblical words, as noted above). With the exception of the concluding chorale, the entire work is set as a dialogue; solo vocal movements are altogether absent. In the fourth movement, however, there is a change of dialogue partners. Previously the alto took the part of Fear and the tenor that of Hope, but now the alto of Fear is joined by the bass, the vox Christi, for it is not Hope— part of the divided soul of man— who announces the blessedness of the dead ‘who die in the Lord’ but rather the authority of God. Only thus do we understand when, at the end of the movement, Fear sings ‘Then appear again, O Hope!’; the bass cannot be meant by this, since only three bars earlier he was engaged in a duet with Fear! ‘
Mvt. 1: Chorale & Aria - Duet [A, T]
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘The opening movement takes the form of a chorale arrangement for solo alto with framing ritornellos and interspersed orchestral episodes. From the second Stollen (Stanza) onwards the tenor, in counterpoint with the chorale and the ritornello theme, sings biblical words in a freely moving arioso made up of extensive melodic arches, occasionally including ritornello motives. The orchestral ritornello, whose theme holds this multi-layered movement together, consists of a lamenting duet for two oboes d’amore against the background of an ostinato-like tremolo motive for strings and continuo which pervades the entire movement. If the oboe duet might be construed as the yearning wait for the Lord’s Salvation, the tremolo motive would then depict the trembling of Fear. This motive is derived from the chorale melody (the second half of line 1) and by allusion it also anticipates the first line of the concluding chorale (see below).’
Koopman (October 1998): uses the fastest tempo of 3:25 and the many instrumental ritornellos (strings and oboes) – although well played– feel too rushed. Instead of the solo alt voice, the chorale melody is sung by the whole alt section (4 singers) of the choir and accompanied by two horns (instead of one horn according to the existing parts) . The size of his mixed choir is the largest (total 18 choristers, as with Gardiner) His strings with 4 first, 3 second violins and 2 violas is also only surpassed by Gardiner. The continuo is performed with 2 cellos, 1 double-bass, bassoon, lute and chest organ, while the recitatives and arias are also accompanied by cembalo played by Koopman himself).
The entry of tenor Jörg Dürmüller (see BCW) is clearly jeopardized by the fast tempo. I like many other of his performances with Koopman but – although technically good – one can feel that he is not comfortable with this speed that also influences his diction negatively. This is clearly not my first choice.
Suzuki (September 2000): his tempo of 4:18 feels adequate, and his choir with a total of 12 choristers (3 per each voice) and reduced string section of 3 first, 3 second violins and 2 violas is closer to my taste in terms of transparency. The continuo with 2 cellos, 1 double bass, bassoon and chest organ is well balanced. Curiously, Suzuki uses both horn and trumpet reenforcing the chorale melody sung by counter-tenor Robin Blaze (see BCW). I don’t like his voice at all here; he sounds shrill in the higher registers, and his diction lacks clarity. Tenor Gerd Türk ( see BCW) with clear diction and good timbre sounds much better here. This performance is better than Koopman’s, but still not my first choice.
Gardiner (November 2000): with 4:58 minutes, this is the slowest tempo among the other recordings but improves the clarity of the instrumental ritornello playing by the 2 oboes d’amore, although the string section is far too loud with a total of 4 first, 4 second violins and 2 violas, similar to Koopman. According to the BCW, Gardiner also uses 2 violas da gamba, but the liner notes don’t explain why. I can only imagine they are used in the BC, together with 2 violoncellos, contrabass, bassoon, organ and/or harpsichord. A horn reinforces the chorale melody sung by the alto voice. I like both counter-tenor Robin Tyson (see BCW) and tenor James Gilchrist (see BCW) whose voices are technically perfect and mix very well. This is my first choice for the 3 HIP recordings.
Lutz (November 2006): I like this tempo with 4:11 minutes, close to Suzuki’s. The string section is small with 1 violine I, one violino II and 1viola, fitting to the intimate character of this dialogue cantata, leading to a very transparent and brilliant sound combined with the two oboes d’ amore (the liner notes inform ‘oboes’). For the instrumental chorale citation, he omits the horn (or equivalent brass instrument) and uses an additional third oboe. A similar situation happened in his previous (and first) recording of BWV 48 (see BCW). In a recent e-mail, Mr. Lutz explained that he didn’t succeed in finding a satisfying brass instrument and/or musician for his first cantata recordings in 2006. His continuo with cello, double bass and chest organ is one of the seldom cases where he does not include a bassoon nor a harpsichord. Also, Lutz plays the chest organ himself while conducting. Considering all the above, this is one of the “lightest” interpretations of movement 1, only comparable to the live recording with Shunske Sato (see below).
In her many recordings with Lutz, Swiss Mezzo-soprano Claude Eichenberger (see BCW) sometimes has a slight vibrato in the higher registers, but not here, where her voice mixes well with Austrian tenor Bernhard Berchthold (see BCW), also regular soloist with Lutz. I like both voices.
Kuijken (December 2011): his tempo with 4:02 is the second fastest after Koopman but allows a clear and transparent playing of the ritornello instruments, better than with Koopman. His string section follows exactly the original scoring, with 2 first, 2 second violins and a viola as well as with the 2 oboes d’amore. A horn reinforces the chorale melody. Kuijken has a very personal view on the instrumental scoring of Bach’s BC in his cantatas, explained in an additional booklet that accompany his CD Edition 2006 – 2012 recordings, ‘General Introduction – On the Instrumental Forces, especially the Continuo Group’. A very interesting reading, although not all Bach scholars may agree with him. Basically, he rejects the use of the violoncello in the BC and uses an 8 foot ‘violone’, considerably larger than today’s cello, called ‘Basse de Violon’ in France, together with a chest organ. Although he has a good bassoon player, they rarely join the BC as can been seen in the many videos available on You Tube.
The Slovak mezzo-soprano, Petra Noskaiová (see BCW) is clearly my favorite alto singer. Technically perfect, a well-rounded and ‘softer’ voice sets her apart from all other mezzo-soprano voices in this cantata. Also, German tenor, Christoph Genz (see BCW) with a good diction and good vocal range combines very well and is as good as any of the previous mentioned tenors.
Shunske Sato / Nederlandse Bachvereniging (August 2021). See NBV). This is very peculiar OVPP interpretation, also recorded in the Waalse Kerk in Amsterdam as did Koopman, but with a completely different positioning of the performers, not to mention the use of the church organ. The minimal instrumentation is identical to Lutz’s recording: the string section is small with 1 violine I, one violino II and 1viola. Combined with the two oboes d’ amore (the first played by Marcel Ponseele) produces a very brilliant and transparent sound proving again that churches can be good recording sites and that the playing of the church organ is quite possible, especially with a well-rehearsed ensemble. The chorale melody sung by the alt is supported with a horn. The BC is relatively ‘heavy’ with double-bass, cello, bassoon and an additional harpsichord.
The English counter-tenor, Alex Potter (see BCW) is excellent in volume, diction and range combining very well with English tenor, Thomas Hobbs (see BCW), well-known from his various excellent interpretations with Herreweghe.
My personal preferences: I clearly prefer the OVPP recordings for this cantata and am dividing my preferences for the 3 HIP and the 3 OVPP recordings as follows:
HIP: (1) Gardiner – (2) Suzuki – (3) Koopman
OVPP: (1,2) Lutz and Sato – I really can’t decide between both excellent interpretations, followed by (3) Kuiken.
Mvt. 2: Recitative - Dialogue [A, T]
Introduction by Alfred Dürr: ‘ The following dialogue-recitative begins as secco, but in two places it changes into arioso: at the word ‘martert’ (‘tortures’), where we hear a chromatic melisma with brief supporting chords; and at the close on ‘ertragen’ (‘ bear’), which is sung to a wide-ranging melisma accompanied by complementary figures in the continuo. The first arioso passage is assigned to Fear, the second to Hope.
Remark: since the BC has been discussed before, my preferences vary mainly for the alto parts. The tenor voices remains the same as above. Tempos vary from 1:50 (Kuijken) to 2:45 (Gardiner). The others only vary slightly.
My personal preferences:
Alto/ Mezzo-soprano: (1) Bogna Bartosz (Koopman) - (2) Petra Noskaiová (Kuijken) – (3) Claude Eichenberger (Lutz) (4) Robin Tyson (Gardiner) – (5) Alex Potter (Sato) – (6) Robin Blaze (Suzuki)
Tenor: I find it very difficult to make a fair ranking here, since I like all the tenor soloists with their individual skills and I can’t find any major distinctions in terms of technique, timbre or any other restrictions.
Mvt. 3: Aria - Duet [A, T]
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘The central movement, the duet-aria, acquires its dramatic style from the dialogue character of the work as a whole. Only the instrumental ritornellos ensure formal coherence, for the three vocal sections, ABC, lack clearly perceptible thematic links between each other. Each section, however, pursues the same course, beginning with the reflections of Fear, to which Hope responds, after which the two sing together as a duet, Hope having the last word. Each section thus comprises the threefold sequence solo-duet-solo. The clearly text-engendered nature of the melodic material prevents the two voices from sharing the same theme, but their themes are interrelated. The theme of Fear is remodeled in a characteristic manner in the reply of Hope, for example in section A: The dialogue character of the movement extends to the instrumental themes, though not in the form of alternating entries but rather that of simultaneous contrast. Thus the oboe d’amore and continuo have, for the most part, an emphatically rhythmic motive made up of dotted rhythms, while the solo violin intersperses flowing scale passages. In form, then, the movement is closer to the open form of the motet* than to the closed form of the aria. Its course is directional rather than symmetrical and its melodic writing motivically (sic) rather than thematically imprinted.’
My personal preferences for the soloists are identical with Mvt. 2, while the instrumental solo playing of solo oboe d’amore and violin don’t make a notable difference IMHO.
Mvt. 4: Recitative [A] & Arioso [B]
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘A directional course is also taken by the following recitative, no. 4, in which the secco of Fear is three times interrupted by bass arioso. As in the central chorus of the Actus tragicus, BWV 106, the repetition serves the purpose of intensification, increasing awareness and final catharsis. While the secco of Fear, of its very nature, remains thematically free as its text very gradualfalls in with that of the bass, the bass arioso takes the form of variations. Each portion of arioso text is longer than the previous one, according to the scheme a ab abc. Musically, the second arioso section is a repeat of the first, transposed up a tone, and the third a much expanded variant of those that precede it. The overall scheme is thus AAA1. The fascination of these ariosos lies in their memorable and eloquent melodic line which presents the text in heightened speech but without the dependence on the text fettering the musical flow. Here we encounter a late, ripe fruit of continuo-accompanied monody or sacred solo concerto at a time when text-engendered declamation and musically finished form had, in general, long since come to separate fruition in recitative and aria respectively’.
Remark: while the BC has been discussed above, I will discuss the bass soloists and maintain my opinion and ranking of the alt soloists (see Mvts. 2 & 3). The tempos vary from 3:51 (Kuijken) to 5:35 (Lutz). I think both are extreme and I prefer the tempos around 4:00 to 4:30 minutes as with the other performers discussed here. The bass part in this cantata is very small: basically a repetition of ‘Selig sind sie Toten’ and later extended to ‘Selig sind die Toten, die in dem Herrn sterben von nun an’. This is not a case where the full proficiency and mastery of a bass soloist can be demonstrated.
Koopman (October 1998): German bass-baritone, Klaus Mertens (see BCW) has worked with renowned “early music” specialists such as Frans Brüggen, Philippe Herreweghe, René Jacobs, Sigiswald Kuijken, Gustav Leonhardt, Nikolaus Harnoncourt, which makes him a desired guest soloist in several cantata performances, also more recently with Rudolf Lutz. A discography of more than 120 CD’s along with many international radio and television broadcasts testify to Klaus Mertens’ competence as a celebrated, versatile singer. Not surprisingly, he is one of my favorite bass soloists in this movement and his diction in German is perfect.
Suzuki (September 2000): Dutch bass, Peter Kooy (the correct Dutch spelling is Kooij), (see BCW) is from the same generation as Mertens and not less well-known. He also has performed with famous conductors like Philippe Herreweghe, Ton Koopman, Gustav Leonhardt, Roger Norrington, Michel Corboz. Frans Brüggen, René Jacobs, Sigiswald Kuijken, and Iván Fischer. Apart from his many recordings with Herreweghe, he is also the preferred bas soloist with Suzuki. Also one of my favorite voices!
Gardiner (November 2000): also from the same generation, English baritone, Peter Harvey (see BCW) is a leading soloist in many recordings with Harry Christophers and The Sixteen, Christopher Hogwood and the Academy of Ancient Music. He became Gardiners main soloist (and also a member of the Monteverdi Choir) and his interpretation here is also perfect.
Lutz (November 2006): German bass / baritone, Markus Volpert (see BCW) may not be as well-known as the three above mentioned. He made his main debut as soloist in many of Lutz’s recordings. Although from a younger generation and after finishing his studies with the solo diploma with honor, he participated im master-classes with Sena Jurinac, Christa Ludwig, Elisabeth Schwarzkopf and Thomas Quasthoff. His performance here is technically perfect in the high and low registers and his clear diction in German is a bonus. I like his voice as much as the previously discussed.
Kuijken (December 2011): Also a younger generation Belgian baritone Jan van der Crabben (see BCW) is active as a soloist both in Belgium and abroad and among the conductors with whom he has worked are Andrew Lawrence-King, Patrick Peire and performed most bass interpretations with the Kuijken cycle. His voice here is comparable to Markus Volpert with Lutz - technically perfect in the high and low registers and his clear diction. I like his voice as much as the previously discussed.
Shunske Sato / Nederlandse Bachvereniging (August 2021): Swiss bass-baritone, Stephan MacLeod (see BCW) has sung under Philippe Herreweghe, Michel Corboz, Gustav Leonhardt, Reinhard Goebel (Musica Antiqua Köln), Sigiswald Kuijken, Masaaki Suzuki (Bach Collegium Japan), Konrad Jünghanel (Cantus Cölln), Christophe Coin, Philippe Pierlot (Ricercar Consort), Helmut Rilling and many others. More recently he has performed in 6 videos (available on YouTube) with Shunske Sato and the Nederlandse Bachvereniging , and his short participation in this recitative shows his skills as a top bass-baritone. I like this performance as much as all others.
My personal preferences:
I find it very difficult to make a fair ranking here, since I like all the bass voices with their individual skills and I can’t find any major distinctions in terms of technique, timbre or any other restrictions.
Mvt. 5: Chorale
Introduction by Alfred Dürr (without illustrations): ‘The finale comprises Burmeister’s hymn to the melody by Johann Rudolf Ahle, father of Johann Georg Ahle, both of whom were Bach’s predecessors as organist of the Blasiuskirche, Mühlhausen. The opening, with its sequence of three whole tones, forming a tritone (the so-called ‘Diabolus in música’) might have been felt as outrageous in Ahle’s time, only justified as a musical figure depicting the soul’s crossing over from life into death: This image becomes still clearer within Bach’s composition if we compare it with the initial motive of the whole work, derived from the chorale O Ewigkeit, du Donnerwort: the opening figure a-b-c1 sharp-d1 becomes in the finale al-bl-c1 sharp-d2 sharp. This whole-tone sequence fascinated Alban Berg, who wove this very Bach chorale into his Violin Concerto. No doubt he would have been no less fascinated by Bach’s setting itself, whose harmonization and loosening-up into polyphony* allows the text to become, as it were, transparent— something that not even Bach always achieved.
Remark: IMHO, this is one of the most remarkable chorales in Bach’s cantata oeuvre, not only because of the tritone opening sequence but of the entire harmonization of the whole stanza until the last beat. In order to enjoy this better, I clearly prefer the OVPP recordings, where the individual voices enhance the clarity and polyphonic harmonies of this movement.
My personal preferences: I clearly prefer the OVPP recordings for this cantata and am dividing my preferences for the 3 HIP and the 3 OVPP recordings as follows:
HIP: (1) Suzuki – (2) Koopman – (3) Gardiner
OVPP: (1,2,3) Lutz, Sato and Kuijken– I really can’t decide between all these excellent performances.
Final remarks and ranking
I like this cantata mainly because of the intimate character of the dialogues and the fascinating final chorale harmonization. My final ranking considering all of the above movements:
HIP: (1) Gardiner– (2) Suzuki– (3) Koopman
OVPP: (1,2,3) Lutz, Sato and Kuijken– I really can’t decide between all these excellent performances. |
| |
|
|
