|
|
Cantata BWV 88
Siehe, ich will viel Fischer aussenden
Discussions - Part 5 |
|
Continue from Part 4 |
|
Discussions in the Week of April 26, 2026 (5th round)
Cantata BWV 88, ‘Siehe, ich will viel Fischer aussenden’ by Rudolf Lutz (OVPP) compared to 6 recent HIP recordings. |
|
Frits V. Herbold wrote (April 26, 2026):
The BCW shows 18 interpretation so far, beginning with early recording from Karl Ristenpart (which I highly appreciate, but don’t want to compare with the newer HIP recordings discussed here) and ending with newer recordings available on YouTube.
BWV 88 is the 15th cantata of Rudolf Lutz’s cycle, recorded live at the Evangelic Church in Trogen, on Friday, June 20, 2008 - two days before the respective 5th 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.
Exceptionally, I am including Gustav Leonhardt’s recording in this discussion, since this is the only recording of movement 5 and 6 with a boys voice. Normally, I don’t include the Harnoncourt-Leonhardt cycle in these discussions because of the – IMHO – too large size of the choirs used.
Scoring: see KB, I/17.2 and Bach Digital Bach Digital
Sopran solo, Alt solo, Tenor solo, Bass solo, Sopran, Alt, Tenor, Bass, Corno I, Corno II, Oboe d'amore I, Oboe d'amore II, Taille, Violine I, Violine II, Viola, Basso continuo
Remarks:
1. The NBA I/17.2 with its ‘Kritischer Bericht’(critical report) was published only in 1993 (Reinmar Evans) meaning that it was only available to the conductors starting with Pieter Jan Leusink (2000).
2. Both autograph original score and original parts are well preserved. The ‘Kritischer Bericht’ explains in detail the involved copyists as well as the relation between all sources (original and copies). Interestingly, the original score mentions ‘3 Oboes d’ Amore’ , while the parts go into more detail, mentioning Oboe d’ Amore I and II and as third instrument the lower pitched ‘Taille’. The taille, is a straight two-key oboe pitched in F, that also has been used for the Oboe da Caccia parts in period-instrument recordings. This might explain why Leonhardt, Lutz and Suzuki used the latter instrument in their recording (see below).
3. The original Leipzig key is in D Major played at the Leipzig ‘ Kammerton’ a’ = 415 Hz. The final choral is in b minor (German h minor), the relative minor key to D Major. All the HIP / OVPP recordings discussed here perform according to this original setting.
Introduction Cantata BWV 88 by Alfed Dürr (from The Cantatas of J. S. Bach)
‘This cantata, which was performed for the first time on 21 July 1726, is one of the seven works whose texts were drawn from the same cycle as the cantatas by Johann Ludwig Bach that his cousin Johann Sebastian performed. Its content is connected with the Sunday Gospel* reading and takes the account of the calling of Peter as evidence for God’s concern for the human race. The fourth movement not only stands midway but is accorded central significance in content, for it contains Jesus’s words to Peter, Tear not, for from now on you will catch men’ (Luke 5.10). A related passage from the Old Testament, Jeremiah 16.16, is placed at the outset of the work. Originally relevant to Israel’s restoration from the Babylonian captivity, it announces that the Lord will send out fishermen and hunters to gather together His scattered people. In the madrigalian* verse of Part I, the poet reflects that, although the Almighty could easily dispense with mankind, He is nonetheless concerned for our salvation. Consequently, God’s blessing rests upon us, the librettist concludes in Part II, even though ‘brief hardship’ renders this far from obvious. The text concludes with the last verse of the hymn Wer nur den lieben Gott läßt walten by Georg Neumark (1641), a hymn that had already been linked to the Gospel for this Sunday in the chorale cantata BWV 93 of 1724.
Remark: total times vary significantly between the fastest at 17:05 (Pieter-Jan Belder) and the slowest 20:53 (Lutz).
Part I
Mvt. 1: Basso Solo, B, Strings, Oboe d’ Amore I & II, Corno I & II
Introduction by Alfred Dürr ‘The opening movement forms the focal point of Bach’s setting. Though set not as a chorus* but as a bass solo (probably due to the direct speech of God in the singular) it is nonetheless of considerable extent and of unorthodox form. Its text-engendered bipartite form shows it to be related to the motet* and the sacred concerto, hence Bach’s avoidance of the designation ‘aria’. The musical invention is based on the two central words ‘fishermen’ and ‘hunters’. The first part is a pastorale, a ‘scene at the lake’, in which wave-like figures surge up and down over calm or gently moving pedal points. The text is oft-repeated in constantly varied, and thus all the more forceful, declamation. Then all of a sudden the scene changes into a hunt, ‘allegro quasi presto’, with two horns added to the strings and oboes. Again, one admires the effectiveness of the declamation which holds the listener captive to the very end.’
Remark: total times don’t vary significantly around 6 minutes: 5:22 (Pieter-Jan Belder) and 6:55 (Gardiner)
Leonhardt (03 & 09 – 1978): I like the very detailed liner notes from the complete first LP and CD editions by Teldec (‘Das alte Werk’) of the Harnoncourt & Leonhardt cycle. One can look up the instrumentation in each movement but also the origin and description of the – what Harnoncourt calls the ‘original instruments’. I have commented earlier that I like many aspects of this cycle – especially the soloists and boys voices, but I don’t like the size of the choirs. This recording was made at different times, but I don’t think this makes a big difference with the modern possibilities of sound editing, although this resulted in the use of different instrumentalists and vocalists for movements 1 & 7, 2 & 6, 3 & 5 and 4 (see the BCW and liner notes). The size of the Knabenchor Hannover choir (S and A boy’s voices) and the Collegium Vocale Gent (T and B men’s voices, Chorus Master Herreweghe!) is not informed but I am guessing 4 voice per part. The String section has 4 Violins I, 3 violins II and two violas I and II.
Dutch bass-baritone, Max (Rudolf) van Egmond (see BCW) has a long career with several other Bach performances and I like his pleasant relatively dark voice, good German diction and timbre. The instrumental background though, doesn’t sound so well IMHO. The string section with 4 first, 3 second and two violas I & II is not too large and both oboes d’amore sound well played (first instrument by Bruce Haynes!), but the ‘natural’ horns in the second, allegro quasi presto ‘hunt’ part sound off pitch in many instances. Although I like the soloist very much, not my first choice. (I am aware that Harnoncourt in his various comments and books explains that some natural brass instruments would have sounded similarly a little ‘off’ ?) in Bach’s time, but I don’t ‘buy’ it, since many other following HIP recordings with similar natural instruments sound perfect).
Peter-Jan Leusink (01 & 02- 2000): Dutch bass and conductor Bas Ramselaar (see BCW) performs very well in this movement, although Leusink takes in too fast IMHO. The instrumental background (strings size similar as with Leonhardt) sounds lighter and better; the liner notes inform only ‘3 oboes’ and I am guessing that this means 2 oboes d’amore and an oboe da caccia are used here. The horn playing in the second part is less loud and sounds better than commented abov. Among my first choices.
Gardiner (01 & 02- 2000): English baritone, Peter Harvey (see BCW) has a much ‘warmer’ baritone timbre and is technical perfect, especially in the second – faster – part. The string section is basically of the same size as with Leusink and Leonhardt. Here, the liner notes also inform ‘3 oboes’ and I believe this is the same case as with Leusink (using 2 oboes d’amore and 1 oboe da caccia). The horns in the second part are perfect – as is mostly the case with Gardiner’s brass instruments.
Koopman (11 & 12 - 2001 (Mvt 1) ; 02 & 03 -2002 (Mvts 2-7)): This performance is also divided in two recording sessions with different instrumentalists and vocalists. German bass-baritone, Klaus Mertens (see BCW) is one of my favorite bass- baritones with an excellent technique and very pleasant ‘warm’ timbre. Koopmans instrumentation is very delicate; the string section is slightly smaller and transparent. The liner notes regarding the oboes is confusing: they mention‘ 3 players with ‘oboe and oboes d’amore’. I am not sure if there is a oboe da caccia playing at all here unless the one of the oboe players also this use this instrument. The sound of the horns in the second part is perfect. This is a very ‘delicate’ rendition and certainly among my first choices!
Lutz (06-2008: German baritone, Markus Volpert (see BCW) sounds like a ‘younger’ Koopman and his German diction as well as his technique (including in the second faster part) are perfect. Lutz uses only 2 violins (I & II) and a viola in the string section. This is a one of the two recordings with two oboes d ‘amore and a taille (as with Suzuki, see below) and two perfect sounding natural horns. Interestingly, there is no chest organ in the BC - very seldom with Lutz who plays the harpsichord while conducting. Also among one my first choices.
Suzuki (09 -2008): Dutch bass, Peter Kooij (see BCW) is at the same level as Mertens, although lacking some of its ‘warmth’. The string section is similar as with Gardiner and Koopman, but Suzuki also uses 2 oboes d’amore and a taille, as with Lutz above. The horns sound perfect in the second part, IMHO played too loud. Nevertheless among my first choices.
Pieter-Jan Belder (06-2013): Dutch bass, Harry van der Kamp’s (see BCW) performance, although from a technical standpoint not inferior to many other bass (-baritone) soloist is a victim of the clearly too fast tempo. The whole instrumental part also sounds ‘washy’. Certainly my last choice.
Ranking : (1) Lutz, (2) Suzuki, (3) Koopman, (4) Gardiner, (5) Leusink, (6) Leonhardt, (7) Peter-Jan Belder
Mvt. 2 Recitativo T, BC
Mvt. 3 Aria T, Oboe d’ Amore I and BC; Instrumental ritornello: Strings and Oboe d’ Amore I and II
Introductions by Alfred Dürr ‘The following recitative, no. 2, ends with a question, to which the aria, no. 3, gives the reply, and this explains why the latter movement begins not with the usual instrumental ritornello but with the voice answering spontaneously with its passionate ‘No, no’ This aria is again characterized by its forceful delivery of the text, particularly when the initial ‘no’ is countered in the second part by a no less emphatic ‘yes’. Only at the end is the obbligato oboe d’amore* joined by the strings (with oboe d’amore II doubling the first violin), and here a ritornello compensates for the absence of an introduction and, more clearly than the vocal portion, reveals the true dance character of the movement: the clear pairing of bars brings to mind the minuet. The clarity of the periodic structure is here probably an image of the ‘true path’ by which God will lead us.’
Remarks: I am discussing movement 3 also regarding the alto soloist. Movement 2 is only joined by the oboe d’amore I and the BC, while the second oboe d’amore II and strings join for the instrumental ritornello in movement 3.
Leonhardt (03 & 09 – 1978): veteran English tenor, Austrian tenor (and teacher), Kurt Equiluz (see BCW) has been one of my favorite Bach tenors since I started enjoying the Harnoncourt-Leonhard complete cycle. One can better appreciate his art in movement 2 (with BC only, the chest organ played by Leonhardt himself) and in the following aria (mvt. 3). The oboe d’amore I is very well performed by Bruce Haynes (see BCW). The second oboe d’amore joins the final ritornello together with the strings and the BC (chest organ, 2 violoncellos, violone). One of my first choices
Peter-Jan Leusink (01 & 02- 2000): Dutch tenor (former boy soprano), Marcel Beekman (see BCW) might not be as well-known as Equiluz, but his performance in both movements here is excellent, at the same level as most of the other tenors discussed here. The instrumental playing is as good as any other. Also one of my first choices.
Gardiner (01 & 02- 2000): the same goes for tenor Kobie van Rensburg (see BCW) , not so well-known, although he performed for Gardiner in 5 other recordings. I like his timbre and technique as well as Beekman and the oboe / string playing is also pleasant and intimate. Also one of my first choices.
Koopman (11 & 12 - 2001 (Mvt 1) ; 02 & 03 -2002 (Mvts 2-7)): German tenor, Christoph Prégardien (see BCW) is also at the same level of all other tenors discussed here. The instrumental parts sound intimate and very transparent. Also one of my first choices.
Lutz (06-2008: German tenor, Andreas Weller (see BCW) received his first singing lessons with the Stuttgarter Hymnus-Chorknaben and tis made him an experienced Bach tenor. He performed also with Suzuki and so far only with BWV 88 and BWV 103 so far. I like his timbre, technique and perfect German diction. Both oboe d’amore players are excellent and the minimal strings of only both violins I and II and one viola as well as the BC (Lutz himself playing the harpsichord while conducting) together with violoncello, violone and bassoon makes this rendition very transparent and intimate. I am not sure why Lutz chose the harpsichord instead of the organ in this typical ‘late’ Leipzig cantata since the original parts (see above) contain a transposed part for the organ. Nevertheless, also one of my first choices.
Suzuki (09 -2008): German tenor, Gerd Türk (see BCW) also performed in many other cantatas with conductors René Jacobs, Konrad Junghänel, Koopman and Lutz. He is at the dame level as Prégardien; timbre and technique are perfect. The instrumental part is also very transparent and pleasant. Also among my first choices.
Pieter-Jan Belder (06-2013): English tenor, Charles Daniels (see BCW) was both a Chorister and a Choral Scholar of King's College, Cambridge, spending the intervening years at Winchester College. Also very experienced, he is at the same level as Daniels (above). The BC is played with a harpsichord, without the chest organ as with Lutz, above. Also among my first choices.
Ranking: I am very picky with tenor soloist playing Bach (especially as evangelists in the passion music’s). But in the case of these excellent tenors – each with their individual timbres and mostly similar tempos, I like them all and don’t think a ranking would be fair. Nevertheless, I have a slight preference for Equiluz with Leonhardt.
Part 2
Mvt. 4: Arioso, T, B, strings and BC
Introductions by Alfred Dürr ‘The fourth movement forms the center of the work in content as well as in position, for the image of the fishermen and hunters here receives its interpretation. After a short introductory ‘Evangelist’s’ recitative, sung by the tenor with string accompaniment, the words of Christ are, as usual, assigned to the bass. Here, for the third time in this cantata, we have occasion to admire Bach’s compelling speech-melody in an arioso over a basso quasi ostinato As often in movements of this kind, its charm lies in the tension between the relatively strict, motivically imprinted continuo part and the eloquent and relatively free bass part.
Remark: tempos don’t vary much from around 0:45 minutes.
Ranking Tenor: see movements 2 and 3
Ranking Bass: see movements 2 and 3
Mvt. 5: Aria Duetto, S, A Oboes d’Amore I & II, Violins I and II and BC
Introductions by Alfred Dürr ‘By contrast, an imitative* texture prevails in the following duet, no. 5. The voices in turn adopt the theme stated in the opening ritornello by unison oboes d’amore and violins, and the continuo on several occasions takes up the head-motive of this theme in imitation. Even the theme of section B is derived from the opening theme, giving rise to an A B B1 structure of striking homogeneity.’
Remarks: tempos don’t vary much from around 3:30 minutes, with the exception of the slower Leonardt with 3:52.
I am discussing the soprano soloists in more detail for movement 6 (see below)
Leonhardt (03 & 09 – 1978): English counter-tenor, Paul Esswood (see BCW) mixes very well with Boy Soprano: Marcus Klein (see details below) and the instrumental playing is excellent. Although this rendition is as ‘authentic’ and HIP as one can expect, this is not my first choice because of the not so ‘confident’ singing in higher registers of the boy soprano. Not my first choice.
Peter-Jan Leusink (01 & 02- 2000): I am not a big fan of Dutch counter-tenor, Sytse Buwalda (see BCW) because a somewhat ‘wobbly’ timbre. Soprano Ruth Holton (see below) to the contrary is one of my favorite sopranos with her ‘boyish’ voice. Although both voices mix well and the orchestral accompaniment is delicate and transparent, this is not my first choice.
Gardiner (01 & 02- 2000): English counter-tenor, William Towers (see BCW) mixes very well with soprano Joanne Lunn (see below). The instrumental background is also intimate and transparent. Among my fist choices.
Koopman (11 & 12 - 2001 (Mvt 1) ; 02 & 03 -2002 (Mvts 2-7)): this rendition is too fast IMHO. Polish mezzo-soprano and contralto, Bogna Bartosz (see BCW). Although I like her technique and timbre very much, Dutch soprano, Johannette Zomer (see below) sounds somewhat uncertain in the higher tones. Not my first choice, but mainly because of the fast tempo of 3:09.
Lutz (06-2008: German mezzo-soprano, Ruth Sandhoff (see BCW) mixes very well with the excellent Austrian soprano, Miriam Feuersinger (see below). The minimal strings (two violins I and II and viola) . The keyboard instrument played by Lutz himself is the harpsichord (without chest organ) This very delicate and transparent rendition makes this one of my first choices.
Suzuki (09 -2008): English counter-tenor, Robin Blaze (see BCW) also mixes well with English soprano, Rachel Nicholls (see below), although I feel some lack of coordination of both voices in this also very transparent rendition. Not bad, but not my first choice.
Pieter-Jan Belder (06-2013): Swiss counter-tenor and former boy soprano, Terry Wey (see BCW) German soprano, Dorothee Mields (see below) mix surprising well in this rendition. The instrumental parts sound louder in the forefront. Among my first choices.
Ranking: (1) Lutz, (2) Gardiner, (3) Pieter-Jan Belder, (4) Suzuki, (5) Leonhardt (6) Leusink, (7) Koopman
Mvt. 6: Recitativo, S and BC
Introductions by Alfred Dürr ‘A secco recitative with continuo accompaniment, no. 6, is followed by the concluding chorale in a plain four-part texture.
Remark: tempos vary slightly around 1 minute.
Leonhardt (03 & 09 – 1978): Boy Soprano: Marcus Klein (Soloist of the Knabenchor Hannover, see BCW) sounds much better as soloists in this recitative. I always prefer boy voices in Bach’s soprano parts. One of my first choices.
Peter-Jan Leusink (01 & 02- 2000): the same goes for my favorite English women’s soprano, Ruth Holton with her ‘boyish’ timbre. In this case, clearly my first choice, before Klein.
Gardiner (01 & 02- 2000): English soprano, Joanne Lunn (see BCW) comes very close to Holton in her timbre – very close to a boys voice. Among my first choices, after Holton and Klein.
Koopman (11 & 12 - 2001 (Mvt. 1) ; 02 & 03 -2002 (Mvts 2-7)): Dutch soprano, Johannette Zomer (see BCW) sounds much better here as soloist as in the duet. Technically perfect and a good reach of the high notes, among my first choices.
Lutz (06-2008: Austrian soprano, Miriam Feuersinger (see BCW) represents a younger generation of fine soprano voices, with technical excellence and a very pleasant ‘warm’ timbre – also in the higher registers. The minimal BC consist of one violoncello only and the harpsichord played by Lutz himself. As mentioned above, Lutz doesn’t use the organ in this recording.
Suzuki (09 -2008): English soprano, Rachel Nicholls (see BCW) is considered one of the most outstanding young sopranos recently to have emerged in the UK, Rachel Nicholls combines a warm lyric voice with outstanding musicianship and command of several languages. I like her performance here – very similar to Nicolls, above. The BC is also ‘light’, with the harpsichord as keyboard instrument and probably violoncello. Among my first choices.
Pieter-Jan Belder (06-2013): German soprano, Dorothee Mields (see BCW) reminds both of the previous sopranists discussed. Again, only a harpsichord and a violoncello are playing the BC. Also among my first choices.
Ranking: (1) Leusink, (2) Leonhardt, (3) Gardiner, (4) Lutz = (5) Koopman = (6) Suzuki = (7) Pieter-Jan Belder
Mvt. 7: Choral, S, A,T, B, Strings, Woodwinds and BC
‘… A secco recitative with continuo accompaniment, no. 6, is followed by the concluding chorale in a plain four-part texture.
Remarks: ‘Whenever Dürr mentions ‘a chorale in a plain four-part texture’, I get struck by the word ‘plain’, since this sounds pejorative IMHO. There is never anything ‘ plain’ about Bach’s harmonizations of chorales! Since the early interpretations of Bach’s chorales with enormous choirs until the more intimate HIP and specially OVPP renditions, their interpretation has changed a lot over the time. I have my own understanding about how such a chorale should sound, since at a very early age, when it was a (welcome) habit to sing Bach chorales before the beginning of class in a typical Dutch Lutheran elementary school: full notes and no shortened pauses and / or extended fermatas. As a consequence, I always prefer the more transparent OVPP recordings, especially in cases when the original parts don’t indicate the use of ripienists, as in this cantata (‘a 4 voci’ and no separate parts for ripienists).
Ranking: (1) Lutz, (2) Pieter-Jan Belder Leonhardt (with 2 voices per part!), (3) Su, (4) Gardiner, (5) Koopman, (6) Leusink, (7) Leonhardt.
Dürr offers a final comment to this cantata: ‘What was already evident in our consideration of the individual movements proves to be characteristic of the entire cantata: a retreat of the concertante style in favor of the monody, declamatory principle and a renunciation of brilliant passage-work, founded in the joy of virtuoso playing, in favor of graphic textual interpretation. For the period around 1726 this is by no means characteristic: we need only recall the extended introductory sinfonias to Cantatas 35, 169, 49, and 52. It is all the more likely that the features concerned are intentional, peculiar to this cantata, and stimulated by the text.’ |
| |
|
|
