Walcha Playing Bach.
Posted by: u5227470736789439 on 18 November 2005
Dear Friends,
I have been wondering however to describe the two most significant Bach recordings I have become aquainted with this year. I speak of the Helmut Walcha's recordings of the Art Of Fugue and Golberg Variations, on Baroque Organ and Harpsichord respectively. Both lack any element of charisma or particular eccentricity. Both are single-minded and direct, though they have slightly different effects on an expressive and emotional level. The Art is not easily accessable music, and yet Walcha reveals beauties hard enough to reveal in any case (with such a straight reading) which are immediately engaging. The issue of the 16 foot tone is not addressed, and so there is the anomally of the bass being wrong in relation to the tenor, and these cross in the score, but put another octave down from the bass as written, and this is transformed. In fact is is not quite as clear cut as that and in practice is an intelectual issue as much as musical expressive one. The trouble is that the music is so far from most in style that description become very difficult. The sound world is mostly gentle and light, but the music making, is both very correct, and once past the idea of so many fugues, totally involving.
The Goldbergs are also rather severe, and the Aria, sets the tone, being quite swift. The whole method of expression is based in structural emotional expression and surface details are placed within the structural context rather than being underlined. This puts it out of line with modern ideas of Baroque keyboard playing, which Leonhardt pioneered. Flexibility of tempo is far more part of the menu nowadays. With Walcha any changes of tempi are based in long term structural considerations, with quite surprising results. One of which is that the 75 minutes pass before you realise it, it is so absorbing. I enjoy this severity, but that is why I titled this, Grit in the Eye. One will never tire of the approach, but it is formidable to say the least. Nothing is sweetened, and thus one can see the parallel with the greatest efforts of Klemperer, and Grumiaux's Bach playing as well.
Rightly these performances are still available, and will provide a sort of reference that should not, and really for the curious cannot, be ignored even if they represent 'a way' and not 'the way' to approach the music. They represent the peak for me, but then I must enjoy Grit in my Eye, musically at least, in that case!
I have failed to really advocate these performances adequately, and yet they represent the real Everest for me in Bach performance, and I think the sweetness and humanity as well as the rigourous severity of it are held in a fine balance. Not for everyone I would guess, but pretending otherwise would be to mis-represent the situation in my humble oponion. The greatest and most rugged peak, which is aproached by a steep and stoney path, affording a unique and staggering view, once climbed...
All the best from Fredrik
PS. From this peak, having listened again to the Goldbergs, my analogy of a splendid view from the highest peak might be seen as 'looking down' on all else. Not true; as a hike in the green and rolling foothills is just as pleasant and affords the chance to 'look upwards,' which is actaully just as enlightening. Klemperer did that and it is natural for the human to do it. A humble response to the mysteries of the world, I would think, and a good start for attempted understanding of anything. I am sure Walcha spent his time looking up, even though blind, which is paradoxically why his lofty view is SO compelling... The most devastatingly emotioninal music, and music making I know of, and enough to quietly make me weep in the right frame of mind.
I have been wondering however to describe the two most significant Bach recordings I have become aquainted with this year. I speak of the Helmut Walcha's recordings of the Art Of Fugue and Golberg Variations, on Baroque Organ and Harpsichord respectively. Both lack any element of charisma or particular eccentricity. Both are single-minded and direct, though they have slightly different effects on an expressive and emotional level. The Art is not easily accessable music, and yet Walcha reveals beauties hard enough to reveal in any case (with such a straight reading) which are immediately engaging. The issue of the 16 foot tone is not addressed, and so there is the anomally of the bass being wrong in relation to the tenor, and these cross in the score, but put another octave down from the bass as written, and this is transformed. In fact is is not quite as clear cut as that and in practice is an intelectual issue as much as musical expressive one. The trouble is that the music is so far from most in style that description become very difficult. The sound world is mostly gentle and light, but the music making, is both very correct, and once past the idea of so many fugues, totally involving.
The Goldbergs are also rather severe, and the Aria, sets the tone, being quite swift. The whole method of expression is based in structural emotional expression and surface details are placed within the structural context rather than being underlined. This puts it out of line with modern ideas of Baroque keyboard playing, which Leonhardt pioneered. Flexibility of tempo is far more part of the menu nowadays. With Walcha any changes of tempi are based in long term structural considerations, with quite surprising results. One of which is that the 75 minutes pass before you realise it, it is so absorbing. I enjoy this severity, but that is why I titled this, Grit in the Eye. One will never tire of the approach, but it is formidable to say the least. Nothing is sweetened, and thus one can see the parallel with the greatest efforts of Klemperer, and Grumiaux's Bach playing as well.
Rightly these performances are still available, and will provide a sort of reference that should not, and really for the curious cannot, be ignored even if they represent 'a way' and not 'the way' to approach the music. They represent the peak for me, but then I must enjoy Grit in my Eye, musically at least, in that case!
I have failed to really advocate these performances adequately, and yet they represent the real Everest for me in Bach performance, and I think the sweetness and humanity as well as the rigourous severity of it are held in a fine balance. Not for everyone I would guess, but pretending otherwise would be to mis-represent the situation in my humble oponion. The greatest and most rugged peak, which is aproached by a steep and stoney path, affording a unique and staggering view, once climbed...
All the best from Fredrik
PS. From this peak, having listened again to the Goldbergs, my analogy of a splendid view from the highest peak might be seen as 'looking down' on all else. Not true; as a hike in the green and rolling foothills is just as pleasant and affords the chance to 'look upwards,' which is actaully just as enlightening. Klemperer did that and it is natural for the human to do it. A humble response to the mysteries of the world, I would think, and a good start for attempted understanding of anything. I am sure Walcha spent his time looking up, even though blind, which is paradoxically why his lofty view is SO compelling... The most devastatingly emotioninal music, and music making I know of, and enough to quietly make me weep in the right frame of mind.
You're quite right about some of the organs Hurford selects (all of which are modern instruments). That said, some of them are small and not overbearing. I'm very curious about Simon Preston's survey as he used organs from Bach's time.
What is most interesting for me about Gould is that while I totally buy into his Goldbergs, his Well Tempered Clavier left me utterly cold. I only bought a second set (also Barenboim) because my excellent local cd shop (it's, incidentally nice to finally be living somewhere with a specialist classical store - also dangerously expensive!) had a special on all his stuff (also why I picked up the concertos). I was so sold on this first volume that I recently picked up the second.
As to the nature of definitive recordings, you're quite right. For example, I recently picked up one of Decca's bargain boxes of Britten conducts Britten operas. The Peter Grimes (the only one I have a different recording of for comparison) is very fine indeed, but definitive? I also have the LSO live one, and the orchestral playing on that is in another league, though the voices are markedly inferior. But, still, it makes it hard to describe the Britten as definitive. That said, I would go so far as to describe the Brunelle recording of Paul Bunyan as definitive (at least until something better comes along, and I'll be surprised if it does), but then we only have to to chose from there. Also, I wonder if perhaps some of Sir Charles Mackerras's Janacek might not be described as definitive?
As to the Art of the Fugue, would you have said the Walcha recording was a good one to be getting started with (I feel as though it's something of a gaping hole in my collection
).
Regards, Tam
What is most interesting for me about Gould is that while I totally buy into his Goldbergs, his Well Tempered Clavier left me utterly cold. I only bought a second set (also Barenboim) because my excellent local cd shop (it's, incidentally nice to finally be living somewhere with a specialist classical store - also dangerously expensive!) had a special on all his stuff (also why I picked up the concertos). I was so sold on this first volume that I recently picked up the second.
As to the nature of definitive recordings, you're quite right. For example, I recently picked up one of Decca's bargain boxes of Britten conducts Britten operas. The Peter Grimes (the only one I have a different recording of for comparison) is very fine indeed, but definitive? I also have the LSO live one, and the orchestral playing on that is in another league, though the voices are markedly inferior. But, still, it makes it hard to describe the Britten as definitive. That said, I would go so far as to describe the Brunelle recording of Paul Bunyan as definitive (at least until something better comes along, and I'll be surprised if it does), but then we only have to to chose from there. Also, I wonder if perhaps some of Sir Charles Mackerras's Janacek might not be described as definitive?
As to the Art of the Fugue, would you have said the Walcha recording was a good one to be getting started with (I feel as though it's something of a gaping hole in my collection
).Regards, Tam
Fredrik,
I totally agree with where you're trying to go with composer renditions, in that there is certainly something 'special' and indeed 'important' about them, whilst not being 'definitive'. As such, I suppose 'authoritative' is a reasonable description, but for some reason it doesn't seem to sit quite right with me. That said, since I cannot think of a better word...
I think it's helpful to have the distinction of 'best' recordings though, again, without their being definitive, that way we're never excluding the possibility that someone else will come along and manage it even better than has been achieved before.
As for Sir Charles's schubert, I hope you enjoy it (please note, that since I do have something of a soft spot for him, as you will no doubt have gleaned from my many glowing posts on the man, I'm possibly not the best arbiter of the absolute quality of his work).
Thanks for the recommendation of Walcha. I assume you're talking about the stereo set there as opposed to the mono one on DG's original masters series?
regards, Tam
I totally agree with where you're trying to go with composer renditions, in that there is certainly something 'special' and indeed 'important' about them, whilst not being 'definitive'. As such, I suppose 'authoritative' is a reasonable description, but for some reason it doesn't seem to sit quite right with me. That said, since I cannot think of a better word...
I think it's helpful to have the distinction of 'best' recordings though, again, without their being definitive, that way we're never excluding the possibility that someone else will come along and manage it even better than has been achieved before.
As for Sir Charles's schubert, I hope you enjoy it (please note, that since I do have something of a soft spot for him, as you will no doubt have gleaned from my many glowing posts on the man, I'm possibly not the best arbiter of the absolute quality of his work).
Thanks for the recommendation of Walcha. I assume you're talking about the stereo set there as opposed to the mono one on DG's original masters series?
regards, Tam
Nic,
Congratulations on your purchases, I hope you enjoy them.
Yes, it does take some getting used to the way classical cds get laid out, but it does make sense, I promise! I think part of it is probably getting used to the way the works are arranged within each composer: normally you get the big orchestra works first (symphonies, concertos, etc.), then chamber music (i.e. string quartets) and then solo instrument stuff. Opera will be somewhere else again. Of course, just to confuse you, there will then be another section for budget price labels (such as naxos where all discs are about £5) and, in hmv, another rack of item on sale!
regards, Tam
Congratulations on your purchases, I hope you enjoy them.
Yes, it does take some getting used to the way classical cds get laid out, but it does make sense, I promise! I think part of it is probably getting used to the way the works are arranged within each composer: normally you get the big orchestra works first (symphonies, concertos, etc.), then chamber music (i.e. string quartets) and then solo instrument stuff. Opera will be somewhere else again. Of course, just to confuse you, there will then be another section for budget price labels (such as naxos where all discs are about £5) and, in hmv, another rack of item on sale!
regards, Tam
Very interesting comments there, I'd never really thought of his music in quite those terms.
I do like Bruckner, though I simply find that, when I listen through one of the complete sets after I buy it, I find things getting a little repetitive. I also think he tries too much in terms the music always coming to climax. I think what I'm saying is that Bruckner is great, but only one or two symphonies at a time. Also, I think he sometimes suffers from not keeping the best until last, take, for example, the 4th symphony: the first two movements are some of my favourite music but the second two come as something of a letdown.
I understand why some people struggle with Mahler, though, personally, I couldn't bring myself to part with more than one of my 8 cycles! What I love about Mahler goes back to that quote about a symphony being the 'world', I think the music, especially in the finest ones, comes on such a journey that listening to a good performance can be a wonderful and emotionally draining experience.
Aside from Mahler (and Wagner, if we're talking opera) most of my favourites would be on that list. Tell me, have you heard the Davis LSO live Sibelius 3&7 (an excellent disc, though their other recent effort, 5&6 is more mediocre). I love Haydn too, especially when Bernstein is doing his symphonies, I think he manages to get the most wonderfully joyful sound. As far as Brahms goes, while I'm very happy with my Mackerras/SCO cycle (which is very good), I've yet to find a truly satisfying account with a larger band. Abbado's was not bad, Haitink's recent LSO live set was not good (except no.2) and Bernstein's DG set was lousy except no.4.
Interestingly, and going back to Bach to finish off with I was at a concert last week given by the SCO of a Brandenburg (I forget which one) and two violin concertos (as well as haydn's clock). Now, aside from the soloist in the violin concertos being out of tune with the orchestra
my biggest complaint was that the balance was wrong and I couldn't hear the harpsichord properly. Indeed, in the past when I've heard Brandenburgs done with piano they just sound plain wrong (with the possible exception of Hewitt's latest stuff on Hyperion which uses both - but I only heard the taster on Gramophone). I suspect this is due to balance between the instrument and the orchestra and the tone just not quite sounding right. However, it's interesting that the piano sounds 'wrong' in one part or Bach's repertoire yet, for the goldbergs or the well tempered I much prefer it.
regards, Tam
I do like Bruckner, though I simply find that, when I listen through one of the complete sets after I buy it, I find things getting a little repetitive. I also think he tries too much in terms the music always coming to climax. I think what I'm saying is that Bruckner is great, but only one or two symphonies at a time. Also, I think he sometimes suffers from not keeping the best until last, take, for example, the 4th symphony: the first two movements are some of my favourite music but the second two come as something of a letdown.
I understand why some people struggle with Mahler, though, personally, I couldn't bring myself to part with more than one of my 8 cycles! What I love about Mahler goes back to that quote about a symphony being the 'world', I think the music, especially in the finest ones, comes on such a journey that listening to a good performance can be a wonderful and emotionally draining experience.
Aside from Mahler (and Wagner, if we're talking opera
) most of my favourites would be on that list. Tell me, have you heard the Davis LSO live Sibelius 3&7 (an excellent disc, though their other recent effort, 5&6 is more mediocre). I love Haydn too, especially when Bernstein is doing his symphonies, I think he manages to get the most wonderfully joyful sound. As far as Brahms goes, while I'm very happy with my Mackerras/SCO cycle (which is very good), I've yet to find a truly satisfying account with a larger band. Abbado's was not bad, Haitink's recent LSO live set was not good (except no.2) and Bernstein's DG set was lousy except no.4.Interestingly, and going back to Bach to finish off with I was at a concert last week given by the SCO of a Brandenburg (I forget which one) and two violin concertos (as well as haydn's clock). Now, aside from the soloist in the violin concertos being out of tune with the orchestra
my biggest complaint was that the balance was wrong and I couldn't hear the harpsichord properly. Indeed, in the past when I've heard Brandenburgs done with piano they just sound plain wrong (with the possible exception of Hewitt's latest stuff on Hyperion which uses both - but I only heard the taster on Gramophone). I suspect this is due to balance between the instrument and the orchestra and the tone just not quite sounding right. However, it's interesting that the piano sounds 'wrong' in one part or Bach's repertoire yet, for the goldbergs or the well tempered I much prefer it.regards, Tam