How should I restart studying Bach?

Okay, I thought of something that is a good Bach-Chopin comparison. I have never practiced this one, but I had to analyze the d minor set from WTC-I. The prelude introduces a technique that Chopin was very fond of, because Chopin was enormously fond of functional counterpoint, but he had either a distaste for writing strict counterpoint or an insecurity complex about writing it (which would be understandable, in the face of Bach...Bach leaves the impression that any attempt on our part to do what he did with strict counterpoint would be, at best, redundant). But in this d minor prelude of Bach, there is an example of a technique that Bach used quite often, where voices that are not explicitly written are implied. I really favor the interpretation with the light, most connected version of the portato in the right hand, where the 'hidden' voices can subtly rise up out of a generally delicate fluttering. It's very similar to what Chopin did in a number of instances. Well, almost everything Chopin wrote used this 'hidden counterpoint' style, but some works are more similar to that d minor prelude than others. The 25/1 etude is one example.



The 'hidden' voice on the third note of each triplet is similar to the 'hidden' voice here in the Chopin etude, first on the 3rd and 6th notes of each sextuplet, and then on the 2nd note of each sextuplet in the 2nd measure:



Prelude #8 is another example. These two, already, are quite far removed from Bach, but they simply expand outward from Bach's premise. Chopin uses even more chromaticism, even more obscure counterpoint, even more convoluted technical problems, and all of this simply to achieve the aforementioned tapping of the percussive/expressive capabilities of the piano. Even more convoluted is Chopin's use of the false unison, in prelude 14 and in the final movement of the 2nd sonata.

Alf mentioned the WTC as didactic works, but the suites and the Goldberg variations were all published under the title Klavier-Übung, and some organ stuff as well of course. If you have a complex about the suites, though...I understand. :lol: I think I go for the suites because they are so long, and I dig that as opposed to just a prelude-fugue combo. I want my recitals to be more Bach than anything else, so that is my approach. :wink: Everyone is of course quite correct that you shouldn't perform something you don't like.

 

See? That’s already a good reason to avoid using it out of habit. :lol:

The metronome disorientates (and in the long time impairs!) an important component of your musical faculties, your inner sense of rhythm. The metronome doesn't know what's going on in the score, tic-toc-tic-toc, and makes your playing mechanical and your rhythm artificially stiff. Also, since you're in the delicate phase of learning a piece, that unwanted rhythmic stiffness will ingrain and you will probably never be able to recover an authentic pulse in the piece you are studying.

I've tracked down a quotation by Joseph Hofmann that I remembered reading in the past, about the use of a metronome.

But of course my killer argument against the metronome in Bach is that Bach himself avoided using it.

 

LOL, I trust my ability to play without mechanical rhythm when it's important. I can do it even with the metronome on, and I'm sure Chopin could as well, or he wouldn't have used it to the point of keeping it on during lessons. I will continue to practice with a metronome.

PS - I have been practicing that Chopin etude, the 25/1, with the metronome on 4 16ths per beat. :lol: Good way to learn the notes on the inner two pages and accustom myself to the polyrhythm at the same time.

 

The German Organ Mass, framed by the St.Anne's prelude and fugue, is the absolute pinnacle of (Baroque) organ music, containing some of the most ingenious, impressive, and challenging organ chorales ever written.

You don't want to call that some organ stuff Terez, for fear of incurring my eternal wrath :!: :lol:

 

I don't know nothing about the music of other asian countries, but I've been certainly exposed to Korean traditional music. The traditional music for the courts is quite elegant. For example this kind of music is performed for international events again and again :wink:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIYLKjD5Pzc&feature=PlayList&p=0FB243CA3581A297&index=0&playnext=1
These things are examples how the traditional instruments are used nowadays to survive (they play "western" music on those trad. instruments):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5j0EnN_RpU&feature=PlayList&p=31F6AC34B16CDF93&index=0&playnext=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tRfOB43mzY&feature=related
Or, some bands play their own original composition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7kKefjV3sA

Ok, now I understand what you meant!

OMG, this is really helpful! Thank you very much, Terez.

The special techique you mentioned is still unknown to me and I think it's too clear, since I never studied Bach seriously. Looking forward to the moment where it is unveiled also to me

Terez, my baby just made poo-poo, so I'll be back!

 

LOL, sorry Chris. :lol: I don't play organ so I've never had occasion to check it out before. Of course I got bombarded with the organ passacaglia as a listening assignment in music history, so now I've got to play it.....

Hye-Jin....I first read that as 'Terez made my baby poo-poo', lol. I'm glad it wasn't my fault! :lol: And thanks much for the links on the Korean music!

 

Bach possibly avoided using the metronome because Maelzel was born to invent it yet. :wink:

Anyway, as far as the variety of articulations available in Bach, one thing to consider is that neither the organ nor the harpsichord offered any form of dynamic accent -- a particular note could only be brought out through an agogic accent, which occurs by shortening the note(s) before the stressed note or lengthening the stressed note.

This becomes particularly important in such instances as a piece that starts on an anacrusis (pick up). If articulation is not adequately differentiated to help define the beats, the music can be heard as being a partial beat off -- one can get disoriented. For example, the Invention in D major, the initial notes could sound as beat one.

Articulation is also necessary to spell out syncopations and hemiola.

Though not all harpsichord / organ type articulations will work at every similar spot on a piano (indeed, there can be differences between harpsichord and organ to bring out the same piece), they can often be quite useful in certain spots and at the least inform your use of dynamic articulation on a piano.

(I know what I'm trying to say but I'm not sure that it is coming out well.)

Scott

 

Shhhh, Alf is trying to be funny! :lol:

 

The good news is that, after 1-thousand plus posts here, I can still get surprised. :lol:

 

I guess he'd only just been born then, and Bach decided to wait, but died before Maelzel could invented it ? Makes sense to me

 

Ah that was the trigger, I see. Well, I think it's normal that a difficult piece cannot be mastered the first time you approach it (at least, that is what happens to me everytime). When you feel that there's no further improvement on a piano piece, it is time to give it a rest, especially if you have been working exclusively on it.

Re which etudes can be useful to reinforce the kind of technique required by that transcription I recommend: some of the 2 Clav.variations from the Goldbergs (ex: V, XI, XIV, XVII, XX, XXIII, XXVI), some Scarlatti sonatas with jumps and crossings like the K.28 (but there dozens with jumps and crossings).

Finger substitution/changing on the same note is ubiquitous in Bach's keyboard music, particularly in the contrapuntally denser works. But you can use it every time you must or want to keep the music clean of the pedal. Finger crossing is when a finger of 'lower numeral' crosses over a finger of 'higher numeral' in a direction away from the thumb or viceversa (a 'higher' finger over a 'lower' one towards the thumb). It's very useful to obtain an otherwise unachievable legato and, in many cases, I prefer it to 'thumb under' in order to keep the hand perpendicular to the keyboard. Both finger substitution and finger crossing are helpful when you 'run out' of fingers and cannot or don't want to employ the thumb. The finger crossing piece par excellence is Chopin's Etude Op.10/2 of course.

Look at these 2 examples of finger crossing from the Bach-Rach Gigue (the second one is my fingering, probably others would put the thumb on the E#).

I don’t think it’s cheating, but a bit bewildering (me). :roll:

Well, this is true for every composer, isn't it? However what's really remarkable in Chopin is that virtually all the difficult passages in his music are entirely included in his 2 sets of etudes. Only Scriabin, to an extent, did something like that.

No biedermaier or early romantic composer would have possibly written music in the strict style à la Bach (apart sometimes Mendelssohn, clearly an exception). In the best case, the goal was to assimilate the techniques of the old masters, blending them in a new style.

Don’t mix up the original destination of those works in their aesthetic frame of reference with the didactic use that piano teaching has historically made of them. Bach published the Partitas as (the first volume of the) Clavier-Uebung after Kuhnau’s C-U, itself a collection of suites in 2 volumes. The ‘Uebung’ here is a concept that has more to do with the composer activity than the player’s.

 

I don't see that, in the end, there is much difference, though. Both the WTC and the suites are both have the same sort of technical problems and the same sort of compositional approach, on the per-movement scale. Most of the suites have at least one fugue if I am not mistaken (though it would have to be in the gigues in the French Suites, and some of those are not fugal), and some suites have two, and then there are fugato and accompanied-fugue types of thing like the capriccio of the c minor partita (which is just like a gigue, double fugue with the second exposition being the inversion of the subject in the B section, and not like an accompanied one as there are no extra voices, but all three voices are in play from the beginning). All of the preludes of the WTC are classifiable as genre examples, though some are less clear than others: allemande, french overture, sarabande, etc. The suites just have more movements, and are more balanced toward the non-fugal writing; also, the opening movements of the partitas and English suites are more large-scale than the typical WTC prelude.

Yes, but not every early romantic composer was as obsessed with Bach as Chopin seemed to be. Mendelssohn obviously being an exception. But yes, I already indicated earlier that hardly anyone wrote that way for keyboard after the piano became popular, but there were few composers who benefited as much from Bach's counterpoint lessons as Chopin did, and there lies the contrast.

Except for Bach. :wink:

 

That's in fact my point. Ex post, there's clearly a progressive path of difficulty in Bach's 'piano' works, from the 2-part Inventions to the Goldbergs, but it's not correct to state as you said that, for instance, the Goldbergs are a didactic work because are 'Uebungen'.

Simon Sechter was even more obsessed than Chopin with Bach and counterpoint, but nobody seems to care...

Of course not, since a 2-part invention doesn't 'prepare' you for the Goldbergs or even a spot hard movement from the Partitas. This sounds quite plain to me.

 

FOUR 16ths per beat in the 25/1 means that for example at bar 29 LH plays 2.(6) notes per beat, on the first beat. That is for sure a creative way to use a metronome.

 

I'm sorry, I don't think I explained that very well! Hopefully this clip will explain it better than words can (I exaggerated the motion so it's more visible).

 

Hey Hye-Jin!

wow you have a pretty good musical foundation if your piano teacher got you to learn all the 2 and 3 part inventions at such a young age.
Surely that must have played a positive role in your musical development.


Funny thing about bach, people play it in so many different ways, different ideas of articulation/dynamics/phrasing/tempo. Ive always found the safest bet when all else fails is to simply be very subtle/clear and let the music speak for itself. The music itself I feel is so beautiful and survives so many different interpretations and instruments.

My attitude on repertoire has always been to simply play the music which you want to play! In the case of Bach there is really so much music and different styles of music, one could easily spend their entire life on it.


b.t.w. some may be surprised that I am actually a big believer in the use of the metronome, though I am also at times fearfull of it. I believe it is important to build an internal sense of time and expression, I also know of no other way of correcting or identifying an inconsistent tempo then by the use of a metronome. Funny thing is though, the metronome as far as I know was invented in 1810 long after the death of Bach! Makes me wonder what people did back then

 

Terez, sorry for this delayed comeback. Before you made my baby poo-poo :lol: :lol: :wink: , I had watched your whole recital and I must say your Bach was really impressive! Even though I'm not familiar with that partita, I can still notice how profound your musical ideas are from your performance. You are saying that you're not satisfied with that recital and I think you are so, because you have worked on that set very intensively and you could not show all of that on that day. But you know, what you prepared for a public performance (even a part of that) must be revealed to a mature audience (including me? :lol Of course, you made some wrong notes, but if you hadn't correct them, those recordings are already very good! BTW it was very cunning of you to have posted that on the General forum! Do you know how many times I used the "Search" funtion to find your recordings in AR? :roll:

 

:lol: :lol:
BTW I reached the 500 posts!!! (This is the 505th)

 

@Chris, Alfonso and Terez:
Thanks for the informations around the edition things! Now I think I have to pay something for good scores... What I have here in Germany is only partitas on Henle. Before I bought it my teacher showed me two scores: Bärenreiter(NBA) and Henle. He recommended the NBA, but said Henle is ok, too. I saw in NBA there is no fingering, so I decided for Henle :lol: It's funny of me that I always have preferred scores with fingering than without it, even though I must change many fingering of it at last. As Terez said, it is still interesting to compare mine with other's. (Thanks for the score example for finger substitions, Alfonso. I think your own fingering for that Gigue (3 instead of 1) very good, of which I didn't think yet)
As final question, what do you think guys is the advantage of NBA against Henle? Chris mentioned only Henle and Alfonso/Terez only NBA.

 

Sarah, it is very endearing of you that you made that video! Thanks very much. The technique you showed help me even on that Bach-Rach set (in the Gavotte en Rondeau) BTW your hands on that video look pretty