|
Discussions of Bach’s Instrumental Works - No. 1
Chaconne in D minor from Partita No. 2 in D minor BWV 1004
Francis Browne wrote (April 16, 2002):
To begin discussions on the chaconne from the second violin partiita in D minor I shall put forward a series of questions that I hope others may answer, (Please do not assume I know the answers!)
1.What is the source of this music's power and popularity.?
2. Why did Bach make this movement substantially longer than his other works for solo violin ?
3.What is the history of how this movement became detached from the partita and so popular by itself?
4. Should it be detached from the partita of which it is part.?
5.Is it legitimate to transcribe it for other instruments?
6. What transcriptions have been made and for what instruments ?
7. How do the various piano transcriptions - Busoni , for example- compare?
8. What are the problems of technique and interpretation faced in playing it on the violin.?
9. Has anyone tried to play it on differnet instruments and if so how do the experiences compare?
10. What do people think are the best performances and on what instruments?
I would be interested in answers to any of these questions, but would be delighted if members chose different approaches.
Brahms thought that the chaconne was 'one of the most wonderful and most incomprehensible pieces of music" I hope that together we may see why it is wonderful and make it a little less incomprehensible
Basic information about the chaconne can be found at:
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~bachlogc/bwv1004.htm
and an analysis at:
http://www.community.pima.edu/users/larry/bachacon.htm
Recordings of the partita are listed on the J.S. Bach Home Page at:;
http://www.jsbach.org/bwv1004.html
Bernard Nys wrote (April 17, 2002):
The Chaconne is for me the most mysterious creative masterwork of JSB. Here Bach invents free jazz improvisation. They say he wrote it for the death of his wife and that it represents the whole circle of life. That's why it is so long (nearly 15 minutes). There's an experience I would like to organize : to make a transcription for solo saxophone and to play it a free jazz festival. My guess is that nobody would notice it's nearly 3 centuries old !
It's a miracle that JSB could "preview" music that would be written 3 centuries later. My theory is that JSB was so blessed that he invented all music : jazz, free jazz, swing, hard rock, soul, new age relaxation music, minimalist music,... JSB is for me the alpha and the omega of all music. I like the Schlomo Mintz violin version and the Busoni transcription by Fazil Say. The Brahms transcription for piano one hand is also very nice. This music is so inventive, so modern, so creative, so original, so deep, so universal that you can play it on all instruments.
Unfortunately, I'm not a musician but I "feel" Bach' music with all my heart and all the Christian faith that Bach put into it. Last year, I sold 500 CD's of other classical music composers, because even Mozart or Beethoven (nr. 2 and 3 for me) are a waist of time. A lifetime is not enough to fully appreciate Bach's complete works. Recently, I bought a DVD and now I start to fully understand and appreciate the Cantates. I play the "Glorious Bach" by Harnoncourt every day with subtitles in French, Spanish, English, German, Latin, untill I know the text by heart and understand each word. And then you see that every word and every note is perfect and that Bach tells you a story that is so refreshing for someone who shares Bach's faith. That's why they call Bach the 5th Evangelist. I think that someone who has not that Christian faith cannot fully appreciate the text and music of the Cantates (logically, a non Christian finds the Bach texts boring and not interesting, because they all speak about J.C.).
I really think that JSB was divinely inspired, literally or indirectly. The best example is the B minor Mass, his opus summum, his final legacy, his greatest masterwork, the essence of all his music. How could a German protestant write a 2 hour lasting Mass in Latin according to the Catholic tradition ? It's was never played during his life and was ment for "omnes generationes" (to quote the Magnificat). I was shocked by the results of the poll. The Art of the Fugue is not the "essence" of JSB. It's an interesting pedagogical work.
Francine Renee Hall wrote (April 17, 2002):
[To Bernard Nys] Do you mind if I ask you about Harnconourt's DVD, "Glorious Bach"? Are they cantatas, and are they available in the US? I haven't seen it at amazon or at tower.
Francis Browne wrote (April 17, 2002):
< Craig Schweickert wrote: Although I haven't--and, right now, don't--have time to think this through, Francis, I'm curious as to why you've decided to have us discuss a single movement from a suite as opposed to the entire suite. My initial reaction is to bridle a bit at the implicit lack of context (but, as I say, I haven't considered this deeply). The idea of scheduled topics of discssion is an interesting one, though. >
By all means discuss the whole partita! My own view is that it does gain greatly by being seen in context as the culmination of that work.
But I chose the chaconne because even in my not very extensive collection of Bach CDs I have five versions,two of which are performances of the partita while the other three are transcriptions. I suspect that many more people come across the chaconne by itself than by listening to Bach's work for solo violin.. It seems to me one of those works of Bach that people come across out of context and then may be led by it to listen to more of Bach's music. I am also curious to know how many transcriptions there are and for what instruments.
Since starting the topic yesterday I read in 'The Cambridge Companion to Bach' that for an 1841 Gewandhaus performance with the violinist Ferdinand David Mendelssohn produced a piano accompaniment for the Chaconne .Schumann wrote of the performance:
David played a Ciacona by J.S.Bach , a piece from the sonatas for solo violin about which it has been said, wrongly as it turns out, that one could not imagine another part being added. Mendelssohn Bartholdy refuted that idea in the most convincing manner by acccompanying it at the piano, and so wonderfully that the old, immortal cantor seemed to have a hand in the performance himself.
I wonder whether this was the beginnng of the chaconne's independent existence. The book also mentions an orchestration by Joseph Joachim Raff and Brahm's piano arrangement for left hand (which was where I first came across the chaconne)
Kirk McElhearn wrote (April 17, 2002):
Well, it certainly is a magnificent and complex pieces, and is one of the bits that hooked my on Bach so long ago.
What is probably most interesting is that the chaconne is a self-contained sonata, in the sense that it contains several movements, alternating between fast and slow, at different rhythms. From the amazing arpeggios to the slower, melodic sections, the essence of Bach's music can be heard.
I have often wondered why it is included in a partita. It is not one of the usual "suite" movements; in fact, it sounds as though Bach tacked the rest on to the chaconne to make a longer work. It is also his only chaconne (though there are other works which contain variations, such as the organ pascaglia and partitas). So it does seem as though he wrote it in a different context. This said, the other movements do work well as an intro, but remain just that: an introduction.
I have several recordings of the work for violin and others on lute and guitar. I think the best violin recording is by Sigiswald Kuijken (his first), and on a plucked instrument I would go no further than Paul Galbraith. I have heard piano versions, but do not own any.
Kirk McElhearn wrote (April 17, 2002):
[To Francine Renee Hall] Here's my review of it...
See: Bach Cantata Pilgrimage DVD
Francis Browne wrote (April 17, 2002):
For convenience I have gathered together what has been said about the chaconne in the most recent reviews on the cantata website:
Reviews of Partita in D mnor BWV 1004
Kirk McElhearn wrote (September 30, 2001)
Benedict Cruft (violin)
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NonVocal/Solo-Violin-Cruft-Kirk.htm
The D minor partita is my personal favourite; not only because of the huge chaconne at the end, but because of the rich flowing melodies of the other movements, that seem to be a sort of musical discourse leading up to the final monument. Cruft does well in this partita, giving more convincing rhythmic structure to the Corrente and Giga, although, again, his tempi are a bit slower than the norm. The Chaconne, which is the movement by which violinists are always measured, is performed with a great deal of energy, as Cruft attacks the strings with verve in the initial measures, then maintains this energy throughout the movement. But there are a few places where he misses the rhythm just slightly, throwing off the inertia of this huge piece.
Kirk McElhearn wrote November 8, 2001
Paul Galbraith (guitar)
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NonVocal/Solo-Guitar-Galbraith-Kirk.htm
Many of the movements are played far slower than other performances; the D minor chaconne, at nearly 20 minutes long, is nearly twice as long as many other renditions. Gone is the hurried sound of musicians just barely able to keep up with Bach¹s hectic score. Instead, we hear the subtle harmonies and counterpoints that lay hidden in this extraordinary work. Galbraith gives this, the grandest movement in all of Bach¹s solo works, the approach it needs to become otherworldly, to transcend mere music. From a virtuoso display of pyrotechnics it becomes a spiritual meditation; from a mad rush, it becomes a study in restraint and depth. He adds incredible emotion to this piece, playing each section at a tempo that allows the ear to appreciate the complexity of Bach¹s music and its profound spiritual intensity.
Craig Schweickert wrote Mar 10, 2002
Hopkinson Smith (arrangements for lute)
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NonVocal/Solo-Guitar-SmithHopkinson-Craig.htm
The arrangements - Smith's own except for BWV 1006, which is closely based on Bach's - are superb. Although the music has been entirely rethought in terms of the instrument, the many added notes (mostly filled-out harmonies and ornamentation) and occasionally fast tempos are never detrimental to its expression. On the contrary, the performance brings out facets of the music I'd never heard before, including voices the violin version only hints at. Any prior doubts about the lute's "pointillism" not being suited to the sometimes sustained lines of the original quickly evaporated, a development probably due to the brillance of the arrangements and the fact that, unlike a violinist, Smith can let a string resonate while he plays others. Of course, there are times when Smith uses the lute's unbowed sound to great effect - for example, in some of the variations of BWV 1004's famous Chaconne, where "strumming" and plucking generate tremendous rhythmic drive
Thomas Braatz wrote (April 17, 2002):
The MGG lists the following book on this subject which I do not have access to:
Feder, Franz Georg (1927--) “Geschichte der Bearbeitung von Bachs Chaconne” in Bach-Interpretationen, Göttingen, 1969 (A history of all transcriptions and reworkings of Bach’s Chaconne.)
A list of transcriptions from the MGG (many of which were already mentioned on this site):
Brahms, Johannes - "Chaconne nach Bach für die linke Hand allein" d moll [In this connection, the chaconne-type conclusion of his 4th symphony should be mentioned.]
Casella, Alfredo - J. S. Bachs Chaconne für großes Orchester, 1935. (a transcription for full modern orchestra)
Handschin, Jacques Samuel (1886–1955) a transcription of Bach’s Chaconne for organ (unpublished)
Joachim, Joseph (1831-1907) an annotated copy of Joachim’s fingering and bowing of the chaconne located in the British Museum Add. 35026 (fol. 62, “Chaconne Joh. Seb. Bach.”)
Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Felix Transcriptions of Works by Other Masters: "J. S. Bach, Chaconne für Violinsolo," transcription for piano and violin, Ewer & Co.;
Schumann, Robert in den ersten Monaten des Jahres 1853, Klavier-Begleitung zu den Solosonaten für Violin und für Violoncello von Bach, eine Arbeit, die durch Mendelssohns Begleitung von Bachs Chaconne angeregt war und zum Ziel hatte, einen größeren Hörerkreis zu gewinnen. (Stimulated by the Mendelssohn transcription, Schumann, early in 1853, added a piano accompaniment to Bach’s solo sonatas, so that the pieces would reach a greater audience.)
Reger, Max eine Chaconne für Solo-Violin (this is strongly influenced by Bach’s Chaconne, but is not a transcription as such)
Schubert, Franz (This is a very interesting sidelight that I had not been aware of: the song “Der Doppelgänger” (from “Schwanengesang” D 957) is a chaconne!! albeit not specifically the famous one by Bach.)
Bradley Lehman wrote (April 17, 2002):
Some other transcriptions of the Chaconne:
Skip Sempe improvised one on harpsichord on his DHM CD 77222. Interesting.
Dom Andre Laberge has recorded Pierre Gouin's transcription for harpsichord (in G minor) on Analekta Fleur de Lys 3006. Pretty good performance and arrangement.
I too have written my own, and performed it in concerts on both harpsichord and fortepiano. Works well either way.
When I was working on mine I checked some other reference sources about existing versions, and found a pretty good one somewhere...but I don't remember where that was! I ended up using a transcription style based on the BWV 964 version of BWV 1003, pretending that I myself was a Bach student doing one along those lines. And I kept it fairly straightforward most of the time, as the Brahms arrangement for left hand is. I used some of the Brahms passages "as is" but of course played them with two hands, since the harpsichord has no sustaining pedal which is necessary in his version.
Francine Renee Hall wrote (April 17, 2002):
Anyway, since mom and dad went to see Heifetz at Orchestra Hall in Chicago, I thought well that would be good for me too! So I have his 1952 (oh, my 'oldest' Bach recording I see) RCA Victor Gold Seal. I even had a tape of him playing the Chaconne but gave it away as a gift. Well, I since learned that Heifetz had the pyrotechnics but not the soul. So I started hunting around for more. One is a freebee and am not happy with it at all, Nathan Milstein's 1975 DG recording. I'd sooner have the Heifetz. However, while journeying around I picked out Max Reger's Sonatas with the last movement Chaconne played by Ulrike-Anima Mathe. I was really pleased with it and its homage to Bach. Reger also complimented Bach by a two-for-one deal with preludes and fugues for solo violin played as a 'world premiere recording' by Mateja Marinkovic to excellent reviews on the ASV label. And what is Reger without Paul Hindemith, with Hobuko Imai, playing viola, Hindemith's "own personal" instrument on the BIS label (CD-571). AT this time I was reading classical magazines galore and picked what I felt were the best at the time. My raging fire pick is as Kirk's, Kuijken, on deutsche harmonia mundi. The sound of the instrument is so mellow and beautiful and Kuijken "moves" me. Is that a good enough criteria? Finally I have the experimental Gaehler set which sounds so different, rather bleak and sorrowful, slow, not italiante but heavy polyphony without arpeggios. And oh, yes, the Morimur / Hilliard CD based on obsessive numerology but actually the combination of the violin with the singing is very exciting.
Bradley Lehman wrote (April 17, 2002):
< Thomas Braatz wrote: Casella, Alfredo - J. S. Bachs Chaconne für groÃYes Orchester, 1935. (a = transcription for full modern orchestra) >
I have a CD of thisby Dimitri Mitropoulos and the Orchestra of Radio Italiana, from the 1950s. Colorful arrangement, I like it! Nickson Records 1003, a Mitropoulos retrospective.
Francis Browne wrote (April 18, 2002):
There is a Joachim Raff website ( http://www.raff.org/arranged.htm) which contains information about Raff's transcriptions of the chaconne for both orchestra and piano.(copied below).
There are audio extracts and a review of a disc by Walid Aki which includes the piano transcriptions by Raff, Brahms and Busoni. If you are curious to hear how Bach can be made to sound like a late romantic composer, I recommend the extract of the orchestral transcription
Orchestration of Bach's Chaconne in d minor WoO.40 - 2:11
The Chaconne in d minor from the Suite for solo Violin was regarded as being so difficult to play that it was almost the sole preserve of the great virtuoso Joseph Joachim. Because of its extensive polyphony and implied counterpoint Raff also shared the common conviction that the original piece was itself a "reduction" made by Bach from an orchestrated original. He orchestrated it in 1873 to both bring out the work's complexities and to bring it to a wider playing and listening public.
The extract is from the central section. From Chandos CHAN 9835. This CD is
<A HREF="http://www.raff.org/review07.htm">reviewed</A>.
Piano arrangement of Bach's Chaconne in d minor WoO.40 - 1:38
At around the same time as he prepared his orchestral arrangement, Raff also prepared a piano transcription of the Chaconne. This preserves the baroque nature of the work, whilst amplifying the counterpoint and polyphony in an essentially romantic vein. It is interesting to contrast this with the Brahms' much sparer transcription for the left hand of a few years later.
The example is the beginning of the work. From Pavane ADW 7255. This CD is
<A HREF="http://www.raff.org/review09.htm">reviewed</A>
Francis Browne wrote (April 18, 2002):
A long list of recordings that include versions of the chaconne for various instruments can be found at:
http://shopping.yahoo.com/shop?d=wrk&cf=0&id=472945
Bradley Lehman wrote (April 18, 2002):
< Bernard Nys wrote: I really think that JSB was divinely inspired, literally or indirectly. (...) I was shocked by the results of the poll. The Art of the Fugue is not the "essence" of JSB. It's an interesting pedagogical work. >
Well, the Art of Fugue is thoroughly Bach's "essence" to one who has played it. There's no better window into his mind and soul than playing this piece. :) (There might be others *as good* perhaps, but none better...)
Chad Romney wrote (April 18, 2002):
[To Bernard Nys] Excuse my ignorance and sorry ask if it's already been answered (I've been going through emails rather quickly, as the semester is winding down and I have little time, and I've been sick) but what is The Chaconne. From what I have picked up it is the last movement of the solo violin Partita No. 2 in D minor? Why is it called The Chaconne? The recording I have (Menuhin--EMI Classics) is nice playing I suppose, but the recording itself has some background noise. What other recordings are highly recommended? Thanks
Francine Renee Hall wrote (April 18, 2002):
[To Chad Romney] Basically a chaconne is a variation on a ground or ostinato bass. It was originally from a dance and song form from Italy and Spain. My favorite is Kuijken who uses a Giovanni Grancino, Milano c. 1700 baroque violin and a Bogen bow, available as a 2-CD set on deutsche harmonia mundi (77043). Below is a website listing so many different interpretations and instruments used to play this famous movement of Bach.
I hope this helps a little!
Francis Browne wrote (April 18, 2002)
[To Chad Romney] Basic information about the chaconne can be found at
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~bachlogc/bwv1004.htm
and an analysis at
http://www.community.pima.edu/users/larry/bachacon.htm
where this definition is given.
The chaconne is a special type of continuous Theme and Variations where a fairly short subject (normally 4 measures) is relentlessly repeated and varied. The subject or theme occurs either as a repeating melodic bass line or as a harmonic progression. It is a slow dance in simple triple meter, often in a minor key, using the rhythm of a Sarabande, with an agogic accent on the second beat. With A representing the theme, the form of the chaconne can be diagrammed:
A A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
The chaconne is one of those pieces of Bach that has taken on an independent existence outside its original context and been transcribed for many instruments, I suggested the list might look more closely at one or two of Bach's Instrumental Works each month and this seemed a good starting point.
In earlier postings Kirk strongly recommended Sigiswald Kuijken on violin and Paul Galbraith on guitar.. I have enjoyed Grumiaux 's performance and Benjamim Schmid recent version on the (very cheap) Arte Nova label. I hope other members will discuss their own preferred versions.
Joost wrote (April 18, 2002):
< Kirk McElhearn wrote: [snip] I have often wondered why it is included in a partita. It is not one of the usual "suite" movements; in fact, it sounds as though Bach tacked the rest on to the chaconne to make a longer work. >
A chaconne may not be included in many suites, but if there's one (or a passacaille), it's usually much longer than the rest of the movements. To name just two examples: the second suite for two bass viols in Marais' first book has ten movements. Apart from the chaconne the longest one in the performance by Violes Esgales (CBC Records) is an allemande (3:12). The finishing chaconne is more than twice as long: 7'36. Muffat's Sonata in G major from Armonico Tributo has five movements. In the La Petite Bande recording on DHM the first four together take 7:42; the ciacona is 9:01!
An explanation may be that most movements have their origins in dance forms. And a menuet almost always has two times eight bars (maybe with a 'petite reprise'), and that is it. Passacaglias and ciaconas on the other hand are variations on a bass, which gives the composer the opportunity to display his ability to come up with as many inventive ideas as possible - note that most passacaglias and ciaconas are the finishing movement of a suite: a perfect example of 'showing off'!
Francine Renee Hall wrote (April 18, 2002):
[To Chad Romney] If you scroll down a bit, you'll see a great description of Bach's Chaconne, a continuous variation on four notes.... (francine)
http://www.mangore.com/chaco.html
Trevor Evans-Young wrote (aApril 18, 2002):
[To Chad Romney] I would like to add that even though I can play most of the chaconne on the violin,viola (really hard), and piano(I cheat and use two hands), the analysis below taught me many things that I did not know. If you can read a little music you will be able to see how Bach was able on one level to write a beautiful piece of music and on another level wrote a masterpiece of counterpoint and mathematical precision. It took another 200 years before composers started to write complex music for the violin and Bach's work was sitting there all along.
Francis Browne wrote (April 18, 2002):
A n image of the first page of Bach's autograph manuscript of the chaconne is available at:
http://www.jsbach.net/images/chaconne.html
Olle Hedström [Sweden] wrote (April 18, 2002):
[To Bernard Nys] I agree with everything you have stated about BACH in the mail below, except that it is easier for a person of the faith to appreciate the music of Bach. I'm not a Christian and I spend hours daily in the company of this wonderful music. I like especially the church cantatas.Bachs music is universal angreatly accessible to all people of all time, regardless of conviction.
Juozas Rimas wrote (April 19, 2002):
< story that is so refreshing for someone who shares Bach's faith. That's why they call Bach the 5th Evangelist. I think that someone who has not that Christian faith cannot fully appreciate the text and music of the Cantates (logically, a non Christian finds the Bach texts boring and not interesting, because they all speak about J.C.). >
Let me express my opinion regarding the texts in Bach's music.
The texts do not seem to be anything worthy by themselves to me. It's not art - not poetry or prose but rather excerpts from improtant cultural sources with some nice images and quite powerful allegories. Schumann's "Love of the Poet" after Heine or Schubert's songs depend on the text much more than Bach's cantatas. In those songs the text is as important is music, if not more.
Of course, the text and music are connected in Bach's vocal works and it's worth to translate the text for yourself if you don't know German - so I know now why certain lines are sung sorrowfuly, others are sung energetically, joyfully etc because they reflect the text.
However, I cannot say that anything changed radically when I started listening to the Matthaus passion knowing what it is about. More interesting to listen to the evangelist - yes, but the arias and recitatives do not benefit so much from the text.
Or, do you think the intro choir of the Magnificat is lacking something important because all its text is merely "Magnificat anima mea dominum"? All the text could be one word with no harm to the music.
I am absolutely convinced that when text dictates to the listener what he has to imagine or the composer himself tells the listener what he has to imagine by giving an exact title to a composition (eg "Winter"), it does not make the music better in any form. The highest level of music for me is abstract music – with no prescriptions and complete freedom for the listener to draw his own mental
images.
Francis Browne wrote (April 19, 2002):
[To Francine Renee Hall] I have just investigated the chaconne site you recommended to Chad.
http://www.mangore.com/chaco.html
You are right. I like the enthusiastic account of the chaconne and the performance on guitar is wothwhile also. Anyone who is interested in the work should certainly look it up.
Francine Renee Hall wrote (April 19, 2002):
[To Francis Browne] Your recommended sites are superb and thorough. To fully appreciate them
one needs to go over them several times. It's a task worth undertaking!
Francis Browne wrote (April 19, 2002):
A piano transcription of the chaconne by Alexannder Siloti(1865-1945) played by Risto Lauriala can be heard on the Naxos site at:
http://www.naxos.com/naxos/naxos_marco_polo.htm
Catalogue no 8.553761
"The piano version by Siloti gives great clarity to the melodic line, which is not always at the top, and is able to give fuller form to the chordal structure, while avoiding the occasional extravagance of Busoni's version" (liner notes)
Francis Browne wrote (April 19, 2002):
Performances of the partita No 2 in D minor BWV1004 by Christiane Edinger (8.550570 BACH J.S. : Violin Sonatas and Partitas 2 )
and by Lucy van Dael on 'baroque violin' 8.554423 BACH J.S. : Violin Sonatas and Partitas, Vol. 2
can be heard on the Naxos website at:
www.naxos.com.
The two performances make an interesting contrast.
Steven Langley Guy wrote (April 19, 2002):
[To Chad Romney] The Chaconne was a popular kind of dance movement in the Baroque. The word itself comes from the Basque word 'chocuna' meaning 'pretty'. Chaconnes are in 3 beats and feature a ground bass which is frequently passed to the upper voices. Some chaconnes have no ground bass and the music is composed in sections - as if there were a ground bass present. Jean-Baptiste Lully wrote splendid Chaconnes which appear as orchestral movements in his opera - the chaconnes in operas Roland and Le Ballet du Temple de la Paix being the most extensive (if people want midi files or Sibelius scores of these movements let me know). French Baroque operas frequently ended with a chaconne and this practice started in Lully's time and continued into the operas of Jean-Philippe Rameau. However, the chaconne seems to have had its origins in native American music and some of the earliest examples come from the time of Giovanni Gabrieli - Merulo wrote a brilliant chaconne that is very well known in early music circles and it is featured in two forms in René Jacobs' recording of Cavalli's opera La Calisto. Antonio Bertali wrote an amazing chaconne for violin and harpsichord. H. I. F. von Biber also wrote a fine chaconne for solo violin & continuo. It seems that chaconnes were often quite simple and afforded the musicians an opportunity to embellish the melody and improvise on the bass line. In Bach's time the chaconne had lost something of its raw edge and wildness.
The chaconne is very similar to the passacaglia in Bach's time.
I am sure that others have more interesting things to say about this dance form.
Kirk McElhearn wrote (April 19, 2002):
< Steven Langley Guy wrote: It seems that chaconnes were often quite simple and afforded the musicians an opportunity to embellish the melody and improvise on the bass line. >
This was the case for all types of variations pieces; one well-known example is Les Folies d'Espagne/La Folia, which exists in hundreds of versions, because of the many possibilities it offered.
Francis Browne wrote (April 19, 2002):
[To Francine Renee Hall] MD stands for Monthly Discussion followed by the number of the discussion (at the moment 1) or the name or BWV number of the work in question. Kirk suggested some such system so that postings on the work being discussed could be easlily distinguished from postings on other topics..
Many thanks to you and others who have contributed so far.to the discussion. I repeat my original list of questions but stress that this is very much meant to be an open discussion and other approaches would be very welcome
1.What is the source of this music's power and popularity.?
2. Why did Bach make this movement substantially longer than his other works for solo violin ?
3.What is the history of how this movement became detached from the partita and so popular by itself?
4. Should it be detached from the partita of which it is part.?
5.Is it legitimate to transcribe it for other instruments?
6. What transcriptions have been made and for what instruments ?
7. How do the various piano transcriptions - Busoni , for example- compare?
8. What are the problems of technique and interpretation faced in playing it on the violin.?
9. Has anyone tried to play it on differnet instruments and if so how do the experiences compare?
10. What do people think are the best performances and on what instruments?
Thomas Braatz wrote (April 19, 2002):
Larry Solomon in his excellent analysis of the Bach chaconne states:
“It is interesting that the 30 variation pattern used here was also used for the Goldberg Variations. (I don't know the significance of the number 30, but it seems unlikely that this is a coincidence.) “
30 variations
There are actually 32 pieces in the Goldberg Variation (the Aria is played before and after the set of variations) but the final repeat of the Aria is simply notated as Aria da capo, so this means that there are 31 separate items visible in this set. Of these 31 pieces, 28 are in G major and 3 in G minor. Taking all these numbers into account, we have 28 = BH, 3 = C, and 1 = A, thus containing Bach’s signature using gematria. [See below for a more detailed explanation.]
There may be a meaningful division of the variations in the chaconne that could yield some significant (for Bach) numbers that could reinforce the notion that he may have been thinking along these lines, but I have not found them yet. The only thing that comes to mind off hand is a tri-partite division [minor, major, minor] that could be linked to the T.
257 measures of the Bach’s Chaconne are numbered in the NBA VI/1, but the 1st measure that is counted is incomplete, more in the form of an upbeat to ms. 2. This means that there are really only 256 full measures in the chaconne. This then means that understanding this number according gematria, a system of number symbolism, giving numbers to the letters of the alphabet, which was also used during the Baroque, we have a significant number for Bach here: If A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, H = 8, then BACH = 2 + 1 + 3 + 8. Numbers can be combined, as you saw above (2 and 8 become 28), and still be significant: 2 * 1 * 38 = 76, which still would be a number representing the name BACH. In this case, 256 full measures in the Chaconne, we have 32 * 1 * 8 = BACH. It appears to me, that in a composition of this sort, which Bach must have recognized as being important and significant, he enhanced the monumentality of this composition by embedding into it additional significance such as this.
Joost wrote (April 19, 2002):
< Kirk McElhearn wrote: [snip] I have often wondered why it is included in a partita. It is not one of the usual "suite" movements; in fact, it sounds as though Bach tacked the rest on to the chaconne to make a longer work. >
A chaconne may not be included in many suites, but if there's one (or a passacaille), it's usually much longer than the rest of the movements. To name just two examples: the second suite for two bass viols in Marais' first book has ten movements. Apart from the chaconne the longest one in the performance by Violes Esgales (CBC Records) is an allemande (3:12).
The finishing chaconne is more than twice as long: 7'36.
Muffat's Sonata in G major from Armonico Tributo has five movements.
In the La Petite Bande recording on DHM the first four together take 7:42; the ciacona is 9:01!
An explanation may be that most movements have their origins in dance forms. And a menuet almost always has two times eight bars (maybe with a 'petite reprise'), and that is it. Passacaglias and ciaconas on the other hand are variations on a bass, which gives the composer the opportunity to display his ability to come up with as many inventive ideas as possible - note that most passacaglias and ciaconas are the finishing movement of a suite: a perfect example of 'showing off'!
Thomas Dardleff wrote (April 19, 2002):
< Bradley Lehman wrote: Well, the Art of Fugue is thoroughly Bach's "essence" to one who has played it. There's no better window into his mind and soul than playing this piece. :) (There might be others *as good* perhaps, but none better...) >
Let me suggest a quotation that might help to describe why the Art of Fugue is probably Bach´s - in any sense - most essential and universal opus: because it is INFINITE; not only unfinished, but endless. It cannot be fully explored in a lifetime, nor in a longer period. Not only for musicians, but maybe even more for mere listeners, who can be thankful for the great variety of instumentations and interpretations which offer a lot of different pathways into this secret garden. The Chaconne seems to be a pocket version, regarding its history of transcriptions, and a comparable challenge for composers and arrangeurs of any provenience. Obviously it bears immanent symphonic qualities.
My favourites: in large orchestration, the most charming one is, strange enough, Ottorino Respighi´s; to be found on Bach Transcriptions, BBC Philharmonic dir. by Leonard Slatkin, Chandos 2000 - a disc full of surprises: orchestrations by Bantock, Honegger, Reger, Elgar, Vaughan Williams, Raff, Holst a.o. In Stokowski´s and Hideo Saito´s orchestral versions I couldn´t follow the thread through the whole piece... but this may be a matter of interpretation as well.
A rare record which is satisfying in any sense is Nikolayeva plays Bach (recorded 1982 in Japan, published by Mezhdunarodnaya Kniga, printed in England! - if you ever catch a sight of this recording, grab it and run.) In her interpretation of the Chaconne - must be Busoni´s version - she unfolds a drama of Shakespearian (or Mussorgskian) variety, full of different characters, coulours and tension.
There are more, and some quite exotic versions, e.g. one played on the Cimbalóm, the specific hungarian hammered dulcimer. Another one is really remarkable: Friedrich Lips plays Bach & Gubaidulina on the Bayan, which is a sort of voluminous accordeon. For Busoni`s Chaconne transcription this instument fits very well, as its spectre ranges from subtle tenderness to organo-pleno power.
Among my favourite violin originals are two completely contrarious recordings: Lucy van Dael´s, and Salvatore Accardo´s muscular, well-structured interpretation.
Any comments or rare recommendations?
Juozas Rimas wrote (April 19, 2002):
< There may be a meaningful division of the variations in the chaconne that could yield some significant (for Bach) numbers that could reinforce the notion that he may have been thinking along these lines, but I have not found them yet. The only thing that comes to mind off hand is a tri-partite division [minor, major, minor] that could be linked to the Trinity. >
Why only here? All occurences of the number 3 in Bach's music could be attributed to the Trinity but I find it not unlikely that such things are simply coincidences. Gematria is very appropriate in the cannons (a kind of musical games by themselves, see http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~tas3/realfami5.html ) but in other works the supposedly significant numbers could be pure coincidences. Part of the numbers could indeed be put in by Bach on purpose but we will never know this...
The tri-partite division simply helps to make the piece even more varied. Not only the variations are so different (and similar at the same time!) but we have 3 parts with a different mood for the middle part.
And couldn't the 3 minor variations from the Goldberg be simply a sign of proportion? There is the basis for the variations, the starting aria, that embeds the whole cycle. The 3 minor variations are simply 9 times less than the number of major variations (27). A simple proportion?
Trevor Evans-Young wrote (April 19, 2002):
[To Juozas Rimas] I think it is interesting how the discussion of the Chaconne has naturally included a discussion of the Goldbergs. My question is how many variations does the Passacaglia from the Pass. and Fugue have. I seem to remember it is 30 something. How aware was Bach of all of his numerological implications? Aren't there too many to be an accident?
Michael Grover wrote (April 19, 2002):
Well, I've wanted to own a copy of the violin sonatas and partitas for a long time, but they were always "next in line" and something kept butting its way in front. But Francis's idea for a discussion brought things to a head and I couldn't put it off any longer, so I went out at lunch today and bought the two Lucy van Dael Naxos discs. Maybe I'll have something intelligent to say about the Chaconne after I listen to it this weekend.
Thanks, Francis!
Bradley Lehman wrote (April 20, 2002):
< Jim Morrison wrote:
"Suite en ut majeur."
I have no idea what "ut" is in English. >
"Ut majeur" = "C major"
Ut, re, mi, fa, sol, la, si
C, D, E, F, G, A, B
Francine Renee Hall wrote (April 20, 2002):
The genius of Bach's Chaconne is that he can take the most mundane of themes and transform them into intricate, seemingly endless, beautiful variations (well, he does this all the time!!!) that test the limits of the player's endurance and sensitivity, as well as 'forcing' the listener to pay close attention (no talking, eating and other activities allowed!). Bach pushes the envelope, his trademark. I would prefer that the Chaconne be played as an integral part of the S&Ps, but then again, why not make it separate? The Morimur CD with the Hilliard Ensemble is so unusual and to me quite exciting. I think it should be played, and it has,on different instruments other than the violin. And this is the case of his other works too. Bach's works live in the abstract, and I don't think Bach would care one bit about which instrument is used.
FrancineRenee Hall (April 20, 2002):
[To Trevor Evans-Young] According to the site I sent before, the Chaconne contains 31 variations.
Craig Schweickert wrote (April 20, 2002):
Ut survives in modern English in gamut, meaning range (as in "run the gamut of emotions, from rage to joy"). In Middle English, gamut was the musical scale, from Medieval Latin gamma ut, low G : gamma, lowest note of the medieval scale (from Greek 'gamma', the third letter of the Greek alphabet, akin to Hebrew 'gimel') + ut, first note of the lowest hexachord (after 'ut', first word in a Latin office hymn for Saint John Baptist's day, the initial syllables of whose successive lines were sung to the notes of an ascending scale CDEFGA).
Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable goes into more detail:
GAMUT ... Originally, the first or lowest note in Guido d'Arezzo's scale, corresponding to G on the lowest line of the modern bass stave; later the whole series of note recognized by musicians, hence the whole range or compass. It is 'gamma ut'; 'gamma' ... used by Guido to mark the first or lowest note in the mediæval scale; and 'ut' is the first word in the mnemonic stanza 'Ut queant laxis resonare fibris', &c., containing the names of hexachord. See ARENTIAN SYLLABLES.
ARENTIAN SYLLABLES, 'Ut, re, mi, fa, sol, la' used by Guido d'Arezzo or Arentino in the 11th century for his hexachord, or scale of six notes. These names were taken from the Latin hymn by Paulus Diaconus, addressed to St. John, which Guido used in teaching singing:
UT queant laxis
REsonare fibris
MIra gestorum
FAmuli tuorum
SOLve polluti
LAabii reatum
Sancte Iohannes
UTtered be thy wondrous story
REprehensive though I be
ME make mindful of thy glory
FAmous son of Zacharee
SOLace to my spirit bring
LAbouring thy praise to sing.
-E.C.B. [Ebenezer Cobham Brewer]
'Si' was added in the 16th century and 'do' (doh), probably from 'dominus', took the place of 'ut' in the 17th century. In England 'te' replaced 'si' in the 19th century ('ti' or 'si' are used in the U.S.A.).
[I suspect si has lost ground in the US in recent years thanks to the Sound of Music ("ti, a drink with jam and bread").]
Francis Browne wrote (April 22, 2002):
Some thoughts on the discussions so far.
Craig was entirely right to suggest that it is better to hear the chaconne as the last movement of the partita rather than as an isolated work. Heard in context the chaconne with its great range of moods seems to take up and deepen what has gone before, particularly the sarabande and gigue; and when heard after the rapid passages at the end of the gigue the opening statements of the chaconne seem to have even greater force and weight.
Repeated listening to the chaconne has, I realise, subtly changed my attitude to it. Since I first heard the work (in Brahms' arrangement for piano) I have admired and been impressed by the ingenuity and technical achievement of the music, but with the experience of listening as closely as possible to every version available to me it has made the transition from music that as it were stays outside to music that haunts and possesses the inner imagination, expressing something unique to itself with a rightness and inevitability.
Expressing what? What is the meaning of this music? I found some of Kirk's remarks in his review of a transcription for guitar helpful:
"Galbraith gives this, the grandest movement in all of Bach¹s solo works, the approach it needs to become otherworldly, to transcend mere music. From a virtuoso display of pyrotechnics it becomes a spiritual meditation; from a mad rush, it becomes a study in restraint and depth. He adds incredible emotion to this piece, playing each section at a tempo that allows the ear to appreciate the complexity of Bach¹s music and its profound spiritual intensity."
But I find it impossible to articulate the meaning of such spiritual intensity, and if it were possible superfluous and beside the point. Why put into clumsy and distorting words what Bach has expressed with an eloquence beyond the reach of language.?
I haven't heard Galbraith (and I would certainly like to) but the transcriptions for guitar I have heard (John Williams and the site Francine found http://www.mangore.com/chaco.html) and the piano transcriptions are certainly enjoyable but leave me with the feeling that something vital is lost when the chaconne is not played on the violin . However I was very interested in the information given by Tom Braatz, Thomas Radleff and Brad Lehman about transcriptons - particularly I wished Brad might say more about his own transcription for piano and harpsichord. I imagine the experience of having to rethink and rewrite the whole work in terms of a different instrument must give great insight into the music. I wished also that Brad and Trevor Evans-Young might say more about the experience of performing the chaconne - how they tackle the variety that Kirk referred to:
"What is probably most interesting is that the chaconne is a self-contained sonata, in the sense that it contains several movements, alternating between fast and slow, at different rhythms. From the amazing arpeggios to the slower, melodic sections, the essence of Bach's music can be heard."-
Tom's discussion of gematria I found intriguing -and plausible. Numerology seems widespread in many fields, including my own area of classical literature. My impression is such practices are far more important for the author or composer in structuring his work than for the audience, who presumably would be unaware of what , in Tom's phrase, the author has 'embedded' in his composition. Is there any evidence of Bach's contemporaries finding such significance in his music.?
I wonder also if there is any evidence for Bernard Nys' suggestion that Bach may have written the chaconne for the death of his wife. Such biographical connections are interesting but of course do not make the music in itself any better or worse. But on the subject of biography I cannot help wondering what led Bach to write the six sonatas and partitas - the presence of a particularly gifted player at Cöthen or Dresden is the usual plausible suggestion. Even if this is so, I like to think of Bach himself - who was an accomplished violinist and had the genius to create such marvellous music - playing the chaconne.
Michael Grover wrote (April 22, 2002):
As promised, I am writing to report my experiences with the Chaconne and the 2nd partita this weekend. Not to make you seasoned Bachians jealous, but it was a wonderful voyage of discovery for me as this was the first time I've ever heard the whole partita. I had heard snippets of the chaconne before through various web samples, but this was the first time I have heard the whole thing. Do you remember YOUR first time? ;-)
What can I say about the music? As you all know, it is simply gorgeous. Listened to the chaconne several times over the weekend, and am listening to it again now as I type. The version I have is Lucy van Dael's on Naxos. The first time I listened to it, my initial thought was that she was playing it too fast at the beginning. I think I either expected or wanted something more along the lines of the Goldberg aria, something with a little more adagio, a little more gravitas. As the movement went on, her choice of tempi seemed to fit a little better with the variations. However, that initial negative assessment has largely been overcome. As I listen to it again, her beginning tempo does seem appropriate. Maybe I wanted it a little slower to begin with to be able to grasp it all a little better the first time.
I don't have the score, so cannot follow along, but her playing sounds very clean and accurate to me - she sounds technically excellent if not a blow-me-away virtuoso. Her changes in dynamics, volume, etc. are tastefully and nicely done. I must say it doesn't bowl me over with emotion - I wasn't really "moved" by the performance although I recognize it for a beautifully played rendition. This music seems to be an excellent candidate to really let some pathos be played into it, but I didn't really find that here.
van D's baroque violin has a beautiful tone. However, there are several places where the violin sounds sort of rough and scratchy. I don't have the vocabulary to express myself adequately about string performances - I'm an amateur pianist and organist but never learned much about orchestral instruments. I don't know if the sound I am describing is common to all violins or only baroque violins or only hers in particular. Compare, in your mind, the smooth and delicate sound of many violins playing Bach's Air from the 3rd orchestral suite with the sound of nails on a blackboard. The contrast here is not quite that bad - I am exaggerating - but that is what I hear occasionally.
I still greatly enjoyed van Dael's performances and would not hesitate to recommend these discs, especially at their low price, and especially to anyone who needs an inexpensive way to get into these works, such as I did.
Concerning the recording venue: I note with interest that van Dael recorded in the same location as Mark Lubotsky did for his Brilliant Classics set, namely the Maria Minor church in Utrecht, Netherlands. Haven't heard the Lubotsky’s version, but the sound on the van Dael discs is excellent. Very little echo or reverberation - her violin is recorded close and up front. Anyone (especially Dutch members) know if this church is a popular recording spot?
Rianto Pardede wrote (April 22, 2002)
< Francis Browne wrote: Performances of the partita No 2 in D minor BWV1004 by Christiane Edinger (8.550570 BACH J.S. : Violin Sonatas and Partitas 2 )... >
If that recording is actually the same as what I used to own:
Her recording of S&P was the first Bach that I bought. I was not impressed, not even a bit. Bach is not that great , so I thought.
Come Nathan Milstein (EMI Classics, his first complete recording of S&P, 1950’s). There are one or two occasions where notes sound out of tune, nevertheless the drama is there...thus overriding any drawbacks, I think. There are times when listening to the Chaconne ( ...and Beethoven's Fifth), you thank God just for being alive and be able to listen. I always like this recording. It actually lured me to have more of Bach...Bach is one of the great, indeed. One more thing, Milstein surely is not the best among others but I'm quite satisfied with this recording.
< Chad Romney wrote: The recording I have (Menuhin--EMI Classics) is nice playing I suppose, but the recording itself has some background noise. What other recordings are highly recommended?... >
Yehudi Menuhin recorded the S&P in 1930ies as found on EMI Reference (as I remember ). A little better than Edlinger, but still not up to my anticipation. Essentially not up to Milstein's level of interpretation. Recording sound is quite disturbing.
< Francis Browne wrote: A piano transcription of the chaconne by Alexannder Siloti(1865-1945) played by Risto Lauriala can be heard on the Naxos site at .... >
There's Pietro Spada playing Busoni transcription of Chaconne for Piano: The difference in dynamic level and tempo: both are too extreme to my taste that don't think I listen to this as much as I listen to that of Milstein.
< Francis Browne wrote: I wonder also if there is any evidence for Bernard Nys' suggestion that Bach may have written the chaconne for the death of his wife. Such biographical connections are interesting but of course do not make the music in itself any better or worse. But on the subject of biography I cannot help wondering what led Bach to write the six sonatas and partitas - the presence of a particularly gifted player at Cothen or Dresden is the usual plausible suggestion. Even if this is so, I like to think of Bach himself - who was an accomplished violinist and had the genius to create such marvellous music - playing the chaconne. >
Particularly intrigued in this matter . Can anybody shed more light on this?
Joost wrote (April 23, 2002):
< Michael Grover wrote: [big snip] Concerning the recording venue: I note with interest that van Dael recorded in the same location as Mark Lubotsky did for his Brilliant Classics set, namely the Maria Minor church in Utrecht, Netherlands. Haven't heard the Lubotsky versions, but the sound on the van Dael discs is excellent. Very little echo or reverberation - her violin is recorded close and up front. Anyone (especially Dutch members) know if this church is a popular recording spot? >
This Maria Minor church is often being used for small scaled recordings. It's a pretty small church, so don't expect Messiahs or SMPs - and one of it's advantages is that there is very little traffic noise around, nor an airport nearby.
One of the churches of my home town Haarlem probably holds the record in early music recordings; this Doopsgezinde Kerk is somewhat away from traffic noise too, and as it is bigger than Maria Minor it is a perfect venue for recording Bach cantatas - many, if not all, Gustav Leonhardt cantata recordings are made in this church, and so are many Philippe Herreweghe's. Check your collection and you'll be surprised how many times this church turns up. Ton Koopman does his cantata recording project in the Waalse Kerk (= Eglise Wallone) in Amsterdam. And again: not to much traffic around. This Waalse Kerk is a great concert venue as well - the last concert I heard there was yesterday: La Trulla de Bozes with an all Guerrero programme.
Bradley Lehman wrote (April 23, 2002):
[To Craig Schweickert] Yep. That "Guidonian Hand" stuff is also pretty interesting to read about, the way choirs could learn their music by pointing to different knuckles on their hands, and not having to read music. The thing to keep track of is when the hexachord moves to a different note, and everything shifts over....
There were also those pieces based on the phrase "Lascia fare mi" using its syllables as a melody.
And Josquin's "vive le roy" that translates the vowels into a melody, V being equivalent to U:
U I U E E O I
Ut Mi Ut Re Re Sol Mi
Trevor Evans-Young wrote (April 24, 2002):
[To Bradley Lehman] I am curious, is this part of the reason that Bach did not write in Db but C#? he did write in D# minor in Book II and Eb minor in Book I.
MD-1: Chaconne – arranging it
Bradley Lehman wrote (May 2, 2002):
[To Francis Browne] It's indeed an enlightening exercise to prepare one's own transcription of the Chaconne (or of anything, really). It's a way to "get inside" thinking like the composer, wrestling with the field of choices the composer made among his/her options, and translating a similar (or perhaps different!) set of choices to another medium. It gives a deeper appreciation for whatever the composer did write.
Some of the questions I remember having for myself while working on it:
- How can I articulate the overall structure so the dramatic effect is similar to the original's? Do I want to make any of the effects *different* since I'm writing for today's and tomorrow's audiences, not yesterday's?
- Are there any special effects of tessitura, harshness, sweetness, or physical difficulty that should be reproduced *as effects* on the other instrument? (How much is the physical act of playing the violin, with its inherent difficulties and its inherent strengths, part of the piece? Or is the piece more abstract than that?)
- What will this piece sound like on an instrument (keyboard) where the temperament cannot vary during the performance, as it can on violin? What happens when the music modulates to different keys, and how can I take advantage of that?
- What portions of the music are primarily harmonic, or figurative, or contrapuntal, or homophonic, or perhaps antiphonal? How can similar emphases be mapped into the same places in the transcription?
- Are there any implied voice-leading parts that Bach left out because they would be unplayable on the violin, but which the keyboard would be able to play? (See for example his own transcription of the A minor sonata 1003 as the keyboard version 964.)
- Since I can't sustain notes the same way a violin would, or do crescendos vibrato during them, how can I substitute a similar *level* (if not necessarily the same type) of effects, writing crescendos into the music in other ways? More rhythmic motion, thicker chords, etc.
- What types of elaborate figuration sound best on the violin, as opposed to figuration on the keyboard, and how can the *effects* be similar even if we need to change plenty of the notes? (See for example the way Bach transcribed his violin concertos as harpsichord concertos, and especially the way he transformed the very wild violin solo of Brandenburg #4 when he recast it as a harpsichord concerto. The figuration is *very* different.)
- What rhythmic profile should be added (or perhaps taken away) for the overall drama, given that more fingers are available to play notes than a violinist would have?
- Since the transcription is for either harpsichord or fortepiano (or clavichord), what textures are appropriate? Should I use the sustaining pedal on the fortepiano, or do everything with finger over-legato as I do on the harpsichord? Some of both? How much do the different instruments inform the music toward one another?
- Should I complete harmonies that the violin can only imply, or leave things open where they're open? (For example, at the places where a chord is implied but no violin strings are available to play the third.)
- What have other people done in transcriptions for non-keyboard: lute, guitar, cello, orchestra, etc.? What ideas can I borrow from their solutions?
Etc.
I've also written a harpsichord transcription of the solo partita for flute, BWV 1013. The same types of questions came up. How much rhythmic interest and harmonic filler should I add, how contrapuntal should it be given that the harpsichord can play many more parts at the same time than flute can, how is counterpoint implied in the flute version, etc., etc.?
Francis Browne wrote (May 3, 2002):
[To Bradley Lehman] Thank you very much for your detailed and fascinating account of the problems faced and insight gained in transcribing the chaconne. I think that what you write sheds light not only on your own work but also on what must have been Bach's experience. In Wolff's biography discussing Bach's "Musical thinking : the making of a composer" (p169ff) he stresses the importance for Bach's development of transcribing Italian concertos and quotes Forkel:
"He so often heard Vivaldi's concertos praised as admirable compositions that he conceived the happy idea of arranging them all for clavier. He studied the chain of ideas, their relation to each other, the variation of the modulations, and many other particulars."
You give us a good idea of what those other particulars must have been.
|
