|
|
Die Kunst der Fuge BWV 1080
General Discussions - Part 1 |
|
The Art of the Fugue. What is it? |
|
Mark Zimmerman wrote (May 12, 2001):
I now have 3 versions of the Art of the Fugue and am confused as to what exactly makes it up. Is it both Preludes and Fugues; or all Fugues? It seems that the length of timing and number of pieces on each recording varies a great deal. FWIW I have the Naxos with Rubsam on organ, the Kenneth Gilbert on harpsichord, and (my favorite) a version for mainly string orchestra on Hungaraton. The reason for the Hungaraton being my favorite is that I can hear and follow all the different threads very clearly. The Naxos is just too reverberant and makes it impossible to hear what is going on. The sound is just too muddied. I admit that I love the sound of Gilbert's harpsichord, but I find there is a big difference between liking the sound the instrument makes and being able to follow the train of thought (does this make sense?) I wouldn't mind getting an excellent organ version (complete) if anyone knows of one (think of one rated 10 for performance and 10 for sound. |
|
John W. Thomas wrote (May 12, 2001):
[To Mark Zimmerman] You might consider getting the most recent Glenn Gould reissue set, which contains both his (incomplete) organ and piano versions; the 2nd CD in this 2 for the price of 1 set doubles as a CD Rom that contains not only interviews with Gould discussing and playing the work but an animated score that unfolds along with Gould's performance. I found this bonus item to be most illuminating. Of course, if you're a Gould hater... I've personally found the piano versions by Sokolov (Opus 111) and Nikolayeva (Hyperion, but OP) to offer the most satisfying approaches to the work as a whole. |
|
Kirk McElhearn wrote (May 13, 2001):
Riccardo Nughes said:
< I've read great reviews about the K.Koito version (2cd) but I think that this set is available with some difficulties outside France. >
It's ok, but I find the Andre Isoir recording much better. |
|
Thomas Boyce wrote (May 14, 2001):
[To John W. Thomas] My two cents, but I think most "Gould haters" would like his performance of the great unfinished fugue. |
|
Donald Satz wrote (May 14, 2001):
[To Thomas Boyce] I don't know about Gould haters, but I love his unfinished fugue. Its combination of incisiveness and poetry is stunning. I get the feeling that Gould has taken this music apart and rebuilt it with an exceptional staccato and wonderful bass lines.
Concerning his Art of Fugue recording, not all the movements are superbly realized. However, the use of organ and piano is enlightening, and when Gould is "on" there's nobody who can touch him. |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (May 15, 2001):
Riccardo Nughes wrote:
< As regards organ versions I suggest you to keep away from the H.Tachezi recording : it's absolutely boring. >
Hmm. The Tachezi is my favorite among more than a dozen organ recordings I've heard. I like his clarity, and the basic sound of that instrument. I've never found it to be boring for a moment.
Among harpsichord recordings my favorite is the recent one by Robert Hill on Hänssler. His earlier recording of the early version is also very good.
On piano, Charles Rosen and the two-piano arrangement played by Millette Alexander and Frank Daykin.
In an ensemble arrangement: Jordi Savall. The one by Phantasm is also good.
I reviewed the Gould recording of the unfinished contrapunctus a few years ago: http://www.tug.org/mail-archives/f_minor/msg02168.html . I'm a Gould fan in most things, but do NOT like this performance. The reasons are in that posting.
The Art of Fugue is my favorite piece of music. Any music. I think I have more recordings of it than of anything else. But the piece is even more satisfying to play than to listen to. There's something to solving all its fingering puzzles, and then feeling the piece go by while playing and listening. It's best on harpsichord. |
|
Donald Satz wrote (May 15, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] I'll second Brad's recommendation of the Savall recording as the best using an ensemble. The brass are glorious and used at just the perfect times by Savall. I also go for his slow tempos, although I was surprised that he wasn't particularly slow in the unfinished fugue.
I should pick up Rosen's AOF - keep seeing it in the stores coupled with some Bach pieces by Tureck. |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (May 15, 2001):
Donald Satz wrote:
< I'll second Brad's recommendation of the Savall recording as the best using an ensemble. The brass are glorious and used at just the perfect times by Savall. I also go for his slow tempos, although I was surprised that he wasn't particularly slow in the unfinished fugue. >
Well, any album with Bruce Dickey playing cornetto (Zink) is self-recommending. So is any album with Jordi Savall, Christophe Coin, and/or Paolo Pandolfo...and all four of those guys are on this one.
I'm a little surprised to hear you refer to Savall's winds as "brass," though. Of the cornetto, oboe da caccia, trombone, and bassoon, the trombone is the only one not made of wood. And the trombone in this ensemble is playing fairly quietly on that tenor line, sounding more like a woodwind than a brass instrument. (Perhaps the French word "cornet" on the jacket was causing you to confuse it with the trumpet type of cornet that is in marching bands? But the "cornet" played here is a cornetto, a Zink, a wooden instrument fingered like a recorder.) I confess to being a cornetto addict: when it's played well, as here, it sounds so much like a plaintive human voice. That's how it was described in the 17th century, too. Anything with Jean Tubery or Bruce Dickey playing cornetto...ooh, time to go put on a "La Fenice" CD! But we digress.
The Fine Arts Quartet (modern strings) and New York Woodwind Quintet played an arrangement sort of like this one in the 1960's (2 LP set). That arrangement was by flautist Samuel Baron. That's a nice recording, too, but doesn't have the transcendence of this Savall set. That's not to put it down; hardly anything has the transcendence of this Savall recording. |
|
Steven Guy wrote (May 15, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] As cornetto player of many years I can assure you that Brad is correct - the cornett is a wooden instrument. However its mouthpiece is very much like that of a small trombone mouthpiece. It was used in the Renaissance and survived until the 1840's in Europe. Cornetti were also played by Aztec and Inca Indians and we are only just beginning to discover how this instrument spread into the New World. Gluck's Vienna version of Orfeo was the last great work to include (2) cornetti but a piece survives for cornetto, flute and pianoforte from 1815!
Bruce Dickey is an excellent musician by anyone's standards and his AOF with Jordi Savall is an interesting idea! I like it. I bet Bach would have too! Bach seemed to have a soft spot for the cornetto and he included it in a number of cantatas. Sadly the players in Bach's time were getting old Gottfried Reiche (1667 - 1734) was one of the last great virtuosi for the cornett (he was also a damn fine trumpeter - Bach's clarino tromba parts in his cantatas are a testimony to Reiche's skills).
Reiche published chamber music for the cornett & trombones - Sonatinas & Fugues in his Vier und Zwanzig neue Quatricinia mit einem Cornett und drey Trombonen vornehmlich auff das so genannte Abblasen auff den Rathhäusern oder Thürmen mit Fleiß gestellet.... Leipzig: Johann Rölern, 1696 (24 pieces for Cornett & Alto, Tenor, Bass Trombones)
Alas, no one has recorded these works. (yet - Dickey & his Concerto Palatino have recorded a couple of these works)
Bach petitioned the Leipzig council to fund the training of new cornett and trombone players to replace the elderly players in the Stadtpfeiffen but, so like modern governments, the Leipzig council was either too stingy or too apathetic to care!
Regards,
Steven
(Tenor singers & Cornettist) |
|
Mark Zimmerman wrote (May 15, 2001):
Savall's Art of the Fugue
[To Donald Satz] Ok Ok, I get the point that a lot of you love the Savall Art of the Fugue. But, on a scale of 1 to 1how whould you rate it for sound? |
|
Donald Satz wrote (May 15, 2001):
[To Mark Zimmerman] 9 |
|
Marshall Abrams wrote (May 15, 2001):
Riccardo Nughes wrote:
< I've read great reviews about the K.Koito version (2cd) but I think that this set is available with some difficulties outside France. >
The web changes a lot of things. alapage.com, a French online bookstore, etc. has it in stock, as well as other CDs that I can't find at amazon.com, cdnow,com, borders.com, or towerrecords.com, or which are available only as special order items that they'll try and find somewhere if you ask (e.g. Brendel's Italian Concerto, Pinnock's Scarlatti sonatas). alapage.com is in French, so you'll have to guess your way through it if you don't read French or at least have a dictionary handy. (I think alapage used to have an English language version, but it looks like they've given that up if so--I can't find it.) And of course you have to pay shipping to wherever you are. I suspect that there are other French sites that are useful for this sort of thing; this is the one I've used the most and with which I've had some recent success. |
|
John W. Thomas wrote (May 15, 2001):
[To Marshall Abrams] Paolo Cordone's listing of worldwide online classical CD music stores at: http://indigo.ie/~pamolo/faq.html will give you others. FWIW, though I have purchased from French sites, I haven't cared much for their service. Alapage took 30 days to deliver my 5-day shipping order because TWICE they sent it without the apartment number in my address. You can often find the same recordings cheaper at Dutch and German sites, most of which have English-language pages. For instance, I found the S. Richter WTCs complete at Adori Shop for $24 USD including 5-day shipping. It's also a good soiurce for Arte Novae recordings. |
|
Philip van Casele wrote (May 15, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] I'm also hooked on buying new versions of the AoF again and again, but I allways put the Musica Antiqua Köln version in my "desert island” selection when I'm on the road. I'll suggest some really nice versions that haven't been mentioned jet:
One of the most recent ones is the version by the woodwindensemble Calefax (MDG 619 0989)
Henk van Zonneveld recorded Bach's first autograph-version of the AoF on clavi-organum (WISP 25969)
A very interesting version is the '83/'84 recording by the Neues Bachisches Collegium Musicum Leipzig directed by Max Pommer. I like the way viols are used in some of the fugues (Capriccio 50059)
And last but not least: I will allways keep a soft spot for Karl Ristenpart’s recording with orchestra (nonsuch) because it was my first one given to me by my granfather when I was young.
As far as I know these last two where never released on CD. Let me know if I'm wrong. |
|
John W. Thomas wrote (May 16, 2001):
Philip van Casele wrote:
< I will allways keep a soft spot for Karl Ristenpart’s recording with orchestra (nonsuch) because it was my first one given to me by my granfather when I was young.
As far as I know these last two where never released on CD. Let me know if I'm wrong. >
The Ristenpart A of F is part of a 6CD set issued last year by Accord, "J S Bach: Oeuvres pour Orchestre", containing Ristenpart's Brandenburgs, Orchestral Suites and concertos, as well as the A of F. As far as I can tell it's obtainable only in France (I got it from Alapage) as Accord 465 893-2. All the performances are fine pre-HIP examples with harpsichord and contain IMHO the best Brandenburgs and Suites of their type. The concertos are more routine and the A of F a lush, French Romantic orchestration that has to be heard. The whole set cost me $36 USD including delivery; but beware of Alapage's incompetent shippers. Fnac carries it, too. |
|
Charles Francis wrote (May 16, 2001):
[To John Thomas] I bought this set a while ago through FNAC (France) for a most reasonable price following rave reviews on the net. I've yet to listen to the CDs properly, but from quick sampling I've done of selected tracks, the AoF performance seems ok but not in the same league as my favourite - "Scherchen". Many people enthuse about this recording, however, so perhaps I need to listen more closely. |
|
John W. Thomas wrote (May 16, 2001):
[To Charles Francis] Both the Scherchen and the Ristenpart are so un-Bachian in approach that a preference for one over the other can be only a matter of personal taste. I have both, but continue to believe that a keyboard version is the best way to hear the A of F. |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (May 16, 2001):
Mark Zimmerman wrote: < I now have 3 versions of the Art of the Fugue and am confused as to what exactly makes it up. Is it both Preludes and Fugues; or all Fugues? >
On this question of "what is it?" --
The "Art of Fugue" is often described as a sort of textbook of contrapuntal techniques. Bach demonstrated his art by examples, rather than by writing any instruction manual in words. It could also be called the "Art of Fuguing" or the "Art of Counterpoint."
Each movement illustrates a different contrapuntal game: use the subject normally, use it upside-down, use it at different speeds, overlap it with itself in various ways, use it combined with new subjects in various ways, change the rhythm, etc. The collection consists of "contrapuncti" and canons.
A contrapunctus is not always the same thing as a fugue (like the fugues in the WTC): some of these don't have the typical expositions or episodes that one expects from other Bach fugues. That is, the large-scale structure of some of the contrapuncti is "incomplete" if we take them as fugues, but Bach was able to leave out some of those expected sections because all the movements share the same subject. He gives more concentrated examples of the contrapuntal techniques being illustrated, without having to follow the overall form of a typical fugue.
This could also be called the "Art of Playing Keyboard," although most people probably don't think of it in that way. This is a practical point not easily evident to the listener or the theorist. But in the movement sequence of the print version (as opposed to the earlier manuscript), the first thirteen contrapuncti (ending with the mirror pieces) increase steadily in difficulty for the player. The fingering to get all the notes becomes progressively tricky. It is like a series of puzzles to be solved. The two mirror pieces (12 and 13) are the most difficult, and many keyboard players don't play them at all; they bring in the assistance of a second player (or they overdub themselves!). Bach himself recognized this: he made later arrangements of #13 for two players, adding new non-thematic material. But everything is playable by one player, except ONE note that must be faked (or overdubbed) in #13.
Bach also explored some other keyboard techniques in the canons: one of them ends with hands crossed; one of them requires two manuals for the awkwardness where the voices cross; one requires the performer to deal with a mixture of triplets and duplets; and another requires the performer to improvise a cadenza. And all the canons make the performer wrestle with the problem of how to execute ornaments within a strict canon.
The supposedly "incomplete" triple or quadruple fugue (variously numbered 14 or 19) is one more puzzle for the player: After putting the player through every other keyboard technique there is, Bach leaves this piece open for the player to finish. He's demonstrated how to compose and how to play contrapuntal music: now he leaves this one as an exercise.
And I haven't mentioned the layout or the clefs: the whole thing is also a textbook for the player in reading four independent lines, each in a different clef. There was a tradition from Frescobaldi, Froberger, etc giving contrapuntal works to the keyboard player in open score like this. It's one more thing for a fully-equipped keyboard player to learn how to do! (Bach's six-voiced ricercar from the "Musical Offering" is also presented in open score like this, while in one of his earlier drafts it was laid out on the more familiar two staves.) It's certainly frustrating for an otherwgood sight-reader of music on two staves: it encourages a different way of working on pieces, both in terms of reading and fingering!
So, the Art of Fugue is as least as much a textbook of playing Bach's keyboard music as a textbook of his counterpoint.
One thing Bach certainly NEVER intended is that people would go to a store and buy a recording of somebody else playing this piece, learning it only as passive entertainment. This is completely practical music to have one's own hands on! |
|
Kirk McElhearn wrote (May 16, 2001):
Charles Francis wrote:
< I bought this set a while ago through FNAC (France) for a most reasonable price following rave reviews on the net. I've yet to listen to the CDs properly, but from quick sampling I've done of selected tracks, the AoF performance seems ok but not in the same league as my favourite - "Scherchen". Many people enthuse about this recording, however, so perhaps I need to listen more closely. >
I have it too. It didn't overwhelm me, but the AoF is nice.
WARNING: there is a defect in the AoF at one point. The record company promised to send CDs to those who asked when they repressed them. I never heard back from them after that "promise". |
|
Charles Francis wrote (May 16, 2001):
John Thomas wrote:
< Both the Scherchen and the Ristenpart are so un-Bachian in approach that a preference for one over the other can be only a matter of personal taste. I have both, but continue to believe that a keyboard version is the best way to hear the A of F. >
I must say I rather like the Rubsam recording from Naxos (which others seem to dislike) and which convinced me that the AoF is primarily an organ work. So yes, in the first instance its probably a keyboard work. But given Bach transcribed Vivaldi's orchestral music for organ, I'm sure he wouldn't be the least surprised by an arrangement in the other direction. And, after all, he didn't even indicate it was keyboard music!
But with regard to Scherchen, do you have the 1949 performance with Radio Orch.of Beromunster and orchestration by Roger Vuataz? This is the one I know, and actually the orchestration reminds me somewhat of the Jordi Savall recording. Remember, Scherchen was interested in "New Music" and in 1949 what we now associate with "Early Music" was highly innovative. Granted, the tempo, phrasing, etc. is not what we currently associate with Bach or the Barock, but try to prove its un-Bachian... |
|
John Thomas wrote (May 17, 2001):
John Thomas wrote:
<< Both the Scherchen and the Ristenpart are so un-Bachian in approach that a preference for one over the other can be only matter of personal taste. I have both, but continue to believe that a keyboard version is the best way to hear the A of F. >>
Charles Francis wrote:
< (snip) But with regard to Scherchen, do you have the 1949 performance with Radio Orch.of Beromunster and orchestration by Roger Vuataz? This is the one I know, and actually the orchestration reminds me somewhat of the Jordi Savall recording. Remember, Scherchen was interested in "New Music" and in 1949 what we now associate with "Early Music" was highly innovative. Granted, the tempo, phrasing, etc. is not what we currently associate with Bach or the Barock, but try to prove its un-Bachian... >
My recording is from June, 1965, with the VSOO and "members of" the VRO - his own orchestration. As to whether one can prove this recording to be un-Bachian, it's not possible to prove a negative, especially of so vague a concept as "un Bachian", so I'll gladly withdraw my comment. It wasn't meant necessarily as a criticism; after all, my favorite version of the WTC is Feinberg's. |
|
Bradley Lehman wrote (May 17, 2001):
Charles Francis wrote:
< I must say I rather like the Rubsam recording from Naxos (which others seem to dislike) and which convinced me that the AoF is primarily an organ work. So yes, in the first instance its probably a keyboard work. But given Bach transcribed Vivaldi's orchestral music for organ, I'm sure he wouldn't be the least surprised by an arrangement in the other direction. And, after all, he didn't even indicate it was keyboard music! >
I like the Rübsam set on Philips (from his 1970's set of all the organ works) better than his remake on Naxos. His performances have more straightforward flow, and the recording is considerably clearer. It hardly sounds like the same player! This one and the Tachezi are my two favorites on organ. The Naxos remake is enjoyable, too, but for different reasons.
Bach *did* indicate that it's keyboard music, both by the layout and by internal evidence...24-year-old Gustav Leonhardt showed this convincingly in his 1952 book. (The text is reproduced also in the SEON/Pro Arte LP edition of Leonhardt's second recording, and again in the CD booklet of this same performance on dhm 77013.) He listed more than 30 16th-18th century examples where contrapuntal keyboard music was published in open score, just as the AoF was, and says that "this practice (...) was more a rule than an exception."
In a later section of the essay he said, "The fact alone that the whole of the Art of Fugue is written so that everything can be played accurately by two hands (the mirror fugues will be discussed below) should be enough for us to conclude that whilst composing this work Bach always had a keyboard instrument in mind. The importance of this will become eminently clear if one tries to play an ensemble work of Bach's with one's own two hands correctly on a keyboard instrument: it cannot be done. The possibility of playing this work on a keyboard was also a factor that Bach respected during its composition; he took on this disagreeable limitation consciously, at the cost of being illogical sometimes!"
The other parts of his argument are also worth reading. For example, where Bach has marked the two-keyboard arrangement of the mirror fugues "a 2 Clav.", Leonhardt remarked (inter alia), "It is then not a case of a sudden appearance of a strange new instrumentation, but a continuation of the same sound through an addition of a second instrument. Thus the unity of the work is preserved even in the sound aspect. The marking 'a 2 Clav.' should therefore be read with the accent on '2'."
Finally he pointed out seven reasons why the harpsichord should be the choice of *which* keyboard instrument, over organ and clavichord. The most compelling reason (to me) is the fact that the augmentation canon has a low B that doesn't exist on any organ's keyboard! Other good reasons are the observation that no pedals are specified (or required), and the observations about the music's texture: Bach writes moving parts to keep the unsustained tone going, and wouldn't have needed to do that if the piece were for organ.
But I find all the reasons in his essay convincing, not just those excerpted here in this posting. And I agree with Leonhardt's observation: "The playing of the music on the organ as well as the harpsichord gives one the feeling that the work is really at home on the harpsichord." Obviously this reason speaks most directly to those of us who have tried it, and it is sufficient evidence in itself: the AoF doesn't *feel like* Bach's organ music, it feels like his harpsichord music (especially in rhythmic profile)! All his other reasons seem to be there to help convince skeptics who don't play it.
It's played so often on organ and piano anyway because they don't want to be left out of this marvelous music...! :)
Tovey had also gone through some of this keyboard-vs-ensemble territory in his 1931 book....
Of course the AoF still works fine when arranged for various ensembles, but it always opens up the old unanswerable question, "What WOULD Bach have done with it musically if he hadn't had to stick to his restriction of playability by two hands?"
-----
Probably the weirdest rendition is the CD "Die Kunst einer Fuge" by Gerd Zacher. He realizes ten different interpretations of the first Contrapunctus on organ: sort of in the style of Schumann, Brahms, Ligeti, Messiaen, Varese, .... The first nine are audible. The tenth is an evocation of Japanese "No" Theatre and consists of eight photos of the performer making ges.
< But with regard to Scherchen, do you have the 1949 performance with Radio Orch.of Beromunster and orchestration by Roger Vuataz? This is the one I know, and actually the orchestration reminds me somewhat of the Jordi Savall recording. Remember, Scherchen was interested in "New Music" and in 1949 what we now associate with "Early Music" was highly innovative. Granted, the tempo, phrasing, etc. is not what we currently associate with Bach or the Barock, but try to prove its un-Bachian... >
I'm curious which Scherchen recordings we're all talking about, and how similar they are.
I have the live one from December 1965, Scherchen's last performance of this piece. It's with the CBC Toronto Chamber Orchestra and a very young Kenneth Gilbert on harpsichord. The CD set (Tahra 108/9) includes some rehearsal excerpts.
The 1949 Decca recording of the Vuataz orchestration was also scheduled for release on Tahra CD's, according to the booklet of 108/9.
Or are we talking about the Westminster LP's XWN 2237?
To me, THE Scherchen Bach record to have is the St Matthew Passion (BWV 244) on Westminster 401. Wow! |
|
Peter Bright wrote (May 17, 2001):
[To Bradley Lehman] I recently picked up my first organ version of the Art of Fugue - Hans Fagius on BIS, to add to two harpsichord versions (Moroney and Hill) and one chamber version (Keller Quartet). I must say, the organ suits the music very well indeed, although I also tend to think the harpsichord was the most likely instrument Bach had in mind (if any). Any other opinions on the Fagius recording? I know Don didn't include it at the top of his list, but I find it a beautifully measured performance (although a little forceful in one or two places). The commercial reviews were generally very good and, at least one suggested, more than some other versions, it achieves its effect when heard as a coherent whole rather than simply a collection of independent movements. |
|
Donald Satz wrote (May 17, 2001):
[To Peter Bright] I have read the 'cumulative impact' argument in favor of the Fagius AOF, and I have heard it in the recording. I'm not convinced - sounds more like an excuse to downplay the less than highly rewarding opening movements. Those opening movements are more than preludes to the real thing. How about this novel idea? A great performance of the AOF has cumulative impact and each movement stands tall on its own. |
|
Donald Satz wrote (May 17, 2001):
[To Peter Bright] I forgot to mention a review of the Fagius AOF that I tend to side with; it's on the Classics Today web site, and I find it pretty much on target. |
| |
|
New articles uploaded |
|
Uri Golomb wrote (September 16, 2010):
Aryeh Oron has just uploaded a paper I wrote on televised productions of Bach's passions:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Articles/Passion-Hierarchy%5BGolomb%5D.htm
I have also written a review of a recent album containing a performance of the Art of Fugue and a fascinating DVD documentary and lecture on this work - this was placed online a few months ago, but apparently I forgot to tell the lists at the time.
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NonVocal/AOF-Ritchie.htm
Hope you enjoy these! |
|
Uri Golomb wrote (September 16, 2010):
Art of Fugue review – correction
As a PS to my previous message, I would like to take this opportunity to correct one mistake in my review of "Desert Fugue". I complained there that, in his lecture on the Art of Fugue, organist George Ritchie "fails to explain the meanings of several terms (such as "chromaticism") which are indeed familiar to musicians, but which are not exactly common currency for a wider audience". In fact, the album's booklet contains a glossary with definitions of such terms, something I should have mentioned in my review. I still believe it would have been better to include some definitions within the video lecture itself (since many of these terms are much easier to explain with examples than with words alone); but it was wrong to make it look as if the terms had not been defined at all. |
| |
|
BCW: Die Kunst der Fuge BWV 1080 - Revised & Updated Discography |
|
Aryeh Oron wrote (October 24, 2011):
The discography pages of Die Kunst der Fuge BWV 1080 (The Art of Fugue) on the BCW have been revised & updated:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/NVD/BWV1080.htm
The discography is arranged chronologically by recording date, a page per a decade, and includes 212 different recordings.
If you have any correction, addition, etc., please inform me. |
| |
|
|
