John Eliot Gardiner & Monteverdi Choir & English Baroque Soloists
Bach Cantatas & Other Vocal Works
General Discussions - Part 3

Continue from Part 2

BWV 24 and BWV 185 on BBC Radio 3

Jill Gunsell wrote (July 14, 2000):
BBC Alert! Music Features 15-21 July 2000
BBC Radio 3
Sat, 15 Jul, BBC Radio 3, 1930-2045

Live from the Royal Albert Hall, London. A concert of music by Bach. Miah Persson (soprano), Magdalena Kozena (mezzo), Nathalie Stutzmann (contralto), Paul Agnew (tenor), Nicholas Teste (bass), Monteverdi Choir, English Baroque Soloists/John Eliot Gardiner. Orchestral Suite No 4 in D, BWV 1069; Cantata BWV 24 `Ein ungefärbt Gemüte'; Brandenburg Concerto No 1 in F, BWV 1046.

Ryan Michero wrote (July 14, 2000):
Sorry for not writing lately to the list--I've been terribly busy. I plan to do some catching up tomorrow.

But this can't wait: Tomorrow BBC Radio 3 will be broadcasting live a concert of Bach's music performed by John Eliot Gardiner and the English Baroque Soloists and Monteverdi Choir. Included in the program is the cantata for next week's discussion, BWV 185!

Here are the details of the program:

Bach
Suite No.4 in D major, BWV 1069
Cantata BWV 24, 'Ein ungefärbt Gemüte'
Brandenburg Concerto No.1 in F major
I N T E R V A L
Bach
Cantata BWV 185, 'Barmherziges Herze der ewigen Liebe'
Magnificat in D major (BWV 243)

Miah Persson soprano
Magdalena Kozena mezzo-soprano
Nathalie Stutzmann contralto
Paul Agnew tenor
Nicolas Teste bass
Monteverdi Choir
English Baroque Soloists
Sir John Eliot Gardiner conductor

"Sir John Eliot Gardiner is devoting the whole of 2000 to celebrating the music of Bach. Here the joyous Magnificat and popular orchestral works join two cantatas composed for this weekend in the liturgical year."

I'm especially excited about this, as Persson, Kozenב, and Agnew are three of my absolute favorite singers! Too bad I don't live in London so I could see it live.

You can listen to Radio 3 online if you go to <http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/> (you'll need Real Player). The first part of the program will be broadcast Saturday at 7:30 P.M. in the UK and the second part at 9:05 P.M. Go to <http://www.timezoneconverter.com/> if you want to figure out what time that will be in your area.

Matthew Westphal wrote (July 16, 2000):
I heard the concert over the Net. Did anyone else? What did you all think?

Ryan Michero wrote (July 16, 2000):
(To Matthew Westphal) It was a fine concert, and I wish I could have been there. I do have my complaints, though.

The instrumental pieces, the Orchestral Suite No.4 and Brandenburg Concerto No.1, were very nicely played, especially in the brass department (I'm glad the commentator described the elaborate painted embellishments on the players' horns, too.). Gardiner's interpretation of these pieces was pretty middle-of-the-road though--strange, as his vocal music recordings are anything but, with extreme tempi seemingly the norm. The instrumental pieces were nice but obviously not the raison d'etre of the concert.

The cantatas were overall wonderfully sung and played. Paul Agnew was particularly fine here, and the bass Nicholas Teste was also very convincing. I was disappointed by Nathalie Stutzmann, though. She is one of the old school contraltos, of a kind you don't hear very often in Bach nowadays (thankfully, in my opinion), with a heavy, constant vibrato. And she sang altogether too much in these cantatas, taking probably the two most important arias in both BWV 24 and BWV 185. Too bad, as the wonderful mezzo Magdalena Kozena was there and could have easily sung either of these pieces. I especially wanted to hear her in the gorgeous alto aria of BWV 185 (as it was, she only sang in this work's opening duet--sigh). Otherwise, I liked Gardiner's approach in these works. Anyone familiar with Gardiner's Bach recordings would recognize this brand of dramatic, high-octane performance tempered with moments of great gentleness and beauty. The choruses were really astounding, with the central chorus in BWV 24 taken at a breakneck pace that was really thrilling and must have left his audience (not to mention his singers) gasping for breath!

Gardiner cleverly closed the concert with the biggest crowd-pleaser, the D-major Magnificat, giving it a very exciting performance. I was surprised that Gardiner's interpretation of this work has changed so little since he recorded it in the early 80's, with all of his sometimes joltingly fast tempi intact (working better in the context of a live performance than it does on record). Finally, Kozena and the superb soprano Miah Persson were given chances to shine here, with their respective readings of "Et exultavit" and "Quia respexit" both highlights of the concert. (Interestingly, these singers can be heard singing these same movements on record, Kozena on her Bach "Arias" recital and Persson on Suzuki's Magnificat recording.) Agnew and Teste were again great, and Stutzmann even excelled in her duet with Agnew, "Et misericordia" (though I didn't like her singing in the otherwise gorgeous "Esurientes"). The chorus and orchestra were fantastic in the final movement, which must have brought the audience to their feet.

All in all, this was a great concert that makes me terribly upset at DG for not releasing all of Gardiner's cantata pilgrimage recordings on CD as was originally planned.

But you're the professional reviewer, Matthew--what did you think?

Matthew Westphal wrote (July 17, 2000):
Ryan Michero wrote:
< But you're the professional reviewer, Matthew--what did you think? >
I'm the professional reviewer? That doesn't mean much at all, except that (a) I knew the right people at the right time, and (b) I can string words together to make coherent sentences and paragraphs (a virtue not as common as it should be).

Anyway, I'm afraid Ryan liked the concert much better than I did. Am I the only one who notices that the Monteverdi Choir hardly sounds like the magnificent high-precision machine it was in its glory days? (That's circa SOLOMON and the Christmas Oratorio, before Gardiner turned to Beethoven, Schumann and Verdi.) The choir's ensemble and even tuning sometimes sound woolly -- not, of course, by the standards of American amateur or semi-professional choirs, but definitely by the standards of English professional choirs (granted, probably the highest standards in the world, but the ones we can get in this repertory).

I did think the instrumental pieces went well, although it seemed to me there wasn't a whole lot of feeling behind the speed. (That's a very subjective thing, I know.) I did like the soloists other than Stutzmann quite a lot. I usually don't look forward to hearing Stutzmann in Baroque music at all; like Ryan, I find her sound too plummy and her vibrato too wide and prominent. I thought that was something of a problem in BWV 24, but in the Magnificat I thought Stutzmann sounded quite nice and blended very well with Agnew. Esurientes was OK, much better than I expected, and I thought the trio Suspect Israel was the loveliest thing of the whole evening. I think this means I must change my assessment of Stutzmann: she can control her vibrato, so why does she choose so often not to do so?

Ryan Michero wrote (July 17, 2000):
Matthew Westphal wrote:
< I'm the professional reviewer? That doesn't mean much at all, except that (a) I knew the right people at the right time, and (b) I can string words together to make coherent sentences and paragraphs (a virtue not as common as it should be). >
Very true. However, you shouldn't underestimate yourself. Such intensive and intelligent listening as one must do in a reviewer's position must increase one's critical acuity, right?

, instead of saying "you're the professional", perhaps I should've just said I want to hear what you have to say about it?

< Anyway, I'm afraid Ryan liked the concert much better than I did. Am I the only one who notices that the Monteverdi Choir hardly sounds like the magnificent high-precision machine it was in its glory days? (That's circa SOLOMON and the Christmas Oratorio, before Gardiner turned to Beethoven, Schumann and Verdi.) The choir's ensemble and even tuning sometimes sound woolly -- not, of course, by the standards of American amateur or semi-professional choirs, but definitely by the standards of English professional choirs (granted, probably the highest standards in the world, but the ones we can get in this repertory). >
True, the Monteverdi Choir is not as impressive as it used to be, alas. But this was not as obvious to me in this performance due to the poor sound of the Internet streaming audio.

< I did like the soloists other than Stutzmann quite a lot. I usually don't look forward to hearing Stutzmann in Baroque music at all; like Ryan, I find her sound too plummy and her vibrato too wide and prominent. I thought that was something of a problem in BWV 24, but in the Magnificat I thought Stutzmann sounded quite nice and blended very well with Agnew. Esurientes was OK, much better than I expected, and I thought the trio Suspect Israel was the loveliest thing of the whole evening. I think this means I must change my assessment of Stutzmann: she can control her vibrato, so why does she choose so often not to do so? >
Indeed! She was much more palatable in the Magnificat than in the other pieces. Why does she insist on using the heavy vibrato? Or perhaps the more appropriate question is why do early music conductors insist on using her?

Matthew Westphal wrote (July 17, 2000):
Ryan Michero wrote:
< Such intensive and intelligent listening as one must do in a reviewer's position must increase one's critical acuity, right? >
In the sense that practice makes perfect (or at least better)...

< True, the Monteverdi Choir is not as impressive as it used to be, alas. But this was not as obvious to me in this performance due to the poor sound of the Internet streaming audio. >
Yes, but we have the evidence of the appalling Vol.1 of the Cantata Pilgrimage series. (Vol.2 is a re-issue; Vol.3 is considerably better, thanks largely to better soloists; I have Vol.4 but haven't heard it yet.)

< Indeed! [Stutzmann] was much more palatable in the Magnificat than in the other pieces. Why does she insist on using the heavy vibrato? >
Until I heard that Magnificat, I thought that she couldn't help it -- that was the voice and training she had.

< Or perhaps the more appropriate question is why do early music conductors insist on using her? >
That was always my question before. Now that I've heard that Magnificat (BWV 243), my question is "If she can do better, why doesn't she?"

Ehud Shiloni wrote (July 24, 2000):
I was present at that concert and I can add some input to the various points raised [sorry for being late with this]:

Re Natalie Stutzmann: I read in the local press in London that she was a late stand-in for Claudia Schubert who was originally in the program [no reason was given why Schubert could not make it]. My impression was that Stutzmann started real awful with the opening Alto aria of BWV 24, but her voice grew better as the evening progressed. I agree with you, Matthew, about the trio "Suscepit Israel", except that I think that it was more than just "lovely" - it was really, truly amazing and magical!

Re Monteverdi Choir: Their performance of the vigorous prelude and fugue chorus "Alles nun, das ist wollet" in BWV 24 was riveting! The type of stuff you want to go to a live performance for - goose pimples and all. On hearing that, I immediately forgave Gardiner his less-than-inspiring recording of BWV 6 on the first "pilgrimage" CD! However, despite the overall great effect, I understand what you say about them sounding "wooly" - the voices don't stand out as clear as they do with Suzuki's BCJ [more on that later]. The acoustics of the Royal Albert Hall may have contributed to that problem, because it is actually a huge, circular arena, and the reverb effect is quite dry [Galina said about her Easter concert there: "For a large barn, though, the acoustic seemed to be okay"...].

Re Kozena and Persson I second every one of Ryan's superlatives - both are practically perfect.

Two more visual points about "theatrical" effects which Gardiner used in the Magnificat: The choir was seated during the "Quia respexit", and stood up only on the very last bar before breaking into the "Omnes", and in the "Deposuit" Gardiner made the entire violin section perform while standing up. Nice gestures. Overall, the performance of the Magnificat was more moving and satisfying than any of the [many] CD versions that I have. I'd say that Gardiner did deliver a live-performance-home-run with this one, and it is a shame that DG will not record all the concerts. If they did, they could then decide to release only the successful, "special" pieces, and skip the less exciting efforts [such as the poor Easter concert that John van Veen heard].

And, finally: Just four days after hearing the Magnificat (BWV 243) live with JEG, I heard the same piece live with Suzuki/BCJ in the Mann Auditorium in Tel Aviv! Also on the program were BWV 147 and Orchestral Suite #1. In short: A very-very good concert, the smaller choir sounding clearer and with better "color", but somehow I was not as moved as I was in the Albert Hall...

Johan van Veen wrote (July 27, 2000):
The Prom concert by Gardiner's Monteverdi Choir and the English Baroque Soloists on July 15th has been written about here (I think). Tonight Belgian radio broadcasted the concert. Considering the fact that some on this list were quite positive about this concert I was looking forward to the recording. I have to say that I am totally speechless about the positive opinions on this concert. My negative view on Gardiner's Bach-interpretation, which I wrote about earlier in reference to the concert in Eisenach were confirmed. Yes, technically it was slightly better - not a lot better, though. The violino piccolo in the 1st Brandenburg Concerto was anything but perfect. On the whole the performance of the two orchestral works was characterized by too much legato playing, a lack of rhetorical accents and wrong articulation and phrasing. I haven't heard such a boring and smoothed-down performance of the Brandenburg Concerto for a long time.

The vocal works were not any better. When I heard Nathalie Stutzmann I immediately knew why I dislike most female altos. That dark voice, "inward looking" as I would call it, is just the wrong type of voice for Bach. You can hardly understand a word she is singing. It is more like "mumbling" than singing. There were quite a number of textual errors in the tenor recitative of Cantata BWV 24. There were errors in the pronunciation as well. The worst in that respect was the bass Nicolas Teste. Errors were all over the place in the bass recitative in Cantata BWV 185 ("doch recht" sounded like "do' recht"). He wasn't able to keep up with the fast tempo of the basso continuo. The following aria (Das ist der Christen Kunst) was just a caricature. It reminded me of Polyphemus' aria "Oh ruddier than the cherry" from Handel's Acis and Galatea. I could say more about the cantatas (p.e. the wobbly singing of the choir), but I won't. Only a couple of things about the Magnificat (BWV 243). The only aspect of the whole concert I was really pleased about was the excellent singing of Miah Persson. She has exactly the right kind of voice for Bach. Phrasing, articulation and pronunciation were flawless. Magdalena Kozena waacceptable (better than in Cantata BWV 185), although I don't like her vibrato. The other soloists didn't impress me at all. And why on earth is Gardiner using the Italian pronunciation of Latin in a work by a German composer? In a way the performance was old-fashioned, in particular in the long sustained closing chords of most sections. That is a habit of the past. And here again: no dynamic accents, a lot of legato playing and singing, and therefore a complete denial of the rhetorical, language-based character of Bach's music.

I am very sorry if messages like these are upsetting people. Nobody needs to agree with what I am writing. But I can't see it in a different way. I don't like to write things like this, but I feel very sorry that gifted musicians - for whatever reasons - seem not to be able to do justice to what I am sincerely convinced is the character of Bach's music.

Thomas Boyce wrote (July 27, 2000):
(To Johan van Veen) That's all right, man, you write 'em as you see 'em.

Robert Murphy wrote (August 7, 2000):
(To Johan van Veen) Personally, I would take any female altos over male altos in Bach. The males sound like cats trying to pass kidney stones!

Matthew Westphal wrote (August 7, 2000):
(To Robert Murphy) When was the last time you heard any male altos? Which ones?

It's all a matter of taste, of course, but an argument might be made that some male alto soloists of the 1970s and 1980s made sounds like those you describe.

But I think you'd have a very hard time finding people who would agree that David Daniels, Andreas Scholl, Brian Asawa, Daniel Taylor and Bejun Mehta sound like cats trying to pass kidney stones.

In fact, Robert, I'd venture to guess that if you heard a recording of any one of those gentlemen without the singer being identified, you'd think it was a very good female alto singing.

Ryan Michero wrote (August 7, 2000):
(To Robert Murphy) I wouldn't expect to get any sympathetic responses to this statement as even the most reactionary of critics and listeners have accepted that male altos can be fine interpreters of Bach's vocal music. Many may prefer female altos, but it is absolutely certain that Bach did not write his music for them. And certainly Bach would not have written so much wonderful music for alto voice if he expected it to be sung by "cats trying to pass kidney stones".

And as Matthew asked, when was the last time you heard a male alto? Or do you just prefer to just cover your ears and pretend the last thirty years didn't happen?

Patrik Enander wrote (August 8, 2000):
Robert Murphy wrote:
< Personally, I would take any female altos over male altos in Bach. The males sound like cats trying to pass kidney stones! >
Matthew W wrote:
< When was the last time you heard any male altos? Which ones? (Snip) But I think you'd have a very hard time finding people who would agree that David Daniels, Andreas Scholl, Brian Asawa, Daniel Taylor and Bejun Mehta sound like cats trying to pass kidney stones. >
Or the excellent altos of Herreweghe's Collegium Vocale. To be fair not all men, but Steve Dugardin doesn't sound like a cat.

Robert Murphy wrote (August 8, 2000):
WOW! Glad to know that my "cat" statement has caused such a reaction!

I have following the discussions for the past three weeks with everyone pontificating their views so I thought it was high time I added some ingredients this Bach stew!

Matthew is absolutely right about Daniels, Scholl, Asawa, and Mehta! They absolutely sound great. I have Daniels' Handel Aria collection and own Scholl's Bach Cantata album, and knew of Brian Asawa way back when he was a member of Chanticleer. They do sound great; I was only expressing my own humble opinion.

Ryan, what makes you think I haven't heard what's been going on the past 30 years? I own both complete cantata sets of Rilling, Harnoncourt/Leonhardt, plus many of Richter's cantata recordings. I don't care that Bach didn't write for FEMALE altos, the women weren't allowed to sing in church. As much as I do sincerely appreciate the artistry and sound of these great male altos, in my opinion none of them, IMHO, will EVER match Helen Watts, Janet Baker, Kathleen Ferrier, Jessie Norman, or Maureen Forrester. And I know you can give me good argument of why not to prefer female altos, just the way I feel that's all! The world is big enough for both, no reason to sweat it! Just an opinion!

Being a music director at a large Lutheran church in St. Paul, I have had the privilege to direct Bach cantatas in the context of a WORSHIP SERVICE, which, again, IMHO, is the best way to experience the cantatas. Somehow in concert setting it doesn't feel the same to me. Some cantatas work great for concert like BWV 51, 119, 31, 212 among others. It is always amazing to see the theological depth that Bach expresses in the cantatas. I have directed BWV 9, 22, 23, 29, 41, 51, 61, 70, 79, 99, 100, 106, 112, 127, 182, 172, 161. Hopefully this year, I will be able to do 95, 35, and 33!

Well, guys, I hate to hit and run, but I will not be commenting again for about a month on the list, as my life is quite busy now. I am starting a run of 12 West Side Story performances with 50 high school kids at church, plus conducting a 30 piece orchestra, then taking off for a two week vacation back home in San Francisco, and then moving to my new house when I return to the Twin Cities!

Thanks for letting me express my opinion, and I wish nothing but the best for all you! How knows maybe I will call up Scholl, Daniels or Asawa and see if they are interested in singing the part of Anita!

Bob Sherman wrote (August 10, 2000):
Generally I agree with Robert Murphy re male vs. female altos. It's a question of a cold sound vs. a warm sound. There is no shortage of male altos with fine technique and musicianship, but none of them do anything for me emotionally. IMO male altos can be compared to synthesizer music -- intellectually fascinating but just not where I go for gratification.

I also have a lot of difficulty relating to altos -- male or female -- doing heroic male roles, as is commonly done with Handel's Julius Caesar. The height of disconnect was a performance of that opera I saw recently in which Ptolemy, a lecherous playboy, is trying to put the moves on Julia, a virtuous woman. Julia was an alto but Ptolemy was a male soprano. Weird! And Caesar himself was played by a female alto who had learned well how to walk and move like a strong athletic man -- but why not go all the way and use a bass-baritone? Terfel would be perfectly suited to the role.

I'm glad Robert included Helen Watts in his list of top baroque altos -- she is frequently overlooked. I'd add to that list Hertha Töpper -- her "Es ist Vollbracht" from the St. John is one of the most moving arias I've heard anywhere.

I recognize that none of the above is politically correct, and probably historically incorrect as well. So be it.

Robert Murphy wrote (August 10, 2000):
(To Bob Sherman) Thanks for your support, Bob! Yes, I just got the Richter Johannes Passion, and I was really moved by Hertha Töpper. Generally, I really love Richter's recordings of the big Bach pieces except for his last Matthäus Passion. I was greatly disappointed in it despite having a great "cast" of Mathis, Baker, Schreier, and Dieskau, it didn't move me at all! I greatly prefer his earlier 1958 recording. I don't think the solo singing on his Christmas Oratorio can be beat-Janowitz, Ludwig, Wunderlich (what a voice!). Even though, Richter was historically correct, in my opinion his love and devotion to Bach shines through convincingly! As I have grow older, I have come to appreciate the older generations performance more and more. I just bought a used copy of Jochum's Matthaus passion and Christmas Oratorio. I was surprised that his tempos are not much slower than today's performances, plus he has great singers in Ameling. Fassbender, Ridderbusch, etc.

At this bach workshop I went to at Princeton, Robin Leaver played an old Koussevitsky/Boston Symphony recording that took place in 1939. I was bowled over by the tempos. Gardiner was not that much faster! In fact taking a cursory look at the timings, it came within 5 minutes of Gardiner. I guess just because it was the 1930's did not necessarily mean slow tempos. However, Mr. Leaver, did play a performance from 1941 with Bruno Walter and New York Philharmonic. OH, MY GOD! The opening chorus tool SO SSSSSLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOWWWWW! The first chord took about 10 seconds. Watching molasses sap running slow, a tree would have been faster!

Talk to you guys next month! I gotta get cool and take in some rumbles for the next few weeks! Bye for now!

Robert Murphy wrote (August 10, 2000):
P.S.

I forgot about your Guilio Cesare! Yes it does seem unseemly for those things to happen on stage because of the vocal ranges. However, I think some strong mezzos can bring it off. I saw Tatiana Troyanos do a performance back in the summer of 1982 at the San Francisco Opera with Valerie Masterston as Cleopatra, Sarah Walker as Cornelia and Delia Wallis as Sexto. James Bowman was Ptolomeo. He was AWFUL! His voice sounded like a cat…well anyway. He just didn't sound good at all. If Scholl or Daniels or Mehta were around, then I know it would have been a different story. Troyanos really pulled it off successfully, I thought. The performance was conducted by Sir Charles Mackerras and done in English.

Another one who was good in the role is Jennifer Larmore on her Harmonia recording with Rene Jacobs, she sounds convincing. So does Janet Baker. I guess it all depends who the mezzo is who can bring it off.

Really gotta kick it this time! Bye guys, until next month!

Ben Mullins wrote (August 10, 2000):
(To Bob Sherman) A male soprano? As in a castrato? I didn't know they still made those! This puts me in mind of the anecdote where Stravinsky (I think it was Stravinsky) was asked by the pope what the Catholic Church could do for music, to which Igor replied: "Give us back castratos!"

Matthew Westphal wrote (August 11, 2000):
Bob Sherman wrote:
< I also have a lot of difficulty relating to altos -- male or female -- doing heroic male roles, as is commonly done with Handel's Julius Caesar. The height of disconnect was a performance of that opera I saw recently in which Ptolemy, a lecherous playboy, is trying to put the moves on Julia, a virtuous woman. Julia was an alto but Ptolemy was a male soprano. Weird! And Caesar himself was played by a female alto who had learned well how to walk and move like a strong athletic man -- but why not go all the way and use a bass-baritone? Terfel would be perfectly suited to the role. >
Why not go all the way and use a studious-looking, high-strung young tenor as the Composer in Ariadne auf Naxos? Bostridge would be perfectly suited to the role.

Why not? For the same reason, I should think, that we don't go all the way and cast randy young tenors or baritones as Cherubino and Octavian.

< I recognize that none of the above is politically correct, and probably historically incorrect as well. So be it. >
Careful, Bob. My friends in the Thought Police will deport you to re-education camp and force you to take seminars in Gender Studies.

Continue on Part 4