Johann Sebastian Bach

Recently I've picked up a CD with some of J. S. Bach's compositions. And I really enjoy it (listening to it right now )!

It's performed by a French ensemble Cafe Zimmermann. They use instruments from the epoch (like a harpsichord e. g.) so presumably the music is pretty similar to how it sounded in Bach's times.

Do you know any prog inspired by J. S. Bach's music?

Can't think of any JS Bach inspired prog. at the moment but would reconmend
Glenn Gould's A state of wonder - The complete Goldberg variations
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00006GOCJ/qid=1149717887/sr=8-3/ref=pd_ka_3/202-6269266-9527044

It's so beautifully played and such sweet music you'll have a permanent smile through the entire CD.
I just love Bach, he was a true genius, like Einstein was to physics.

krusty wrote: Can't think of any JS Bach inspired prog. at the moment but would reconmend Glenn Gould's A state of wonder - The complete Goldberg variations http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00006GOCJ/qid=1149717887/sr=8-3/ref=pd_ka_3/202-6269266-9527044 It's so beautifully played and such sweet music you'll have a permanent smile through the entire CD. I just love Bach, he was a true genius, like Einstein was to physics.

Incidentially, Gould recorded the Goldberg variations twice; they were his very first recording and a smashing debut; no-one had ever played the Goldberg variations with so much fire. And they were his very last recording too; a more "mature" version, but you can hear the fire is still there, if you listen closely.

I like J.S.Bach's works which have choruses and singing, there's just so great harmonies and melodies to be found on them. I have found the best gems from his cantatas, which he composed for single event masses only. (!)

Teaflax wrote: To me Bach is math, it doesn't touch me on any level.  JSB, the DT of his time? Discuss. As far as classical music goes, I don't much care for much of anything before approximately the turn of the last century. And when it comes to piano pieces nothing has Eric Satie beat (particularly his less well-known stuff, which is pretty much anything but the Gymnopedies or Gnossiennes). In fact, I consider my interest in Prog to have been grounded at least partially in having grown up on Satie and his surprising twists and turns and his often savagely humorous defying of the listener's expectations.

Teaflax wrote: I've heard plenty of Bach in m'day. My ex-Father in Law was deeply appalled at my indifference to Bach, so...yeah. As noted, I find that the Gymnopedies, Gnossiennes and Sarabandes -  while quite pleasant and worthy pieces - are really nothing compared to La Belle Excentrique, Jack in the Box, Embryons desseches, Sonatine Automatique and particularly the Dali movie soundtrack Entr'acte and the ballet Parade. And don't forget that among Satie's biggest supporters and fans were Ravel and Debussy, the latter of which is said to have been very inspired buy Satie's compositional style. He's far too obscure for the actual effect he's had on modern music, if you ask me. As for emotion - I don't belive you can say it is produced by any piece of music; it is produced by the listener. For someone, right now, the most touching thing in the world is David Hasselhoff singing Secret Agent Man, for yet another person it is the instrumental section of Genesis' Fly on a Windshield and for a third it's Fats Waller slamming his way though Ain't Misbehavin'. For me, Bach is just flat. Yeah, I can note that on a technical level, it's quite an achievement, but I don't understand why I would want to spend time listening to something that I feel that, for all that's going on, is ultimately static.

you obviously never heard Glenn Gould's first recording of the Goldberg variations, else you could not say such nonsense as "Bach is static". he is "ecstatic" here


Edited by BaldJean - June 08 2006 at 06:32

One must have a heart of stone to stay unaffected listening to Kathleen Ferrier singing Bach arias, or hearing a quality performance of his St. Matthew Passion. And how about parts of the cello suites? Cembalo concertos? Full of fire and passion.

Most (aleast up to Beethoven) composers made an incredible amount of compositions for royal weddings, birthdays, religious mass, funerals etc... When you've made over 500 vocal works like Bach (or 104 symphonies like Haydn!) there's bound to be some repetative, boring stuff. Which of course means, what you've heard and who's performing is crucial to what you think of the composer.

I've heard this math thing a lot of times. My guess is that is says more about the performers than Bach.

Well, golly. Sign me up as stone-hearted, then (although I don't think my wife would agree). Any aria leaves me cold. I don't consider the operatic style of voice handling to be actual singing, it's more like a circus performance. "Yes, right - very impressive and all, but now would you just relax for a bloomin' second and sing with your actual voice, please?"

I'm fairly sure I've heard Glenn Gould, what with it being the hallmark of Bachery, and all. I think it's a pointless exercise to try to convince me that there's something there that I'm missing, because it's a style of composition I find utterly devoid of anything interesting.

I will agree that performances and interpretations play a large part in classical music (I remember buying a particularly lacklustre version of Carmina Burana a few years ago, and it was almost unlistenable), but I really don't think that there's anything that can be done to Bach for me to find fascinating.

Like I said, I can understand that it has qualities, but those qualities are not ones I look for in music (and please; "fire" and "passion" - these are in no way whatsoever intrinsic to the works, these are things that you - and many, many others -  get out of them and I clearly don't). It's no great loss. There is so much great music to be found in this world that closing that particular door doesn't bother me in the slightest.


Edited by Teaflax - June 08 2006 at 07:24

^Your English is certainly good enough that I didn't even notice you were Norwegian until you said it. Morrn da!

Teaflax wrote: Well, golly. Sign me up as stone-hearted, then (although I don't think my wife would agree). Any aria leaves me cold. I don't consider the operatic style of voice handling to be actual singing, it's more like a circus performance. "Yes, right - very impressive and all, but now would you just relax for a bloomin' second and sing with your actual voice, please?" I'm fairly sure I've heard Glenn Gould, what with it being the hallmark of Bachery, and all. I think it's a pointless exercise to try to convince me that there's something there that I'm missing, because it's a style of composition I find utterly devoid of anything interesting. I will agree that performances and interpretations play a large part in classical music (I remember buying a particularly lacklustre version of Carmina Burana a few years ago, and it was almost unlistenable), but I really don't think that there's anything that can be done to Bach for me to find fascinating. Like I said, I can understand that it has qualities, but those qualities are not ones I look for in music (and please; "fire" and "passion" - these are in no way whatsoever intrinsic to the works, these are things that you - and many, many others -  get out of them and I clearly don't). It's no great loss. There is so much great music to be found in this world that closing that particular door doesn't bother me in the slightest.

well, I guess that proves violin player Hilary Hahn wrong, who once stated "some people say: 'I don't like Mozart' or 'I don't like Stravinski', but nobody ever says 'I don't like Bach' "