On 16 Jan 2007 at 19:23, Johannes Gebauer wrote:

> On 16.01.2007 Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
> > Payroll records weren't the only way to figure out how many
> > musicians performed at concerts, the number of parts tells us how
> > many played as well. (Of course as Joshua Rifkin's research as
> > proved, not everyone agrees. 
> 
> As someone who used to play with Joshua regularly in the past, I found
> not only his arguments convincing but also the result. I did the B
> minor mass with his group, with 8 singers (no choir), 4 violins and
> everything else one to a part, and it really works. In fact I much
> prefer that to any conventional performance.

While I certainly Bach's music enjoyable and convincing when 
performed one on a part, I *don't* find Rifkin's argument convincing 
that this was Bach's intention (and his only intention). As someone 
who's been involved in a lot of church music, I know that you really 
perform with what's available that week, and single copies of vocal 
parts could easily have been sung from by two singers. Had Bach had 
the singers avaiable, I expect he would have prepared additional 
parts.

It's this dogmatic part of Rifkin's argument that most people 
disagree with (and I've argued it with him directly, in fact -- very 
shortly after he came up with the idea), not the idea that much of 
Bach's choral music doesn't work very well and sound quite good with 
one on a part.

I also know from conversations with the continuo player for Rifkin's 
recording of the B Minor Mass that the singers' voices were in 
tatters after the recording sessions and that the recording was 
heavily edited and patched together to get something usable. His 
opinion (as an experienced church musician) was that this proved to 
him, at least, that the B Minor Mass is not really performable with 
but one singer on a part because it's too much music to attempt at 
one go with such a small group of singers.

It is an open question as to whether there B Minor Mass as a whole 
was ever intended by Bach to be performed or if it was just something 
of a magnum opus demonstrating all the varying techniques and 
varieties of musical settings for mass texts (to stand alongside the 
Musical Offering and the Art of Fugue). I can't get past the 
liturgical problems with the work as a whole (the creed is Catholic 
and thus not usable in the Lutheran service , while other parts are 
the Lutheran versions of the text and thus not usable in a Catholic 
mass), and the impracticality of the variable number of parts (if 
you're singing one on a part, what do the singers needed for the 
Sanctus do the rest of the time (6 parts in the Sanctus, as opposed 
to the 5 in the rest of the mass, and 8 parts in the Hosanna)? I know 
that Rifkin attempts to address this question, but I don't find his 
line of reasoning convincing. Either the B Minor Mass was not 
intended for performance, or Bach did not restrict his intended 
performances to one on a part -- both cannot be true.

Me, well, I have no problems with having 8 singers divided up 
appropriately in the 5- and 6-part movements according to the voice 
types of the singers you happen to be using.

-- 
David W. Fenton                    http://dfenton.com
David Fenton Associates       http://dfenton.com/DFA/

_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to