On 18.01.2007 John Howell wrote:
But I like your wording, Johannes. If we can agree that Joshua's belief is indeed an hypothesis--an interesting hypothesis, a suggestive hypothesis, even a brilliant hypothesis--then the next stage in the scientific method follows. Test the hypothesis.
Done, I did the John passion with him in Stuttgart in 2000.
Test it in Bach's own church.
I have done the Magnificat there. It makes no sense. The original
accoustics are lost because the original panelling on the walls was
stipped out. No chance to go back to the original.
Test it with the instruments he would have used.
Well, we played on period instruments, I guess this got as close as one
can get today. There is one exception, and one which I in particular
don't like: we always use little chamber organs for the continuo. Bach
used the church organ. And from all we know he might have used more than
the softest stops.
Most importantly, test it with two boys and two university students who
are NOT operatically trained soloists!!
The ripieno parts are no problem for them, it is the solo parts. Since
they are undisputed there is no argument here.
Yes I have done the John Passion with boys (with the choir of Christ
Church College, Oxford, soloists from the choir, including the difficult
soprano arias, though they were doubled by two as the master said this
year he didn't have one secure enough to do it on his own - reminds one
of Bach's Entwurf...). There is one problem with that: Their voices
break quite a bit earlier than they used to in Bach's time, and it makes
an enormous difference whether you have a 12 year old or a 16 year old.
Still I have done it, and the good boys choirs today will have capable
soloists.
I studied at King's College in Cambridge. That's a pretty good example.
Tölzer Knabenchor and Thomas Chor are others.
Just to return to the John Passion: The way Joshua does it (with 8
singers) actually convinced me that this may indeed be what Bach
imagined. The result is almost a double-choir setup like the Matthew.
Especially Eilt, Eilt becomes a completely different piece. I have to
say it is now the only way I like the John Passion. I have played this
piece so many time that I know all the weaknesses, and for me those
weakness come out many times more with anything but single forces.
BTW, the John Passion is on piece with a rather large violin body. It
needs 3 firsts and 2 second violins if one follows the available
material. There is also a contra bassoon part, although I am personally
not convinced it should always be used, I believe it was meant to
replace the organ 16 foot in the year the organ was broken (when the
harpsichord was used).
Arguments and opinions are easy; proof is not.
No proof will ever convince you fully. But I wished you could have heard
it in 2000.
Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
