BWV 999 score

[Yves C.]

I have two different piano scores for BWV 999.
They are the same with one exception:
- on the first one (a french reprint, given by my piano teacher), in
measure 23 the first note is a E (flat)
- on the other one (found on the web) it is a D

Which one is the right one ?
I'm pretty sure the second one is the right one, but I'll have to prove
this to my piano teacher. How can I prove it? Is it possible to find a
manuscript? This piece was originally written for the lute, and is often
played on a guitar

Thank you,
Yves

-- replace "hexagone" by "fr" in my e-mail address

[Sybrand Bakker]

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 22:10:39 +0200, "Yves C."

Post by Yves C.
Which one is the right one ?
I'm pretty sure the second one is the right one, but I'll have to prove
this to my piano teacher. How can I prove it? Is it possible to find a
manuscript? This piece was originally written for the lute, and is often
played on a guitar
Thank you,
Yves

Just look the work up in the Neue Bach Ausgabe, series V, volume 10
There is only one manuscript, it's signature is
D B Mus. ms. Bach P 804, Faszikel 19
It is kept in Berlin, in the Preussiser Staatsbibliothek, and it is in
the hand of J.P. Kellner.

I got this information by querying
www.bach.gwdg.de

which I found via www.bach-institut.de



Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[Charles]

The NBA score gives a D as the first note in measure 23 (D crotchet in

the

bass followed by C# semiquaver in the RH)

Thank you.... where can I find the NBA score ?
Yves

You can almost certainly order it here: http://www.baerenreiter.com

Good luck searching the site!!


Regards
Charles

[Sybrand Bakker]

But an essential question remains? What note did Kellner copy in the manuscript. Tghis information
shoud be in the volume of "critical notes" (Crtitisce Bericht) that comes as a separate little book
with each volume of the NBA. I wish I knew what note Kellner wrote.
ajn.

There is only one manuscript. Still there might be harmonical and
contrapuntal reasons the editor of the particular volume corrected the
note. Are you stating you insist on playing Kellners possibly
erroneous note? Or do you say you want to correct the editor?


Sybrand Bakker

anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[ajn]

I am not advocating anything, just asking a question. Good arguments could be (and have been) made
for either note, D or E flat.

I would simply like to know what note Kellner wrote. That is the essential question here, as I see
it. And with all those D's before and after the E flat, it might be easy for Kellner (or someone
else) to mistakenly write another D.

In other words,

(1) Did Kohlhase (editor of the NBA volume of lute works) "correct" what he perceived to be a
mistake in Kellner's manuscript? Or

(2) Did Kohlhase restore the reading in Kellner, which earlier editors (e.g., BGA) thought was
erroneous, and had "corrected"?

That is really an amazing chord progression, ending with a half cadence. I wonder what followed.
nyone prepared to analyze the progression around that chord?

Gounod used this lute prelude for a second Ave Maria. I've never heard it, or seen the music.

The NBA (Neue Bach Ausgabe) is published by Bärenreiter, Yves. In series V, vol. x.
ajn

Post by Sybrand Bakker

But an essential question remains? What note did Kellner copy in the manuscript. Tghis information
shoud be in the volume of "critical notes" (Crtitisce Bericht) that comes as a separate little book
with each volume of the NBA. I wish I knew what note Kellner wrote.
ajn.

There is only one manuscript. Still there might be harmonical and
contrapuntal reasons the editor of the particular volume corrected the
note. Are you stating you insist on playing Kellners possibly
erroneous note? Or do you say you want to correct the editor?
Sybrand Bakker
anti-spam maatregel
om te antwoorden verwijder '-verwijderdit' uit mijn e-mail adres

[arthur ness]

I finally took some time in the library today. For questions such as this, it is best to consult a
critical edition. There are critical editions of the "complete" works of most master composers.

There are two for J.S.Bach, the 19th-century Bach Gesellschaft Ausgabe ("Bach Society
Edition"---->BGA) and the Neue Bach Ausgabe ("New Bach Edition"---->NBA).

In these "complete works" the editors will consult all of the available early sources for each
piece, such as the composer's autograph, first printed and other early editons, copies by
contemporaries, et cetera. Any variant readings will be reported in the Critical Notes, usually
called Critische Berichte, so that by consulting the critical notes, one could reconstruct any of
the early sources. In the BGA the critical notes are at the beginning of the volume, in the NBA
they come in a little booklet, usually shelved next to the appropriate volume of music. Thus one can
determine just what the editor may have changed. You might also find that you favor a variant
reading from the 18th century.

For the note in measure 23 bass clef, the BGA gives E flat. E Flat is the note in the earliest
source, a manuscript copied in the mid-1720s for his own use by a Bach associate (student?), the
organ virtuoso Johann Peter Kellner (1705-1772). This is the only surviving original source for BWV
999. (Kellner copied several Bach works that are otherwise lost.)

The Neue Bach Ausgabe (the lute volume edited by Thomas Kohlhase) changes the Kellner E flat to D,
apparently believing Kellner's to be a slip of the pen. Kohlhase gives no reason for the change,
but it is strange to have the long D pedal note starting in bar 17 and continuing to bar 33, with
one adjacent note breaking the pedal near its midpoint. It creates a jarring effect, in my opinion,
particularly in the context of this supra-chromatic chord progression. Normally this kind of break
would appear towards the end of the pedal, if at all.

Bar 42: Kellner has a D instead of E Flat, RH note 9.

Bar 17, RH notes 5 and 7 read D in Kellner, rather than C.

The Kellner manuscript has a page with blank staves following the prelude. Since it ends on a
dominant chord, Kellner probably planned on adding the successive piece. Alas he didn't.

So take your pick, Yves. E flat? D? At least now you'll know who did what to whom.

ajn.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 22:10:39 +0200, "Yves C."

Post by Yves C.
I have two different piano scores for BWV 999.
- on the first one (a french reprint, given by my piano teacher), in
measure 23 the first note is a E (flat)
- on the other one (found on the web) it is a D

My copy (out of an old book my former teacher loaned me) has the E
flat (assuming we are talking about the first note of the measure for
the left hand in the bass clef). The measures before and after have a
D. This sounds correct with the C# that follows, but see below.

Post by Yves C.
Which one is the right one ?
I'm pretty sure the second one is the right one, but I'll have to prove
this to my piano teacher. How can I prove it? Is it possible to find a
manuscript? This piece was originally written for the lute, and is often
played on a guitar

I also have a lute/guitar version edited by Jerry Willard). I believe
the lute version was derived from the keyboard version. Mr. Willard
transposed the piece from C minor to D minor to better suit the modern
guitar. The lute/guitar version has the same E (natural) for the
first (bass) note in measures 22, 23 and 24, which is consistent with
the web version you have and inconsistent with my piano version and
your French reprint.
My guess at this point is that the D appears in the original version,
and some editor at some point in time changed it to an E flat because
he thought it sounded better.

<ajn:> The E flat is in the earliest source for the prelude.

Post by Sybrand Bakker
I will take a peek at my teacher's
Urtext edition at my next lesson. If someone has an Alfred edition
edited by Willard Palmer, then that may shed some light on the
subject, as the Palmer editions usually discuss these sorts of
discrepancies.
- -
Gary L.
Reply to the newsgroup only

[Yves C.]

Post by arthur ness
So take your pick, Yves. E flat? D? At least now you'll know who did what to whom.

Thank you very much for this research.
Well, I have listened to BWV 999 on three different CDs (plus some MP3
ont the web).
Most of the time, an E flat is used (or the equivalent, since this piece
is transposed, played on different instruments. Anyway, it is easy to
hear if the note is the same or different from the previous and
following bar).
But... I don't like this E flat. First, it is not logical (you explained
it better than me). Second, it does not sound well.
My piano teacher swears that E flat is better, more beautiful, etc...
but well, she played this score for at least forty years, so what do you
expect from her ? to change now ? Of course it sounds better to her ears.

Unfortunately, I am just a beginner, and I don't know how to explain
that an E flat is an error. But I can hear the "jarring effect" you
mentionned precisely. Furthermore, the D is the first note of 16
measures, and 16 is not just a random number imho.

Yves

[Gary L.]

BWV 999 is often paired with the fugue BWV 1000 when played on the
guitar or lute. I first heard and played it on the classical guitar.
When I took up piano a few years back and learned this piece for the
keyboard, I always though it sounded incomplete and should be followed
by the fugue.

Yes, Gary, it ends on the dominant chord (G major in C minor), so surely something should follow.
But BWV 1000 in g minor, but I guess it could work. There are versions of that fugue in d minor, so
maybe one could fit them into the same key. I wonder if the lute original was actually in C minor,
and if that is not the key selected because Bach often had his keyboard instruments in Chorton.
There are so many unsolved questions about the lute music.

My guitar version has the Prelude in D minor and the Fugue in A minor
(same relationship as the C minor-G minor in the original) and it
sounds good to my ear. But that's what I've listened to for years.

Another comment that I have (as a performer and not as a musicologist)
is that on a baroque lute, there are open D strings that can be played
without fretting. There is no open E flat. (Of course, you could tune
an open D to E flat, but that isn't going to help here with all of the
Ds in the bass line.) So perhaps the editor of the lute volume was
inclined to go with the D.

No, there's a E on the _baroque_ lute. The notes over the finger board are tuned in a d minor chord
(so the tuning is often called "D-Minor"): A-d-f-a-d'-f' (c'=middle C)
And the (unfingered) bordons go down stepwise, G-F-E-D-C-B-A. Each is tuned according to the key,
so the E would be tuned to E flat, the A to A flat, and the B to B flat or B natural.

I am aware of the baroque lute tuning (since I looked it up before my
last post). Still, guitarist/composers usually prefer keys with few
flats such as A minor, E minor, D minor, etc. to make the best use of
the instrument. Most of the lute music I've looked at has been in
similar keys, but perhaps it was simply transposed for the guitar.

Of course, there is no such issue with a
keyboard and if the keyboard version was the original then this would
not have influenced the composer. Also, Bach was known to have
invented a "Lute-Clavicembalo" that imitated the sound of a lute on a
keyboard. So it isn't clear that the "lute" music was intended for a
lute or that the physical limitations of playing the lute were
considered in the composition.
- -

We could argue that point forever. It is called Lauten-Werk, but Werk means a mechanism. Was it a
separate harpsichord, or was it a plucking mechanism that could be inserted into the harpsichord?
Bach had two, but acquired one in 1740, well after the lute works had been written.

I found the name Lute-Clavicembalo in the preface to the Willard
edition of Bach lute works for the guitar, in reference to a keyboard
instrument that imitated the sound of the lute. That's all I know
about it.

But many works are clearly labelled for lute, and the one instance of "Lauten-Werk" with a title was
added in the 19th-century (according to the BWV). So it is not contemporary with JSB. There are
quite a few unsolved mysteries surrounding Bach's works for lute. There is a good summary view by
Tim Crawford in Malcolm Boyd's recent Oxford Composer Companion: J.S.Bach.

Thanks for your insights. I'll look for the book in the library.
- -
Gary L.
Reply to the newsgroup only

[arthur ness]

Post by Gary L.

BWV 999 is often paired with the fugue BWV 1000 when played on the
guitar or lute. I first heard and played it on the classical guitar.
When I took up piano a few years back and learned this piece for the
keyboard, I always though it sounded incomplete and should be followed
by the fugue.

Yes, Gary, it ends on the dominant chord (G major in C minor), so surely something should follow.
But BWV 1000 in g minor, but I guess it could work. There are versions of that fugue in d minor, so
maybe one could fit them into the same key. I wonder if the lute original was actually in C minor,
and if that is not the key selected because Bach often had his keyboard instruments in Chorton.
There are so many unsolved questions about the lute music.

My guitar version has the Prelude in D minor and the Fugue in A minor
(same relationship as the C minor-G minor in the original) and it
sounds good to my ear. But that's what I've listened to for years.

They _are_ closely related keys.

The Fugue BWV 1000 also comes down to us for organ in the key of D minor. So perhaps both should be
in D minor. I wonder if C minor is the original key. If Bach thought of the lute as being in
Cammerton (Chamber Pitch) and the keyboard in Chorton (Choir Pitch), then the keyboard would be in C
minor, and the lute in D minor.

Post by Gary L.

Another comment that I have (as a performer and not as a musicologist)
is that on a baroque lute, there are open D strings that can be played
without fretting. There is no open E flat. (Of course, you could tune
an open D to E flat, but that isn't going to help here with all of the
Ds in the bass line.) So perhaps the editor of the lute volume was
inclined to go with the D.

No, there's a E on the _baroque_ lute. The notes over the finger board are tuned in a d minor chord
(so the tuning is often called "D-Minor"): A-d-f-a-d'-f' (c'=middle C)
And the (unfingered) bordons go down stepwise, G-F-E-D-C-B-A. Each is tuned according to the key,
so the E would be tuned to E flat, the A to A flat, and the B to B flat or B natural.

I am aware of the baroque lute tuning (since I looked it up before my
last post). Still, guitarist/composers usually prefer keys with few
flats such as A minor, E minor, D minor, etc. to make the best use of
the instrument. Most of the lute music I've looked at has been in
similar keys, but perhaps it was simply transposed for the guitar.

I agree with you and am not convinced that the key for lute was originally C minor. D minor would
be easier and more idiomatic. The surviving version is amongst a collection of keyboard music.

Post by Gary L.

Of course, there is no such issue with a
keyboard and if the keyboard version was the original then this would
not have influenced the composer. Also, Bach was known to have
invented a "Lute-Clavicembalo" that imitated the sound of a lute on a
keyboard. So it isn't clear that the "lute" music was intended for a
lute or that the physical limitations of playing the lute were
considered in the composition.
- -

We could argue that point forever. It is called Lauten-Werk, but Werk means a mechanism. Was it a
separate harpsichord, or was it a plucking mechanism that could be inserted into the harpsichord?
Bach had two, but acquired one in 1740, well after the lute works had been written.

I found the name Lute-Clavicembalo in the preface to the Willard
edition of Bach lute works for the guitar, in reference to a keyboard
instrument that imitated the sound of the lute. That's all I know
about it.

I think the whole matter needs further researcxh. I've seen a picture of such a modern attempt at
such an instrument. Somebody in Italy "invented" a lute with a mechanical decvice to stop the frets.
You pressed keys, and the frets would be stopped.

Someone has set forth the idea that Bach composed these pieces for gallichon. That instrument has
several tunings, but the most common is just like the modern guitar tuning. Guitarist usually know
the Brescianello sonatas for gallichon, since they are payed so frequentlyu on guitar.

Post by Gary L.

But many works are clearly labelled for lute, and the one instance of "Lauten-Werk" with a title was
added in the 19th-century (according to the BWV). So it is not contemporary with JSB. There are
quite a few unsolved mysteries surrounding Bach's works for lute. There is a good summary view by
Tim Crawford in Malcolm Boyd's recent Oxford Composer Companion: J.S.Bach.

Thanks for your insights. I'll look for the book in the library.

It's a good place to look for basic information about Bach, his contemporaries and his music. It's
arranged like a dictionary.

(((I just picked up Christoph Wolff's new Bach biography at a bargain price from Edw. R. Hamilton,
Falls Village, CT. See EdwardRHamilton.com)))

Post by Gary L.
- -
Gary L.
Reply to the newsgroup only