How very interesting, but not surprising.

I have often wondered by Chopin so worshipped Bach because his (Chopin's) music is so radically different from Bach's. At least that is what I thought a few years ago.

But as I have started again on the piano, picking up the C Major Prelude by Bach again, playing a few more pieces by Chopin (just learning a couple of his mazurakas right now), I have noticed that there is a definite logic going on. Years ago, I was too ignorant to recognize it for what is was.

Although many think of Chopin as being a great Romantic composer, nothing could be further from the truth. He took what was great about Bach and Mozart and, in his own ingenious way, created music that combined all three ages...Baroque, Classic and Romantic.

In beginning to study Bach (maybe then, Mozart), I will gain greater skills, understanding and appreciation for Chopin's works. I love them now, but I want to know WHY.

Kathleen

Apple, i hope not he has got a hold on me

Kathleen, from what i have read, his dad and his first teacher made him play bach. he did love bach to, but it was first his dad then his teacher who pushed bach on him. thats just what i have read so if i find out otherwise i will let you know, but i have read it in several different places so.....i believe it to be true. i also believe bachs music is what made him(chopin) such a great player and thats why he too loved bach(just what i think). i also learned that his father got him another teacher to teach him the theorhetical side of music so he could learn to compose on his own, as he(chopin) would get up in the middle of the night and try to compose on the piano in his room. just a few tidbits i picked up doing a little research

I agree with you, Kathleen. I've read that Chopin hated the "Romantic" label, too.

Kathleen, back on page one you asked some questions, so let me share how I would answer those questions (someone else might have different answers.)

Re the fugue definition, I was just lucky that my music dictionary has a good one for that term! Here's what it says for

invention[/b] a short, contrapuntal piece.

If you ask me, they could have said more about that! :rolleyes:

And here's what it says for

sinfonia[/b] 1. a symphony. 2. a small orchestra. 3. an overture to an opera, cantata or suite.

And I think that definition is completely irrelevent to Bach's collection! In Bach's works, the Inventions have 2 voices, and the Sinfonia have 3, so I always just think of those terms as referring to the number of voices.

Regarding when you might start working on Inventions... you don't have a teacher, is that right? (If you have a teacher, that perosn could certainly tell you.) Regarding how much you should play before starting Inventions, I don't think you need to finish that Intro book, 4 or 5 pieces is probably just about right. Just for comparison, there are 15 Inventions, and my teacher told me that she thought I should play about 7 of them, and then I could go on to the Sinfonia.

Another way to think about it is: you should start Inventions when they don't feel overwhelming. I tried working on Invention 1 about a year ago, and I just couldn't make heads or tails of it, so I put it away. When I started it this year (a few months back) I was able to work through Invention 1 in about a month (although I didn't work on it long enough to get a very fast tempo.) Also, I have 2 recordings of Inventions and Sinfonia, and I compare the two to see what the possibilities are, so I'm not playing "blind."

Find the music, and play through #1 HS and HT and see how that feels to you. If you're brain turns inside out, then you're not ready! :p See if you can find the voices, see where one hand echos or inverts the other hand's part etc. If you can follow what's going on, IMO you might as well start now.

I work with a teacher, so I use the Henle edition urtext, but if you're working on your own, a text with more info would probably be better. Was it Palmer that everyone thinks is really good? If you decide to buy something, you might start a separate thread here with a title something like "please recommend a good edition of Bach's Inventions" and you'll probably get a lot of really good info.

BTW, if your book doesn't list titles, the first Invention is BWV 772. If you have that, then it's Invention 1.

Frank, I never heard that Chopin hated the "Romantic" label, how funny! Just like some pianists today how hate being called "new age."

You know what they say, the more things change...

He was a romantic by temperament (whether he realized it or not) and an intellectual realist. He thought the "romantics" were emotionally sloppy, sentimental and lacking in sincerity. For example, he was outraged that George Sand, the protocommunist and champion of the poor could callously fire her old family servants at the whim of her son.

Thanks, Frycek. I agree with you: Chopin was probably THE quintessential romantic! Haha... Amazing how difficult it is to see ourselves objectively. On the other hand, I am a great hater of labels. People will do their best to limit others by labeling and pigeonholing them, and it's little wonder that someone as brilliant as Chopin would have chafed at this.

If you look at Chopin's music, his ornamentation is always done judiciously and in good taste. Compared to the "romantic" composers of his day, that just clubbed people over the head with their fancy ornamentation, I'm sure Chopin was appalled at the prospect of being lumped in with them.

Yikes! Frank, if Chopin were alive, he would be having one of his fits and would probably throw a chair at you.

He detested that label. And, in truth, he wasn't. Not really. Even though his music does sound romantic in the sense that it is "emotional." But then what composers' music isn't?

What separated him from the true romantics (Liszt, Schumann, Beriloz) was the fact that he did NOT strive for that emotionalism, as other did. His music is about as pure as music can get. NOTHING in it is superficial or created to impress or overwhelm the listener.

Perhaps it is best to remember that Chopin was all about "control." He looked within the deep well of his being and used classical forms and processes to "tame," (if you will) that inspiration that sprung up from memories of childhood and homeland. But, above all, he was an intellectual composer. NEVER, did he lose his head to his heart.

Kathleen

Right. That's exactly what I was driving at, Kathleen!

But his stormy temperament? Oh yes! Romantic! See? Haha

I will agree that, yes, his temperament was mercurial. But he often managed to control it with either sarcasm or periods of long silence.

As a perfectionist, he "lost it" when dealing with ignorant people or students who were not prepared for their lessons.

Although his acquaintances numbered in the hundreds (everyone who was anyone at that time), he had no real friends. Perhaps Delacroix came as near as possible. Even George Sand, who lived with him for 9 years, readily admitted that she couldn't get close to him.

He was, without a doubt, the only composer who was a true enigma.

Kathleen

Man... How cool it would have been to have been able to meet him and hang around with him, though. There's no doubt in my mind that he was truly a genius and a prodigy. Of all of the great composers, I find Chopin to be the most fascinating, and in his music, there is such a lush elegance... I can't even find words for it...

Amen to that!

Kathleen

Kathleen, so glad Bach is growing on you. I didn't think I liked Bach when I was a kid (though I loved playing certain individual pieces, like the Musette in D). The older I get, the more I love him. I like the keyboard pieces, but LOVE listening to the "bigger" things like the B Minor Mass, orchestral suites, etc. The more I listen, the more I am awed by his genius.

Finally got Bach kathleen
Congrats - and join the club

As a gift - here is the ultimate link that made me recognize the true genius of Bach
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~tas3/wtc.html

But sorry i reject sth

As you reject chopin being called romantic - i reject that Bach is being called "logical - complex - interesting - clever" only

Of course he has all that
but his music was emotional number one - and don't forget that

His music for me just touches a part of my heart not touched by any other composer - it is a new "complex" feeling if you might say

Bassio - the number one Bach fan in these forums .. umm, probably after apple

I am trying to play the first little (2 page) menuet in my book. It looks so simple, until you try to play it. There's no chords, just single notes. The RH runs up while the LH runs down or visa versa. Once in a while they land on the same note --different staffs. I work on the fingering more than I actually play the piece.

It's hard. Maybe not hard, just so different from what I'm used to playing. And I say this after just completing the Db prelude by Chopin and almost done with Rach's variation on a theme by Paginni.

I agree there is a very strong emotion there, but it's not covered with roses and songbirds. Just a simple elegance. Bassio, I know of what you speak by saying a certain composer touches your heart like none other. While I love the music of so many composers, Chopin is the who speaks to my heart. Thanks for the site.

Waterfall: I don't think I ever heard any of his big works. But I just returned from the library with all kinds of stuff...even a CD called "Bach for Dummies."

I am determined to proceed with learning the whole book...although it might take me a while.

I belong to two learning groups: The Chopin group is learning his Nocturne in Fm 55/1 and then I belong to the Debussy group and we're going to tackle Clair de lune.

I'm glad I'm retired; otherwise, I'd had to quit by job to find the time for everything "important" like piano and music.

Kathleen

Kathleen--Bach is hard. I get a little irritated when people refer to anything by Bach as "easy." If you're going to play something by Bach correctly, and you're going to play it well, then you're going to have to work at it (at least most of us will!).

"Bach for Dummies" should have "Air on the G String" from one of the orchestral suites. It's just about my favorite piece of music ever written. Enjoy!

Air on a G String? See thread below:

http://well-temperedforum.groupee.net/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9030004433/m/5450002634

Bach is not simple C.P. I am learning pipe organ (1 year now) and playing a 5 or 6 voice fugue (4 in hands, 1-2 in feet) is not easy. Yes wrong notes stand out a lot which makes it even harder. I never really liked Bach keyboard music until I started organ. (surprisingly, I am a professional flutist and love bach flute music). I always added pedal and stuff to cover up the fact I didn't want to hold the long notes, etc. After playing organ for a month (mostly orgelbuchlein) I was able to go to the piano and play bach and other baroque like I have never been able to before;)

Anyways I like the organ works better than the "piano" works

Frycek:

That link...so funny. Did Bach really have 22 kids? I read that he had many, but not that many.

All from the same woman/wife/whatever? Why is it the man gets all the credit for having all those kids. That poor woman....ggggeeeezzzeeee!

Kathleen

As I remember it was actually 17 and by two wives.

What exercises are you talking about?

That's about 8.5 per woman.

Wonder how those .5 kids turned out?

Probably couldn't reach the pedals on the piano. :p

Poor ladies, at any rate. Imagine being pregnant for 8.5 years running.

Kathleen

"Poor ladies, at any rate. Imagine being pregnant for 8.5 years running. "


Pregnancy probably beat menstration in the era before modern feminine conveniences.

I think I'd prefer the latter as opposed to the former. :p

Kathleen