Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner What is the correct way to play Bach, musicaly?

Just a comment on the suggestions to listen to Bach's choral music.

That encompasses an enormous range - the St John and St Matthew Passion, the B min Mass, the motets and the cantatas. The cantatas aren't known as well as the two passions and the B min Mass but many are absolutely wonderful. Some of aria's in them are heart stoppingly beautiful. (Many pianists with know the chorale (i.e. hymn) setting 'Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring' which is lifted from his Cantata No 147 "Herz und Mund und Tat und Leben")

However, these works, together with, say, the violin concertos, etc reveal a different side to Bach to that of the keyboard works. Often much more lyrical - often sublimely beautiful.

Couldn't agree with you more stores,

That's why the suggestion is made for the OP to be more specific about the Bach work.

D4v3: If nothing else, listen to lots and lots of Bach's music... The piece you're working on, other pieces from that set, other keyboard works in general (partitas, English suites, French suites, Well Tempered Clavier), and then choral works/concerti/anything else.

The more Bach you listen to, the better!

You will become more familiar with the style, and that will guide you closer to the direction you're looking for.

If you present us a specific example, some members here might be able to give you even better pointers.

Some would take a good deal more brandy with their soda ... a menu of unadulterated Bach-listening sounds like perdition.

Some would take a good deal more brandy with their soda ... a menu of unadulterated Bach-listening sounds like perdition.

It's been a long time since I took lessons but as I recall when I played Bach for my teacher she would insist I not use the pedal. Is that standard practice?

wow, thanks for all the replies! Also, I did not intend for the question to be confusing, so my apologies there.

This is situation where my former teachers have allowed me to delv into advanced pieces with minimal exposure to Bach and polyphonic music; so, my current teacher is sending me back to the two-part inventions (#2 C min) to be exact.

I thought it would be as simple as finding the "theme" and bringing it out more than the accompanyment(sp?) and as the theme shows up in the other hand bring it out more there. In other words, all non theme parts arent as loud.

My teacher said that this was wrong and where I am confused is that I am getting the impression that Bach music is supposed to be played at the same volume for each "voice" but that you differentiate them via accents?

My teacher really wants me to stick to the Urtext editions on this era which have no dynamics or tempos so Im not sure how to shape the bach piece right now outside of my limited idea of louder theme vs softer non theme.

Also, apparently there is a "cross" mentality to Bach vertically understanding the chord structures of the piece and horizontally understanding the theme.

So I am to learn hands seperately memorized because the horizontal part of Bach music is apparently the hardest for students. After all of this I guess we will be transposing the piece inito different keys.

If that made any sense to you then you win +1 internets.

Here’s the first page of JS Bach’s Invention no. 2 ... Allegro moderato in C minor ... it is worth noting that Bach makes an exact repeat of certain RH outlines to the following measures in the LH ...

RH m1-2 is identically repeated in LH at m3-4, and similarly
RH m7-8 is identically repeated in LH at m9-10

Learning about “mordents” (upper and lower) is a necessary part of a musical education ... and Bach throws in a fair dose of these twiddly bits in his Inventions ... but glad I’ve graduated out of the Baroque Era.

No.

It's a view.

Not an uncommon view, but not predominant.

Err.., it's called counterpoint?

There's a story about Wanda Landowska where she was in disagreement with another pianist on how to play Bach. Eventually she said "Fine, you play Bach your way and I'll play Bach his way."

Supposedly, Casals, it was with whom she had the conversation.

just listened to young pianists playing in a competition, Bach was on the program, of course, and the different ways they played gave me a smile: with pedal, without pedal, with gradual dynamics, with terrace-dynamics, wthout any, fast and lightweight, heavy and ponderous, real piano sound, quasi harpsichord sound, and the funny thing is: Bach still was Bach, the music just can't be played to death, if only one has fingers, heart, and, yes, sometimes: brains.

Forgive me klutz old chap,

But I was trying to be helpful to a battling newcomer to the Bach-game ... who had only reached the third measure of the Invention ... the note was merely to forewarn of the typical Bach compositional approach ... switching identical note outlines.

The correct way to play Bach, is to play like Bach!

There is definitely no one way to play like bach.

Playing this music is not difficult. Grasping it in your mind is difficult. And you can only play so well as you understand it.

This week, my daughter had four 2-3 hour lessons dedicated, at my insistence, exclusively to the C-maj Invention. Not playing the piece so much as examining it, and even so they didn't go entirely through it in detail. My daughter was a bit overwhelmed, so we decided to stop after four sessions so that she can digest what she has learned. Every portion that they worked through she has been able without difficulty to play hands together, the evening when the teacher was not there.

I think that it is a mistake, viewing the Inventions as pedagogic material aimed at developing keyboard technique (independence of the hands, and so on). They are of course, but without a doubt they were written in the spirit of the apprenticeship of composition. Their most interesting content is conceptual.

Isn't that a contradiction?

No.

Well, if playing it isn't difficult, but grasping is, and your playing depends on your understanding then you do the math.

Sounds to me like a semantic difference on what "playing it is difficult" means.
And even maybe on what "playing it" means.

As is the case with many arguments, I think the two of you would realize there's no argument at all, except how you're viewing the words.