Stokowski's Bach AGAIN

[ardcarp]

It does something to my blood-pressure when yet another of JSB's inimitable organ works is served up by Rob in a GHASTLY Stokowski version. Whilst LS was a fine conductor and formed his own orchestra, etc, etc, he was IMO a TERRIBLE orchestrator and he reduces Bach's glorious textures to MUD, MUD, inglorious MUD. As for the big Rit at the end, well I pressed the 'off' button with a few chords left to run....has it finished yet?

[LeMartinPecheur]

I enjoyed it (at least mildly) as I sped to work in my rattly old car. Perhaps I would have loathed it on the home hifi, but probably not. I'm not clever enough to mind Stoky's orchestrations, and absolutely adored the Respighi one of BWV582 at last year's Proms. Should I retire behind sofa, or just sink into the eternal darkness ardcarp?

[ardcarp]

Chacun...

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I enjoyed it (at least mildly) as I sped to work in my rattly old car. Perhaps I would have loathed it on the home hifi, but probably not. I'm not clever enough to mind Stoky's orchestrations, and absolutely adored the Respighi one of BWV582 at last year's Proms. Should I retire behind sofa, or just sink into the eternal darkness ardcarp?

I too am not clever enough to mind. If fact I'm dim enough to actually go out and buy recordings of them. Far from muddying the texture, the use of orchestral instruments can clarify the lines and counterpoint. But I say this as an orchestrator and not as a scholar/purist.

[Richard Tarleton]

As for the big Rit at the end, well I pressed the 'off' button with a few chords left to run....has it finished yet?

I left it on for the Stoko/Bach but turned off when RC announced Night on the Bare Mountain. You can begin to see the association of ideas in RC's mind - a glimpse into the crucible of the playlist presenter's art

[Nick Armstrong]

I have to say I agree with the original poster. I love Bach re-scored for orchestra - the Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor reworked by Respighi, Elgar's transcription of the Fantasia and Fugue in C minor and above all, Schoenberg's phenomenal version of the 'St Anne' Prelude and Fugue BWV552 are among my favourites, for example (all done terrific justice by the BBC Phil under Slatkin on Chandos ). Compared with them, the Stokowski versions are lumpen and banal. Like aardcarp I can't stand to listen to them.

[arcades]

I too am not clever enough to mind. If fact I'm dim enough to actually go out and buy recordings of them. Far from muddying the texture, the use of orchestral instruments can clarify the lines and counterpoint. But I say this as an orchestrator and not as a scholar/purist.

I don't think I follow that, EA. Are you saying Bach was an incompetent composer whose "lines and counterpoint" lack clarity and require orchestral or other transcription to put them right? Or that Bach was hampered by the lack of a Romantic/early C20 symphony orchestra to write for and had to make do with what was to hand?

I'm not sure either sounds very likely to me, but it's an interesting idea. Presumably you'd be happy for someone to re-orchestrate to include electronics/amplification a Richard Strauss tone poem, on the grounds that it makes it possible to hear individual lines within the composition more clearly and adds up to a more impressive overall effect? :)

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I don't think I follow that, EA. Are you saying Bach was an incompetent composer whose "lines and counterpoint" lack clarity and require orchestral or other transcription to put them right? Or that Bach was hampered by the lack of a Romantic/early C20 symphony orchestra to write for and had to make do with what was to hand?

That wasn't quite what I said, arcades. I also have recordings of all Bach's organ works in their original form. But that doesn't prevent me from appreciating an orchestral transcription. Similarly, as a total Elgar fanatic, I have several version's of the great man's Organ Sonata, but I also have (and relish) Gordon Jacob's orchestration of it.

I'm not sure either sounds very likely to me, but it's an interesting idea. Presumably you'd be happy for someone to re-orchestrate to include electronics/amplification a Richard Strauss tone poem, on the grounds that it makes it possible to hear individual lines within the composition more clearly and adds up to a more impressive overall effect? :)

Electronics/amplification? You really know how to wind me up. But seriously, I do have electronic versions of Holst's Planets and Stravinsky's Firebird. So I expect I'd have to buy the electronic Alpine Symphony. Come to think of it, some recordings are very much electronically enhanced, e.g. Kempe's cowbells sounding as though they are right at the front of the orchestra. And that's nothing when compared with Karajan's oppressively close miking.

[salymap]

Ilike hearing the Stokowski arrangements occasionally, they remind me of my youth when they were played a lot. I don't see that they have any effect on Bach's original works which I regard as different pieces altogether.

[arcades]

Thanks EA :). It sometimes seems, in these conversations, as if older music (Bach) is regarded as wonderful in intention but sadly lacking in realisation (or: he only had absurd instruments like the harpsichord not a Steinway); so it's not only OK but positively a kindness to ignore Bach's instrumentation to make the stuff sound proper. Approaches to later music aren't generally so free. Perhaps it's felt that Strauss had all the materials at his disposal and Bach didn't?

Transcription is another thing, of course. The two sometimes seem to shade into one another, though: as if help is needed to turn the proto-music into real music. I do realise this is ground that has been covered before!

[Pabmusic]

Thanks EA :). It sometimes seems, in these conversations, as if older music (Bach) is regarded as wonderful in intention but sadly lacking in realisation (or: he only had absurd instruments like the harpsichord not a Steinway); so it's not only OK but positively a kindness to ignore Bach's instrumentation to make the stuff sound proper. Approaches to later music aren't generally so free. Perhaps it's felt that Strauss had all the materials at his disposal and Bach didn't?

Transcription is another thing, of course. The two sometimes seem to shade into one another, though: as if help is needed to turn the proto-music into real music. I do realise this is ground that has been covered before!

I've not read any previous discussions, but I do have a view about transcriptions. Most of these orchestral transcriptions of Bach are from the early twentieth century, before the widespread availability of cheap, quality recordings. In those days it was, quite simply, rare to hear any of Bach's organ music at all. (No R3, just imagine!) In such a climate, people were much more used to transcriptions (much of Elgar's orchestral stuff, for instance, was published in piano arrangement at the same time as the full scores were published) because piano was often the only way you could experience the piece. This phenomenon was really widespread (just glance at the adverts on thee back of old scores) and it produced a culture of expectation quite different from our own, in which orchestral transcriptions of Bach's organ works were acceptable. Add to this the fact that the early twentieth century was the apogee of orchestral brilliance - as witness Strauss, Elgar, Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Respighi, Suk and many others - and it's hardly surprising that such transcriptions were made. I think we need to remember, too, that Stokowski (who I suppose was the most prolific transcriber) was an organist himself, and was thus in the unusual position of knowing the music well.

It's quite interesting, I think, that the climate changed quite quickly, and by the 1940s it was unusual to find such transcriptions (except with Stokowski, of course) and this may be connected as much with the growth of broadcasting and recording, as with anything else. People could now hear Bach played on an organ. But this shouldn't diminish our admiration for the great transcriptions, which were creative labours of love and deep respect in most cases (Elgar even gave his an opus number).

[salymap]

Well argued Pabmusic. Even in the late 1940s/early 50s firms like Augener were selling quite a quantity of piano reductions, sometimes piano duet, of classical symphonies.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

True. Even in the 1960s, when I was at a boarding school, a musical friend and I would spend our evenings in the practice rooms, playing piano duet arrangements of Beethoven, Mozart and Haydn symphonies until we knew them inside-out. Of course, recordings and broadcasts were available by then but this did not diminish the value of the experience.

[Roehre]

Excellent posting, Pabmusic

[ardcarp]

I've come over as some sort of dreadful Bach purist! Oh dear. I've always thought that Bach works well played on almost anything, swung by Swingles, digitised...almost anything in fact...except muddied by Stokowski. I agree with a previous poster that many Bach orchestral transcriptions work well. One of the most moving experiences was to hear 'Jesu Joy' played by a handful of kids under 11 on violin, flute, electric bass guitar and chime bars.