bach cello suites vs. partitas sonatas

**glauber** · Jul-12-2005, 11:18am

Viktor mentioned "Mandobach" by Wolfhead Music in the previous page. Link to Wolfhead: http://www.wolfheadmusic.com/

Originally Posted by (wolfhead @ web site)

MandoBach features 16 selections from the Sonatas & Partitas for solo violin, carefully edited for performance on mandolin. The selections have not been simplified but merely edited with fingerings and other instructions that make the works more accessible on mandolin. Edited by John Craton.

**jaco** · Jul-12-2005, 12:19pm

Thanks Victor and Glauber, I pulled up the Wolfhead site but it doesn't list what pieces or S&Ps are included. Any idea? Are these just selected dance movements as opposed to entire S&Ps? Thanks, Mike

**John Craton** · Jul-12-2005, 2:42pm

Originally Posted by (jaco @ July 12 2005, 13:19)

I pulled up the Wolfhead site but it doesn't list what pieces or S&Ps are included. Any idea? Are these just selected dance movements as opposed to entire S&Ps?

Here is a link to a PDF of the contents page. Hope it helps!

**dfxlr** · Jul-12-2005, 6:32pm

Originally Posted by

Of all the Sonatas and Partitas, which one would be the easiest to start with from a technical standpoint?(for mandolin) I'm working my way through the third cello suite now but want to move up to one of the S&Ps. Thanks, Mike

After looking quickly over my copy of the Sonatas and Partitas, looking over my violin fingerings and phrasing, and attempting to play them on the mandolin, I'd suggest any of the later two "Double"s (of three) in the first partita. The first is VERY presto. The second two are easier. The second double (in 9/8 time) is the easier of the two. I play that particular double at about 65 BPM, with "one" on each downbeat (of threes). It's a nice tempo.

**Jim Garber** · Jul-12-2005, 6:37pm

One confusing thing I have been finding is: what distinguishes a sonata from a partita? Is it a difference in the actual form.

Actually the edition I have (Carl Fischer/Auer) has all these called Sonatas whereas the Icking (online) version distinguishes between the two.

So, dfxlr, when you say the first Partita is that the second piece (in B minor)?

Jim

**dfxlr** · Jul-12-2005, 8:16pm

Hi Jim

I'll try to make this simple.

It is a difference in the actual form. A quick way to differentiate a Sonata or Partita is the title of the individual "movement". A sonata will have it's movements titled as tempi or style (ie Siciliano).

A Partita usually consists of dances. Two of the partitas start off with the Allemanda. In a partita, you'll see stuff like Double, Corrente, Sarabande, Bourree, Giga, Ciaccona, Loure, Gavotte, Rondeau and Minuets.

These are Sonatas:
Sonta #1 in G minor (s. 1001)
- Adagio, Fuga, Sicilliano, Presto

Sonata #2 in A minor
- Grave, Fuga, Andante, Allegro

Sonata #3 in C Major
- Adagio, Fuga, Largo, Allegro Assai

Note that most of them are known by their tempo, or by their style (Sicilliano) or structrue (Fuga, or fugue). All three Sonatas have a Fugue in them. The Sonatas also have four movements.

These are Partitas:
Partita #1 in b minor (s. 1002)
- Allemanda, Double, Corrente, Double, Sarabande, Double, Tempo Di Bourree

Partita #2 in d minor (s. 1004)
- Allemanda, Corrente, Sarabanda, Giga, Ciaconna

Parita #3 in E Major (s. 1006)
- Preludio, Loure, Gavotte en Rondeau, Menuet I & II, Bourree, Giga

Note that Partitas are longer than Sonatas.

In most editions it's usually listed as

1. g minor (Sonata)
2. b minor (Partita)
3. a minor (Sonata)
4. d minor (Partita)
5. C Major (Sonata)
6. E Major (Partita)

So, yes, Jim. I was talking about #2, the b minor Partita.

Probably an overcomplication to your question, but oh well. Love your mandolins, by the way.

**Jim Garber** · Jul-12-2005, 8:28pm

Originally Posted by (dfxlr @ July 12 2005, 21:16)

Love your mandolins, by the way.

Which mandolins? BTW which bowlback do you play at night?

Thanks, dfxlr, for the clarification. I guess I was just trying to figure out why Auer calls them all Sonatas. I think most editions distinguish and put them in the order you mention.

Jim

**dfxlr** · Jul-12-2005, 8:53pm

Originally Posted by

Which mandolins?

I jokingly said that as I feel like a foreign violinist trying my hand at mandolining.

As of now, I'm playing on a friend's washburn as my personal mandolin is in the workshop.

Oh, and per Auer. Auer has his "Auerisms". Besides being the greatest teacher of violin, he certainly does some strange things - awkward fingerings, some weird bowings, and he actually said that Bach's two violin concerti (a minor and E Major) were not "worthy of their composer". Gotta love that Auer.

**Eugene** · Jul-12-2005, 9:11pm

Originally Posted by (jgarber @ July 12 2005, 19:37)

One confusing thing I have been finding is: what distinguishes a sonata from a partita? Is it a difference in the actual form.

However, the terms were still mighty variable in the baroque era. When Bach designated "partita," exactly as dfxlr says, you can take it to mean a suite of dance movements, only often a little more capricious or Italianate than those things Bach called "suite." If Bach wrote "sonata," again as dfxlr says, you can expect a small collection of abstract movements bearing no more title than a description of tempo (e.g., Allegro or Adagio) or form, not necessarily related to dance. However, "sonata" didn't need to mean any more than an instrumental work for one to a few players. A good many Italian composers were perfectly happy incorporating dance movements into things labeled "sonata." Corelli, e.g., distinguished between purely abstract sonatas and those that contained dances as "church" and "chamber" respectively. ...And if Weiss wrote a sonata or a suite, it was almost certain to mix abstract movements with dances. Pretty much any wee, single movement Scarlatti wrote gets called a sonata.

Things became more codified with the end of the baroque. "Sonata" still refered to a work for soloist or chamber ensemble, but also came to describe a form to emphasize contrast and development. The form came to pervade most instrumental composition, often in the first movement of classical and romantic multi-movement works, be they sonatas, symphonies, or concertos.

Of course, there also are always exceptions.

**Jim Garber** · Jul-12-2005, 9:24pm

Originally Posted by (dfxlr @ July 12 2005, 21:53)

Oh, and per Auer. Auer has his "Auerisms". Besides being the greatest teacher of violin, he certainly does some strange things - awkward fingerings, some weird bowings, and he actually said that Bach's two violin concerti (a minor and E Major) were not "worthy of their composer". Gotta love that Auer.

I have noticed a few of these awkward fingerings and just ascribed them to the necessities of being a classical violinist. I am happy to see that there are things that don;t make sense to a violinist. Is there a edition where the fingering largely does make sense.

Then again, I found that in the Hladky edition of the Beethoven mandolin pieces, that there were some odd fingerings for which I could find no real reason. That is why I opted for an urtext edition and played it more or less my way -- wrong or not.

Jim

**dfxlr** · Jul-12-2005, 9:55pm

Hey Jim

I'm glad you found your way to urtext. Most violinists in recent times worth their salt will use urtext and make their own fingerings. Editions with fingerings are usually used either by students (who frankly don't know any better) or those who don't want to make their own fingerings. Of course, many good violinists use editions because it makes sense to them and are close what they'd do by themselves or need guidance as they discern what is "right" for them.

Personally, I think the edition by Galamian makes the most sense, but I don't know how that would translate into mandolin. I'd have to play around with it. But, as far as a violinistic standpoint, it's the edition you love AND hate. You love it because it makes sense. You HATE it because he uses second position...a lot of it. Joachim's is good, too, but it ties notes together that some may not hear as one entire phrase.

My first teacher always taught me something about fingerings and bowings: simpler is better. As in engineering, something fancy has always room to gum up and get ruined. The simpler, the better. However, the desired tone is the objective. If simplicity doesn't get you musically where you want to be, then change it. Some of the weird fingerings you may be seeing is an attempt at a tonal effect. However, shifting all over during Bach isn't ideal - especially on a fretless board with the danger of hearing a shift's "scoop". In Baroque, simplicity of fingerings and shifting is paramount.

Finally, are you listening to recordings of the S&Ps? That may help.

**John Craton** · Jul-12-2005, 10:20pm

Originally Posted by (dfxlr @ July 12 2005, 22:55)

Personally, I think the edition by Galamian makes the most sense, but I don't know how that would translate into mandolin.

I have to agree with dflxr that the Galamian fingerings overall are the most sensible ... to me at least. But as it has been otherwise stated, one would do best to use the urtext editions when playing these on violin. Probably every violinist in history has modified even the "best" editions to fit his/her own hand. As far as translating fingerings to the mando, Galamian is the most conducive to this (far easier than Flesch, for example), but not in all cases by any means. My own mandolin editings for MandoBach should be viewed as suggested fingerings. What works well for me might be a nightmare for someone else -- just ask some of my students.

They're given as perhaps a good starting place, but as you work through them I'd be surprised not to find a number of pencilled corrections for facilitate your own hand.

**RSW** · Jul-13-2005, 2:11am

I like to study fingering options (suggestions) from the past and find that a lot can be gleaned from giving serious time to understanding the why and how of these performance aids. Of course, many of us only look at fingereings as solutions to technical expediency. I believe that some of the most extreme examples of so-called 'whacky' fingereings come from the great player/composers of the past. Campagnoli, Fiorilo (who started as a mandolinist) and Cartier are prime examples from the end of the 18th century where the fingereings are not to make the music 'easier' to play, rather more expressive and colorful. Auer's editions as well those of his famous students Heifetz and Elman demonstrate this approach. With Bach, we have a tendency to become such 'purists' that anything that strays from 'plain vanilla' approach to fingereing is considered bad taste. Yet, when you hear some 'enlightened' modern day historical performances of Bach, there are no qualms about the extreme use of rubato (it's beyond rubato) and all sorts rhythmic tricks to get over the tricky bits or in the act of over interpreting. I heard a performance the other day on the radio by some baroque violinist and I litteraly could not stomach the rhythmic free-for-all and turned it off before I found out who was playing. Originally I felt that our job as mandolinists was to play 'original' mandolin music, but I believe all music is worth challenging ourselves with the mandolin. In fact, the less 'mandolinistic, the better since it will force us to challenge our capabilities even more.

I play the Sonatas and Partitas from a copy of the original MS. There are a couple instances of fingereings written in (by Bach?) but, oddly enough, they are among the most obvious. On the mandolin, I would not hesitate to use tremolo if played on one of the double strung neapolitan type mandolins. There are a couple of recordings of the d minor partita, one by Neil Gladd another by a Japanese mandolinst, name escapes me right now. Neither uses tremolo but both succeed with the music regardless on the modern mandolin.

**jaco** · Jul-13-2005, 6:23am

Just a quick question regarding ornamentation. Many years ago I took a class on Baroque ornamentaion while at the Aspen summer program. I believe the book used at the time was by Robert Donnington. What is the refernce most widely used these days? Thanks all. Mike

**vkioulaphides** · Jul-13-2005, 7:57am

Oh, Eugene... the proverbial "kiss of death" in doctoral oral exams was the question "Could you please trace all the applications of the term Sonata across music history?" *malicious grin* (Argh! That takes one all the way to CZERNY and beyond...)

On the other side of your twofold point, yes: partitas, ordres, suites... the stuff that has kept musicologists employed.

On a per-movement basis, of course, (and apart from the occasional prelude), the norm is binary, "dance" form, AB :II: AB (thematically), AB :II: BA (tonally).
But I digress...

As per the original topic, I must admit that I have lived with the cello suites so long, in the original register, that I find them hopelessly "treble-y" on mandolin— just my impression, and one I don't expect anyone else to share.

My own taste —and only that— would favor works for violin on mandolin, as opposed to those originally written for the cello. De gustibus...

**Eugene** · Jul-13-2005, 10:39am

Thank God I'm not pursuing my DMA!

**vkioulaphides** · Jul-13-2005, 10:53am

Yet you are better informed —and more in a "living relationship" with music— than most. I have always tried to keep my training from ruining my education. #

**msarthe** · Jul-13-2005, 11:28am

Hello, first of all apologies for my english.
As this is my first post here I briefly introduce myself: My name is Mathieu Sarthe, I am a mandolin teacher in a national conservatory near Paris, I'm a concertist and I work regularly with french national symphonic orchestras and opera houses.

I played on the mandolin almost all of the S&P for violin (except BWV 1002 and the loure of BWV 1006 wich I think can't sounds "right" on the mandolin). I tried to play the cello Sonatas on a Calace's liuto cantabile, and I dont think they could sounds good on a mandolin. I think this music is a must-do for any serious student, because of it's difficulty and because nothing in the classical mandolin repertoire can match those pieces. Besides, apart the fugues, this music is not that difficult technically, any player with a solid technical background can manage them I guess. Musically they are of course incredibly hard, that's why they are interesting to study, and playing them in concert (especially the Ciaccona) is a tremendous experience for the player, even if I'm not sure anymore that the audience feels that way...

Some mandolinists in Europe are playing the S&P, partly because, I guess, that our instrument and the people playing it are overlooked in Europe. There is a kind of "see, I can do it, I'm a real musician" feeling about playing those pieces on the mandolin. I think that playing a Bach's Partita on a mandolin in concert dont valorize(?) our instrument for two major reasons : first, they are very challenging pieces for the "average" audience, I never meet somebody after one of my concerts that enjoyed the Bach's piece most of the rest of the program. Second, you always facing the risk of having a violonist or a conservative musician in the audience that dislike your work, and therefore will never change it's point of view towards the mandolin or the mandolinists in general.

I'm maybe wrong, but I don't think playing Bach's S&P on a mandolin will brings dramatic changes in the way this music is played or feel. The fugues are interesting I guess because one can play more legato than on the violin and works more with the harmony and the dissonances. But the mandolin lacks the violin's grandeur and expressiveness in the ligatura.

I wanted to write more things but I have no time and I'm very limited by my english, hope I was understandable though.

**vkioulaphides** · Jul-13-2005, 11:34am

Welcome, Mathieu!

First of all, your English is perfectly adequate. For many of us here (myself included), English is a foreign language.

Your points are well made and well taken. I will leave it for others to respond in detail.

Bienvenu!

Victor

**jaco** · Jul-13-2005, 1:29pm

Welcome Mathieu! Thank you for responding to our discussion. I think you communicate very well. Isn't it a shame audiences do not repond well to entire Bach Suites or anything they percieve as too long and boring. In classical guitar it is the same among musicians. If you can play an entire lute suite well you are considered proficient. If you play it well technically and musically you are repected. Then you play it in a recital and people go to the bathroom. I get so much personal enjoyment from this music I see it as a lifetime endeavor (on any instrument). I know of jazz musicians who study Bach seriously (Mike Stern, Jim Hall, etc.) I hope we hear more insight from you in the future. Mike (Michel en Francais)

**jmcgann** · Jul-13-2005, 2:35pm

Bach, of course, was the first jazz musician; or at least is revered by jazz musicians for his harmonic content in single note lines.

I love the whole of his body of work (not that I've heard it all, but that's what's good about getting older- more to look forward to!) and have enjoyed playing various parts of the sonatas and Partitas as well as some of the Cello suites.

My small experiences in classical music politics makes me wonder how an all-Bach mando recording would be recieved- there is always someone ready to rain on your parade regarding interpretation, tone, rhythmic feel, you name it...not to mention the outrage people get into by the mere fact you are using a plectrum instead of a bow...that stuff is the kind of annoyance you find in any style of music, but in the classical world, it's all the more vicious, perhaps because the academic side is so rigorous and produces so many "experts"

**John Craton** · Jul-13-2005, 2:59pm

Originally Posted by (jmcgann @ July 13 2005, 15:35)

there is always someone ready to rain on your parade regarding interpretation, tone, rhythmic feel, you name it...not to mention the outrage people get into by the mere fact you are using a plectrum instead of a bow

Ah, well said! And a great segue to lead me into one of my favorite rants

Having a fairly strong background in early music, it really annoys me how "purists" love to complain about transcriptions (playing something on an instrument other than the one for which a piece may originally have been written). This seems to be something of a modern development as transcriptions abound from all other time periods. Sure, it's great to hear music as it may have sounded to the original audiences (period instruments and all), but the bottom line is music is music! As a composer, I guess I should be one of those persnickety people who insist that my music should only be played exactly as I wrote it. But I don't see things that way. To me the composer "suggests" -- presents a musical thought or idea that is then taken up by the performer (perhaps on the instrument I envisioned, or perhaps on another with which he feels he can better articulate that idea) and interprets it, adding to it his own vision and artistry.

Just look at the works from the Middle Ages. In most cases we have little idea what instruments were in the composers' minds when they set them down on paper. Most likely they were played with whatever instruments were at hand, varying greatly with the troupe's personnel and instrumental holdings -- probably also with their venue. (They also improvised the music a great deal, but that's another discussion.)

Why do we get so bent out of shape these days when it comes to transcriptions? Do you folks agree we're too uptight ... or am I just full of it?

**WJF** · Jul-13-2005, 3:02pm

Originally Posted by (jmcgann @ July 13 2005, 15:35)

My small experiences in classical music politics makes me wonder how an all-Bach mando recording would be recieved- there is always someone ready to rain on your parade regarding interpretation, tone, rhythmic feel, you name it...

LOL ... I've witnessed this too John. The serious classical guys do seem to be kind of hard on each other, don't they?

Still, I'd love to hear an all mandolin version of the Sonatas & Partitas. I've heard that at some point down the road Chris Thile might record them but truthfully, I'd welcome and wholeheartedly support any well recorded / exectuted version of them on mandolin!

BTW ... and not to hijack a thread here, but will you be participating in any way at all at next week's "Summer String Fling"? I talked my way into the program (as a mandolin player) and was hoping to least be able to say "hi" to you at some point ...

**Eugene** · Jul-13-2005, 3:11pm

Originally Posted by (jmcgann @ July 13 2005, 15:35)

...that stuff is the kind of annoyance you find in any style of music, but in the classical world, it's all the more vicious, perhaps because the academic side is so rigorous and produces so many "experts"

Frankly, I think it's far worse amongst the bluegrass crowd. #Outside of academia and the world of publish-or-perish, I think classical musicians are much more accepting than implied...often...sometimes...maybe...

I am one of those characters who rants against transcription, especially regarding that for guitar. #I actually love artfully crafted transcription and do not remotely dislike the concept. #What frustrates and saddens me is when transcription is embraced as standard repertoire to the neglect of (or more often from ignorance of) music conceived for any given instrument. #The brave can read some of my diabolical advocacy here.

...And welcome Mathieu. #I enjoyed your insightful post.

**jaco** · Jul-13-2005, 3:26pm

Someone earlier posted about Neil Gladd. I looked up his website and lo and behold he has previously recorded the entire Partita in Dm (BWV 1004)including the infamous Chaconne. Unfortunatly this recording was issued on LP (one year before CDs were issued.) The site states there are no plans to reissue this on CD. Has anyone heard this? It's the only recording I've ever heard of on mandolin with an entire Partita. The site does say the LP is still available. May have to dust off that old turntable for this one.