TELEFUNKEN
1 LP - SAWT 9552-B - (p) 1968
5 LPs - SCA 25022-T/1-5 - (c) 1972
2 CDs - 8.35778 XD - (c) 1989

KONZERT FÜR 2 CEMBALI & TRIPELKONZERT






Johann Sebastian BACH (1685-1750) Konzert für 2 Cembali C-dur, BWV 1061 - Streicher Continuo

18' 32"

- (Allegro)
7' 23"
A1

- Adagio ovvero Largo
5' 13"
A2

- Fuga
5' 56"
A3

Konzert (Tripelkonzert) a-moll für Flöte, Violine und Cembalo, BWV 1044 - Streicher und Continuo

21' 58"

- Allegro
8' 48"
B1

- Adagio ma non tanto e dolce
5' 44"
B2

- Alla breve
7' 26"
B3





 
Gustav LEONHARDT, Cembalo *
Anneke UITTENBOSCH, Cembalo
FransBRÜGGEN, Flute
Marie LEONHARDT, Barockvioline
LEONHARDT-CONSORT
- Antoinette van den Hombergh, Sigiswald Kuyken, Violine
- Wim ten Have, Lodewijk de Boer, Viola
- Dijck Koster, Violoncello
- Anthony Woodrow, Violone
- Fred Nijenhuis, Kontrabaß

Gustav LEONHARDT, Leitung
Instrumente:
- Cembalo I (Martin Skowroneck, Bremen 1962, nach J. D. Dulcken, Amsterdam 1745)
- Cembalo II (Hubbard, Boston, nach original)
- Flute (Friedrich Huehne, Boston, bach Hotteterre, c.1700)
- Violine (Jakob Stainer, 1676)
- Violinen (Klotz, 18. Jahrh.)
- Viola (Giovanni Tononi, 17. Jahrh.)
- Viola (deutsch, 18. Jahrh.)
- Violoncello (Giovanni Battista [II] Guadagnini, 1749
- Violone (deutsch, 19. Jahrh.)
- Kontrabaß (deutsch, 18. Jahrh.)

Alle Instrumente in Barockmensur
Stimmung ein Halbton unter normal

 






Luogo e data di registrazione
Hervormde Kerk, Bennebroek (Holland) - Febbraio & Dicembre 1967


Registrazione: live / studio
studio

Producer
Wolf Erichson


Prima Edizione LP
Telefunken "Das Alte Werk" | SAWT 9552-A | 1 LP - durata 40' 30" | (p) 1968 | ANA
Telefunken "Das Alte Werk" | SCA 25022-T/1-5 | 5 LPs - durata 212' 39" | (c) 1972 | ANA | (Sämtliche Cembalokonzerte)


Edizione CD
Teldec Classics | LC 3706 | 8.35778 XD | 3 CDs - durata 76' 42" - 72' 00" - 63' 57" | (c) 1989 | ADD | (Sämtliche Cembalokonzerte)

Cover

"Hofmusik in ismaning", aus dem Gemälde von Peter Jakob Horemans (Original in Bayerischen Nationalmuseum, München).

Note
-














Concerto for Two Harpsichords in C major, BWV 1061
The C major Concerto for Two Harpsichords is presumed to have been composed as early as circa 1730, and thus to be one of the first of Bach’s harpsichord concertos; it is, at the same time, one of the few that were not written as a transcription of an earlier model but evidently conceived from the outset as harpsichord concertos. The tendency of this entire group of works to transform the Italian concerto through thematic and polyphonic intensification of the writing, in conjunction with the tendency already inherent in keyboard writing to extend the solo parts more and more powerfully in relation to the tutti, and to base them on thematic substance rather than free “concertante” style, already leads to consequences in this work that almost eliminate the concerto tradition. It has been noted ever since Forkel that the tutti of the outer movements is almost dispensable, and that the work could also be performed by two harpsichords alone. The tutti sections have indeed been kept very brief, and are almost only reinforcements of the solo parts or realizations of their latent harmony. On the other hand, however, they can only be dispensed with from the point of view of the part-writing, on no account from the formal scheme, since they at least divide up, in a rudimentary “concerto” manner, the impetuous, surging flow of movement of the solo instruments, based on almost uninterrupted semiquaver motion. The frequently encountered suggestion to play the work “senza ripieni”, as domestic music for two harpsichords is, from this point of view, but a recommendation not to take old Bach and his intentions as a composer too seriously.
Thematic work, pushing all concertante traditions and elements completely into the background, already dominates the first movement with remarkable consistency. The first tutti (bars 1-12) is constructed according to the Italian concerto tradition in that it is tonally self-contained, but it is at the same time articulated through motifs and frequently “concertante” in itself (with alternations between tutti, first and second harpsichord). There follows the first solo section which-again traditional in the foreground-modulates to the dominant. It does not, however, do this figuratively, but lets a “subsidiary theme” develop through the dialogue between the two harpsichords which, in its “cantabile” character, already suggests the contrast in character between the themes essential to the later sonata form. Immediately after this there begins an intensive thematic treatment of 
both ideas which dominates the entire remainder of the movement: with the initial motif of the first theme, its continuation motifs, the second theme, confrontation of first and second theme in dialogue style and modulation, based on a new treatment of the initial motif, back to the tonic, which is reached again shortly after the middle of the movement. The recapitulation that now begins, back in the tonic and denoted by the repetition of the opening bars, which would correspond to the concerto tradition, reveals itself at once to be but an “apparent recapitulation”, from which a new, second development begins that is harmonic and, in the fragmentation of the smallest thematic motifs, still more intensive and far-reaching. The traditional ritornello is not suggested until the very end of the movement, through repetition of the first bar and the greatly modified second theme. This movement, in which there is hardly a “concertante”, hardly a nonthematic bar, is brought to a powerful close by a broad cadenza.
The first movement, so extraordinarily concentrated and so irresistible in its impetus of motion and its energy, is followed by a Siciliano for the two harpsichords without orchestral accompaniment that is no less concentrated, but more intimate, reflective and almost a little austere. It is a strict four-part invention that intensifies its uninterrupted imitatory style into canonic strictness in places, and suggests a free ternary form. The Finale returns to the spirit of the first movement, intensifying it in the strictness of a big concertante fugal structure. The first harpsichord begins with a three-part fugal exposition, which is repeated by the second harpsichord with interchanged entries of the parts. The third “presentation” distributes the entries between the two harpsichords, and lets the tutti parts join in “colla parte”. A strongly modulating episode for the two harpsichords forms the transition to an abridged and simplified repetition of the first section (one entry each of the theme with an obligato counterpoint in the upper voice in Harpsichord I and II, and free and modulating repetition of these entries with the tutti). There follows a second, very shorter episode and a new, incomplete “presentation” of the subject with two entries in the tutti, from which-quite unexpectedly, -there evolves a section that can be designated “development” not in the sense of fugue form but of sonata form: treatment of the initial motif of the fugue subject and the motifs of the first episode. The sequential treatment of the opening of the subject, striving upward from the low bass register, imparts a dynamic to the close of this “development” that leads in magnificent intensification to the crowning conclusion of the movement. Here the subject of the fugue is quoted once more as if rounding off the movement in ritornello style, and at the same time like its apotheosis in a highly dynamic fugal form. It appears in octaves in the bass of both harpsichords (thus in a kind of organ registration) with upper voices in free counterpoint, at the close in a powerful chordal cadence.

Triple Concerto in A minor, BWV 1044
All three movements of Bach’s Triple Concerto in A minor, written for solo flute, violin and harpsichord, are based on earlier compositions. The first and third movements come from his Prelude and Fugue in A minor for clavier (BWV 894). The Adagio comes from the Organ Sonata in D minor (BWV 527). These new versions (1) probably date from the period he spent in Leipzig after 1730, during which he re-arranged several violin concertos as clavier concertos for the benefit of the Collegium musicum, and also wrote some works for several concertante instruments. The standard of these other works, however, cannot be compared to that of the Triple Concerto. Here such radical alterations take place, the original musical conceptions undergo such a complete remoulding that, in the first and third movements particularly, they are scarcely recognisable. The polyphonic treatment of the thematic material, merely hinted at in the original keyboard work, is here thoroughly expounded. In the outer movements the interplay of the solo instruments is quite magnificent; sometimes they partner one another, sometimes they play seperately with the orchestra, rivalling one another in true concertante style. This is a rare example of perfection and balance in the face of the particular difficulties that a concerto of this nature entails. The C major Adagio movement stays relatively close to the original organ sonata. The Trio is shared out between the three solo instruments. The fact that the harpsichord has the upper melodic part, the flute the second part and the violin a mere pizzicato accompaniment suggests that in this concerto there is a certain grading of the soloists.

(1) It is Gustay Leonhardt’s opinion that the Triple Concerto is based on compositions by Bach (Prelude and Fugue in A minor and the Organ Sonata in D minor middle movement), which, however, were probably arranged for this concerto by J. G. Müthel (1728-88), his pupil in 1750; one of the few original copies that we have was by Müthel.