That was wonderful for so many reasons. It's always a pleasure to hear Robert talk (not to mention demonstrate things in the way that he does here) and there was so much great information that came about as a result of the discussion. Thanks Kirill, your contributions were very sensitive and just right I thought.
Friend; balance your volumes... This stuff is important! We musicians aspire to know this stuff. Levin gives us great context to interpret Bach. Thank you. Glenn Gould once stated that Bach modulated to keys for color as one would pull stops on the organ. Levin's comparison to a Lady's clothes aisle at the department store is also evocative.
Regarding equal temperament, it's a fascinating idea to tune a Steinway, etc., in historical tunings. One could argue that if Bach tried a piano, he'd find the tuning system quite boring. That being said, I do think that keys don't sound the same in the sense of merely higher or lower. This is because very early on in our listening and playing experience, we learn which keys are the "plain keys," like C major and A minor. We don't ordinarily sing Christmas carols in keys with many sharps or flats for example. So when we encounter more "exotic keys," they shouldn't sound the same. I remember being amazed as a student by the tonal colouring of Schubert. Or to take a Bach example, the wide modulations of Contrapunctus IV from the Art of the Fugue. This comes through even with equal temperament and A=440..
Dear Mr. Levin, what you played at the beginning admiring Bach were common thorough-base progressions and schemata, first example modulation b minor to D Major is simply thorough-base progression 6-4-5-1 , than the so called page 1 minimal cadenza at the beginning of the first WTC 1 Prelude. These werr not Bach's "Genius" but common craftsmanship every musician knew at that time. So you are not talking about Bach but about the common music language of the baroque era.
Fascinating. But why assume it's a religious and not just a purely intellectual impulse? Five has no theological implications, as far as I know. And what independent evidence do we have that Bach considered the diatonic scale to be equivalent to the universe?
@@garrysmodsketches if we were to take Bach's (or Mozart's, or any religious composer, really) words, they really do think they are religiously compelled to make music. Religious characteristics sort of became inseparable from their music-making (and thus, the music itself).
IOW, why is traveling everywhere in the universe necessarily a theological impulse? Parsimony would suggest it's the OCD of an epochal genius, not necessarily anything more.
That was wonderful for so many reasons. It's always a pleasure to hear Robert talk (not to mention demonstrate things in the way that he does here) and there was so much great information that came about as a result of the discussion. Thanks Kirill, your contributions were very sensitive and just right I thought.
Starts at 4:30
Friend; balance your volumes... This stuff is important! We musicians aspire to know this stuff. Levin gives us great context to interpret Bach. Thank you.
Glenn Gould once stated that Bach modulated to keys for color as one would pull stops on the organ. Levin's comparison to a Lady's clothes aisle at the department store is also evocative.
Disagree on Wagner. It certainly was an important part of the way he thought for at least a while - see Lohengrin and the mentioned Die Meistersinger.
Regarding equal temperament, it's a fascinating idea to tune a Steinway, etc., in historical tunings. One could argue that if Bach tried a piano, he'd find the tuning system quite boring. That being said, I do think that keys don't sound the same in the sense of merely higher or lower. This is because very early on in our listening and playing experience, we learn which keys are the "plain keys," like C major and A minor. We don't ordinarily sing Christmas carols in keys with many sharps or flats for example. So when we encounter more "exotic keys," they shouldn't sound the same. I remember being amazed as a student by the tonal colouring of Schubert. Or to take a Bach example, the wide modulations of Contrapunctus IV from the Art of the Fugue. This comes through even with equal temperament and A=440..
Dear Mr. Levin, what you played at the beginning admiring Bach were common thorough-base progressions and schemata, first example modulation b minor to D Major is simply thorough-base progression 6-4-5-1 , than the so called page 1 minimal cadenza at the beginning of the first WTC 1 Prelude. These werr not Bach's "Genius" but common craftsmanship every musician knew at that time. So you are not talking about Bach but about the common music language of the baroque era.
nice straw man
Fascinating. But why assume it's a religious and not just a purely intellectual impulse? Five has no theological implications, as far as I know. And what independent evidence do we have that Bach considered the diatonic scale to be equivalent to the universe?
@@garrysmodsketches if we were to take Bach's (or Mozart's, or any religious composer, really) words, they really do think they are religiously compelled to make music. Religious characteristics sort of became inseparable from their music-making (and thus, the music itself).
20:25 And thus Bach invented every pop song chord progression ever.
IOW, why is traveling everywhere in the universe necessarily a theological impulse? Parsimony would suggest it's the OCD of an epochal genius, not necessarily anything more.
maybe because Bach was a religious nut, and in christianity god created the universe?