Prelude and Fugue No. 8 in E-flat minor, BWV 853, from Bach's Well-tempered Clavier, Gulda pianist

[@노유경-p9w]

Happy as lazzaro♥️

[@enriquesanchez2001]

EXQUISITE interpretation by Mr. GULDA! ♥♥♥

[@MrGer2295]

Beautiful piano playing !

[@Mr.Dziej72]

@mallorcametal3 I know of a wonderful Bach scholar, who once remarked "when playing Bach on the piano, some pianists choose to not use the sustaining pedal, in an effort to make the piano sound like a harpsichord. But it doesn't work - it doesn't sound like a harpsichord, it simply sounds like a piano without the sustaining pedal, that's all, pure and simple".

[@MyzTiC44]

so awesome.. one of the most amazing pieces in the history of the whole classic... bach is just awesome, my favourite

[@joeyhardin5903]

Fugue starts at about 4:35

[@mwu42251]

@mallorcametal3 I agree, but I think pianists avoid using pedal because of the clarity. Adding pedal creates a very different effect. Bach's instrumentation doesn't really matter that much, since you could play any piece of his on any instrument and it would sound similar. It is absolute music in a sense. I simply think the clarity/purity of Bach's work (unclouded by overlapping harmonies) is the one of the most important parts in finding his style.

[@randomvideo098]

That is exactly what I said: "I think it takes both creativity and labor to accomplish something like this beautiful piece of music." Bach was a creative and musical genius who worked hard to use that genius. The only thing I am confused about is why you insist on arguing and insulting so much, both of us were just forming an opinion.

[@spurtfather]

I first heard this music as part of the soundtrack to Yuri Norstein's animation "Tale of Tales", the combination of Norstein's images and the melody are deeply moving in a way it's hard to express. Bach is one of a handful of artists who, for me, get right to the core of things and produce work which truly deserves the label "Profound".

[@Poempoe]

@mallorcametal3 the main reason not to use the pedal is that the piece can become less transparant, sustain doesn't ruin the piece, but if you are over using it, it will become one wave of sound and the melodic lines can't be seperated from eachother.

[@rapperscanttakeahint]

@Anononononononymous I completely agree! I've been learning this piece for the last few months and every single one of the few hundred times I've played it through I've been stunned at how fantastic those few bars are

[@ttomace]

I agree with the idea of yours. In fact a man who worked hard is much more great and amazing than a genius who is lazy or negligent. Whether Bach is one of that or not I dont know. But I do know that his music is wonderful-and few people would ever again be able to compose the way he did.

[@EcstasyJesus]

The trills are perfect!

[@mericozer559]

Tale of Tales...

[@Ivan_1791]

Meriç Özer Yes. :)

[@grimaulkin]

This is the best rendition on youtube that I have found. Pianists who play Bach and use the pedal don't understand Bach.

[@vector8310]

Much you commend but wow! the magnificent trills

[@randomvideo098]

Well, if this music is not a product of hard work, then what is? Bach was a master at his art, it's true, but that doesn't mean he didn't have to work at it. I think it takes both creativity and labor to accomplish something like this beautiful piece of music. It does not help to be a genius if you do not want to improve and use your talent. Also, please refrain from calling people that just have an opinion "idiot".

[@ThatRachGirl]

Extremely well-put, sir. I think the same as well. :)

[@solarwindlass]

I'm learning this fugue - finding it extremely slow going, even for a Bach fugue. This is my favourite interpretation on You Tube, though. Lovely, bell-like tone and much more colour than the others. It's a long fugue, and most interpretations get tedious by halfway. It's tough to keep the landscape varied without killing the continuity.

[@pekkapelkonen9479]

Exceptionally moving. Touching in a way which is hard to explain. Impossible to? Why? What did Bach express in this prelude? And Gulda interprete? This corona-summer I happened to read an analysis of the compositions in the "Das Wohltemperierte Klavier". What is said about this prelude? "It is a Tombeau-kind of composition. From a baroque figurative perspective, the dotted rhythms may be seen as a reference to the knocking of death on the door of a dying person." So, this prelude from Bach - is it "Abschied vom Leben"? Farewell to life? Gulda did have a weak heart. He knew - and felt? - what he was playing. Interpreting. Da capo? Definitely: 'no man is an island' - just like John Donne wrote (and Hemingway cited)..

[@naruto00nix]

maybe his muse was just his love for composing music :) if one is able to channel this love into creation incredible masterpieces can be born of course one needs to have studied plenty beforehand :D

[@hbmp88]

@mallorcametal3 You are somewhat right. But that is besides the point. Bach wrote his pieces without pedal, so it sounds a lot differently than intended because he designed his pieces nicely to the technology available.

[@philipmcniel4908]

To me, it seems that calling this a work of "genius" acknowledges the work that went into it. Edison once said, "Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration."

[@4ubi]

sooooo powerful and such a reasonable music that will make it trough the cunturies.. and a pianist who will, too:):):)

[@Johannes999999999]

@KindFurryBoy I believe it is both hard work and genius. He could not have written such a well-constructed piece without plenty of both.

[@11Kralle]

@KindFurryBoy If Bach wasnt a music-genius, who is/was? Every composer after him has to compete with Bachs work - a work which hasnt been fully understood by musicologists up til now. Most people listen to crummy interpretations of bachs music and forgot to analyze the notes in their original facon. Bach was an autodidact, he combined the french and the italian style to the galant (german) style, contemporaries saw him as old fashioned, but his neglection of opera makes him the main genius BACH

[@Gerhold102]

comparing. For me music is essentially an emotional experience; analysis a far second in importance. I will maintain though that Bach had a ready access to some Muse, whether in his unconscious, the supernatural (which I doubt) or in the inspiration of his antecedents - or a combination of all three. Thanks for responding so diplomatically.

[@Rokudammela]

LOVELY

[@jsnauwaert]

@KindFurryBoy I think this is a non issue. Of course was, as he admitted himself, a very hard worker. AND he was a BIG genius, the biggest music has ever seen. There is no mutual exclusion. One is not born a genius, but gifted (tremendously so, in the case of Bach), but that coupled to relentless work gives birth to true genius.

[@BachFlip]

BWV 853's fugue strikes me as almost a preliminary study for the Art of Fugue - there are similarities between the themes, and the treatment with inversions, the various stretti and the augmentations. I wonder if this fugue was on Bach's mind when he started AoF?

[@naruto00nix]

i would say you were both on the same terms to begin with u both approve of the hard work and also of the genius so whats there to really argue about

[@Chickengirl005]

I personally think Sviatoslav Richter performed this composition best, but it's hard to find a clear recording of it, Most of what I've found are live recordings with a lot of background noise. :c This is really nice though, probably the best I've found after Richter.

[@SergejKlassen]

@wawa314159, I guess you didnt really listen to this music... By the way, this Fugue is also three-voiced...

[@TheMrSteinway]

For the ease of viewer, 4:26 is the fugue

[@jojok5049]

04:33 beginning of the fugue

[@jojok5049]

08:39 anfang vierte Durchführung

[@hellomate639]

There's a problem with this: many others tried just as hard, but didn't reach the same level. That's how you know "genius."

[@pierocampi2350]

deepest execution of bwv876 prelude & fugue (d sharp or e flat? who can tell?) I've ever heard. running rings around Gould's.

[@pierocampi2350]

Oops, bwv853......

[@alainamar898]

It's e flat.

[@klop4228]

@@alainamar898 the silly thing is that the prelide is in E-flat and the fugue in D-sharp. Which is, honestly, complete nonsense (and you'd find few people today who'd do that), but he was showing off well-temperament, so I guess he gets a pass :P

[@alainamar898]

@@klop4228 Considering the will of Bach to show off well-temperament it's a clever nonsense.

[@klop4228]

@@alainamar898 absolutely!

[@solarwindlass]

genius actually means one who creates. Same root as generate and genetics. That's why a football coach is not a genius, not matter how good he is. That's why a performer is not a genius not matter how good she is. There has to be an act of unique creation. That is genius. Possibly Glenn Gould, certainly Bach, maybe Marlon Brando. Think NEW, and you have genius. It does not mean the same thing as brilliant, super talented, really really smart, ultra savvy or anything else. Think CREATE.

[@1973gs]

@KindFurryBoy work AND genius

[@linguistmuz]

@KindFurryBoy Well, it's true that people tend to forget the amount of work spent on something that flows so effortlessly as a good musical performance or an excellent musical composition. But there are so many (even professional) composers and performers out there who work so incredibly hard but remain on a pretty mediocre level. I feel that in the end, work is irrelevant - it's the result that counts. And to get results, you must have the talent.

[@jamesmitchell6925]

D sharp or E flat? Cast your votes!

[@caseMasterxL]

which portion? the prelude is scattered d sharp dancing on tip-toes around the e flat intro to the fugue, the main piece..

[@caseMasterxL]

and take note that "prelude" meant something far different than we think of it today; prelude in the time of this composition could be used as as an "intro-proper" as we think of it today, as well as a fleeting chord note introducing each new sentence. I can see how calling this e flat can be confusing, especially in minor scale. the intended work, the subtext, within the sentence is purely e flat even though the shiny object that captures our intention is in d sharp. subtextual fugueism in this period is akin to modern rap with a "techno" [electronic] hook. everyone focuses on the rap, but the recurring hook is firmly based in electronica.

[@joeyhardin5903]

E flat, I have the music

[@PaulJones-oj4kr]

trivial question

[@josephjacobshagen5108]

Eb Minor

[@erosmigo]

fugue at 4:33

[@Bbzije1]

music and all forms of creativity are perceived individually albeit impacted and manipulated by our peers the composer is intimatly involved with their work and perhaps the whole idea is to have the audience feel what they are trying to convey timeless ? I doubt it although the simplicity and the melody is (reffering to this piece) music is simply for sake of the question feeling and embellishment

[@paramourrock]

Is this polyphonic??

[@VaSavoir2007]

Yes.

[@klop4228]

Only the fugue

[@deezlesteezle]

@KindFurryBoy Hell, you can't even recognize it.

[@walterleipzig]

Reread the offending statement: "I wouldn't call this a work of genius, but instead of hard work." Kindfurryboy claims IMHO that hard work is a SUFFICIENT condition for Bach's output, while you claim that it is a NECESSARY condition, but genius is a necessary condition as well. Don't confuse the issue - go for intellectual clarity.

[@Paulius8774]

I think it's a little bit silly to 100% copy harpsichord sound when you playing the piano and don't use the another options like a pedal .

[@Gerhold102]

KindFurryBoy was subtly denying the evidence of some other 'ingredient' in JS Bach's work other than hard work. I couldn't define genius - and I think it's an oft-misused term - used by many to infer the supernatural. On these webpages the God figure is often invoked to explain the wonderful music of Bach but there are many who cannot discern what I, you and many, many others can in his creations. Then the emotional response isn't there - for some music is a critical exercise - dissecting and

[@Geron1mo1]

So what is a genius for you hm?

[@cj5273]

Too slow for my liking. I like Gulda and Richter but Gould’s WTC cannot be beaten.

[@luisbaldas2118]

Lazzaro felice..

[@polymath7]

Ah, what's this then? Snark? Nothing wrong with this in itself, but I seem to recall you some months ago admonishing me for the same. As with almost all tone trolls, your true concern is not at all the degree of civility, only its direction.

[@polymath7]

Never mind It appears you were far less self righteous than I'd remembered you being.

[@deezlesteezle]

@KindFurryBoy Wow I know you said this a year ago but I still have to reply... Cleary you do not appreciate the intellectual depth...

[@stevesalke5404]

Wow, I can't believe the amount of arguments over this piece and Bach himself. Can we all agree that Bach was indeed a genius and that his compositions are timeless? NONE of you (and I hope that you have had some formal music theory study or training if you are arguing here) can refute the fact that most, if not all, music theory is based on the works of Bach. You can argue his music's relevance or beauty to you personally, but you cannot argue its merits. Any further questions?

[@Pianomundo]

Good, but definitely not for me.

[@walterleipzig]

Calling Bach's music a product of hard work is being totally ignorant of the range and the quality of his prodigious output - the St Matthew's Passion, the Christmas Cantata, the Goldberg Variations, and so on. Only an idiot could make a statement like this - which would be denied by every musician, dead and alive.

[@angryjalapeno]

What a cheap shot. So genius = someone who doesn't study his art? That it just materializes from nowhere? I would love where you got that idea as I can't think of any "genius" who created something from nothing.

[@vladmelamed985]

Relax. Bach is just a collection of different authors. they did't have copyright in 17th century and "Bach" means "musician". The project "Bach" is made up in 19th by his descendants and Mendelssohn

[@pierocampi2350]

Vlad, did you smoke something weird?

[@vladmelamed985]

Take all the music Bach wrote, spread it on timeline of his adult life. He "wrote" the hour of perfect music per week, including time of sickness, marriage and , by the way, nobody paid him for creating music, people didn't have the copyright yet. if u still believe in bullshit , u make count me as heavy smoker, not prob.

[@vladmelamed985]

especially weird concert for violoncello which couldn't be performed at his time - cello wasn't invented yet!!!!

[@pierocampi2350]

There are many cellos built by Nicolo Amati, who was born in 1596, and died in 1684...........

[@vladmelamed985]

if u'd dig into history of cello invention, u will see that modern cello became popular only in 18th centery, and all the cellos are available for Bach could'nt play his passages. One music lover wrote ecstatic book about it, claiming "Genius of Bach wrote music for unknown player of the same level, because on old cello type his concerts are practically impossible to play". The same story as with Shakespeare. Lie, Lie,Lie.

[@benroo89]

That is rubbish. Art is 90% talent. Having that talent is motivation enough; the music has to come out of them. There's no way that someone as talanted as Bach couldn't be successful in music without being incredibly unlucky.

[@cristianaguilar8445]

fugue at 4:27