Added: 4 years ago
From: tneorg
Views: 67,658
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (201)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I saw him at the Performing Arts Center in Milwaukee in the mid 1970's. Arguably one of the greatest organists of our time.

  • Amazing.

  • I saw him play and met him backstage in the 70's. He was a delightful man and an absolute master at infecting the audience with the same enthusiasm he had for the music.

  • I had met Virgil in '76 (i think it was) at Hammond Castle. He was an amazing man, and great performer,,,organist.

  • 7:00 is one of my favorite moments in music - this is extremely difficult to play even for seasoned masters

  • 7:00 is one of my favorite moments in music

  • I will always think of my Dad when I hear Virgil Fox play Bach...

  • "Purists are barnacles on the ship of music"

    Virgil Fox

  • I have grown to at least like Fox's tempo in the fugue.

  • It's hard to believe Fox was slowly dying of cancer when this recording was made. He may have been physically sick, but he was emotionally in high spirits as he took his Bach interpretations to the limits of human ability and sonic brilliance.

    As for those who lament performances that aren't to their notions of academic precision, just how would you know how Old Man Bach would have played them? If you can provide that information, we'll listen to you.

  • my God! I'm close to tears. Awesome!!!

  • Amazing organist ! He is feeling and experiencing this music!

  • DOES ANYONE ELSE THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE SUPER MARIO BROTHERS FROM 2:32 TO ABOUT 2:45 ???

  • all i know is this guy is good

  • @ the discussion below - Of course Bach didn't play like Fox...Try playing like Fox on a 12 rank tracker action organ and see how you do...

    Organs were developed to provide a more cohesive writing process for the composer than piano or harpsichord and to better SIMULATE a full symphony. NOT to replace one.

    Just appreciate the talent of the artist and stop trying to dissect him.

  • 2. Interpretation, expression of the elements of the construct and the construct in itself, the pieces and the whole and the whole to the pieces and how it all fits together in order to augment certain elements and diminish other elements and keep even some elements to the same in order to achieve an emotional and thoughtful interpretation of the piece in question to resonate to the musician and/or to resonate with the audience as best thought. Either way, unique to the musician. INTERPRET>PLAY.

  • 1. Construct and general parameters of the art by composer... composer creates the construct of the idea of a piece of art. Just putting this out there. The piece in question is just a line of notes, rhythm, dynamics, harmony, instrumentation (construct) of an idea of the construct in the many possibilities of music to a specific construct to a more specific construct within that music that becomes this piece in question.

  • Of course Bach didn't play like Fox! We can largely agree that we are fighting our own points here by trying to figure out where the overlap starts and stops. Bach was awesome! Virgil Fox was awesome! Bach simply wrote the idea of a specific variation in a general concept in music! Virgil Fox interpreted it in his own way that was meaningful to him and/or felt would resonate with his audience. 1. Written Score of Art. 2. Interpretation by player of his color (crayons in or out of lines, shade).

  • i'm so glad we have any video at all of this great performer playing the greatest music written.

  • One of the truly amazing things about this performance is that he plays as if there isn't anyone else in the entire room. It is just him and the organ!

  • An artist interprets art...that is all...You like it or you don't....You are free to interpret as you wish.

  • let the resulting art stand on its own two feet.

  • just awesome

  • HOLY SHIT, GREAT PERFORMANCE! That organ has 5 keyboard! FIVE KEYBOARDS! XD

  • AMAZING

  • I give props to anyone who can artistically interpret 200 year old music consisting of 200,000 notes from memory, using only 5 keyboards and pedals.

  • This guy's a fucking maniac!

  • i like 1:29 to 1:35

  • I cannot understand those who have critics about this guy. Common, is your ego that big it blinds you that much? This dude is a genius and gave is whole life to achieve what he as done. So if you don't understand, at least give respect to a master.

  • @musael22 I completely agree with you.

  • Excelent...

  • Virgil Fox was a genius and there can be no quibbling about it. He was a consummate artist and was dedicated to sharing his love for the great masters with the masses. What can be wrong with that? He had a huge personality, but he was no musical clown. He was a serious musician who, to the very end of his life, gave himself to playing these great works. Let us be grateful for this much!

  • these arguments are such a lollercaust.

    Bach and his baroque ilk jammed so hard they didn't have time to write everything down. we will never EVER know what it sounded like so that is our curse and we can choose to be boring or be fun. i choose fun. GFY, PYT.

  • No-one really knows how Bach played. OK, I bet it wasnt like Fox. But were not listening to Bach, or to an C18th organ with C18th ears. Arguably Foxs personality gets in the way of Bachs music. But maybe Fox is so popular as he wasnt so in awe of Bach as to be afraid to include his own personality. Arrogant? So what! Hes a performer. And it was Bachs greatness that inspired Fox to play it in the first place. Cant we enjoy it for what it is, not what we think it should be? Sorry to rant!

  • @mapps101 oh pish posh -- bach was LOUD... he even said of his leipzig organ, 'let's let her breathe a bit...", and then proceeded to play the thing to the heavens in honor of god almighty.... virgil fox may not be technically perfect, but he plays with the spirit of bach unlike mere technicians, and if you don't get that, i am sorry for you...

  • @bbbbmer I think that's what I was trying to say... that's why I used the word "arguably" to show that some may argue in that way. I'm all for getting into the spirit of the music, regardless if it's the way we think Bach would have performed, or if it's Fox. I still bet that Bach didn't play like Fox though!

  • @mapps101 Very well thought out comment. Mr Fox had terminal cancer, was probably in pain but determined to honour his prior engagements despite this. There are many organists today with a similar flamboyant style - it is part of their musicality. Had J S Bach had at his disposal this wonderful modern organ with all its bells and whistles, the mind boggles at what he would, not might have done at the console.

  • amazing performance!!!!!! very original

  • I am sure Mr. Fox could have slowed down his playing, used only one manual and one set of stops, and hired someone to make a bad recording of him in some European cathedral... After all, he had been playing since age ten, went to Peabody, and taught at Peabody... But that's evidently not what some people like.

    Some people also like artists, despite how photographers clearly make more lifelike and accurate pictures. Some people prefer beauty, awe, and style to minutely better technique.

  • And what exactly is "Heavy Organ"? Like over 3500 pounds that can be pulled by F-150 truck with double wheels, or is it much heavier then that? Could never figure that out, darn it. Such art and not defined properly.

  • Wikipedia say: Virgil Keel Fox was an American organist, known especially for his flamboyant "Heavy Organ" concerts of the music of Bach. These events appealed to audiences in the 1970s who were more familiar with rock 'n' roll music and were staged complete with light shows. Clasical music says: La Garbage.

  • And btw, Bach is not language of expression . Stravinsky and Debussy are language of expression. Bach music is language of precision.

  • @midiborg So, I can play Debussy horribly wrong and no one will care, so long as I express myself? And I guess that means I could play Bach using only a mixture of reed stop and no one will get annoyed or critical in the slightest, so long as I hit the notes? I think there should probably be a balance; and if people want to express themselves through Bach, because they happen to like his music, that's fine with me.

  • I do respect your position, and I do understand you play Bach. There is one thing that one needs to understand and respect Bach is not just another jack in the crowd of many. This is the man that have written Das Wohltemperierte Klavier, and if you ever tried to tune a grand piano with no digital tuner you know there is more to tempered scale then just pushing keys and doing match with acoustics.

  • Dickhead.

  • Therefore Bach is not open to interpretation, just like Tchaikowski , , Rachmaninov or Haydn are not open to interpretation. Anyone that tries to play Bach like a Rock@Roll retard is either confused or absolutely and totally cocky and ignorant retard. Do you know county song about Plastic Jesus? I am beyond understanding why such great place as US allows clowns to butcher art and to make American music look bad.

  • And I completely understand your position! I hate it when these terrible American artists go around and ruin good music, especially sacred music. Have you seen the video of Toccata and Fugue on the violin with drums and other desecration in the background? It's awful! I simply do not understand how changing the stops and playing maybe a little too loudly makes this version such an awful interpretation. He's making use of the organ's capabilities, which I'm sure Bach wrote music to do.

  • If he stood up there with an electric guitar, I would cry. Even the Trans-Siberian Orchestra disappoints me with how they ruin good music, just like you are describing. But I find that using quieter stops to start a prelude or fugue and then louder, powerful stops on all the ending chords is a perfectly valid interpretation. I can never see Bach's own stop suggestions in the music, I can only assume to play quieter when it seems logical. I'm guessing Mr. Fox thought somewhat similarly.

  • Bach was a genius. That's a fact. I consider him to be my favorite composer, and don't like to see his work destroyed. Maybe I will just need more education to understand how people like Karl Richter interpret Bach more respectably than Virgil Fox interprets Bach. When you look at it, everyone who plays Bach has their own interpretation. I just can't see at this point how their really is a "correct" interpretation.

  • missed at 0:47 - 0:49, 1:00 - 1:01, 1:10 - 1:11, 1:10 - 1:21, 1:25 - 1:26, 1:30 - 1:31, 1:55 - 1:56, 2:03 - 2:04, 2:23 - 2:24, and on and on, please make it stop. How can anybody miss so much Well, granted I no expert. I play church organ for over 50 years, did Master on it, worked as teacher of the instrument, but most in Germany and England.. How could anyone argue with US Nevada interpretation of Bach. He was an American, wasnt he? Everybody knows that.

  • And you never do, Mr. Perfection? Idiot.

  • Who is this US clown?? He can not even play straight progression down without hitting half dozen keys mistakes. What a joke. What is this? Las Vegas performance for wealthy retarded? Must be too much Aspartame.

  • Please timestamp his mistakes in video. K...thx....bye

  • Music if for all to listen and share equally, those who go to school choose so of their own accord, those who don't choose so of their own accord. In any case, I, and by "I" I mean me, the person typing this, have found that music is a great way of sending a message. Virgil Fox chose to interpret this particular Prelude and Fugue in the manner a bass-trombonist such as my self would approach a triple forte marking. With great enthusiasm. I am glad he chose this route. I like perspective.

  • Always loved the pregnant dominant 7th at 7:48!

  • now please , dont come back with a load of critisism , I want an oppinion. I do not know how people can respect the work of Fox, he was a showman , not a bach interpreter , and his playing of bach is insesitive to the very extreme , and it doesnt touch god and the essence of existance which bach does

  • If he was a mere showman, how did he perform such pieces for live audiences... I was there. He is as much as anyone a valid interpreter of Bach. You try to put Bach into a small box, and imply there's only one interpretation and one musical path to some touching of god. It is you that are insensitive.

    Finally, yes, I have studied the classics myself.

  • Comment removed

  • I dont dispute the fact you have studied classical music. I am an organist myself. Obviously , I have been brought up playing by a very biased school of thought , but my problem with fox , is he never really brings out the intricate beauty of bach , and only really goes for the big powerful sound of the organ , dont get me wrong its great - he was a showman , not a bach interpreter - that has its merits , dont get me wrong , he brought bach into the public eye - nobody else did that!!!

  • He displayed perspective that should be respected. HE should be respected. And whats wrong with the big powerful sound of the organ? Just a question.

    Wait, I came into this conversation at the wrong time. Sorry fellows, you seemed to have solved the delema. Well done..... :)

    Now I feel like a grade "A" Idiot.

  • Well said. Anyone who pays devotion and plays the works with his/her heart and spirit is a valid interpreter. For what is music, other than a language of expression?

  • Virgil Fox was the Vladimir Horowitz of the organ -- or was it the other way 'round?

    Those who can DO; those who can't DENIGRATE, DISAPPROVE, DOUBT and DEBUNK.

    VF raised standards to such impossible heights his would-be competitors and stuffy musicologists just HAD to find plausible excuses for putting him down in order to survive.

    'Twas the same with Landowska.

    We'll never see their equal again.

    I'm a great André Marchal fan as well. His St. Anne P&F is non pareil.

  • andre stahm is the best virgil is commercial

  • andre stahm is the best

  • Virgil - R.I.P - A grand artist in the grand manner! He playing may be seen to generations to come! Those "small" minded indivduals who could not even play 1/100 and have the artistry as this artist always complain. The green-eye dragon is still alive and well. Too bad!

  • Il virtuosismo nella fuga è eccezzionale!!!

  • Mi piace molto questa interpretazione.Molto bravo.

  • Virgil?..You're a tool. He brought baroque music to more people than probably any other man in history

  • And I suppose you can play this during your yoga routine while blindfolded, whisling bwv 2000 and humming silent night at the same time after guzzling a fifth of jack. come on you guys.

  • It would be very funny to watch victorcharlie, modernmanx or one of the other idiots to try and play this! Somehow I doubt that we'll be seeing any of them playing at Thomaskirche or Westminster Abbey anytime soon!

  • One of the truly greatest organists of all time. Beautiful! Stunningly played.Thank you James.

    Bravo!

  • Why is it so easy to make negative comments about someone clearly so talented, playing an instrument so complex.. I say it's beautifully done and I'd love to hear you do better. Please play for us all. I would love to enjoy it as much as I have enjoyed this. Bravo Virgil Fox. Bravo!

  • And I suppose you can play this with one hand tied behind your back.

  • goosebumps for the whole video. awesome playing.

  • That's a great shame. Why not?

  • So why come here and tell everyone whod does ? Prick

  • Do you like music at all? More than likely whatever you do like wouldn't make sense to you without Bach.

    To listen to the music Bach is to listen to the very voice of God revealed in song.

  • Wow, this peice is fantastic! I have had the rare privilege of knowing Virgil Fox peronsonally although I was a LITTLE Girl - an no I'm not an organist (altho my dad wanted me to be) the love of organ music is still there. And while this is not the bombastic Virgil that I am used to hearing, I like this recording!

    M Wrenn (the old timers will recognize the name) xxoo

  • I can't believe the "discussions" of some of the people of this video. Grow up and stop bickering from your ivory towers. again, it's all about who's got the bigger organ so to speak...blah blah blah. go out and enjoy life.

  • Stunning.

  • I don't care for they way Fox played most things, but I actually enjoyed this performance.

  • Someone way back (about a year ago) posted that it was impossible to play this Prelude & Fugue faster that does Fox in this video. There was a recording by Anthony Newman from about 1975 that was much faster. I just pulled the album and verified the time... 7:03. That's fast! I had trouble hearing the performance, as with this. It's like trying to understand someone who talks too fast. In my brain, it all disintegrates.

    Mike Wenger

    Raleigh, NC

    (real name... I hide behind nothing)

  • Speed isn't everything, emotion IS

  • Wonderful performance. I wonder if the pedal entrance in the fugue with the mixture on was a not planned?  Virgil handled it well, if it was....

  • I prefer E Power Biggs, personally. The whistle-like sound works better for me. This instrument seems to quack when played fast.

  • putting aside all Virgil talk for a moment, let's hear it for Bach!

  • just because he doesn't always play what's written in the score doesn't mean that he isn't a great musician. Music isn't just what's written in a score -- it's portraying emotion and human feeling through how you preform the piece

  • @rodeoclown3579

    what he plays is most times better.

    why always hang on to THAT what 1 person wrote.... isnt it possible that another person could have good ideas about a piece wich could sound good?

  • Now who is the one being condescending? Your "improvisatory ideas" are fine but please don't try to bring them in to real musicianship. Oooooh we can all be bitches really...

  • grande virtuoso...l unica cosa ke non mi piace e questo cambio di registri in continuazione e di tastiere...

  • So much in the previous comments is true. Yes in many ways VF was a genius, yes he did communicate, yes he brought the organ into the lives of many who still appreciate it - like Carlo Curley in the next generation - their styles are very similar. BUT its not a style I like. Taste is very subjective - we all appreciate different things. Many years ago I played this for one of my professional qualifications, how I wish I had his astounding technique, how glad I am I have never had HIS taste.

  • Oh - [go ahead - - cheet. Time. Go to 3:29 exactly. Take a breath. Then comes the Schwung: you can sit back and... take off. And always keep in mind that good music is oh-so-much-better than good sex for the reason why you keep on going to three minutes and twenty nine seconds again. And again. And again.

  • You know, it really saddens me when "divas" get on here and post pathetic negative comments about a musical genius such as Mr. Fox. He has done more to win the hearts of audiences for the organ than any of you "purists" who think you know more about proper execution of organ music than anyone else. Who cares?????

    Interpretation of great music is highly personal and subjective, so please don't be hatefully critical of these great performances if you don't want others critical of you!

  • Another typical Fox performance. Tempo, colour and continuity are all over the place in the prelude. The fugue here is totally wasted as it is played far too fast and the manual pedal balance is poor (maybe this is just the recording).

  • Excuse Me?!! Are you insulting perhaps one of the GREATEST of all organists. The man brought SO much personality to his performances. If you want a dry, stilted, and so called "authentic" reading, please check out Anthony Newman or Wolfgang Rubsam. I for one have sat through the latter who played technically perfect but COMPLETELY without soul.

  • Yes.

  • Maybe technically he's one of the best, but musically he's not so great. It's so typical of people who don't have a music degree to be the judge of who the best musicians are.

  • That has always been the problem with classical theorists though, hasn't it? Always rules, always strict structure. That plus a "music degree" = not really knowing much about music.

  • Dude, I'm a rocker jazz fiend and 20 yrs classically trained organist and musically Virgil is a GIANT! I'll put him up against E power Biggs or Charles Rosen, or Glenn Gould!

  • And yet, he's the guy everyone went to see and hear, and brought them to love Bach, noy you! HA HA !

  • A music degree is not necessary, unless the purist-snobs must rely on it to bolster their flagging self-esteem while they sniff about someone who can actually DO what they cannot. It's well known that PhD is an acronym for Piled Higher, Deeper.

  • haha. Fox is a genius. You just don't get it.  (I'm sure you believe you do though, sadly)

  • Wrong- please consult any trained organist for a full explanation

  • k - I'll consult my mother, 30 year professional organist, featured in the American organist several times and winner of several national/international competitions. Think she might know? And, VictorCharlie, I'm more interested in YOUR explanation. smells like a cop out answer to me. I doubt you can handle this convo past this point. My recommendation, go study ALOT and then talk with me in a public forum. I leave it to you. By all means, elaborate...

  • As a holder of a BMus (Hons) and an MMus and an ARCO I think I can handle this conversation perfectly well and probably don't need to study "ALOT" despite the fact that one is always learning new things.

    Prelude- Stop change at about 00.34 is in the middle of a group of triplets which in my opinion is incorrect and sounds disjunct.

    Tempo change at 00.51 is not marked in the urtext score so why out it in as it breaks up all flow of the music. Change of tempo again at 1.25 etc etc...

  • That's all you've got? "incorrect" stop changes and even more subjectively, tempo changes?  ok...

    can't see the forest for the trees...

  • additionally, what is this obsession with urtext editions by so many scholars? Especially when it comes to Bach, I find taking the purist's approach to be exceedingly punctilious and in many instances embodying the antithesis of the true free spirit of music.

  • Ok Flipscratch I feel we need to agree to disagree as we both seem to have opposing opinions. I find it a good thing that we have provoked debate but it seems we come to a point of personal opinion which will never have a concorde.

  • fair enough, I guess...?...Your strict, restricting, purist, condescending, "right answer" rhetoric vs. my improvisational, free, intelligent, progressive ideas. OK we'll nominally call it a draw!!

  • Bmus: Bullshit Music Underling Sycophant.

    MMus: Master of Megalomania Understudy.

    What you never learned in all those hours of studying dried up dusty tomes is: YOU LEARN THE RULES, SO THEN YOU CAN BREAK THEM. Counterpoint, 101.

  • ...and if you know history, Bach was a rebel and rule-breaker...

  • WHO CARES? The important thing is the delivery of the music to the masses... or, are they not deserving of Bach? Snobs like you would deny this to the common man. As Virgil described your type: "They can't get into the House of Music any other way!" I'll tell you, snob... learning of Fox, and of Bach and of the depth of this music literally changed my life. You can't take it from me, or anyone else.

  • Chandros, you might want to learn more about Mr. Fox and his remarkable place in organ music and performance before you mock the dated nature of this performance. Virgil Fox is still one of the most influencial organists in the modern era and the reason many still go to organ concerts today.

  • I agree, this isn't good at all.

  • You know, what you call "unneccesary rubato and stop changes," is what I call PERSONALITY. I am a rock guitarist who has a DEEP appreciation for classical organ music and who has heard many recordings. Virgil Fox is the Eric Clapton and Jimi Hendrix of organ. Virgil brought tremendous personality to organ playing and is why he was so popular.

  • maybe we should accept that there are many avenues into the heart of music, just as there are many musical hearts and minds out there. So, rather than insist that ther is A way into one of the most complicated and amazing mind the world as ever known, we should listen and ponder about the many truth about our minds and hearts? Who cares what is The truth , rather than many various and wonderful understanding of musical truth. Gould versus Turek, or, you name them, great musicians all.

  • What's the BWV on this one?

  • BWV 543, my favorite a minor. i saw him do this live 35 years ago. i will never forget that night, the night i fell in love with Bach.

  • Virgil is absolutely stunning.

  • one of the coolest things I've ever seen!

  • He is a real freak.

  • assolutamente fantastico sia l'organo e l'organista

  • isn't it wonderful that Bach's music resist most interpretations? One of the nicest two part invention (in F M) was on steel drums and it worked! Menuhin commented on the fact the Bach's music can not take much rubato or dynamic shading, but it can resist a lot, as opposed to lesser geniuses

  • Yes I have heard Bach on steel drums too, it still sounds amazing. If there is a definition of perfect music, it has to be Bach. I disagree with Menuhin because music has to be expressed. Why do you think Glenn Gould was so popular? He made Bach music and people could feel it. That is the whole point of music, no? To feel something? Anyway, I feel Virgil and I miss him.

  • Man, I seriously hate to be vulgar on a classical music video, but the historical performance people need to go fuck themselves. Seriously. Nobody is making you watch VF. Go watch E Power Biggs or John Butt or any other historical performer if that's your thing, they're good at it. But music is interpretation, and Fox takes Bach in a modern interpretation. Who knows what Bach would've done with a 5 manual modern organ? He was continually disappointed with the instruments at his disposal.

  • Hear, Hear

  • Amen to that!

  • Fantastico.

    E' impressionante la capacità di questo grande organista.

  • Some people here are both ignorant and rude.

  • modernmanx is also a cheesedick!

  • modernmanx is a jeolous pitckfork in the ass of every organist. You obviously have no or know no talent. Go jump in a lake and take your cheesy opinion with you.

  • Please,tell me where I can get this concert onDVD!!  Great !!!!!

  • Study and learn! In your country you have for example Harald Vogel who is a very fine organist. It IS possible to understand how music was performed 300 years ago. This is basic to all baroque musicians.

  • The best baroque organists come from the Netherlands and most american organists are still stuck in the romantic tradition. Virgil Fox way of playing is vulgar and he is unfortunately acting like a clown.

  • You don´t know anything about how Mendelssohn played Bach - there are no recordings. Straube and Dupré played Bach in their way, which was not historically correct. They were, however as opposite to Virgil Fox, good musicians. Playing in a correct historical manner makes the music better, that´s the point. No one would play Franck or Dupré like Buxtehude but the opposite should for some curious reason be allowed.

  • How do you know how Bach played - there are also no recordings! I think it´s vulgar to say he´s playing like a clown.

  • I like thin-crust pizza with only 2 or 3 toppings. That means that I am not allowed to like chicago-style deep dish supreme pizza. It also means that everyone who does is wrong.

  • I think what you don't like of Fox's style is exactly what I like. His way of "register" the organ, his majestic interpretation, make this performance quite perfect (not completly though, cause he made some mistake at 5:28 and 7:05 for example but at that speed I suppose is impossible to be perfect). Of course I agree with you this is not a baroque style, but I don't care.

  • Ok, but which facts are those? It's a modern organ with an electrical console, maybe with a french recit, very aggressive reeds, little acoustic and so on - not a baroque organ like Naumburg or Brandenburg. We live in a time after the interpretations of Mendelssohn, Straube, Middelschulte and Dupré, this is a modern organ, so why the hell should he play as historical correct as possible?

    It's important that it is musically played - and it IS musically played. So what?

  • I agree with you!

  • Are you so sure he's not aware of how to articulate baroque music? I believe that a true musician is one who knows how to play it the way it should be but then also any way he chooses, which is definitely the way Fox plays. For all we know, he could also be able to play this right out of the history books in style but chooses to play it this way due to the modern organ and how he was particularly feeling at the moment.

  • He plays even worse (like a clown) on many other recordings here on the tube but unfortunatelly he destroys this piece of music. All changes of the stops are totaly unhistorical and don´t make any sense. He often switches tempo in a romantic way, the pedal is played to much staccato and the organ is totally wrong. There are certainly better organs than this one on the left side of the Atlantic.

  • Sure... Ton Koopman does have CD's with "Best of Bach", "Bach plays Bach" and so on and therefore does exactly know how in Baroque the musicians played.

    If you hear Koopman on a modern organ like this (and he DOES play an such instruments), it will be a terrible happening. Vox here uses much of the possibilities the instrument offers - it's just genius! His interpretation is fluid, musicantic, makes sense etc.

    Are YOU able to play this piece such convincing?

  • You have to over articulate the pedal when the organ is in a large reverberant space and has very unresponsive action. Thus, I would take this over mush.

  • Dude, get a clue. You are like a garage band guitarist saying Jeff Beck sucks. Maybe if you play a Hendrix song it has to sound exactly like Hendix or it's no good because it is "unhistorical"? Virgil isn't the clown. You are the clown busily trying to build a bridge back to the 19th Century! People, music, and technology all change. Smart people have the sense to have open minds and move forward.

  • Very well said.

    Justin

  • Very well said indeed!

  • That is exactly what I've been trying to say for the last year now. You really have a way with words.

  • This is Virgil's style and it's not a "terrible interpretation" just because it's not played like it would be in 1700.

  • You should listen to a modern organist who has studied some "alte Spielweise" which means how to play baroque music like it was performed in the baroque period. Virgil Fox was a showman, primarily interested in himself and not in the music, its character, and how to register the organ. Nor is this organ suited for Bach. It should be an organ in the north German baroque style (approximately 1700). Listen to Ton Koopman, or any modern Dutch organist for example.

  • Who knows how it was played??????????????

  • Terrible interpretation

  • Where have you heard better ?

  • Аццкий сотона!

  • Please, won't somebody tell me where I can get this concert on DVD!!

  • VIRGIL SARAI SEMPRE IL MIGLIORE

  • Alguem nesse mundo é capaz de explicar a monstruosidade do genio bachiano?

  • Bach é mais do que um compositor; é um profeta que mostrou a verdadeira musicalidade aos ouvidos de todos. Se existe um messias ou um salvador dos homens, pra mim ele se chama Johann Sebastian Bach.

  • MONSTER PIECE!

  • Sera que Bach é humano mesmo?