Added: 4 years ago
From: truecrypt
Views: 632,309
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (352)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • What's the duck at  0:50?

  • This man has something upperious to his approach.

  • Oh no, I mean b sharp!

  • @MsKendoro yeah, around 2:10 he's playing b instead of b sharp but i can't believe he would make such a mistake..maybe a different score from yours and mine :)

  • shouldn't it be f double sharp at the end? around 2:10. I don't have the score in front of me, but I am hearing the leading tone to g sharp minor...Oh well

  • I've been wondering whilst reading many of the comments connected to Glenn Gould and his method of presenting and bringing music to life why we all bother to argue. As with most things, people and places in the wonderful world of ours, you either love him and his renditions, or you hate him. Why are we all so obsessed in trying to force our own opinions on others when we are all taught the entitlement of having and holding onto your own opinion. His is personally one of my all time favourites

  • @suzeb50 so yeah you trying to go get some ice cream or something? I like your opinion of opinion. lol. And Gould is the best interpreter of Bachs music, in MY opinion. 

  • Cette interprétation est empreinte de méditation, Gouldienne !

  • I don´t know if it´s just me, but I hear him humm the one of the voices. /acutally he skipps from one to another/

    THIS IS SOOOOO GOOOOD!!!!!!

  • @littlerainworm550 this is soooo goooooou(l)d.. :D

  • PaterEcstaticus888: Many more people like this kind of music and unfortunately many more do not like it. The actual fact is that this is real great music. When you combine two geniuses in music you get good music. This comment could be done by most people here into a piece of music you admire or like.

  • dicctionnaire de mes idées reçues:

    Glenn Gould: avec tout le respect que je lui doit, il reste une machine à musique

    au génie musical que trop développé...au détriment de tout effort sentimental !

  • Comment removed

  • I can't believe that 444 people actually like this. Whatever happened to good music?

  • @PaterEcstaticus888 Yeah, Palestrina was the shit. After him everything sucks.

  • @PaterEcstaticus888 u don't like classical music or just this piece? 

  • @MeJoho I don't like Gould's interpretation of this piece. I don't think it does justice to Bach's music and I think that Gould is generally overestimated.

  • @PaterEcstaticus888 Yeh I agree, I think Gould is more of an interest to those who want to hear things played a bit differently, but I do think it's worth listening to his work as it can confirm/modify your own view of things. Personally, I don't ever listen to him for pleasure.

  • @PaterEcstaticus888 A piece of advice: when you say you dislike this, state who else you prefer, so we can understand where this is coming from.

  • glenn went beyond musicianship. He became a real life fairy tale.

  • G.G. was a sick man. His (this) interpretation of the fugue makes me sick too.

  • The polyphony and the musical richness of the fugue are incredible. Unbelievable how so much music can be contained in such a short work.

  • @bayreuth79 Both of you and DayBergs are right, and both of you are wrong. Bach lived in the first XVIII sec. but he wasn't an Enlightenment artist. He was the last, greatest agony of the Baroque Style, that just in that period in all Europe was falling down under the strokes of Classicism (the musical movement corresponding to Enlightenment) At his times, Bach's music hadn't so much success because it was considered "retro" : he was the last great Baroque musician, not an Enlightened.

  • @bachinblack94 and if you want to get really technical, it wasn't even quite the Classical period yet. It was a transitional period in which new styles, such as the Rococo and Empfindsamer Stil, were emerging from the Baroque and which would evolve into what we know as Classicism. And it's true, because he wrote in what was becoming an outmoded style, Bach's genius went unrecognized until years after his death when Mendelssohn performed the St. Matthew Passion with his orchestra

  • I love this fugue but I don't think GG's choice to play the various countersubjects in a staccato manner works.

  • @ratsrcute me neither Richter version's much better

  • wow, this is really sad. i could see this happening on a justin bieber video, but not this. whether or not we like this particular fugue, could we all just agree that we love bach? end of story.

  • @yumeybaconcutout

    Believe me, I hate being involved in this just as much as you hate reading this. Sigh... 

  • nobody beats HERR BACH !!!!!!!!!!

  • I thought bach was better than this.

  • @Samoriah I am sure Bach is turning in his grave at having disappointed you so. You twat!

  • @kramnivas

    I really like Bach, he is definitely my favorite composer. But even you can see that this piece is beyond repetitive and the fugue is just painful to listen to. His C# major was a lot better than his C# minor prelude and fugue. I really *really* like Bach, but you honestly can't expect every single thing he wrote to be great. This is one of the rare exceptions. I don't like this piece. Sorry.

  • @Samoriah My point is that you say you thought Bach was better than this. You have just listed some other pieces of his that you say are far superior. So therefore he obviously IS better than this! So your initial statement made no sense! I would not criticise anyone for just not liking something,

  • @kramnivas

    ...what? You have officially just confused me for the day. I can not say that bach IS better than this, because it's a matter of opinion; but in my opinion, I think Bach could have done better than this. I'm sure someone out there thinks that this is Bach's magnum opus. Also: are you aware of what an idiomatic expression is? Not everything is taken literally you know.

  • @Samoriah Its really simple. Just read what you said in your original post! You said, in disappointment, you thought Bach was better than this piece. Then went on to say he WAS by mentioning some other pieces of his you did like.So what was the point in what you said? Why not just "not my favourite piece of Bach's". Instead you called into question his whole output. Remove the 'm' and 'a' from your 'idiomatic' and there is left a clue as to the relevance of your original statement!

  • @kramnivas

    Are you actually arguing about this? This is simply lost in translation and nothing more. Jesus Christ, I can't believe how stupid you are. I'm trying really hard not to lose my temper and insult the living fuck out of you, but I'm trying to show a little maturity. I'm just going to leave it at that. You don't know what you are talking about.

  • @Samoriah Aha! So I WAS right the first time! You twat. I was not arguing at all. The irrelevance and idiocy of your initial statement is there in black and white for all to see. Not even Jesus Christ can change that now. As for stupid, I cower in the shadow of your obvious and superior talent for the same. You going to lose your temper? Oh dear, how worrying for me. And yes, you sound extremely mature. Well done. And scary too!

  • @kramnivas Really? You are basing your whole claim off something that wasn't even supposed to be taken literally. I thought Bach was better than this does not mean "oooh, I have heard some amazing things about that bach guy, but I thought he was better than this" . In the context it meant "I have heard better things from Bach". You are calling my maturity to question? Well, just look at how far you are taking a simple OPINION of mine out of context.

  • @Samoriah There was no claim! Its there in black and white. And yes, I call your maturity into question. Are you calling the threat of you losing your temper and insulting the living fuck out of me a mature response? Let me wrap this up for you. I apologise for reading your initial post and not realising you were not saying what you actually meant. I know the English language can present some difficult challenges at times.

  • @kramnivas It wasn't a threat, it was maturity because I was holding back my insults, which is not what you were doing. If you are sincerely apologizing, then I will accept and we can quit arguing.

  • @Samoriah God you dont even have the intelligence to realise when someone is being sarcastic! How about you give up arguing because you have turned up to a battle of wits unarmed?? Or we could continue and I can match then outdo your bad language, your threats, hey, I might even come down to your level of maturity to try and make it a fair fight?? Or, in future, just say what you actually MEAN when you comment! Possible??

  • @kramnivas

    You're an idiot.

    Immediately when someone dislikes one piece from Bach's/Gould's repertoire - you immediately jump to the clueless-fan-boy-wagon-mode and leave no room for criticism; imagination; understanding that not every piece will be consistent with one another.

    Learn not to be so defensive about everything.

    And learn that saying "twat" does not make you look cool. At all.

  • @Leinoire Oh dear, another one. I never jumped to defend Bach. What I reacted to was someone making a statement saying they thought Bach was better than this, then pointing out themselves a number of pieces that illustrated exactly that. The person himself then went on to say he had not said exactly what he meant. Which had been my point. So before you jump in get your facts straight. Twat. Okay, not cool, but nonetheless apt in your case.

  • @Leinoire I also said I would never criticise someone for just not liking something, that is their prerogative. But fan boy wagon mode sounds like fun! The whole exchange was based on language, not whether or not Bach was any good.

  • @kramnivas How is "I apologize for reading your initial post and not realizing you were not saying what you actually meant. I know the english language can present some difficulty" sarcastic? If you are trying to be sarcastic, you are just brutal, as that message contained quit some sincerity to it. Once again, you are arguing over something that is completely pointless you god damn troll. I said exactly what I meant in my original statement, you just took it far too literal.

  • @Samoriah If it could not be taken as literal, ie what it actually said, then it was not written correctly. in future I shall 'interpret' anything you write. The demands of actually writing what you mean can be taxing for some I know. And I just adore the "god damn troll" part. It was worth entering this arena for that alone. I thank you. That was a first for me. My first troll insult. Ha ha!! Honestly, it really did make me smile! (no sarcasm that time!)

  • @kramnivas What I said was "I thought Bach was better then this". The only person who thought that was an absurd statement was you. You took it out of context and just had to argue with me for no reason. I can't believe you of all people are arguing about linguistics as your paragraphs are laden with grammatically incorrect sentences. It almost gives the vibe that English isn't your first language. I'm not trying to insult you either. I know you are going to come back laughing at me but whatever

  • @Samoriah And yet you have not pointed out any grammatical errors in my messages? Curious! And I am the only one who pointed OUT your statement was absurd, therefore not necessarily the only one who thought it so. I was not arguing with you, just pointed out your failing. YOU started the argument. Nice try with the English vibe thing, but transparent and weak. And I am not laughing at you.

  • @kramnivas

    The reasons I have not pointed out your errors is because that is a weak tactic. I could point out that you are starting all your sentences with prepositions and I could point our your numerous spelling errors, but I won't. That message alone was just painful to read. You definitely started out the argument, you didn't even call my linguistics into question until AFTER I had replied to you. You said Bach was turning over in his grave for having disappointed me.

  • @Samoriah Why and how was my statement about Bach turning over in his grave an argument? It just was not. YOU started to argue. Your attempts at trying to find fault are admirable but painful when you then dont get them right. Spellings? By all means point out any errors, because that's what this was all about wasn't it?? No, i didnt think so either. The original "twat" I aimed at you was just in fun as you had made a nonsensical statement.. That was all.

  • @kramnivas

    I'm done. 

  • @Samoriah Me too. Know that I send nothing but positivity and respect your way. From the heart.

  • @kramnivas Forgive my last post: I had confused a preposition with a conjunction.

  • @Samoriah first of all i know that this is your opinion but i just have to point out that this fugue is written with 5 voices. it is one of the most complex and intricate pieces that i have ever heard and also in my opinion one of his most beautiful. i understand that you might not like it but i dont think you can say that it is not well written.

  • @ShyGuy3877

    The fugue may be complex, but I don't really like the subject and how Bach chose to develop it. It's interesting that it is written with 5 voices, I did not know that - but it still does not remain my favorite of his minor fugues from the WTC.

  • @Samoriah fair enough. btw what are your thoughts on prelude and fugue in c minor? i'm learning that song right now and i think that is also very nice

  • @ShyGuy3877

    I actually really like his prelude and fugue in c minor. It's probably my favorite of all the minor keys in the WTC. I also like his prelude and fugue in c# major.

  • the first couple of times i heard this fugue i was, quite honestly, hoping for it to be pretty. the subjects are not bitter or ugly, and they converge at points quite nicely with each other. of course, it never turned out the way i was hoping it would. but then i realized something. i realized that this song isn't a lullaby or a gentle minuet. its a tremendously logical, perfect formation of everlasting notes symbolizing the great rationality of our universe and all of its glory.

  • @yumeybaconcutout That comment gave me chills.

  • The still shot of Gould in the other video (franciccio67's): it looks like a young Larry King playing the keyboard!

  • Man, fucking youtube.

  • What the fuck. Okay, youtube. Several times I tried. Apparently you still don't believe I am human...

  • @Muad420 its funny because.. it is an ACTUAL ROBOT that asks if your human, and still doesn't believe you.

    haha

  • @Muad420 Why use curse words here? It's so inappropriate/

  • @purplepeoplepurple My apologies.

  • @Muad420 Super HUman

  • @Muad420 You think are human. Let me break it to you. The language you use dehumanizes you and those reading your comment. It makes you less human and more piggish.

  • @simcha181818 You are absolutely right. To avoid any further dehumanization of those reading the comment, may I suggest everyone downvote the comment, so it is not shown anymore.

  • Is he singing?

  • @hbmp88 Always, over his recording. And sound technicians struggled to "delete" or "uncatch" his voice on records, but was nearly impossible. Was part of the music.

  • is gould really dead?

  • @hugorilleable died in 1982

  • @oikra he's one of my favorites and I even didn't know...

    yhanks

  • Comment removed

  • MATHEMATICs!

  • If Gould would not live, by far so many people listen to Bach

  • @janlonek English isn't you're first language, huh?

  • @beatlesmack9 lol, but you get the idea..

  • @beatlesmack9 Obviously isn't *yours, either.

  • @ThatRachGirl AH you got me.

  • The onset of the fugue stunned me.

  • The c minor fugue sounds like the most exciting piece ever composed under Gould's hands.

  • Thank you for posting this :)

  • Such a wealth of interesting comments.  One can certainly find much to reflect upon here. Thanks truecrypt.

  • Just to set it straight. Bach lived in the Enlightenment period, the splendid 18th century, long after the dark ages, long after the Renaissance, and long after the Middle Ages. He marks the beginning of modernity in music.

  • @DayBergs Truth on all counts.

  • @DayBergs Marking the beginning of modernity in music is not a compliment. No modern composer would dare say they compose at the level of Bach

  • @DayBergs I would say that Debussy marks the beginning of modern music, and Bach defined music. Before the Baroque period, it was mostly a capella church songs harmonized in 4ths.

  • J S Bach represents the culmination of medieval and renaissance music. He developed the counterpoint that originated in a liturgical context and brought it to its unequaled zenith; but he also elaborated and incorporated into the fabric of his compositions musical currents that had taken shape for centuries, such as popular dance styles and so forth. Also, Bach was a pious Lutheran & so was anything but an Enlightenment figure (actually, it should be "Endarkening"). Modernity is decadence.

  • I don't like Bach lived at all during the Dark Ages; the Renaissance had already passed...

  • what piano brand is he playing on and how old is it?further what is the name of the album this sonate comes from?

  • @1957attilazaborszky thats not a sonate, thats a prelude an fugue, as it is written in the title -.-

    the album is "The Welltempered Piano" Vol.1 as written somehow in the description bar...

  • El mas retador de todos los 48 preludios y fugas, hermoso

  • Bach was a lutheran not catholic

  • Bach: the beginning and the end.

  • It's like a reminder about God

  • I love it when you can here him sing along. Go on my son.

  • Bach's music is more correctly barouqe, which was well after what is commonly reffered to as the middle ages.

  • @MrEriugena That makes sense. Wasn't the Renaissance when the inquisition took place?

  • @MrEriugena Isn't it referred to as the Dark Ages in a reference to the Catholic church in hindering the people from intellectual progress?

  • @fryl0ck33

    The Dark Ages was actually a specific time more or less after the Fall of the Roman Empire and prior to the Middle ages- many hundreds of years before the Renaissance began.

  • @fryl0ck33 The catholic church was one of the few institutions during the so-called Dark ages that kept any remnants of science alive. The majority of literate people within the western world at that time were within the church, did much research, and preserved more of the literature of the Romans than any other group. That being said, the church has inhibited scientific progress in the past. The accusation against them for after the fall of the Romans is just not historically accurate.

  • @broomdalf Bueno, la Iglesia Catolica siempre ha impuesto su dominio, ha matado miles de culturas, siempre para imponer algo qu ni ellos saben que es, lo que son es un monton de corruptos, son muy pocos los que se salvan.

    Aqui en Costa Rica destruyeron a los dioses de los indigenas, cosas que ahora nadie conoce, pero que son las bases de este pais, y se que asi es el caso en muchos lugares

  • @broomdalf Bueno, la Iglesia Catolica siempre ha impuesto su dominio, ha matado miles de culturas, siempre para imponer algo qu ni ellos saben que es, lo que son es un monton de corruptos, son muy pocos los que se salvan.

    Aqui en Costa Rica destruyeron a los dioses de los indigenas, cosas que ahora nadie conoce, pero que son las bases de este pais, y se que asi es el caso en muchos lugares

  • @belialah La gran ironía es que la razón ha dado a luz a algunos de los peores regimenes de la historia, culpables de mucha mas miseria y mas muertes que aquellas por las que la religión alguna vez habrá de avergonzarse. pero esto es música no estupideces banales de religión y razón.

  • @Davidfrancodaza bueno esto es no solo musicam es poesia, es color, es aura, es la mayor traduccion de la voz y la linea humana al pianoo y a cualquier instrumento, pero mi coment fue para el men de abajo que escribio acerca de la iglesia catolica, pero si gracias por el coment esto es musica y no esas idioteces.

  • @broomdalf

    Most learned people were to be found in the church because other institutions of learning (like the schools of Greece) had been closed -- by the church -- and the church had gained a complete monopoly on learning and knowledge. Obviously, no one else preserved writings, there was no one else. Willingly or otherwise, the church slowed and opposed progress throughout its dominance. To say otherwise seems like historical revisionism to me. 

  • He plays and hears Bach's music like he is improvising it.

  • wow he plays like he was in medieval times O=!! and i love medieval stuff

  • @angelito928 Actually, Bach's music is from the Baroque period which is post Dark Ages, early Enlightenment.

  • if anyone is listening i have forgotten my musical knowledge--I want to find Gould playing track 16 from the cd--it begins with two note a perfect fifth perhaps --is there a playlist of book one that starts from the beginning If not Gould then Ricther Book 1 track 16 from cd

  • schumann said he started every day by playing the wtc im sure it was intentional the resemblance

  • In regard to this 'Richter vs Gould' thing, I find that Richter is more successful with the prelude, Gould with the fugue.

  • anyone else notice that the fugue bears a striking resemblance to the fourth movement of schumann's rhenish symphony

  • I prefer Sviatoslav Richter's Version :-)

  • er artikuliert immer so toll!

  • This is not a complete performance by Gould, i missed the vocal part. :-)

  • @tasteism listen, its there ^^

  • La fuga è a 2:41

  • Sorry I still don't know how to post multiple comments so they don't appear in backwards order. :$

  • @Cancrizans you might try to answer to yourself ?!

  • It's funny how we categorize "art" or "classical" music into this mental sphere that has an "elitist" or "finest of the fine, let's put it in a museum" connotation to it. That attitude of classism is truly the most antithetical thing to anything artistic...its really a sad spectacle when art is in all of us that some sit as the critics in the "audience" and have been taught to begrudge the "artist" the joy of self accompaniment. I think that is one of the main themes in Gould's art.

  • The other thing relates to the same idea, but(and not trying to say anything negative about anyone's opinions, they are just that) but this neverending controversy about Gould's singing just seems to indicate how we have become conditioned to view the performance of music as a "representation of perfection" rather than a truly human activity. We have become so inhuman to ourselves that we find fault with this passionate identification with the music!

  • Just like to throw two things out there, first is just a thought; to contemplate the ways our social environment affects the perception of musical thought really is incredible. I'm pretty sure the poster who said Gould's playing is "monotonous" didn't mean it in that way...but it shows we have been conditioned to see variety where it really doesn't exist and miss the abundance of variety that exists in the simple...the depiction of which is a hallmark of Baroque music.

  • @Cancrizans You are a thinker and you are entirely correct.

  • Glenn Gould is wonderful at playing, but he needs to stop with the weird singing while he plays.

  • @SilversTears You will be delighted to know he's now stopped doing that.

  • zaffiro61: Everytime, everywehere I can see your comment, I have to laugh.. Or rather, to cry...

  • Most dislike his humming/singing along while playing...I think it's awesome...his adoration for the piano and it's music couldn't be better exemplified then through such action...love it.

  • Interesting to note that, the fugue subject is in fact a direct quote of the first four notes of the famous Nun komm tune... Religious fugue?

  • May be...

  • Why does he play B in the last part of 34 measure instead of B sharp?

  • In the prelude, of course.

  • @pablodevigo

    B Sharp?

  • Why so staccato on the fugue? I don't like.

  • very strange, just try to relax and feel every note. This is a unique performance like perhaps even Bach himself was not capable of (my guess) ? His son wrote it in his "Art das Klavier zu spielen": try to express every note, clear and well thought. Also in this view, Gould is the master!

  • @KVAAM C.P.E. Bach was praised for the beauty and subtelty of his harpsichord play. But he once commented that he deserved no praise; he was still like a small children compared with what his father could do. I read that in a biography long ago. It may be apocryphal.

  • @houlepn, CPE felt like a child to Bach becuase he was a child to Bach.

  • This is a terrific video. His performance of the prelude is delicate and sensitive, as someone pointed out below. And this fugue, with its four-note opening motive, is actually one of the more complex (as it introduces a new motive later), and Gould, as usual, really "gets" the fugue like no one else. Thanks for uploading this!

  • gould is god

  • Does anyon have the sheet music for this piece pleae?

  • The imslp have it. And pretty much everything else bach wrote.

  • @westoner1

    It's in "The Well-Tempered Clavier", Volume 1. Maybe it's online somewhere if you search.

    You might miss a few notes though.

  • if you google petrucci's music library first link u can get 90% of the classical music for free.. :D cuz it's a public domain therefore it is free to all that wishes to use it.

  • Thanks very much....you sir is gold

  • Gould is great but i wonder if he can improvise music like this as bach did in his day?

  • I find that funny since Gould is dead. So, no, he can't improvise too much.

  • The.J.S.@oddstruck

    superwest began his statement by saying 'he is bach'..obviously he isn't his physical form but i completely get what he is saying. Many piano players don't seem to do a composer justice becuase their interpretation does not seem to flow with the intent of the original feel. Gould is so in tune with bach's works that it doesn't even come across as interpretation, although technically it is becuase he is taking the work of another and creating something out of it himself.

  • @oddstruck

    Gould is not dead.I can hear his music.

    He is alive in my heart!

  • ??? There are videos about him improvising, but, what does is matter? Your comment is pointless.

  • There are self-made recordings of Glenn playing at home, and takes from studio practice sessions, which demonstrate his amazing ability for improvising in many styles. His improvisations obviously wouldn't be close to the standard of a Bach prelude and fugue (that would be more or less impossible), but they are very impressive.

  • thank god for no pedal! for all the crap that Glenn gets for playing too fast, this is a great example of his tender playing. the prelude is beautiful. the fugue is masterful, 5 parts and each part has its own touch, do you realize how hard that is? i dont like comparing performers and i like richter in russian music not bach. richters tone is too hard for me with not much variety. his rachmaninoff is great though!

  • Bach is like the greatest musician of all time.

  • Greatest composer as well.. ;-)

  • one of the greatest human being of all time (if not THE greatest), should I say

  • es un embole tocado asi

  • I am learning the fugue....not easy, especially with no piano teacher/lessons.

  • Gould is my god.

  • Happy Birthday!

  • Comment removed

  • he is bach,the best bach interpretation by far

  • There are a lot of virtuosos and there is Glen Gould, the never reached maestro.