This is 2 questions really...

1. My old teacher still has my book of the Bach cello suites, and I don't know how to get it back without appearing rude. Basically, she had a baby in April, but I have not had a lesson since then, nor have i heard from her or had any replies from my text messages. I asked her husband (who I have had a few lessons from when she has been away) whether she would like her cello suits back, as we swapped editions. I took them back to the house a few weeks ago, and her husband took them back as my teacher was out, and took my address so he could send the book back. I have not received them as yet, and again have had no response from either of them. As they are new parents I really do not want to cause them any inconvenience or hassle, but I really need my book back as I'm going up to Sheffield on Sunday, and I need them for an audition next week!

2. If I don't get my book back, should I buy the Forbes/Chester edition or the Rowland-Jones transcription?

Thanks,
Jess

I would phone up your teacher, explain that you need your copy of the suites back for your audition, and arrange a time to go and collect them. She has probably just forgotten that she still has the book.

If you do need to buy a new copy of the suites specifically to use for the audition next week then it would be best to buy the edition that you are used to playing from, as there are differences in bowing etc which could give you problems when you have so little time left to adapt to them. Otherwise, I think the Rowland-Jones edition is better than the Forbes edition. The Forbes edition has some rather strange metronome and duration markings, but they can be ignored. It also has lots of other markings that have been added by the editor - some of which are also best ignored. I have both editions, but I tend to play from the Forbes edition as it was the only decent viola edition around when I first started learning the suites and I am used to it.

I would recommend the Rowland-Jones transcription, published by Peters Edition.

The Forbes transcription has some strange editing, full stop. In fact, most music edited by Forbes has some really strange suggestion on bowing, tempi, phrasing and fingering.

The Forbes and Rowland-Jones versions differ significantly partly because of differences between the manuscripts that the transcriptions were based on.

The Forbes edition is based mainly on the Anna Magdalena Bach (Bach's wife) manuscript, but also on the Bach Gesellschaft edition (first published edition) because Forbes considered that Anna Magdalena would have copied from the autograph score, and that her manuscript would therefore be the most accurate. Forbes tempo markings, fingerings and dynamics would have been influenced by performance practice at the time he made the transcriptions. Performance practice has moved on since then so these markings could easily be ignored.

The Rowland-Jones edition is based on all four of the early copies of the suites. In his introduction he notes that the Anna Magdalena Bach version was probably based on the autograph score, but that the other copies were based on different source(s) (probably not the autograph). As slurs, ties, and even some notes vary a lot between these sources the editor has had to choose which to use. Rowland-Jones made different choices from Forbes, but that doesn't mean that Rowland-Jones is correct and that Forbes is incorrect.

Ideally you would have both editions so that you can compare them. A facsimilie copy of the Anna Magdalena Bach manuscript is here, if you want to have a look at it for yourself.

Just remember that in Bach, first position should be the main position. Followed by second and then third position.

Fancy fingerings and trying to keep tonal equality is just not the thing for Bach. String instruments of the baroque era were very different to the modern instrument, so keeping it simple is the main aim when playing the suites.

Same goes for the solo sonatas and partitas - for any violinists reading this, or violists playing transcriptions of the same.

Music is expensive to buy. Phone her for a chat and ask when it would be a good time to call round to collect your copy. She has probably forgotten. She may well have changed her mobile number too. I don't think that the lack of response to your texts means anything.

I know I'm going off the initial subject a little but I'm revisiting the suites and my own interpretation of them.
One thing to note is that from the many recordings, the suites are so open to different interpretations. Very rarely will you hear the same performance or bowings played by 2 musicians - that's what makes them a joy to listen to and play.
Extraordinarily, Yo Yo Ma actually uses techniques such as sul ponticelli quite a bit in his recording from a few years ago - affected and not very authentic? Maybe, but it's certainly effective and who's to say it's incorrect?
I particularly enjoy Du Pre's rawness and instinctive playing. However, in my opinion it's Tortelier who had the definitive feel for the suites and it's his style on which I like to base my own interpretation.

I just recently heard a recording on the radio of Steven Isserlis playing the second movement of the first suite. I had never listened to him playing them before and the thing that really struck me was how well he conveyed the sense of a baroque dance movement, which I suppose is exactly what it is!
One recording my viola teacher particularly liked was the Yo Yo Ma one - but the earlier one - he recorded them twice (as far as I'm aware) and there's a bit of a gap between the two interpretations, both in years and in style.