Hi there, I wonder if anyone can shed any light on this subject? It is commonly believed that J S Bach wrote the 48 Preludes and Fugues for Clavichord/Harsichord but my piano teacher insists that they were in fact written for any instrument, or even for no instruments! I am keen to research this subject and wondered if people could give their thoughts on this idea.

Thank you!

On the one hand, the clue is in the title: "The Well Tempered clavier".

On the other hand, there is a reasonable suspicion that at least some of the pieces were not written specifically for TWTC but were assembled (and sometimes transposed) from other compositions that were originally written for a variety of instruments, or (as your teacher has suggested) whatever instrument was at hand. This last idea may help to assuage the conscience of a musical pedant as it justifies playing these pieces on whatever is at hand, such as . . . well, why not a piano?

In either case you can be quite sure that one instrument they were definitely NOT written for was the piano!

This title of course speaks for itself, but do we know for certain that Bach himself gave the title for the work? Could anyone recommend a reliable source that could confirm this?

Whilst I can't think of a source at this time of night, I'm 100 percent positive that that was JSB's title for the collection. Well-tuned clavier, though, not an equally tempered one....

"The Growth of Music" by Colles is pretty certain that Bach gave the title "Das Wohltemperirte Clavier" to the collection of the first 24 pieces. The second lot of 24 items were gathered later in his life at Leipzig. Page 147.

Yes, I believe the title page is in Bach's hand. There's an interesting hypothesis by Bradley Lehman available online, if you're wanting to research it further.

Thank you - I'll see if I can find the book and find out more.



I certainly do! Do you have the link?

Please see below for a post I stuck elsewhere:

The musicologist H C Colles is quite clear on the subject. He maintains that at the time they were written (the first 24 being created at Koethen, and the latter 24 at Leipzig) Bach was favouring keyboard music. His larger pieces such as the Italian concerto were designed for the harpsichord, while the 48 Preludes and Fugues "were intended for the clavichord".

However, Paul Lang maintains that "the work was intended for the more substantial harpsichord or cembalo" (Music in Western Civilisation)

Sure. The address is

http://www.larips.com/

Though I'm pretty certain that there's only one Bradley Lehman who's researched Bach's temperaments.

They were written for any keyboard instrument.

In Bach's time that meant: clavichord, harpsichord, or organ. The three instruments have different characteristics and the pieces vary as to which of the three to which they are best suited.

Nowadays you can add piano (just getting good towards the end of Bach's life) and synthesizer.

In response to your last sentence, I would not be so sure!. JS Bach was indeed an agent for the 'new' Bartolomeo piano and a distributor for Gotfried Silbermann, organ maker and latterly maker of fine pianos based on the Bartolomeo patent. There is every conceivable supposition that Bach did indeed write or transcribe the WTC for the then piano.Most of Bach's work has been transcribed for most other intruments at some time or another, notably his lute music for the 13 course, 8 and 6 course instruments.

Thanks for all the replies - they have given me something to get my teeth into!

NO! not well-tuned, well-tempered. This is certainly not the same as equal temperament but it is a quite different thing to merely well-tuned!


But "the then piano" was at best an early fortepiano and is so far removed from a modern piano that it is simply not the same instrument. Whatever Bach wrote for he could not have written for a modern piano, which did not exist for well over a century after his death*. This is one of the great challenges of playing Bach on a modern piano.

*the same applies, to a lesser extent, to Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Schubert, even Chopin, Brahms and Liszt.

I would split these last into three groups. All of Mozart works, much of Haydn's and the early works of Beethoven must have been written for fortepianos with a light sound and not much sustain. Broadwood sent examples of their first grand (designed in 1777) to Haydn and to Beethoven as he was going deaf; the latter was very grateful for its greater power. Certainly Chopin and possibly Schubert would have had access to similar instruments (Chopin hired a Broadwood for his London visit, and they still have this instrument). The next big leap in piano construction was the one-piece iron frame, invented in the US in 1825, but not adopted in Europe until the early 20th C.; during the 19th C. most European manufacturers adopted composite metal frames. However, an equally important development, complete by c. 1865 according to Helmholz, was the adoption of felt hammers and their positioning on the string so as to minimise the amplitude of the fifth and seventh partials. This allows the tuner to use 12-note equal temperament without making thirds sound unpleasantly discordant; Mozart's fortepianos were almost certainly tuned in an unequal temperament. Brahms and Liszt would have had use of instruments in ET12. Whether Chopin did I am not sure, but his highly chromatic music, ranging freely over the keys, benefits from it.

Ooops! Yes, you're quite right. I blame it on the lateness of the hour and, perhaps, a glass of a rather fine single malt before bed.

This is very interesting stuff, Kenm.
I should know the answer to this but cannot bring it to mind. What is known about the tuning systems used most usually in the late classical and early romantic periods? Was the one of equal temperement in common useage by then?

Back to the OP - I'm no keyboard expert but have studied JSB in some detail. My personal opinion is that he was SO ahead of his time and SO thinking out of the box that he very likely DID imagine the 48 to be suited to any instrument/combination of instruments or even voices. Having played a fair chunk of The Art of Fugue in a recorder consort it would be easy to assume the pieces were originally intended for recorders - the music is THAT darned good. And let's look at what Loussier (and others) can do with JSB - the music was crying out for improvisation all those years ago. Wouldn't it have been FAB to have HEARD JSB improvising himself???

Just my measly contribution.

BachBag x

It certainly would, but to do that you would have to be around at the same time as him, for which there are only 3 options:

Firstly, you discover that he really WAS immortal and find that the little old guy in the rest home who claims to be aged 324 really is: However, having produced nothing original (at least not as JSB) in the last 269 years you might find that his improvisational skills have waned from their peak.

Secondly, you could time travel back to, for example, Leipzig in 1740. OK, but . . .

Thirdly, you could time travel Bach forwards to today. Assuming that he survived the culture shock, this is the one I would like to hear: Bach improvising not only on his own stuff but Bach drawing from all that came after him as well: Bach plays Beethoven? Bach plays Jazz? How about Bach plays Bacharach or the Beatles?

Alas, all dreams.

I haven't found anything definitive concerning the introduction of ET on the piano. It was used for lutes as early as 1600, possibly earlier, since a lute piece which goes through the cycle of 12 keys was written, in tablature,* c. 1580. It was unpopular with many 18th C. harpsichord and clavichord performers. OTOH, Mozart occasionally went through pretty remote keys in a single movement, and Chopin even more so. My guess is that ET was introduced gradually from c. 1800 to 1850, as piano tone got mellower by the reduction of upper partials described previously. I do know that an irate letter was written to the Musical Times c. 1870 complaining that yet another London church organ had been changed to this "barbaric" tuning system.

* so no evidence of the composer's views of enharmonic equivalence

The richer organ stops (reeds and mixtures) present a severe problem. On the one hand, some of the greatest solo organ works are very chromatic, by composers such as Liszt and Messiaen. On the other hand, the organ is used to accompany Tudor verse anthems, which stay very close to their home keys, usually F, C or G major, and good choirs sing in just intonation. Nowadays, I am pleased to hear, it is not uncommon for large organs to have one or two stops in a Renaissance tuning for this purpose.

Thanks, Bagpuss! Yes, this is the kind of stuff we have been talking about in lessons, plus the fact that the keyboard intruments Bach had to work with could not sustain notes for more than a few seconds, meaning the longer tied notes he so frequently used would actually not have have been possible to produce on these instruments.

I am really surprised and shocked that none of you seem to know what instrument Bach's 48 Preludes and Fugues were originally written for

I am pleased to now demonstrate by playing one on the instrument he clearly intended them for ......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw2sSft_NBM


no question really!!

Ha ha , you had that clip lined up all along.... only to make these learned people argue over the answer....!

Played from memory too......

denmark

There is no future in it.

There is a busker at Utrecht railway station (I think he is a conservatory graduate) that plays Bach Preludes and Fugues on his accordion.

Ha ha ha!!!! I LOVE it!!!!