BWV 196 is a very short 10 minute cantata assumed to have been written
around 1707 for a modest wedding ceremony.  Although quite short, the
cantata has a Sinfonia, two Coros, a soprano aria, and a tenor and bass
duet.  This is relatively simple music with little tension.  It expresses
a state of prayer and celebration.  Suzuki (vol.1) and Koopman (vol.  1)
are the comparison recordings.

The opening Sinfonia is for strings and organ; it's a nice and reflective
piece that Junghanel and the others do well.  The first Coro finds Koopman
a little stodgy and his four singers not well blended.  Junghanel provides
a lively atmosphere which is infectious and his singers are effective.
Best is Suzuki whose pacing is stately; his chorus is delicate and
exquisite - this is a special performance.

The soprano aria is lovely music of a peaceful nature.  Junghanel excels
here.  His violins are gorgeous, and Johanna Koslowsky is superb in her
singing and interpretation; she makes this piece special.  It's hard to
believe that she's the same soprano for BWV 106 where she was difficult to
listen to.  Suzuki is very good.  Koopman's Barbara Schlick is not in good
form.

The aria for tenor and bass expresses human "prospering and increase".
Koopman uses a relatively slow and lovely pace with Guy De Mey and Klaus
Mertens singing excellently.  Junghanel is equally good; his pacing is
lively and his singers blend well.  Suzuki's tenor, Koki Katano, has an
unattractive voice.

The concluding Coro is a rousing piece of music.  Suzuki's pacing is great
and his chorus outstanding.  Junghanel is too fast, and his singers suffer
for it; the music sounded more like a caricature.

Junghanel is excellent in BWV 196 excepting for the last Coro.  Overall,
he's as good as Suzuki and better than Koopman.  Junghanel was particularly
good in the two arias, and his vocal soloists were superb.

BWV 12 has a text dealing with believers needing to accept life's
hardships through faith in order to gain eternal rewards.  It does strike
me that this is a perfect ally to power structures, but I doubt Bach had
it in mind when he wrote the cantata.  I just have a one-on-one comparison
between Junghanel and Suzuki (vol 3), and I find their performances fairly
equal in quality.  Junghanel has more bounce in the Coros, and I liked the
one voice per part approach; the bass aria is exquisite with the strings
making a stunning contribution.  The other two arias belong to Suzuki who
provides better pacing and better singers.  Unfortunately, purchase of both
versions would be necessary to get the full effect of BWV 12.  If buying
only one of them, I'd recommend Junghanel for those who want a relatively
lively, crisp, and adventurous account.  Suzuki would be the preference for
a stately and lovely reading.  Both versions do very well in keeping within
the spirit of the text.

BWV 4, 'Christ lag in Todes Banden', is often considered Bach's most
musically inspired cantata of his early period.  I have four versions for
comparison:  Suzuki (vol 1), Koopman (vol 1), Fischer-Dieskau/Richter on
Archiv, and Parrott on Virgin Classics.  The music is set to Lutheran
chorale text from 1542 revolving around the premise that overcoming the
fear of death leads to joy of life.  The work consists of a Sinfonia and
seven verses; the chorale melody of the first verse is used with variation
in each successive verse.  Koopman provides alternative versions of the
Sinfonia and verses 1, 2, and 7.

The opening Sinfonia is a short and highly dramatic piece lasting a little
over one minute.  Three versions fully provide this drama although each is
quite different; Richter gives us the full symphonic approach, Suzuki a
chamber orchestra atmosphere, and Parrott a chamber ensemble approach with
fantastic violin contributions.  Although I personally prefer Parrott's
conception, each of the three is very effective.  Koopman (both versions)
and Junghanel also provide a chamber approach but the drama is a little
thin and subdued.

Verse 1 is a rousing Coro which very much reveals Bach's creative powers.
This Coro is a perfect example of the early Bach period where he used his
subtle creative powers to create music of variety where little would appear
to exist.  The piece is also a good example of the differences that one
voice per part and orchestra size provide the listener; in addition, the
different versions show that the full emotional impact of the music can
be delivered with few voices and/or instruments or with a host of voices
and/or instruments.  Volume and size do not determine intensity.

Junghanel uses one voice per part and a very fast pace; it's exciting and
beautiful.  The other four versions are equally good.  I found Koopman's
alternative version the better of the two with its larger instrumental
ensemble which added weight to the interpretation.  Richter uses the big
approach (well, it seems big now); sounds great and he really turns on the
power at the conclusion of the Coro.

The second verse is a duet for soprano and aria although Koopman's
aternative version gives us a chorus as does Richter's version.  The
theme is that death had a stranglehold on humans through their sins.
Suzuki and Parrott's singers deliver some very unattractive sounds in the
higher reaches.  The other versions are excellent, including both Koopman
versions.  Junghanel's Johanna Koslowsky and Elisabeth Popien blend very
well together and provide an eerie atmosphere suitable to the text.

In the third verse, a tenor aria with much forward momentum, Jesus takes
away the sins of humans and death loses its "sting".  All the versions
are good, but only Richter and Suzuki provide stunning instrumental work.
Unfortunately, Richter uses a male chorus which sounds detached from the
music's meaning.  So, Richter, Koopman, Junghanel, and Parrott are good
readings not up Suzuki's level.

The fourth verse and Bach's music is for gladiators; Life and Death have
a big battle which Life wins - "it has swallowed death".  You might expect
one collosal Coro, but four of the versions (the period instrument ones)
tell it differently.  They calm things down greatly; Koopman's rendition
even puts "cute" into the music.  Junghanel is the fastest but goes
nowhere.  It's only Richter who provides a "big bang", and it's very
exciting and eventful.  The ending can make you shiver.  I'm not suggesting
that this type of approach is the only one that really works, but the other
versions do nothing to contradict that view.

Verse five concerns Christ's sacrifice - "Here is the true Paschal
lamb that God has offered, high up on the cross".  A listener can easily
imagine looking up toward the cross and seeing the individual who is
suffering for the sins of humans, a somewhat errie and other-worldly
scenario with the sky filled with lightening and loud thunder claps.
Suzuki and Richter fully provide this atmosphere.  Richter has the
incomparable Fischer-Dieskau who displays such a majestic and deep voice.
Suzuki's Peter Kooy may not be quite as good, but his is a very effective
interpretation in better sound.  The other three versions are earth-bound,
although Koopman and Junghanel do well in what they provide; Parrott's
bass, David Thomas, displays a grating voice which is unpleasant to hear.

The sixth verse, an aria for soprano and tenor, celebrates the
Resurrection.  However, Bach's music is hardly celebratory; it is dark
and a little foreboding.  All the versions deliver similar readings with
fine singing except for Suzuki; his soprano, Yumiko Kurisu, displays an
unpleasant tone on higher notes.

The final verse is a Coro of drama and optimsim.  Leaving Junghanel aside,
each version is uplifting.  Junghanel postulates that the Coro used by the
others, based on dates and styles, is not correct, and in the recording he
essentially repeats the first verse.  Since this repeat is "conjecture" on
Junghanel's part, I see little virtue in denying listeners the Coro
provided by the other versions.

Junghanel acquits himself well in BWV 4 except for the last verse.  It's
Richter who delivers a near-flawless performance although one might want to
consider sound quality which can not compete with today's standards, and a
style which purists could have some trouble with.  Suzuki's version is the
best on period instruments.

Getting back exclusively to Junghanel, his performances are certainly of
similar quality to most other period instrument recordings.  But he does
not offer outstanding readings of any of the four cantatas and none of his
vocal soloists is outstanding.  Junghanel does give us some distinctive
tempos and interpretations to think about.

Don's Conclusion:  An enjoyable recording - probably best to sample before
buying.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]