Donald Satz wrote:

>There is one aspect that I feel strongly about in the debate about
>"instrumentation".  Anti-period instrument individuals often trot out the
>argument that Bach would have used 20/21st century instruments if they had
>been at his disposal.  First, that argument can not possibly be proven;
>Bach is not here to address the issue.

Plus, even if he were and could make the time jumps necessary to address
the issue, who's to say Bach wouldn't actually prefer the electronic
instruments (with direct plug-ins to the brain) that are likely to be
available in the later 21st or 22nd century? Why would he want to be
limited to today's acoustic "Period" instruments, with all their wooden/
brass/plastic/gut limitations? That's what makes the argument that Don
mentions so ludicrous, once you extend it to its logical extreme.

>Second, I think it is reasonable to assume that had modern instruments
>been available to Bach, he would not have written the same exact music; I'd
>bet my life on it.  So, there is not a perfect match between Bach's music
>and use of modern instruments.  I love Bach keyboard works on the modern
>piano, but I don't fool myself into believing that Bach would have written
>the same way if he had the modern piano.

Personally, I like the idea of a Bach Partita for Unaccompanied Tuba
myself...  But many of us will probably sign up to the idea that the
special character of JSB's music is what enables us to enjoy it on the
modern piano so much, or by an orchestra of "modern" (aka tomorrow's
"period") instruments.  I'm not sure I could do it as well if Couperin
were played thus.

>In conclusion, whether it's HIP or modern, the ultimate test is the
>enjoyment derived by the listener, and enjoyment is about as subjective
>an element as one can find.  Let's stop pontificating about so-called
>objective views and simply zero in on our enjoyment levels.

OK, I'll go back to my corner now...

Bill H.