Mike Leghorn:

>At the risk of being banned from this group, I'd like to share my opion
>about Bach's choral music in general: too much going on!  Bach, who could
>improvise three-part fugues, routinely endowed his music with complex
>counterpoint and relentless logic, sometimes with unmusical results.

Mike!  GO TO YOUR ROOM!

>For keyboard, soloists, and small ensembles, it's not so much of a
>problem, but for chorus, it is.  For choral music, I much prefer Handel.
>I haven't heard the Parrott version of the B Minor, but I wouldn't be
>surprised if it sounded better than the versions with large forces, for
>the reason stated above.

Actually, I think you've put your finger on what is wrong with a lot of
Bach choral performances.  It sounds like mud.  But that's got a lot to
do with the fact that most choruses don't do Bach very well.  Part of
that comes from the size -- anything over 60 singers asks for trouble.
But mainly it has to do with singers and conductors not knowing how the
music is structured (believe me, I've sung in enough bad Bach performances
to be entitled to an opinion), what the other parts are and their relative
importance in the musical texture, imprecise attack and rhythm, mushy
diction, etc.  etc.  You can get away with this sort of thing in Handel
(whose music I love), as the old Ormandy/Mormon Tabernacle Choir recording
of Messiah shows, but not in Bach.

Steve Schwartz