David Harbin writes:

>>For Bach I'd go for the incredible bargain of Andrew Parrott's
>>recording of the B Minor just released this week at superbargain price
>>on Virgin Veritas doubles.  Top choice on BBC Radio 3 Building a Library.

Don Satz replies to David Harbin:

>Top choice? That's quite a honor, and Parrott's is a great version.
>Leaving Leonhardt's recording aside, I can't think of a version I like more
>than the Parrott which shows how silly the contention is that one voice
>per part can't possibly convey the majesty of Bach's music.  Fewer voices
>simply means lower volume, although microphone placement can take care of
>that issue.  I find that the one voice per part approach can be just as
>incisive, majestic, and expressive as the use of multiple voices per part.

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.  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.

I guess I've sealed my fate with these remarks.  I expect condemnation to
follow:-)

Mike