A Missing Accidental in the Goldberg Variations?

[OCTO]

Flesch went for F (as many do), but then subsequently forgot the undoubted

I was also forced to play from Flesch, but later I realized how damaging some of his editorial decisions were.  For instance, here he moved the melody from the lower voice into the secondary voice.  In reality, it is the upper voice that should be broken away, not the lower.

Later, when I was about 25, I abandoned Flesch.  As I played the complete Sonatas and Partitas (BWV 1001–1006), I ordered a somewhat flattened bridge that allowed me to play three-note chords unbroken, even at slow tempos.  That was when I realized just how much Flesch had gotten wrong.

In the Urtext we trust!

[John Ruggero]

Regarding the A flat Fugue, you are certainly in good company, harpsi. My copy of the fugue in Bach's hand shows a D natural and most editions I checked follow suit. There is one manuscript by a Bach student that has no natural sign, and perhaps the copy shown in your post is based on that manuscript.

[John Ruggero]

OCTO, There are Urtexts and then there are Urtexts. And sometimes the editors of critical editions are not performing musicians. So I don't trust anyone but the composer.

Did you know the Enescu copy at IMSLP? And if so, what do you think think of it?

https://vmirror.imslp.org/files/imglnks ... rtitas.pdf

[OCTO]

OCTO, There are Urtexts and then there are Urtexts. And sometimes the editors of critical editions are not performing musicians. So I don't trust anyone but the composer.

Did you know the Enescu copy at IMSLP? And if so, what do you think think of it?

https://vmirror.imslp.org/files/imglnks ... rtitas.pdf

Well, Enescu was undoubtedly a great violinist and a great composer, but he is very much rooted in the Romantic tradition.  The fingerings, in particular, tend to favor second and third position, even where many passages could be played comfortably in first position, and not talking about Flesch "sul G"-ugliness in Chaconne.

As you can see from the edition I studied, this was also strongly encouraged by my teachers.  Once, I challenged my professor by playing the entire passage without vibrato, staying in first position whenever possible, using open strings, and with a light bow stroke.  He simply replied, "You can play like that after you finish your studies."

To me, that reflected the kind of pedagogical indoctrination that was common in the Eastern Europe...

So, I don't favor Enescu's edition actually.

Later on, I played from Urtext only.

Pay attention to the first beat in measure 6 — I forced not to play a pseudo It+6, but rather the regular D7 chord!

[OCTO]

Oh yes, and I found this, regarding the post earlier.

What Flesch did here is so destructive.  He split the main melody in the lower voice into several fragments and reassigned it to the secondary, upper voice, even adding espr. as if it were the principal melodic line.  It is the exact opposite of what Bach wrote.

[John Ruggero]

It is much the same in the piano world, unfortunately. So much teaching is, as you said, indoctrination, and this has lead to a sterile style of playing. Many pianists think that interpretation is finding out what The Tradition is and following that, or simply imitating what they hear, instead of thinking for themselves. Interpretation can only come from a deep understanding of the music, which allows musicians to express themselves with great freedom. And freedom is what keeps music fresh and alive.

[OCTO]

Pay attention to the first beat of measure 6.  I had to fight for the right not to play this "pseudo–It.+6" chord, but instead the ordinary D7 chord, exactly as Bach wrote it.

I actually had to argue with my teachers just to be allowed to play what was written in the score.  The most recordings are with Eb.

20260804_224103 (2).jpg (28.32 KiB) Viewed 456 times

[Mr_Incognito]

Pay attention to the first beat of measure 6.  I had to fight for the right not to play this "pseudo–It.+6" chord, but instead the ordinary D7 chord, exactly as Bach wrote it.

I actually had to argue with my teachers just to be allowed to play what was written in the score.  The most recordings are with Eb.
20260804_224103 (2).jpg

The way it is written IS a bit confusing.

[OCTO]

Pay attention to the first beat of measure 6.  I had to fight for the right not to play this "pseudo–It.+6" chord, but instead the ordinary D7 chord, exactly as Bach wrote it.

I actually had to argue with my teachers just to be allowed to play what was written in the score.  The most recordings are with Eb.
20260804_224103 (2).jpg

The way it is written IS a bit confusing.

Yes, but when I play E , I get an epiphanic* experience.
An It+ should have Eb in the bass line, and it should go into the dominant (major) chord.  I don't remember it was used in pure D7⁻⁵ way as Flesch claimed.

* epiphany [ih-pif-uh-nee] – a sudden, intuitive perception of or insight into the reality or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by some simple, homely, or commonplace occurrence or experience.

[John Ruggero]

Another possibly missing accidental in the Master of Masters!

The New Bach Edition as well as the old Breitkopf and Hartel Complete works have E flat. The editors may have considered the i6 in D minor triad to arrive on beat one with the bass note G and the middle voice E flat (decorated by a chromatic neighbor C sharp) as suspensions that resolve on the second quarter within the i6 harmony.. The harmonic progression would be II6 followed by i6. This is shown at A below. I find the tritone at "ouch" very disagreeable.

But the autograph and the several contemporary copies of the autographs at IMSLP all have E natural. The harmonic progression is II6 V2 i6. This is shown at B.

Had Bach wanted an E flat, he would have had to cancel the E natural 8 melody notes later in the measure, but he didn't do that. Two errors in one measure seem unlikely to me.

All in all, B would seem to be correct and it is exactly what is in the manuscript.

I think that the editor's expectations of seeing a cautionary accidental in front of the E may have influenced their opinion. Perhaps Bach did not feel it necessary. Perhaps he didn't usually use cautionary accidentals in such a situation. That would take some research to determine. And there may be other evidence to take into consideration.

Sonata I.png (75.31 KiB) Viewed 442 times