Luogo e data di registrazione		St. Johann, Oberneuland, Bremen (Germany)
	Registrazione: live / studio		studio
	Producer		-
	Prima Edizione LP		Telefunken "Kammermusik" Vol. 4 - 6.35373 EX - (2 LP) - durata 72' 36" - (p) 1977 - Analogico
	Edizione "Reference" CD		Tedec - 8.43771 ZS - (1 CD) - LC 3706 - durata 72' 36" - (c) 1987 - AAD
	Cover		Detail aus einem barocken Bilderrahmen mit König David, Musen, Tugenden und Lastern. Buchsbaumholz / Holland gegen 1670, mit freudlicher Genehmigung des Museums für Kunst und Gewerbe, Hamburg.

The Organ Version of the Art of Fugue It has no doubt at last been proved that J. S. Bach composed his Art of Fugue neither for an imaginary orchestra nor as a theoretical instructional work. Bach was too much of a practical musician not always to have in mind a genuine sound when composing, or to regard his music merely as an abstract model for compositional study and analysis. Moreover, Bach was mainly an organist and harpsichord player. Despite composition in the “Italian” score form which was usual at that time for playing keyboard instruments, it has been apparent for some years that the long standing undisputed thesis concerning inability of the work to be played on a keyboard instrument has ceased to be tenable. In the entire work Bach limits himself to the fingering range of two hands, which can only have been intentional. Similarly the part augmentations towards the end of some fugues point to a keyboard instrument; at that time there was as yet no “divisi” in the orchestra. Several research projects have gone into this problem. Hans Gal for instance says: “... for Bach and his contemporaries it was taken for granted that the Art of Fugue was written for ‘Clavir’”. In his edition, Tovey emphasises that “...no rule of counterpoint was more conscientiously observed by Bach than restriction of the part-leading to the fingering range of the hands”. G. Leonhardt in his treatise on the Art of Fugue gave a great deal of detailed thought to this aspect. This work was often played in concertante style on the harpsichord. The object of this essay is to explain more clearly why representation on the organ has also been constantly considered, why the organ in particular should appear to be especially suitable for giving tonal effect to this compendium of fugues, and in fact why this work can be ideally interpreted on the organ. The performability of many fugues is technically considerably alleviated and simplified by the use of a pedal keyboard, while the polyphony is elucidated; furthermore the pedal ensures the complete tonal independence of the bass part. When incorporating the pedal, however, one is more inclined to think of the organ than the pedal harpsichord. Use of the pedal appears to be particularly propitious, even necessary, with regard to the mirror fugues. In view of the fact that, for instance, the three-voice mirror fugues can only be performed by occasionally extreme part shifting or exchanging, with two hands in the original position - which of course would strongly inhibit the independence of the three voices - we can perhaps understand why Bach arranged these fugues for two harpsichords (each with an added free voice). However, the composer must not necessarily have conceived this arrangement as an integral part of the overall work. On the organ the three-voice mirror fugues project themselves as genuine “organ trios”: each hand on its own manual and pedal. As regards the four-voice mirror fugues, the theme cues can also be considerably emphasised by the incorporation of pedal play and the use of two manuals. In the Contrapunctus VII (per augmentationem et diminutionem) for instance, the theme augumentation, which of course runs through all four voices (bass, tenor, alt, soprano), can be made clearly audible by shifting to the pedal and suitable registration (tongues!). When performed on the organ, many of the part-leading characteristics of the work are more easily heard than on the harpsichord, and in fact are often heard for the first time: pedal points, stationary parts, lengthy ties, syncopation, cantus firmus-type formations and theme augmentation. Altogether, the affinity in part-leading, setting, character and emotion with many fugues of the great Bach organ works is conspicuous. Compare for instance the counterpoints I, IV, V, X, XI and XVII, whose bass voices are certainly led in “organ pedal style”, with the fugues of the “Dorian” toccata, the F major toccata, the passacaglia, the preludes in C minor, C major, C major in 9/8 time, of the grand preludes in B minor, E minor, E-flat major. Counterpoint VII is completely composed in the form of a chorale prelude (the theme augmentation according with the cantus firmus). Counterpoint XVI accords to a large degree with the fast movements from the organ trio sonatas. Notation of the Art of Fugue is also attuned to the organ. Organ works in score form have existed since the 16th century, especially in Italy (hence the name “Italian” organ score or “keyboard partitura”), starting with works by Padovano, Maschera, Frescobaldi; many of the printed scores are expressly intended for the organ. Above all, this score form remained restricted to the sector of contrapuntally strict forms! It also turned up in Germany (Scheidt, Schonsleder) at the beginning of the 17th century. Bach himself had possessed since 1714 a copy of this kind of Frescobaldi’s “Fiori musicali”, and in the representation of some contrapuntal late works evidently reverted to this form. The famous six-voice ricercare from the Musical Offering observes this system of notation and nevertheless - already apparent from spur-of-themoment improvised elements and then noted down - is a harpsichord piece. Similar notation applies to the “Canonic Variations on ‘Vom Himmel hoch, da komm ich her’”. This after all bears a strong relationship to the Art of Fugue which then, precisely for this reason, was able to appear without any performance practice directions. Marpurg praised as a special advantage of the works the fact “that everything in it is written in the score.” From the tonal point of view, rendition on the organ also has major advantages over other keyboard instruments. By way of suitable and varying registration one can also as regards tone clearly distinguish the individual fugues from each other, emphasise their character in the rhythm and singularity (“in style francese”!) and, if necessary or desirable, tonally differentiate between individual voices, various emotions or emotional changes. From this point of view too, the instrument by Ahrend of Bremen-Oberneuland seems to me to be eminently suitable for performing the Art of Fugue. The North German prinzipal tone enables the voice fabric of complicated counterpoint, especially the middle voices, to be heard three dimensionally and strengthens their independence. And now a few points concerning selection of the fugues in my version and their sequence. The sequence of counterpoint I to XI was laid down by Bach himself in the first edition. The version of the second double fugue without first exposition via the countersubject can be discarded as a duplicate; similarly the arrangement of the three-voice mirror fugue for two keyboard instruments, since of course the original is played. From the point of view of compositional technique, the canonic fugues probably best of all indicate progressive development in the sequence all’ottava, alla duodecima, alla decima and per augmentationem in contrario motu. The chorale prelude “Vor deinen Throhn” belongs to the cycle of the “Eighteen Chorales” and was placed by Ph. E. Bach, probably for pious reasons, together with the uncompleted triple (“Quadruple-”) fugue, at the conclusion of the assumedly unfinished work. It was therefore not included in my version, and similarly the incomplete fugue is also omitted. As regards the latter, there are some differences of opinion as to whether this torso is part of the Art of Fugue or not. Even Spitta and A. Schweitzer came out against this movement being part of the Art of Fugue. A more interesting explanation is that of G. Leonhardt, who analysed the Art of Fugue together with the musicologist Henk Dieben. He discovered that the Art of Fugue - excluding the uncompleted piece - contains the same number of bars as the Well-Tempered Clavier I. In turn, in respect of the latter, Dieben found number squares which in the most varied connections repeatedly reveal Bach numbers: 29-J,S,B.-S.D.G. For the rest, one might mention that the original theme, despite the Nottebohm experiment, fits neither harmonically (un-Bach-like friction in the third bar) nor in the sole possible combination (original theme would end three bars before the three other themes) into this fugue. However, if the “uncompleted” work were to take up once more the original theme after three expositions, it would be of inordinate length (about 300 bars). By leaving out the torso section the entire work itself becomes more integrated and cyclic. In my opinion, however, with the four-voice mirror fugues in 3/2 time (hinting at the Holy Trinity by the tempus perfectum?) which otherwise produce the original theme unchanged (as so often at the end of a variation sequence, and after all the Art of Fugue is also a variation work), the conclusion becomes artistically more convincing. Herbert Tachezi English translation by Frederick A. Bishop