Name: Bach
ISBN: 9780375415296

Bach

Johann Sebastian Bach is one of the most unfathomable composers in the history of music. How can such sublime work have been produced by a man who (when we can discern his personality at all) seems so ordinary, so opaque, and occasionally so intemperate? John Eliot Gardiner grew up passing one of the only two authentic portraits of Bach every morning and evening on the stairs of his parents' house, where it hung for safety during World War II. He has been studying and performing Bach ever since, and is now regarded as one of the composer's greatest living interpreters. The fruits of this lifetime's immersion are distilled in this remarkable book, grounded in the most recent Bach scholarship but moving far beyond it, and explaining in wonderful detail the ideas on which Bach drew, how he worked, how his music is constructed, how it achieves its effects, and what it can tell us about Bach the man. Gardiner's background as a historian has encouraged him to search for ways in which scholarship and performance can cooperate and fruitfully coalesce. This has entailed piecing together the few biographical shards, scrutinizing the music, and watching for those instances when Bach's personality seems to penetrate the fabric of his notation. Gardiner's aim is "to give the reader a sense of inhabiting the same experiences and sensations that Bach might have had in the act of music-making.

What Hacker News says

telesillaDec 2022

Bach's life is so hidden from us in terms of letters from him, but we know enough to write some pretty good biographies. My personal favorite is Music in the Castle of Heaven, by John Eliot Gardiner the conductor. Who knows Bach better than those who know his music so intimately?

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17883941-bach

I also recommend learning a few notes on the keyboard and playing something of his, perhaps the first prelude of the collection they mention in the article. It's magnificent, how he plays with time and harmony.

thread

diego_moitaDec 2022

The book is indeed good.

For those wanting a sample of Gardiner's knowledge I'd recommend the documentary presented by him "Bach - A Passionate Life"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZVn9NZqyxs

thread

gtycombOct 2018

About Bach's involvement and contributions in organ building technology of his age, the point of view comes from here discussed at length:

"Bach: Music in the Castle of Heaven" by John Eliot Gardiner. He is a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Eliot_Gardiner

A detailed comparison with modern music comes from a recent author whose name slips my mind. He taught at Columbia University, a journalist, his entire book is on the relationship of Bach with all kinds of recorded music in digital age.

thread

gtycombJun 2017

English Conductor Sir. John Eliot Gardiner, who grew up singing and learning Bach cantatas as a child, he has published a lovely book "Bach: Music in the Castle of heaven". I think these lines from the very opening of his book will also enlighten us --

"Bach the musician is an unfathomable genius; Bach the man is all too obviously flawed, disappointingly ordinary and in many ways still invisible to us. In fact we seem to know less about his private life than about that of any other major composer of the last 400 years. Unlike, say, Monteverdi, Bach left behind no intimate family correspondence, and very little beyond the anecdotal has come down to us that can help in painting a more human portrait or to allow a glimpse of him – as son, lover, husband or father. Perhaps there was a fundamental reluctance in him to pull back the curtain and reveal himself; unlike most of his contemporaries, he turned down the opportunity to submit a written account of his life and career when the opportunity arose. The limited, heavily edited version that we have inherited is one he himself spun and handed down to his children. It is not surprising some have concluded that Bach the man is something of a bore."

thread

RochusOct 2025

The author's central claim is that AI is just an "averaging machine" that can only reproduce patterns. From that he seems to conclude that "AI will never create truly great music". As a musician myself, I don't think that this conclusion works; neither do I consider the other arguments of the author (as far as I understand them) convincing. The author describes "experiments" with his "listening party": by presenting two excellent recordings of the same piece, the author forces guests to confront a crucial reality: even between two technically brilliant performances of identical music, there are subtle, meaningful differences that can be heard and felt. I agree with that; it even corresponds to my own experience: I didn't recognize the beauty of Bach's Matthäus and Johannes Passions until I heard a recording by John Elliot Gardiner and his team for the first time (ironically, in the credits of a hollywood film); that moment - thirty years ago - was was truly an epiphany; before that, I had always listened to recordings by supposedly great German artists, with those bombastic vibratos that you have to endure in Wagner, which completely overshadowed the modest and perfect beauty of Bach's work.

But that doesn't say anything about computer-generated music. I've been following its development for even more than thirty years, and we did indeed have to wait until 2025 to hear completely convincing results for the first time. The models currently available are optimized for pop, jazz, and other music styles, but not yet for classical music. However, there are already studies that have made it very clear that almost 100% of people can no longer distinguish between human-made and machine-made music (I'll provide a reference on request). I last tried this in May, letting Suno interpret my own pieces, and was impressed in every respect (here are the examples: https://rochus-keller.ch/?p=1350). The arrangement and the musicality evident in the interpretation clearly have a human quality. It is simply not true, that the choice between classical recordings proves that greatness cannot be achieved through averaging or pattern-matching. Much great music, including classical masterpieces and jazz standards, works precisely because it follows established patterns and conventions while introducing variations within those structures. E.g. in Jazz, an improvisation itself is pattern-based, using scales, chord progressions, rhythmic conventions, with creative variations. If AI can learn these patterns and introduce variations (which Suno demonstrably does), why can't that be "great"?

To my knowledge, we don't have LLMs yet trained especially to generate classical music (at least I haven't heard a convincing one so far). In this respect, I have to agree with the author that, at least in the classical field, we don't have the same quality as in other musical styles (yet). But that is only a matter of time, and it is not for the reasons the author supposes. As demonstrated with my - and actually also the authors - example, even among human artists, there can be huge quality differences. The author's "immortal souls" retreat is essentially an abandonment of empirical arguments for unfalsifiable metaphysics, which essentially concedes the technical debate.

thread

ergoproxyFeb 2014

Review of the book Bach: Music in the Castle of Heaven by John Eliot Gardiner. A couple other reviews in the NYTimes http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/books/bach-music-in-the-ca...

...and the Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/book-revie...

The Bach piece that most moves me is the 2nd movement (Largo) of Harpsicord Concerto No. 5 in F-minor (BWV 1056) here played by Glen Gould in 1957 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0zPokdN2wg [video]

What Bach work moves you?

thread