Would Bach rolling in his grave, or enjoying ????

Who cares what Papa Bach would think -- that was a lot of fun!  A little less banging would have served the music a bit better (definitely a case of sowing-your-oats without subtlety), but Mr. Jones pulled out all the stops and had a rip-roaring good time.  Good for him!

Ultimately, I would think that JSB would initially be spinning in his grave, but -- once he understood the player's intent and the instrument (remember, he'd probably look at that upright like it's from another planet!*) -- grudging acceptance might set in.  (And if you got enough beer in him, then maybe he'd actually start playing that way!)

I've never been one to worry much about the egos of dead composers.  Their works live on to be used & abused by future generations.  One camp will surely argue for "authenticity" (always a dicey subject when concrete proof simply doesn't exist and educated conjecture fills the gaps like putty), while other camps will seek to expand and innovate with the older works.

And then, of course, one could argue about the "authenticity" of the particular work in question, BWV 565.  I fall on the side of the argument where it is most certainly not by JSB, so that throws his opinion out the window anyway;  it's so dissimilar from the other organ toccatas and preludes in so many ways that I simply can't attribute it to him (the fugue takes turns that would be positively alien to him).  It's a brilliant, beautiful piece of work, so who cares about this anyway?  Take it as such and enjoy life. 

(* -- Let's just show him a commercial airplane taking off and hope he doesn't have a heart attack;  that ought to move those sensibilities up through a few centuries.)

I like this version of the Bach better than the original:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG7dnI0bW90

(getting a bit off topic. Has a nice harpsichord in it - there - on topic)

Greg.

well... may I disagree a little bit? I really don't like those versions at all!

First, OK, who cares if it's from JSB or not, but if you listen to other pieces like the italian concerto, you'll have to admit that JSB could write pieces in very different styles, so, why not this toccata?

Second, as a composer myself, I would certainly not be happy that someone else would play "with" my score this way. OK, JSB didn't have an electric guitar, but he knew very well, however, how to write for lute! He even wrote the same piece (in another tuning) for keyboard (petit prélude in Cm) and lute (the same, but in Dm). So...

Next, am I against all improvisation? Certainly not! As a matter of fact, I'm improvising a lot myself, and, for the record, I also wrote 5 concertos and each time, I was hesitating to write or not the "cadenza", leaving it up to the soloist or not... Finally, I wrote them all, but letting a lot of freedom to the musician as well.

I simply think we should keep our respect for the composers. But I'm maybe too much of a purist here, for example I find the piano (original) version of Mussorgsky's "pictures at an exhibition", much, much better than Ravel's orchestration! ;-)

Just my opinion anyway...

Interesting. Thanks.

35 years ago I think that any slight modification in a musicof a famous composer would be take as offensive.
Times change.

Yes, times do change, and that's definitely a good thing.  The academic world (regardless of nation, though some are/were more rabid than others) was on a "preserve the composer's original intentions at all costs" kick for about the past 40-50 years.  I'm very happy to see this attitude's stranglehold on the (especially classical) music world relaxing in the past decade or so, because unless the composer is alive and involved, I think that this concept approaches absolute rubbish.  (Even if the composer's involved, rubbish may result;  I can't stand how Stravinsky conducts his own works, but I'm very happy that more talented conductors can work wonders with the man's excellent music.  On the other side of the coin, I derive very little pleasure from listening to how Mravinsky conducts Shostakovich, despite the conductor's famed reputation, because I think that the composer himself had better ideas for how his music should sound, which Mravinsky disregarded.)

Now, I'm all in favour of having "references" which best demonstrate a composer's or performer's true intentions, but the grass doesn't stop growing just because of this reference point.  Music's a living, breathing thing (or, more precisely, we humans are [mostly] living, breathing things which experience music), and this applies just as much to rock & jazz as it does to the "re-creating" (read:  bringing to life) of works which comprise the "classical" genre. 

Yes, I want to hear how Papa Bach envisioned (and performed!) his music, but I also want to hear more than that.  All the truly "great" works (and even many mediocre ones) have multiple things to say to us, and different experiences are required to squeeze all the juice from the lime (so to speak).

You'll always have mavericks who want to "do it their own way," and the results will vary (just as much as people's tastes!), but I am much more interested in hearing different "takes" on a piece than listening to the same static conception over and over and over again -- even more boring is hearing different people strive for the same static conception!  (You should see my Bruckner symphonies collection:  I've compiled it with the express purpose of hearing as many different takes on the same works as is possible in this day and age.  I clearly prefer some to others, but I have no set standards.  After listening, I have only one ultimate criterion:  was the experience rewarding, or did I enjoy what I just heard?  )

And this is completely a person's right -- I agree, the "original" has many merits.  (And, in my case, I prefer the "original" 1,000 times better than orchestrations of the piece, especially the Stokowski version -- I greatly admire the man, but I just don't like some of the tomfoolery in which he engaged with certain works.  I'll take the "original" -- or even the "ragtime" version above! -- over Stokowski's version any day!!!)

Luc, thanks for your comments.

I think the composer's originals must be respected for recitals na other classic or orthodox presentations. 
Every time a adaptation, or a too personal interpretation would be presented, it should clear say that is a adaptation, a modification.

But I still think some adaptations, like Vanessa Mae use to do, help to cget attention from young people to classic music. Maybe after heard the adaption they try to search for the original.

I'm not one to "draw lines in the sand" with music.  At times, the original (as composed and scored) is desirable; at times this isn't quite as obvious.  (One must recognize that the term "desirable" is highly subjective.)

This version of one of Satie's Gymnopedies has some merit, at least to me (why he tagged them with this name escapes me).

It was a midi file performed by a jazz pianist that has been discussed briefly on this forum.  I rendered it to wave/mp3.

http://www.box.net/shared/1t4phlphmi

Because I like this rendition, I searched and tracked down the other two Gymnopedie compositions which I've rendered to wave and burned to a CD to listen to when I'm travelling.  So in some cases, the argument put forth by Beto has merit.

Glenn

"it can be nice". Sometimes ;-) Your "gymnopedie" is a good example. I think that even Satie could have been satisfied. In fact, this is what I'm trying to say: and it's in the title of this post: would JSB rolling in is grave or enjoying? Please make sure the composer would enjoy ;-)

Just found this in the related videos of the above Jacques Loussier post....and can't resist posting it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iehscct7lJI

Happy Easter everyone!