Einsamkeit, O Stilles Wesen – German Cantatas of the Baroque
Christian August JACOBI (1688-after 1725)
Meine Sünden gehen über mein Haupt [12:50]
Johann David HEINICHEN (1683-1729)
Einsamkeit, O Stilles Wesen [15:29]
Musicalischer Circul [2:12]
Johann KUHNAU (1660-1722)
Ich habe Lust abzuscheiden [16:58]
Ernst Nicolaus THAUR (1673-1723)
Der Segen des Herren machet reich [11:10]
Johann Sebastian BACH (1685-1750)
Kleines harmonisches Labyrinth, BWV591 [3:34]
Alles was von Gott geboren, BWV80a [14:59]
Sybilla Rubens (soprano), David Erler (alto), Hans-Jörg Mammel (tenor), Thomas Gropper (bass)
Ralf Waldner (cembalo)
L‘arpa festante/Christoph Hesse
rec. 2017, Ev. Kirche Niedereggenen, Germany
Texts and translations provided
CHRISTOPHORUS CHR77437 [67:13]
This has been waiting to be reviewed for some time, as I have been struggling to know what to write. On one hand, the release has works by two composers – Jacobi and Thaur – whose presence in the discography would seem to be very minimal as well as two others – Kuhnau and Heinichen – whose place in history is well established, even if their presence in the catalogue isn’t as strong. Added to this is a new reconstruction of a Weimer cantata from JSB. All cantatas are first recordings as far as I can tell.
On the other hand, there is a lack of dynamic range that pervades the entire disc, which may be attributable, in part, to the small forces involved - twelve instrumentalists and eight singers - though I have heard similarly sized groups without this shortcoming. However, what I didn’t expect were the generally restrained tempos. I compared the Bach, which employs the same music as his famous Leipzig cantata BWV80, with the Bach Collegium Japan recording, and the difference was immediately obvious: the BCJ performance is quicker but also so much more characterful.
Jacobi’s biographical information is sufficiently scant that his death date is unknown. It is known that from 1717 he was Kapellmeister at the court of Duchess Louise Elisabeth von Sachsen-Merseburg for whom this work was written. The notes describe it as in a madrigal style, and it does have an older feel than one might expect for a work of the period.
All the music of Heinichen’s that I’d encountered previously has been full of vitality and grandeur, which made this rather sombre piece quite a surprise. The notes describe some of its arias as “operatic” and it is true that they require a good deal of vocal dexterity on the part of the soloists. However, even the faster arias are robbed of vitality by the restricted dynamics.
The Kuhnau is the prime example of the problem with the recording. It is uniformly slow, and delivered with a consistent tone that makes it drag more than it probably should. I listened to a Hyperion recording with the King’s Consort of some similar works and, yes they are generally slow, but there was a degree of lightness in those performances that I didn’t hear in the performances being considered here.
Thaur’s biographical information is even more sketchy than for Jacobi. It is known that he worked in Eisenach for some time, and that the main part of his career was in the court of Sachsen-Zeitz. This seems to be a first recording of any of his works, and to bring a more positive note to the review, this was the one work that made me sit up and pay attention, rather than drift off into a stupor. Yes, it is still mostly slow, and feels much earlier than its suggested date of 1719. Nevertheless, it has a certain something that I found appealing, and I wondered what Bach Collegium Japan would make of it.
The booklet is silent on why two short solo cembalo pieces (Heinichen and Bach) have been included. The Heinichen does bring a more sprightly tempo, but the nature of the instrument means that it still sounds solemn (a more polite adjective than “dull”). The Bach work is more usually performed on the organ, and a quick listen to one recording shows it to much greater advantage than here where the effect is almost stasis.
Is the overall lack of dynamic contrast due to the recording venue? I don’t think so. Certainly, I’ve heard brighter, more detailed recordings, but I think the main responsibility comes from the choices that the performers have made. I recognise that these works are of a devotional nature, and therefore, should be treated accordingly, but a little more feeling surely is appropriate. Perhaps the best summary of this is in the notes where in the commentary of the Kuhnau, a line of the text is quoted and the word MELANCHOLY is emphasised in capitals. That probably says it all.
David Barker
