Favorite Tempo Bach Cello Suite

[WGWTR180]

There will be many answers but what's your favorite tempo for the Sarabande from Bach Cello Suite #5??

[hyperbolica]

Do you mean this one:https://musescore.com/micrologus/scores/1219511

My LaFosse edition shows this as part of suite IV. Anyway, LaFosse marks this at mm48, but I like it closer to mm60, and very rubato.

[WGWTR180]

Interesting. My Douglas Yeo version is marked cello Suite 5, movement 4.

[WilliamLang]

The musescore is written as the same movement and suite, just in a different order. I also believe that the 5th suite (though it might have been the 6th) had scordatura tuning on the cello where the highest A string is tuned even high (to B iirc,) and the notes for that string are transposed a major 2nd (or sounding a 2nd lower than written.)

The Yeo version has the correct concert pitch notes, and the musescore version has the transposed version.

[BGuttman]

I'm pretty sure that the 6th is the one with scordatura.

I'm going to follow this with interest to see who does what with the piece. I have cello recordings at all kinds of tempi -- it really depends on the interpretation of the soloist.

[hyperbolica]

LaFosse transposed the entire set of suites up a P4, I assume to make them more playable on the tenor trombone. In the original key they lie well on bass bone.

[imsevimse]

LaFosse transposed the entire set of suites up a P4, I assume to make them more playable on the tenor trombone. In the original key they lie well on bass bone.

That's how I play them on tenor AND on bass, but I have a book with original key too, It's better for bass. When it comes to the tempo I think, it depends. There are a lot of adjustments that needs to be done to play this music on trombone anyway. We just have to breath somewere and to do that we need to do some changes because a cello can play forever. The breath need to be musically prepared. Some play rubato to be able to breath without it to sound awkward but then the rubato may be awkward and destroy everything. You need to experiment. Some skip a few notes to make room for a breath but in the editions we use this has already been done by the editor. Some skip movements that are too hard to play technically and musically. Tempo? Of course tempo need to be adjusted too, but good thing is these Cello suites sound good in many different tempos. I've too thought about this a lot. I think "use what works", "what you can do musically" is what to try, what makes sense. Nothing is right and nothing is wrong but everything concerning this needs to be a compromise, most because we need to breath. I think one reason they are not more recorded by tromboneplayers is this is really hard music for trombone players to do without loosing the music in the music

/Tom

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[WGWTR180]

Do you mean this one:https://musescore.com/micrologus/scores/1219511

My LaFosse edition shows this as part of suite IV. Anyway, LaFosse marks this at mm48, but I like it closer to mm60, and very rubato.

So I'm curious. Does anyone else have this marked as Cello Suite #4? It's clearly Suite #5 so this perplexes me.

[RustBeltBass]

Rather than saying a number, I will go with something a little more cryptic but genuine: A tempo that still allows for me to demonstrate the dance qualities of a sarabande. That means a somewhat steady tempo, playing with rubato and ritardando to a degree that keeps the form mostly intact.

What that tempo exactly is in beats has been different during the years.

Sometimes I listen to very, very slow versions that amaze me for 4-8 measures with the musicianship and the Legato but as the Sarabande continues it seems to me the musical ideas get lost in the process of trying to do too many things with it rather than having the beauty of the individual note and the slur into the next one speak for itself. Paired with the physical requirements to make it through and our need to breathe sometimes these versions seem to somewhat become chaotic and out of control.

[hyperbolica]

My LaFosse edition doesn't have a forward, but in some notes on the cover, it just says "adapted for tenor trombone" in French.

The sarabande you're talking about is included in the IV suite, but there's another sarabande earlier in the suite, so Andre might have combined a couple into a single suite. I'm not trying to claim LaFosse is definitive, it's clearly an adaptation, but it's the set I've been playing since the mid '80s, so I'm a little partial. Low C is good practice on a tenor, but it's hard to be musical on that note with all of it's shortcomings. John Swallow set me on my path with these in my first year of study with him. My book in the earlier suites is all marked up with chord symbols, phrase and breath marks.

sarabande.jpg

I agree with rust belt that there is such a thing as too slow on these, where you start to lose the tune. I think LaFosse's marking of 48 is in that territory, although I've heard a lot of cellists play it there.

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[musicofnote]

content deleted by author

[RustBeltBass]

Very interesting videos to watch and I like the thoughts shared here. I played through some of the movements of different suites in college in Germany, but it was not until I moved to the US that I realized how important some of them, especially the sarabande, are for auditioners on bass and second trombone.

What makes these pieces so beautiful to listen to and so much fun to work on them for me, is that there are so many interesting possibilities on what one can do with them.
For auditions I built a version of the Sarabande that checks many boxes for “audition ears”.

I still do not think it is a fantastic choice for trombone audition purporses as so many teachers and performers feel strongly about how this should be played. I think that by looking at it as an audition piece trombonists have forgotten how it found its way into our repertoire.

[CalgaryTbone]

Do you mean this one:https://musescore.com/micrologus/scores/1219511

My LaFosse edition shows this as part of suite IV. Anyway, LaFosse marks this at mm48, but I like it closer to mm60, and very rubato.

So I'm curious. Does anyone else have this marked as Cello Suite #4? It's clearly Suite #5 so this perplexes me.

I worked out of the LaFosse versions of the suites in school, but I don't think they are used as much these days. Besides the keys being changed, and the editing allowing for them to be played on a straight tenor, I think one Suite was omitted, and that would account for the numbering not being the same as the originals.

Jim Scott