Talk:Erforsche mich, Gott, und erfahre mein Herz, BWV 136

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Erforsche mich, Gott, und erfahre mein Herz, BWV 136/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: JackTheVicar (talk · contribs) 14:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

• I will start reviewing this later today. Looks like a great article on a beautiful masterpiece. Viva Bach! JackTheVicar (talk) 14:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I plan to do a quick copy-edit of the article for a few minor things, obvious moments to clarify.

Lede section

• I would be specific and say the opening chorus is based off "a verse from Psalm 139", rather than "a Psalm"
  • Later in the next section, when you mention that the opening chorus is based off of Ps. 139:29, are you certain of the verse number? Psalm 129 only has 24 verses, I think you meant verse 23.

I do ;) --GA

• The work is part of Bach's first annual cycle of cantatas, begun when he took up office as Thomaskantor in May 1723 -- Clarify/Specify: Was it when he begun composing the cantatas or begun performing cantatas (as in pieces already written for the occasion)?

tried --GA

History and words

• prescribed readings for the Sunday -- prescribed by whom? Which lectionary?

In Leipzig, it was the same every year, explained in church cantata.I don't know enough about church organisationat the time, and does it matter for this work? Compare FA O heilges Geist- und Wasserbad, BWV 165, for example. --GA

• His text is the first in a group of ten cantatas following the same structure of biblical text – recitative – aria – recitative – aria – chorale. -- This is a little confusing: what exactly do you mean by this? I read it as the cantata's movements were biblically based--as if there were arias and recitatives in the bible.

Can you say better that biblical text is [only] in the first movement? --GA

• The sources show that only the middle section of movement 3.... the sources are whom? I know they're cited in the references, but you should mention on what authority "sources show" and their credentials for saying that from a position of authority (i.e. "University of Berlin musicologist (NAME) says, etc.).

Please give me a better word for "sources": it's the paper we have, score or parts. Trieddifferently--GA

• The other parts may rely on a former unknown secular or church cantata -- what indicates this? who made that assessment?

Not I ;) Gardiner is one, Isoyama another, now mentioned. --GA

Scoring and structure

• Some scholars believe that the second oboe... -- who are the particular scholars? why do they argue that?

Gardiner again, but probably others also, let me check. --GA

Music

• (in 1) The music in the style of a Gigue expresses confidence facing the examination -- is this supported by footnote #5? Whether yes or no, who has this opinion? what authority or evidence supports that opinion?

It's my translation/rephrasing of #5, anintroduction to Bach cantata performances in the Swiss Predigerkirche. Better wording welcome, - perhaps stick to translating Mattheson? --GA

• (in 2) renders in contrast -- what does that mean?

change of mood? --GA

• (in 3) is accompanied by an oboe, an oboe d'amore according to Alfred Dürr and John Eliot Gardiner. Clarify: do you mean "an oboe and oboe d'amore" or that it is typically accompanied by an oboe by some and comparatively/contrastingly Duerr and Gardiner alternatively used an oboe d'amore?

one instrument (see above). Dürr thinks amore, Gardiner uses amore --GA

• (in 3) FOOTNOTE 12 has an "Check |url= scheme" error in it.

fixed --GA

• (in 3) It contrasts to the beginning in both marking, Presto vs. Adagio, and time, 12/8 vs. common time -- explain this/clarify this. Do you mean that the middle section is marked with an "adagio" tempo and in common time to the first section's being marked with a "presto" tempo and with a 12/8 time signature? I would prefer you avoid the "vs."

tried --GA

• (in 4) tends to an arioso in the last measures -- elaborate on that--how does it "tend"?

Dürr's German wording "tendiert zu", - it's more melismatic than a normal secco, but is not marked Arioso, - how would you say that?

• Gerda Arendt when I think of "tend" I think of the verb "neigen". It is acceptable in that I can't think of a better alternative phrase. JackTheVicar (talk) 21:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

• How would "leans towards" compare? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

• (in 5) in the style of duets Bach wrote in Köthen -- why is this important? expand on what that means (what the Koethen style is) in particular to how it is used by Bach in this movement of this cantata.

It supports that it was written earlier, without the sources going into deeper description of the differences. How to say that? --GA

• (in 6) to five parts by an independent violin -- do you mean the four-part choir and one violin part, or are you adding a violin part to the two already scored?

Five parts, four vocal, one violin. - The Bischof source has exactly which instrument plays with which voice but I'd find it a bit boring reading, no? --GA

• (in 6) Was BWV136 written later than BWV172 or earlier? The implication that I get from the sentence is that Bach wrote BWV172 and used the technique again when writing BWV136. If BWV172 is written later, would it not be clearer to say Bach used the technique again in BWV172?

172 was written much earlier, in 1714, added. --GA

Recordings

• What is a "Bach" orchestra type? You don't clarify it other than saying a "large group" is indicated by red. How does that compare with a historical/period instrument recording?

More detail in FAs, such as the mentioned 172. Changing to Instr.

Thank you for fresh eyes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

• Gerda Arendt - it has been a busy week, I will take a look at your improvements and see if anything else is needed tomorrow morning. I promise. JackTheVicar (talk) 01:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Passing statement

I am not one for the GA-review templates, but wanted to say that I have passed/promoted this article status after assessing that it satisfies the 6 criteria listed at WP:WIAGA. Congratulations. JackTheVicar (talk) 22:11, 18 October 2015 (UTC)