Editor's note: Dr. J. William Denton, Associate Professor of Oboe at Indiana State University, Terre Haute, Indiana, received his D.M.A. from the Eastman School of Music in 1977. This article is taken from his doctoral dissertation. Dr. Denton is principal oboist with the Terre Haute Symphony Orchestra and is a member of the Indiana State University Woodwind Quintet.
Bach's earliest church cantatas were written for Mühlhausen, where he was organist at the church of St. Blasium from the summer of 1707 to the summer of 1708. With the exception of Cantata 71, "Gott ist mein König," the instrumental forces employed at Mühlhausen were meager. However, from one of the surviving documents of the church, dated 6 March 1688 or 1689, one learns that there was a local music society, whose membership embraced the singers and players of the city and the surrounding district. [1] The society was distinct from the boys of the town-school, the official church choir members, the civic organists, and the six stadtpfeifern (town instrumentalists used for special occasions). The unusually elaborate instrumental resources of Cantata 71 can probably be explained by the availability of these musicians, both amateur and professional, and by the fact that the cantata was written for the inauguration of a new Town Council. The score is laid out in four "choirs": (1) three trumpets and timpani; (2) two recorders and violoncello; (3) two oboes and bassoon, and (4) two violins, viola, and violone. The fact that oboes appear in two of the four cantatas written for Mühlhausen suggests the presence of at least a pair of competent players.
In 1708 Bach was appointed to the Duke of Sachsen-Weimar in the position of Cammermusicus, i.e., an instrumentalist required to take part, either as a harpsichord player or as a violinist, in the small ensemble which the Duke maintained. [2] In March 1714, the Duke promoted him to Concertmeister, with the specific duty of composing and performing a new work every month. At this time a new series of cantatas began, but came to an abrupt end in late 1716. Bach apparently ceased composing when he did not receive the expected appointment of Capellmeister (director of music).
The Duke's musical establishment was very small. Lists of instrumentalists for the years 1714-1716 show that there was one bassoonist, three violinists, a double bassist, and six trumpeters and a timpanist. [3] The string players were possibly joined on occasion by Bach himself, and no doubt one of them played viola. The trumpeters and timpanist were employed for ceremonial duties, and their presence enabled Bach to introduce them into cantatas for festal occasions. No oboes are mentioned in the official records; they were probably supplied from the ranks of the town musicians. [4] The majority of the cantatas written for Weimar contain no oboe parts. [5] However, the nature of the parts for those cantatas that are scored for oboe suggests that Bach had at least one outstanding performer at his service.
A new chapter in Bach's professional life opened in 1717 upon his appointment to the post of Capellmeister at the Court of the Prince Leopold of Anhalt Cöthen. In that position Bach had no opportunity for writing or composing church music because most of his attention was turned to the composition of instrumental music. To this period belong many of his best-known works for the harpsichord, violin, flute, cello, and orchestra.
By the time Bach came to Cöthen, Prince Leopold had acquired a small orchestra of professional players. [6] The dissolution of the Hofcapelle at Berlin in 1713 enabled the Prince to acquire several new musicians; the Capellmeister from Berlin, a violoncellist, several violinists and a certain Johann Ludwig Rose, an oboist. [7] Rose was evidently much esteemed as a performer, since, he accompanied the Prince, along with Bach and four other outstanding musicians, to Carlsbad for medical reasons. [8] Nothing is recorded about the visit; however, it does seem likely that the Prince, when passing through Leipzig and when in the company of noted musicians, would be anxious to display only the finest performers of his court.
When Bach moved to Leipzig in 1723, he found the available instrumentalists inadequate in number and in skill for his purposes. The stadtpfeifern supplied him with eight musicians: two trumpeters, two oboists, three violinists and an apprentice who played bassoon. [9] The instrumental forces that Bach desired, though modest, are a matter of record. In his Short but most necessary Draft for a well-appointed Church Music... (submitted to the Leipzig Town Council, 23 August 1730), Bach lists the numbers and types of players necessary for "well-appointed church music." [10] Bach requested two or three first violinists, a similar number of second violinists, two or three oboists, one or two bassoonists, three trumpeters and one timpanist - a minimum of eighteen performers. In a note Bach adds: "if it happens that the church piece is composed with flutes also, as very often happens for variety's sake, at least two more persons are needed." [11]
University students or alumni of the St. Thomas School were often called upon to fill in for the musicians that Bach requested in vain. The 1730 document tells us that students from the university received no pay for their services and were becoming increasingly unwilling to continue without compensation. Bach also reminded the Town Council that the viola, violoncello, and violone had to be played by students thus limiting the quality of these parts and in turn effecting the chorus. It should be noted that Bach's enumeration excluded both horns and trombones. However, they are implicit when Bach speaks of "trumpeters." For centuries the trumpeters were known as the blowers (die Bläser) responsible for Blasmusik. It can be clearly seen in examination records that any stadtpfeifer was proficient on a variety of wind instruments, including the trumpet, horn, and trombone. [12]
Since all professional musicians played several instruments, it is likely that a given performer would play another instrument, if his principal instrument was not being used in a movement or on a particular Sunday. Johann Schneider, organist of the St. Nicholas Church and a pupil of Bach, "explicitly directed his horn and oboe players in certain movements of a wedding cantata of his composition to put down those instruments and take up their violins." [13] Thus, Bach's Leipzig orchestra was a mixed body of professional and amateur players, varying in size and composition depending upon the means at his disposal.
Johann Kaspar Gleditsch and Johann Gottfried Kornagel, the two oboists that Bach lists in the 1730 document were inherited from his predecessor, Johann Kuhnau. [14] Gleditsch served Bach from 1723 until his death in 1747 [15] and Kornagel served Bach from 1723 to ca. 1735. [16] The considerable technical accomplishments of Gleditsch are evident upon the examination of the difficult obligato parts contained in the Leipzig cantatas. The interest of Gleditsch in new music, and his desire to procure compositions for his instrument can be noted in the fact that he was one of the original subscribers to the first edition (1733) of Telemann's Tafelmusik. [17] Gleditsch not only performed on the oboe but is reported to have owned a Zink. [18]
The oboe is rarely absent from the cantatas written in Leipzig. The cantatas are usually scored for two oboes. Of the ones associated with Leipzig only twenty-six call for three oboes, and in slightly more than half of these he requires the taille instead of a third oboe. In his 1730 document Bach lists the position of "3rd Hautbois" or "Taille" player as vacant. [19] The use of university students to fill the vacant position may explain the simple and often unimportant parts assigned to the third oboe. The two professional oboists probably were required to double on the oboe d'amore, oboe da caccia and often the flute.
One of the most perplexing problems associated with the oboe parts in the Cantatas is the fact that Bach occasionally requires the oboe to go below and above its range (c1 - d3). There are numerous instances in the Bach-Gesellschaft edition in which the oboes descend to b, bb, a, g#, and g as well as ascend to e3. An explanation for those instances is easy to obtain when one considers the various aspects of Bach's treatment of his oboes and certain peculiar notational idiosyncrasies of the time.
Bach often used oboes in pairs, and frequently as ripieno instruments in unison with the violins: oboe I doubling violin I and oboe II doubling violin II. The use of the oboes in this way not only strengthened the string parts, but also added a new timbre to the texture. This fact explains why the oboes, when doubling the violins, often descend to g and on occasion ascend to e3.
There are however, instances of low notes for the oboes when they are not doubling the violins and one must look elsewhere for an explanation. Charles Sanford Terry, an eminent Bach scholar, incorrectly explained those seemingly unplayable notes by speculating that Bach's oboists possessed oboes sounding at different pitch levels, thus enabling them to select that particular instrument that would produce the low notes in question. In his book, Bach's Orchestra, he speculates that Bach's oboists possessed oboes pitched in C, Bb, and A. He even suggests that they would exchange instruments within a single cantata as the production of the low notes dictated.
In order to correctly understand why these low notes appear in the cantatas, one must first examine the problem of pitch in the time of Bach. It is difficult for us to put ourselves into the frame of mind in which the musician of the eighteenth century thought about pitch. Musicians did not consider pitch in terms of frequency of vibration, but in terms of the comparison of pitch in one place with that in another. Various terms were used to describe the pitch- standards of the time: (1)Kammerton (Chamber pitch) was used to describe the pitch for domestic instrumental music; (2)Chorton (Choir pitch, organ pitch) was used to describe the pitch for church organs and consequently for sacred choral music, and (3)Tief Kammerton (low chamber pitch) was used to describe a pitch level lower than Kammerton. These three terms for the pitch standards were usually spread over a total distance of a minor third, as can be seen in the chart below:
Chorton, a major second higher than
Kammerton, a minor second higher than
Tief Kammerton. [20]
These terms did not indicate absolute pitch standards (as our a1 = 440). However, they did name the higher and lower pitch levels in use in any given location; in that sense they had not changed since Praetorius and did not change throughout the eighteenth century.[21]
Bach did not think of any of these pitch standards as being the "real" pitch and the others as transpositions of it. Arthur Mendel reports that, for Bach, "there was no necessary connection between notation and any absolute pitch. The same note-names were applied to different pitches on different instruments, and none of the . . . standards was any more 'real' than another."[22]
The oboes, which were Kammerton instruments, frequently sounded a major second lower than the organ and choir. [23] Therefore, when the oboes accompanied music in churches, unless their parts were transposed, they sounded at a different pitch level than the choir who sang at the pitch level of the organ. Since the oboes could not retune their instruments, Bach frequently had to transpose his oboe parts in order for them to match the pitch level of the organ. It was necessary to adjust the string and voice parts since they could easily adapt to the pitch of the organ. In Mühlhausen and sometimes in Weimar, when the difference between Kammerton and Chorton was a major second, Bach would write his oboe parts a major second higher than the strings choir, and organ parts. When the difference was a minor third, as was sometimes the case in Weimar, Bach would notate his oboe parts a minor third higher than the strings, choir, and organ.
When the editors of the Bach-Gesellschaft were confronted with oboe parts in one key and string, voice, and organ parts in another, they simply transposed the oboe parts to the key of the others. These transposed parts often take the oboe below its range. If one views the oboe parts in the Bach-Gesellschaft as Terry did, without considering the fact that the original parts for some of the cantatas were actually notated a major second or a minor third higher, it would appear that the oboes are taken out of their range. However, that is not the case. In all instances, the oboe parts in those cantatas written for Mühlhausen and Weimar, which contain notes below the oboe's range, have either been transposed down a major second or a minor third. [24]
Bach's transposing practices at Leipzig are slightly different and far less confusing. He treated the organ and trumpets as transposing instruments. The strings and the voices were written not at the pitch of the organ, as in Weimar and Mühlhausen, but at the pitch of the oboes (woodwinds), which in Leipzig in Bach's time was regularly a major second lower than the organ. [25] Consequently, the oboe parts in the Leipzig cantatas were read as they appear today in the Bach-Gesellschaft edition.
A few examples will serve to illustrate how the transposing of the oboe parts misrepresents the technique of the oboes as Bach used them. In Cantata No. 199, "Mein Herze schwimmt im Blut," Weimar, 1714, the oboe part was originally written a tone higher than the voices and other orchestral parts. The transposition in the Bach-Gesellschaft of the oboe part causes it to descend to b-flat, a full tone below its normal range. In the original oboe part the note in question was written as c1, the lowest note on the oboe.
In Cantata 185, "Barmherziges Herze der ewigen Liebe," Weimar, 1715, the oboe part was originally notated a minor third higher than the voices and other instruments. The Bach-Gesellschaft transposes the oboe part to Chorton. This renotation causes the oboe to descend to b, a half-step below its lowest note. Not only are problems of range encountered as a result of this transposition, but also one finds extensive use of the usually avoided note c#1, awkward technical passages, and unusual trills.
In another Weimar cantata, Bach handles the transposition of the oboe part in an interesting way. In Cantata 132, 1714, the oboe part appears with two clefs, suggesting the responsibility of the part being played by a violin, if an oboe were not available. The oboe read the notes in the treble clef, without signature, which would make the oboe part a minor third higher than the notated string and voice parts. However, if a violin were used, it would read the notes in the soprano clef, with the three sharp signature.
Unfortunately, all the range problems of the oboes do not occur in the cantatas written before 1723; there are several Leipzig cantatas that carry the oboe out of its range. Since the Leipzig oboe parts were written at the same pitch level as the choir and the other instruments of the orchestra, those instances can not be explained as the ones above. Nor does Bach's labeling of his double reed parts help to explain the problem since the parts are marked "hautbois" or "haut." and he used these terms, in most instances, to indicate the ordinary oboe. However, upon the examination of the oboe parts in those cantatas, one finds key signatures, meter signatures, and texts that were often associated with oboes d'amore. So the probability exists that Bach actually intended those parts to be played on the oboe d'amore and not on the oboe as indicated. [26]
The conclusion is obvious: when one considers the original oboe parts, the typical ripieno use of oboes in the Baroque period, and the fact that Bach occasionally indicated oboe when oboe d'amore was desired, Bach at no time expected the instrument to go below its fingered c1 or above its fingered d3.
Next to the oboe, the oboe d'amore was the double reed instrument Bach used most frequently. According to Walther's Lexikon (1732), the oboe d'amore "first appeared about 1720 and is described as being in every way similar to the oboe except that the bell was contracted at the lower end, leaving an opening just wide enough to admit a man's finger." [27] The last part of the statement suggests the presence of the familiar squat, bulbous bell. The early eighteenth-century instruments that survive are approximately sixty-one centimeters in length. A short brass crook, slightly curved, is inserted into the top end of the body. The oboe d'amore sounded a minor third lower than the oboe, and its range extended from a to b2.
The earliest extant example of the oboe d'amore is found in Stockholm's Musikhistoriska Museet and bears the date 1719 on both joints. [28] J. H. Eichentopf was a prominent Leipzig wind instrument maker in the early eighteenth century, and several of his two and three-keyed oboes d'amore survive today. Eichentopf worked in Leipzig during the first years of Bach's tenure there (1724-1738). [29] It seems most likely that Bach made Eichentopf's acquaintance and was probably supplied with his oboes d'amore and oboes da caccia.
The first accounts of the oboe d'amore's use are found in Georg Philipp Telemann's opera Der Sieg der Schönheit, Hamburg, 1722, in Bach's cantatas from 1723 onwards, and in Georg K. Schurmann's opera Ludwig der Fromme (Wolfenbüttel, 1726). [30] Were it not for Bach's extensive use of the instrument, it might be regarded as having little importance. The instrument fell into oblivion in the middle of the eighteenth century and was not revived again until the end of the nineteenth century.
The scores of Bach's earliest Leipzig cantatas indicate that he was
undecided about how to notate the oboe d'amore parts. In the first five
months of his Leipzig tenure, Bach experimented with five different
methods of notation: (1) the first method offered alternate clefs in the
parts, a treble clef appeared first, followed by a soprano clef (for
example, the oboe d'amore parts of Cantata 75 appear as follows:
(2) a second method involved parts written only in the soprano clef; (3)
the third method consisted of oboe d'amore parts that were written in
the treble clef a minor third above the sounding pitches (the d'amore
being treated as a transposing instrument); (4) a fourth method offered
alternate G clefs, a treble clef followed by the French Violin clef (for
example, the oboe d'amore parts of Cantata 138 appear as follows: 
and (5) the final method involved parts written only in the French Violin clef.
Since the oboe d'amore sounded a minor third below the ordinary oboe, the problem confronting Bach was whether to treat it as a transposing or as a non-transposing instrument. If the oboe d'amore player used the fingerings of the oboe, the notes sounded a minor third below the written pitch. Therefore, the first and fourth methods of notation allowed the performer the freedom of treating the instrument either as transposing or non-transposing. By reading from the first clef, the performer was able to use the familiar oboe fingerings to produce the notes that would sound in the key of the movement. On the other hand, if the player wished to treat his instrument as non-transposing, he could use the second clef and read the correct sounding pitches at sight.
The second method was used only once by Bach (Cantata 24). This method was similar to the above methods, in that the performer still had the option of employing the oboe d'amore as a non-transposing or transposing instrument; in the latter case he would read the pitches in the treble clef and adjust the key signature. The fifth method was similar to the others, since it provided the opportunity for the player to substitute mentally a treble clef and thereby to treat the part as a transposed one. The third method simply treated the oboe d'amore as a transposing instrument and involved a part notated a minor third above the pitches as sounded in the treble clef.
These five methods of notation occur mainly in the early months of Bach's Leipzig career (see chart below). After that period, with the exception of Cantata 60 and a few written after 1723, it was Bach's habit to score the oboe d'amore as a non-transposing instrument in the treble clef and in the key of the movement.
Cantata Date Method of
Performed Notation
75 5/30/1723 1
76 6/6 1
24 6/20 2
147 7/2 3
136 7/18 3
69a 8/15 3
138 9/5 4
95 9/12 5
50 9/29 non
transposing
in treble
clef
163 10/31 non -
transposing
in treble
clef
60 11/7 4
64 12/27 non -
transposing
in treble
clef
The oboes d'amore are generally restricted to the notes within their normal compass, a - b2. However, there are several occasions when the oboes d'amore are invited to ascend or descend to pitches impossible to produce on the Baroque oboe d'amore: g, c3, c#3, and d3. In most of these instances the oboes d'amore are either doubling the violin parts or they are playing parts similar to those of the violins.
However, there are two arias that contain the pitch c3. In those instances the oboe d'amore is independent and is not involved in a doubling situation: Cantata 55, mov. 1, measure 20 and Cantata 163, movement 1 measure 36. The appearance of the high note is difficult to explain, since Bach was apparently aware of the limitations of the instrument's range. This awareness is evident when one considers that he occasionally altered the oboe d'amore parts when they were doubling string instruments. When these string parts contain notes above or below the instrument's range, Bach provided alternate notes for the oboes d'amore, or indicated that they should not play in those passages that contain notes not in their range. (See Cantatas 37, mov. 5; 133, mov. 1; 151, mov. 1; 154, mov. 7; and 195, mov. 6.) However, in the instances when the oboes d'amore are not doubling the strings and when Bach did not provide alternate pitches, the players would probably leave out the notes or substitute playable ones in their place.
The conspicuous presence of the oboe and the oboe d'amore in a large number of the cantatas leads one to surmise that those instruments, along with the violin, were among Bach's favorite. The use of both of those double-reed instruments may also be predicated on his fondness for different orchestral colors, as well as by the nature of the text.
1. Charles Sanford Terry, Bach's Orchestra (London: Oxford University Press, 1932), pp. 2-3. [return]
2. Jack Allan Westrup, Bach Cantatas (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1966), p. 6. [return]
3. Hans T. David and Arthur Mendel, The Bach Reader (New York: W. W. Norton, 1945), p. 221. [return]
4. Westrup, Bach Cantatas, p. 11. [return]
5. Cantata 31, performed on Easter Day, 1715, is scored for three oboes and a taille. [return]
6. Charles Sanford Terry, Bach: A Biography (London: Oxford University Press, 1928), p. 119. [return]
9. Westrup, Bach Cantatas, p. 14. [return]
10. David and Mendel, The Bach Reader, p. 121. [return]
12. Terry, Bach's Orchestra, p. 17. [return]
15. Arnold Schering, "Die Leipziger Ratsmusic von 1650 bis 1775," Archiv fur Musikwissenschaft, (January 1921), p. 53. [return]
16. Philipp Spitta, Johann Sebastian Bach, 11 (New York: Dover Publications, 1951), p. 233. [return]
17. Georg Philipp Telemann, Tafelmusik, Hamburg, 1733. Herausgegeben von Max Seiffert (In Denkmaler deutscher Tonkunst, Leipzig, 1927. Bd. LXI/LXII). [return]
18. Terry, Bach's Orchestra, p. 21. [return]
19. David and Mendel, The Bach Reader, p. 122.[return]
20. Arthur Mendel, "On The Pitches In Use In Bach's Time - I" The Musical Quarterly, XLI (July, 1955), p. 338. [return]
23. There are instances in Weimar where Kammerton and Chorton differed by a minor third. [return]
24. Oboe parts that have been transposed a major second below the original parts include: Cantatas 12, 21, 71, 131, and 199. Oboe parts that have been transposed a minor third below the original parts include: Cantatas 31, 132, 152, and 185. [return]
25. Mendel, "On The Pitches In Use in Bach's Time - I," p. 345. [return]
26. See Cantatas 17, 45, 148, 169, and 193. [return]
27. Adam Carse, Musical Wind Instruments (New York: Da Capo Press, 1965), p. 142. [return]
28. Cary Karp, "Baroque Woodwind in the Musikhistoriska Museet, Stockholm," The Galpin Society Journal, XXV (July, 1972), p. 83. [return]
29. Lyndesay G. Langwill, An Index of Musical Wind Instrument Makers (Edinburgh, Scotland: Lyndesay G. Langwill, 1960), p. 31. [return]
30. Curt Sachs, The History of Musical Instruments (New York: W. W. Norton, 1940), p. 383. [return]