Talk:Lobet Gott in seinen Reichen, BWV 11

Lobet Gott in seinen Reichen, BWV 11 has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 16, 2015	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 21, 2015.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in his Ascension Oratorio, as in his Christmas Oratorio, Bach used three trumpets and timpani, and ended with a chorale fantasia?

Classical music: Compositions

	Classical music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lobet Gott in seinen Reichen, BWV 11/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 16:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to review these. Give me three days or so.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:13, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History

"In the first complete edition of Bach's works, the Bach-Ausgabe of the Bach Gesellschaft, the work was included under the cantatas (hence its low BWV number)" -not quite sure why this gives it a low number? That paragraph does need to be sourced, either way.

That sentence is about the only thing left by the first editor(s) of this article. The edition assigned the BWV numbers - we can't say and source that in every Bach article. They thought it was a church cantata (1-199), otherwise they would have given numbered it with the oratorios Christmas 248, Easter 249. The numbering is inconsistent anyway but will stay ;) --GA

Yes, I know, it would be redundant to explain in every cantata article, but I wanted to know!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:56, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scoring

"The work is festively scored, exactly like the Christmas Oratorio," -watch the punctuation here ;-)
Might not be clear to a non musician what (rec.) and (acc.) are. Again an unsourced paragraph—both that and the table needs to be sourced.
"common time (4/4)" -do we have an article on 4/4 time worth linking here?

We have the article on time, linked. --GA

Music

I thought you previously said it was exactly the same, now it's Part VI is similar?

The scoring is exactly the same, the structure is similar. --GA

"imaginess"?
"It is composed as a four part setting, with the instruments playing colla parte: oboes and violin I enforce the chorale tune, the flutes an octave higher, violin II plays with the alto, viola with the tenor, and the continuo with the bass." -can you improve the prose here, it reads a little like notes.

How? I didn't know which instrumental parts play with which vocal until yesterday, and thought is was interesting. --GA

I think it was the "viola with the tenor" part and the series of commas when I initially read it but in reading carefully again I agree it's probably OK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be some inconsistency in capitalisation between the translations, Unschuld and innocence and "glances of Grace" for example. Is this intentional?

Selected recordings

All those red links! They can't be notable then if they're missing ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:37, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking, answered a few, more later --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken care of the typo, don't worry.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:50, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, a pleasure, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Date of the first performance not 1735, but 1738?

Peter Wollny claims that the Ascension Oratorio was first performed not in 1735, but in 1737 or 1738.

The main idea is that one of the copyists of the original part scores, Anonymous Vj, has been identified as Johann Wilhelm Machts, based on his handwriting.

Bach Jahrbuch 2016, pp. 83-91. (translated from German):

"However, the identification of Anonymous Vj now calls Dürr's dating of BWV 11 into question, because Machts only moved into the alumnat of the Thomasschule just two weeks after the Ascension Day in 1735, and even if he had arrived in Leipzig a few weeks earlier, it can hardly be assumed that that an eleven-year-old newcomer was immediately called upon to do copy work."

[...]

"...the identification of the Anonymous Vj plays a key role. In view of Johann Wilhelm Machts's biographical data, we can assume with great certainty that the continuo part by his hand - and thus probably the entire set of parts - was not made for a performance on May 19, 1735. The beginning of his activity as a copyist can hardly be put before 1737 or even 1738. Since Bach's own notation underwent significant changes from about 1739, which are not yet manifest in D-B Mus.ms. Bach P 44, Faszikel 5 (autograph score) and in the autograph parts PL-Kj Mus.ms. Bach St 356, a later date of composition can also be ruled out with high probability. Of the two possible dates for the completion and first performance of the Ascension Oratorio - 1737 and 1738 - I would prefer the later option; this would also result in a meaningful reference to the renewed performance of the Easter Oratorio in the same year, which was backed up by strong arguments." Anonymous7002 (talk) 08:40, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]