Talk:Gelobet seist du, Jesu Christ, BWV 91/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Gerda Arendt (talk · contribs) 19:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Llewee (talk · contribs) 14:36, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have agreed to review this article. My knowledge of music almost exclusively comes from not particularly successful childhood piano lessons so apologies if I sound ignorant.--Llewee (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and also thank you for patience, - I had too much going on also in RL and simply failed to watchlist this review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History

"based on the main chorale for Christmas Day" - I feel a bit more context might be useful here. Was it used for for a specific event or concert?
the specific event was the Christmas Day service (one performance in the morning, one in the afternoon at the other church), - all of Bach's church cantatas were dedicated to a specific occasion in the liturgical year or another function such as wedding and funeral. --GA
Perhaps you could clarify that e.g "based on the main chorale, which was performed at churches in Leipzig on Christmas Day"--Llewee (talk) 16:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
but it wasn't only in Leipzig --GA
" It was published in 1524" - clarify that the "it" refers to Luther's work
tried --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:25, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The prescribed readings for the feast day were from the Epistle to Titus" - Could you clarify how the readings link to the song?
The readings are prescribed to said liturgical occasion, year after year the same at Bach's time. --GA
"but paraphrased the ideas of the inner stanzas into alternating recitatives and arias." - I think this could be rewritten in a way that is more accessible for the common or garden idiot like myself.
probably, but then it would be different from FA BWV 1 and several GAs. "stanza", "recitative" and "aria" are all linked (somewhere) and "paraphrased" seemed a normal enough word to me. --GA
"even after his Christmas Oratorio had been first performed in 1734 for which he also used two stanzas of the same chorale" - I would suggest taking out "even after" which gives impression that their something surprising about him continuing to perform it after 1734.
but it is surprising, - people might think that once he had the "better" cantata from the oratorio, he might use that instead, no?

Hi Gerda Arendt, have you seen these comments?--Llewee (talk) 11:05, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes, but only now, thank you for patience! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

rest of the article

"Both text and tune of the hymn are retained in the outer movements, a chorale fantasia and a four-part closing chorale" - I think a clearer way of wording this would be "The text and tune of the hymn remain consistent between the outer movements..."
sorry, not convinced, - it's a standard wording --GA

The final sentence of the first paragraph after "Structure and scoring" is uncited.
sorry, I forgot, - the ref is in the linked article. I am travelling, - will do later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"makes use of four choirs" - My impression and our page on the subject says that a choir refers to a group of singers. Could the wording be changed to something like "four types of sounds". Also, there should be a gap between citation 2 and "makes".
sorry, then the choir article should be changed, - there are choirs of trombones, guitars, flutes - you name ist --GA

"thr cantata" I guess this is meant to be "the"
fixed thank you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any evidence of how people felt about this cantata at the time or since?
no --GA

Hello Gerda, sorry for the slowness of my response. I think some of the terminology used in this article makes it slightly hard to follow for a general audience but there probably isn't much that can be done about that.--Llewee (talk) 16:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, I can't help that - First replies for which I don't have to look at the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]