If the phrase “harmonic counterpoint” was coined for Bach (and his contemporaries), there must be a reason. It is a scale oscillating around its equilibrium point: many times harmony prevails, then there are cases in which the counterpoint is more important (not Renaissance counterpoint, however), but it is impossible to separate the two elements.
...perhaps the passages you are referring to are not by Bach
You're joking, but I remember an interesting discussion by Zedef on the subject and on the "reliability" or lack thereof of certain passages attributed to Bach that could easily have been of a nineteenth-century nature.
Can someone give me a summary of the previous episode, with examples?
I had noted something regarding a Bach passage that "would seem" a century ahead of its time; indeed Thallo did not voice their opinion again ... who knows...
Measures between "121 on page 118" and "146 on page 120" of Bach's Mass in B minor; musicologists prefer a more modal approach to the score... but here it seems truly difficult not to think of harmony.
Someone was saying: "...is there not a risk that the Mendelssohn in question has had a hand in it?"
And so, the subject is on the table
T
Tap
Member
Reply 9 by Tap
Posts
48
Ok
1) but Bach uses tonality, not modality... why use that approach?
2) I think the manuscripts exclude any shadow of a doubt... for the Abbot: "Foresight"
Of course, the modulations to E-flat minor, G minor, and D minor with a key signature of F# minor, since Bach did not use equal temperament, are truly "bold" to listen to... then one of the few cases of German sixth in Bach... I have already said my piece regarding the manuscripts back in the day.
T
Tap
Member
Reply 11 by Tap
Posts
48
Zedef wrote:
... regarding the manuscripts, I have already said my piece in my time.
...I think I missed it, the discussion regarding modulations to distant keys is interesting
But it is nineteenth-century logic, if you were thinking of Mendelssohn it would be too premature ... who else would have had the opportunity?