A Missing Accidental in the Goldberg Variations?

[Mr_Incognito]

OCTO wrote:
a before the D major chord in bar 19, to echo the epiphany moment from bar 6! Then again, maybe epiphanies are meant to happen only once...

A very 'weird' instance indeed - one cannot unsee the clash between A and D in all beauty, with diminished third once again and the unstable fifth of the D in bass. In Bach's time there was a name for A - A (or similar) conflict in different voices immediately following each other - Querstand. It was not really considered a felony, but definitely a misdemeanor.

I have always thought that Violin and Cello solos are some of the pieces where Bach was bending the rules the most.

[harpsi]

I think that harpsi has honed in on Bach's actual usage. Bach doesn't repeat accidentals for two (or more) of the same notes in direct succession, even if the second note is on the other side of a bar line. If so, Bach has made no errors in either case and Flesch has the correct accidentals in both cases.

Yes, thank you John.

So far in this thread, Bach seems (at least to me) to be in the clear regarding his accidentals. However, lest one think that he never made errors of omission in his manuscripts or in proofreading, here is one (Goldberg Variation 15 in his corrected edition) that seems to be universally regarded as one: the sharp would seem to be missing before the C, and a cautionary (we would say "canceling") natural is there later in the measure to prove it

Interesting. Also interesting that the e' in the bass line seems to have a natural on it -- or is it a flat? I always played e d c d, but e seems more logical for the bass line; just an octave up instead of a diminished one.

[OCTO]

Guys, I am a composer too.  And I write by hand, and into transposing scores directly.  My brain explodes when copying from English Horn to Bass Clarinet in A.  Errors happen, forgive us!

[John Ruggero]

Interesting. Also interesting that the e' in the bass line seems to have a natural on it -- or is it a flat? I always played e d c d, but e seems more logical for the bass line; just an octave up instead of a diminished one.

Pretty sure it was intended to be a flat and the small line on the right is an engraver artifact (maybe from a correction made by the engraver?) The engraver usually has a very long line for the right vertical of the natural sign, possibly to avoid confusion with a natural.

In a contemporary copy of the first edition available at IMSLP, the copyist has a flat. The copy seems to be quite accurate; notice the same "error" at the C(#), and also the very long line with a flourish on the right side of the natural signs:

Goldberg copy.png (327.25 KiB) Viewed 462 times

And the BGA and the NBA have E flat.

[Mr_Incognito]

Guys, I am a composer too.  And I write by hand, and into transposing scores directly.  My brain explodes when copying from English Horn to Bass Clarinet in A.  Errors happen, forgive us!

Scores in C suck.

[John Ruggero]

I think that harpsi has honed in on Bach's actual usage. Bach doesn't repeat accidentals for two (or more) of the same notes in direct succession, even if the second note is on the other side of a bar line. If so, Bach has made no errors in either case and Flesch has the correct accidentals in both cases.

The explanation doesn't seem plausible to me:  on the contrary, what if Bach actually intended the E ?  What if that was precisely the harmony he wanted?  Is there any plausible way to verify that?  (I am just thinking aloud.)

Assuming the present theory is correct, he would have put in a cautionary natural sign before the second E. Sometimes he does use cautionary accidentals, as in the previous example from Goldberg Variation 15 above. Since the two notes are in direct succession that would have been necessary here.

[John Ruggero]

1) A in the upper voice A in the lower voice (before the barline).

2) F before the barline; F (nothing) and then F after the barline.

1. After Bach writes an A flat in the upper voice, the A in the lower voice is A natural because there is no accidental in front of it. The previous A flat in the lower octave in that measure does not affect this one because Bach's accidentals don't carry through a measure unless the notes are in direct succession.

2. The F sharp before the barline carries over to the following F sharp because he considered the notes to be in direct succession, despite the bar line. Then he had to add a sharp to the next F because it is not in direct succession with the previous F sharp. It is precisely this latter point that I think gives credence to harpsi's theory about his usage.

[OCTO]

Guys, I am a composer too.  And I write by hand, and into transposing scores directly.  My brain explodes when copying from English Horn to Bass Clarinet in A.  Errors happen, forgive us!

Scores in C suck.

Totally agree.  And did you know that Prokofiev wrote his scores at concert pitch?  He therefore ended up in disliking to notate the English horn in treble clef because the instrument plays so much low and never high.  So, he used the alto clef, and most remarkably the publisher printed it that way as well.

As weird as it can be!

[Mr_Incognito]

Totally agree.  And did you know that Prokofiev wrote his scores at concert pitch?  He therefore ended up in disliking to notate the English horn in treble clef because the instrument plays so much low and never high.  So, he used the alto clef, and most remarkably the publisher printed it that way as well.

As weird as it can be!

Didn't know it, but it actually makes sense if already in C. It was likely just confusing to the copyists.

[RMK]

Guys, I am a composer too.  And I write by hand, and into transposing scores directly.  My brain explodes when copying from English Horn to Bass Clarinet in A.  Errors happen, forgive us!

I hope you are not writing for Bass Clarinet in A! Yes, they do exist but are very rare. I bet fewer than .001% of professional Bass Clarinetists own one.