The choice is becoming embarrassing. Both the Harnoncourt and the Marriner versions reveal in CD form that the original recordings contained hidden treasure now brought to light. But they represent quite different intentions. Harnoncourt's small choir is topped by boys, who lend a dispassionate but fetching air to all but the most exciting passages. Neatness and lightness are all important. And this serenity is not obscured by the period instruments with their translucent tone. Many of the affectations of 'authentic' playing are mercifully absent, notably the mechnical swelling of string tone on every note longer than a crotchet. There is due but not fussy attention to the phrase structure and its subdivisions and this degree of architectural articulation is a great help in a long movement. The soloists produce clean-cut lines informed by a verbal intelligence which regards the message as the reason for the music and not vice versa. All in all one feels that Bach would feel at home if he walked into this performance. But for some people this is a suspect recommendation. Succeeding centuries have welcomed Bach into their lives and invited him to make himself at home with the current fashions. A century ago, a choir of less than a hundred would have been considered inadequate for this size of job. Yet a few years ago, Joshua Rifkin (on Nonesuch: CD CD79036-2—not submitted for review) found that, for him, more than one voice per part was excessive. Smaller forces do provide more, not less, impact. Marriner and Harnoncourt field modest forces without paring to the bone. Both performances are in their own ways vitally committed, and sound it.
Marriner's Academy is not playing period instruments, in the now accepted use of the term, but there is great attention to details of articulation and musch loveliness, especially in solo lines. It is here perhaps that the biggest difference occurs, for solo instruments tend to vary their dynamics freely and sometimes their time too, so that accompanying instruments must accommodate—only, I hasten to add, in a very limited way: nowhere are the bounds of decency overstepped. Vocal soloists, whose distinguished voices it is a pleasure to hear, seem particularly interested in offering their vocalizations in as perfect a shape as possible. The music seems sometimes to be slotted into the technique. And it produces a beautiful result, which could have been more beautiful still with more study of the interplay of voice and instrument—and with much more attention to the way the words are treated. Put it this way: this performance is quite captivating and is full of lovely, sometimes glorious moments (marvellous trumpets and drums in the D major sections for example) but it has at times a little romantic gloss. This will, of course, be the ultimate recommendation for many. Marriner's chorus is first class with sopranos on the top, for whom nothing is difficult. They cannot always shine through the orchestra as much as Harnoncourt's choir do because of the roundness of the instrumental tone, but the balance is nevertheless good.
Nicholas Anderson has dealt very fully with the Gardiner comparative version on Archiv Produktion. From my point of view, this is the best of all, with exceptional vitality and great attention not only to detail but to the overall intention of each movement. Period instruments are used and though the top line of the choir is female, the alto line isn't. It's also a very fine recording. But I must stress that the Marriner performance offers very good value indeed to those who feel the need for a little anachronistic warmth.'