Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Former good articleJohann Sebastian Bach was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
April 23, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 9, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
May 28, 2006Good article nomineeListed
May 30, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
December 29, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
May 25, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
March 16, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Delisted good article

organ with special temperament?[edit]

Article says: "In August 1703, he became the organist at the New Church, with light duties, a relatively generous salary, and a fine new organ tuned in a temperament that allowed music written in a wider range of keys to be played." - If that is the case, I think a citation is needed, along with some explanation. Also, I thought Bach was the main pioneer of equal temperament. I could be wrong. AAABBB222 (talk) 23:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Re. "...citation is needed..." – correct
Re. "...equal temperament..." – incorrect, it would have said "...all keys..." if equal temperament was intended, instead it says "...wider range of keys...", thus some type of "temperament", but certainly not the "equal" temperament. --Francis Schonken (talk) 07:46, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Indeed, compelling logic. More likely one of the many compromise tuning systems (Werkmeister III or Kirnberger III); Wolff had good reason to be careful in his wording. Tony (talk) 11:33, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Re citation - Wolff (The Learned Musician, 2013) has that the organ in the New Church in Arnstadt used Weckmeister's "innovative tuning system", "which allowed the organist to play in any key without spoiling its distinctive characteristics" (p. 81) (talk) 22:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Oh, really? First, if "innovative" is Wolff's term, we need to be attribute it to him, or paraphrase it. Second ... it was probably unwise of Wolff to write that, unless that organ (which has since been replaced twice) really was built in equal temperament. Try playing in F-sharp major in Werkmeister III. Sour. Tony (talk) 11:36, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
The sourness is the "distinctive characteristic" of that key. —Wahoofive (talk) 00:07, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


It's difficult to find information on his children in the article. It's scattered about. Some kind of table or perhaps a link to a separate article (something like "Bach Lineage") is recommended. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

  • The article Bach family is linked four times in the article (start of the second paragraph of the intro; first sentence of the "Life" section; {{see also}} under the "Childhood" section title; start of the title of the second navigation box at the bottom of the article) – I suppose that is what you are looking for, and I consider it linked often enough. --Francis Schonken (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Needs the attention of an expert in the subject - and a native English editor?[edit]

This article as it stands strikes me as the work of one or more enthusiastic amateurs. While it is full of interesting content, it also suffers from an occasionally gushing style eg "subtle, elaborate planning to create a religiously and musically powerful expression", "his compositions are to a large extent considered as laying down the rules for the evolving scheme that would dominate musical expression in the next centuries". The English also contains infelicities eg "putting his foot down on the tonal system", "Bach was less imbued" that suggest an excellent but non-native competence. Potentially the basis of an outstanding article, but essentially unfinished. Dimwight2 (talk) 18:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)