how is this played on piano?

[notxokay]

i know Bach's music was orgionaly written for Harpsicord, and transposed into piano, but im finding a lot of things that dont make sense to me.
such as a measure in his Fuge No. 2 from Book 1.
it looks like that, i was wondering how your supposed to play the half note F but then a count later play it again, and then again.
please let me know if you have any suggestions.

[xvimbi]

This has nothing to do with Bach or the harpsicord, but is a general issue in music that has more than one voice. The notes on the left belong to one voice (stems go up), the notes on the right belong to a second voice (stems go down). Both voices happen to have Fs in them. Sometimes, a note belongs to both voices simultaneously, in which case it will have a stem going up and a stem going down. All this is just for clarity, so that the musician can see better where the voices are.

There are several ways of playing something like this: you can simply play the first F and hold it all the way through into the following measure; you can play all Fs; or you can play the first one, hold the damper pedal down and restrike the following Fs. It all depends on the piece and how you would like to shape the voices. If you are holding the F in one voice and decide not to re-strike the following Fs, you must make sure that the Fs in the second voice can be "heard", i.e. that the listener gets the impression that the Fs, although not played, belong to the melody. I hope that makes some sense.

[allchopin]

Xvimbi: I have not heard of anyone doing this... I think it means to strike the first F, hold it as long as possible up until the next F, where you will rearticulate it and hold it as well, that way the held F feel remains throughout the measure.  If you were you hold the first F, it would be tied to the next F and it is not.

[jazzyprof]

Indeed it is best for hearing the counterpoint if you rearticulate all the F's as they come up.

[xvimbi]

Xvimbi: I have not heard of anyone doing this... I think it means to strike the first F, hold it as long as possible up until the next F, where you will rearticulate it and hold it as well, that way the held F feel remains throughout the measure.  If you were you hold the first F, it would be tied to the next F and it is not.

You are absolutely right for this example. I was speaking in general terms, i.e. I was pointing out some more ways these situations can be treated. In some cases, rearticulation may disturb the flow of the music. For example, in Satie's Gymnopedie No. 1, the chords following the initial melody have a shared, held note. One can hear these chords being played in different ways, depending on the performer.

[Sketchee]

I've never heard  of one not restriking a note in a case like this.  In the recordings of the Gymnopedie I've heard for example, the first note held is louder than the ones in the left hand chord. I think it's safe to say that one would usually play the note again in these cases.  Often cases like this are written in a way that gives the intention of the composer more than as an instruction to the performer;  as was said, how to make the composers intentions clear is up to interpretation

[xvimbi]

I've never heard  of one not restriking a note in a case like this.  In the recordings of the Gymnopedie I've heard for example, the first note held is louder than the ones in the left hand chord.

I am talking about the F in measures 9-12, the chord in the right hand. Most people I have heard play the first F on the first beat in measure 9 and re-articulate it for the following chords, but don't rearticulate those on the first beat of measures 10-12. Others again, play the first F and don't replay it ever, not even for the chords.

[Sketchee]

I am talking about the F in measures 9-12, the chord in the right hand. Most people I have heard play the first F on the first beat in measure 9 and re-articulate it for the following chords, but don't rearticulate those on the first beat of measures 10-12. Others again, play the first F and don't replay it ever, not even for the chords.

I know where you meant (the f#) but I've never heard it played that way.  My score actually has the chords marked forte just after the f# is heald and the left hand plays the chords.  Usually the bottom two notes of the chords are voiced a bit louder than the f# though.

[jlh]

Yes, both the F's in the middle voice should be rearticulated. 

Here's how I'd do it:
Hold the F in the top voice for one quarter note, then play the first F in the middle voice, hold that out till the second F, which is held and tied through to the next measure.  You don't need pedal to do this.

[zemos]

As a matter of fact, that exactly the thing with harpsichord. There you have two keyboards (one above the other), and you can hold a note a play it again and again in the keyboard above/beneath. Bach didn't know that there's going to be this strage thing called piano-forte, which has only (hehe) one keyboard.... on the piano you play it just as "jlh" said. p.s.- i love that fugue! simple but beautifull...

[jlh]

Yeah, that's a very popular fugue.  Amy Grant even used the opening few bars as an intro to one of her songs many years ago.  Good stuff.

[xvimbi]

As a matter of fact, that exactly the thing with harpsichord. There you have two keyboards (one above the other), and you can hold a note a play it again and again in the keyboard above/beneath. Bach didn't know that there's going to be this strage thing called piano-forte, which has only (hehe) one keyboard.... on the piano you play it just as "jlh" said. p.s.- i love that fugue! simple but beautifull...

Well, first of all, not all harpsicords have two keyboards; I actually think they were in the minority. Second, playing the shown measure on a harpsicord with two keyboards brings certain problems with it: If you play the bottom staff on one keyboard, you still need to play the top staff, i.e. two voices, on the other keyboard, leaving you with the same problems. Furthermore, if the music was written in a way that you could play the two voices in the top staff on two different keyboards, you would still have the problem of sustaining notes. The harpsicord is not able to sustain notes. So that leaves us with the question whether this piece was re-written for the piano or not. Sustained notes are not a problem for organs, so this piece is easy to play on an organ using different keyboards. So, in fact I think it is a discussion of organ vs. piano, not harpsicord vs. piano.
Yet, if one wants to play sustained notes on a harpsicord, they need to be played in a way that the listener has the impression that they are there, although they are not audible (that was one of the things I was referring to in my original post above).

[faulty_damper]

the two keyboard harpsichord was added for dynamic contrast.  One keyboard played softly by plucking one string, the other played loudly by plucking two.  And Bach sold Silvermann pianos so he did know that pianos were in existence at the time, even though he thought they were horrible.

[jlh]

Well, the pianos back then WERE horrible, FYI.  If you played this on an organ you could make both keyboards sound the same.  Alternatively, you could pull the stop on the harpsichord and play both keyboards using the same set of strings, making them the same volume.