# Talk:Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme, BWV 140

Another setting by J.S. Bach is a chorale prelude for organ (Schübler Chorale No. 1), BWV 645, which has been recorded with cello by Yo-Yo Ma. This work is most often performed in an instrumental arrangement, without the choir, under the name "Sleepers Awake" with one performer as a soloist. Usually the solo instrument is a cello. The instrumental arrangement has made this perhaps the most performed Bach cantata and one of the most performed pieces by Bach. It lasts about 5 minutes.
I removed this text because it's totally irrelevant to the cantata. The portions concerning the cello, while not inaccurate, concern an arrangement of BWV 645, which is an arrangement itself for organ of the cantata movement for tenors and obbligato oboe. Thus, it is unnecessary for it to be a part of the article. This article is currently in a rather woeful state; I will edit it further soon. —Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 23:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I would like to go on record to say that I believe this information needs either be included in this article or made into a completely different article.    BWV 645 is a terrific and famous work, which I actually thought this page was referring to, until I read closer.  Kntrabssi 09:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
This is not new, but just updating people who are reading this later (like me) that BWV 645 has an article as one of the Schübler Chorales DavidRF 06:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have now added more information to this article, including basic musical characteristics and appropriate (read: Lutheran-specific, as Bach was a Lutheran) information on the situation with the lectionaries. More musical information from someone who knows would be welcome! In particular, I have heard that there has been a virtually exhaustive study of BWV 140 done, but I don't know who did it. It should be referenced! I removed the information regarding the Revised Common Lectionary, as Lutherans use either the historic one-year lectionary or their own three-year lectionary, not RCL. Furthermore, it is a shame that chorale fantasia is currently red-linked, as this is a great genre of music. I will plan to start an article on it soon. —Cor anglais 16 (Talk) 13:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

There might be more information to be found in these discussions.  —Sesquialtera II (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I wonder where whoever wrote it got that there's an Oboe da caccia? The score clearly indicates a 'taille' (which is apparently just Bach word for a cor anglais), and the oboe solo during the duet being a normal oboe. Maybe newer versions show the caccia, but the linked one in the one I've always seen. Anyone? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

There's no Taille page. I'm not expert on baroque precursors to the cor anglais, but I'll try to reword it... Pfly (talk) 09:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Just to follow-up -- there is a Taille page obviously, but it's not about the instrument. I looked in the Oxford Composer Companions: J.S. Bach book (ed. Malcolm Boyd, 1999) and found two bits of info. First, "taille" is defined as a "French term used generally for any voice or instrument which plays a middle, or tenor, part. In Bach's scores 'taille' usually indicates an oboe da caccia." Second, under the oboe da caccia entry, "... 'taille' is given as designation ... only when the instrument is used alongside two oboes." Anyway, I can't pretend to be knowledgeable about baroque instruments and Bach's terms for them myself, but I thought I'd pass along this bit of info on the topic. Pfly (talk) 04:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

There was no reason to remove the referenced in pop culture section, it is accurate and the removal should be documented instead of erroneously reverting the page for no reason.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.40.91 (talk) 09:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 

All the pop culture sections in the WP:CM wikiproject have been removed.  Check BWV 147, check the Brandenburg concerti, check the Beethoven symphonies, Moonlight sonata.  That's the reason.  See archives at the talk page at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music for more details.  Cheers.DavidRF (talk) 13:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks.  I've referenced the BWV 140 page on that movie's soundtrack page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.40.91 (talk) 22:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 

Wouldn't it be known as "Sleepers, awake"?  (Wachet auf.)User:Sca

That's not listed because its the best translation, its listed because that's what everyone calls it.  It came from an older translation which tried to keep the syllable count the same for singing and the name stuck.  Newer translations generally leave out the "sleepers".  Newer translations are available in the external links section.  But the old name has stuck.DavidRF (talk) 21:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Movements are typically titled with the German, not the Italian; we include the English borrowed terms recitative and aria to show the structure. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Bach himself titled the arias Aria in the score, the recitatives Recitativo, - he did not always do that, sometimes only for some movements, typically not for the first movement (but here: Chorale). I think it's worth mentioning. Perhaps you can do it better? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Do you have any sources to suggest that he intended these as titles rather than labels, or any secondary sources discussing the naming? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I have the Dürr source (and he was one of the editors of the NBA) showing exactly what was written by Bach and what not. I don't know which would be the best term for this, "label" seems two weak. We don't have to muse about Bach's intentions when he wrote these words, I assume. (A help for the performers might be a reason, who would sing a recitative differently, for example.) He did not write movement numbers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, but do any secondary sources discuss the naming, rather than simply report? How would a recitative be sung differently than a recitativo, when the two mean the same? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Misunderstanding? I meant that Bach may have written Recitativo and Aria to instruct the performers. Sometimes he didn't. Whatever his reasons, I believe that it is interesting for some readers what he wrote himself. Why do you ask for discussion? Voice parts and scoring are given as facts, without being "discussed". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
It does not appear to be significant that he indicated the recitative as "recitativo" rather than "recitative"; as such, it makes more sense to provide the more standard and familiar label. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme, BWV 140/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Yash! (talk · contribs) 01:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Just woke up ;) Yash! 01:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't take long for life to go from bad to worse. My apologies for not doing this promptly. I will get to it in a couple of days. Sorry again Gerda Arendt. Yash! 06:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
There's no rush as long as we get a DYK in Advent when most people perform it, - Christmas would be too late ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments below. I will not reply in detail right now, as I am first busy with the celebration of Jean Sibelius tomorrow, which will start in less than an hour with an article suddenly made a lead hook!! Improving it frantically ... - Even afterwards, there's plenty of work left on his compositions. What do you think about the question on his talk? - The ref you would like more about was in the article before me, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)


### Lead
The lead is well-written, however there is a problem of repetition. Some sentences in the lead are exactly the same as in the prose. A change in the formation of sentences either in the lead or the prose shall fix it. The repeated sentences are:
Bach composed this cantata to complete his second annual cycle of cantatas of 1724/25, a cycle planned to be of chorale cantatas.
...appears unchanged in movements 1, 4 and 7, while an unknown author supplied poetry for movements 2 and 3, 5 and 6, both a sequence of recitative and duet.
The quote by William G. Whittaker is also repeated. In the lead, either a few words from the main quote can be used or you can try to write the quote in your own words or a mixture of both. In the prose, you can expand the quote and keep the same in the lead.
2 oboes -> two oboes
2 violins -> two violins
I reworded the first two repetitions, but would like to leave the quote, because it can't be said better. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


### History and text
It won't be overlinking if we use "Johann Sebastian Bach" instead of "Bach" in the first sentence.
done (even if it's probably the only one of the cantatas) --GA
Use something other than "extremely early". It is a bit vague term. If early, show it numerically or in some other way.
Can you word it better? We don't have to go to calendar and moon phases in this context, or do we? If Easter is early, we may still have only 25 or 26 Sundays after Trinity. Only if it is very/extremely early we have 27. The article Easter has "Details of this complicated computation are found below in the section Date." --GA
How would just "early" be? "earlier than most..."? "Extremely" doesn't sound right. Yash! 05:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
I think I just explained why I think it would not do (because just "early" might still be only 25 or 26, not 27, it happened only twice during Bach's time of cantata performances) but do it for you. Ideas from someone watching with better English welcome! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Can we link Ordinary Time?
I dropped the lessons from a different Lutheran system altogether. Was there before, is unreferenced, and not really needed. --GA
It is "text and tune" in the lead and "text" in the prose.
fixed --GA
The prose reads that the "text was already available". Previously, it is said that an "unknown author supplied poetry for movements 2 and 3, 5 and 6" and that "text of the three stanzas appears unchanged in movements 1, 4 and 7" - So, who wrote the text for 1, 4 and 7? Or am I missing something?
you are missing the original hymn text by Nicolai for 1 4 7, - text was already available only says something about when it was written: already in 1724 when Bach worked on the second cantata cycle, only that there was no 27th Sunday that year --GA
Okay. Yash! 05:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Thus, the hymn and the cantata are commonly performed in churches on that Sunday. The text and its eschatological themes are also commonly associated with the early Sundays of the season of Advent, and so the cantata is commonly performed during that season. - perhaps a ref?
Another line that was there before I ever looked at the article, sigh. Just today the central chorale was played ina service I attended. The hymn is among the songs for Advent in hymnals. The Sunday for which it was composed so rarely ... --GA
, and so the... -> , so the...
reworded --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


### Scoring and structure
Can be merged as a single sentence:
Bach structured the cantata in seven movements.
The duration is given as 31 minutes.
Sorry, I don't get it, --GA
Bach structured the cantata in seven movements in the duration of 31 minutes. - something like that? Yash! 05:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
It is "basso continuo including bassoon" in the lead and "basso continuo" in the prose. Can something about bassoon be included?
yes, done --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
no because the sentence after structure relates to the structure --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


### Music
Better to avoid little sentences such as: It is in E-flat major.[10] The cantus firmus is sung by the soprano.
dropped the first completely, the keys are in the table, --GA
Shouldn't the German translation be in italics? For example:
The first movement, "Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme" -> The first movement, Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme
tricky: it's the German original, used as the title of a movement (italic) in the table, but in the prose as text to understand the action, therefore I would leave it as quote (as in many comparable works such as BWV 22) --GA
Fair enough. Yash! 05:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
From this a rising syncopated..." - We are missing two little vertical dashes ;)
sorry, don't get it --GA
Sorry for my horrible humor: From this a rising syncopated..." -> "From this a rising syncopated..." - we could use a double inverted comma in the start. Yash! 05:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
"Er kommt"... -> The second movement, "Er kommt"... - not really necessary and you can pass on it. Just suggested it to increase the length of the tiny sentence ;)
I pass, because it's kind of an alarming shouting, - keep the drama --GA
I may be wrong, but shouldn't the full stop be inside the quotes in these?
"contemporary operatic love-duets in his use of chains of suspensions and parallel thirds and sixths".
"artistic intensity".
"heavenly Jerusalem".
"a cantata without weakness, without a dull bar, technically, emotionally and spiritually of the highest order".
none of them is a full sentence --GA
In the lead, it is "love-duets" and "love duet" in the prose. Not really a big issue but consistency is always better.
found "duets" in both,but corrected "is" to "are" to match it --GA
"most beautiful, most mature and, at the same time, most popular sacred cantatas. - um...
hard to find a source for Wikipedia's favourite phrase "most popular" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Again, sorry... It is missing a double inverted comma like above. Yash! 05:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)


### Media
No need to mention "Cantata 140" every time. If you want to use it, write a sentence with "Cantata 140".
Use "first", "second",..., instead of "1st", "2nd",....
sigh, that's a section I didn't touch at all ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


### References
Are there any more details available for ref #8 other than "Lutheran Service Book, xv."?
no, but dropped anyway --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
That should do it :) Yash! 11:11, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for good questions! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Nice work Gerda! Passing it. Yash! 17:19, 10 December 2015 (UTC)