History (based on materials from the Grove Dictionary of Music): Delibes' "Sous le dôme épais", Leoncavallo's "I pagliacci", Barber's adagio for strings - the history of classical music is filled with many examples of so-called "one-hit wonders". Yet no other composer could claim to be more "deserving" of the title than Johann Pachelbel (1653-1706) whose Canon in D major has literally thrown into oblivion all his other works. Pachelbel was outstandingly successful as an organist, composer and teacher during his lifetime, enjoying professional stability and the utmost respect of his colleagues and the public. This becomes especially clear when we consider that he was appointed, late in his life, the organist of St. Sebaldus, Nuremberg, a coveted post, without the customary examinations. Turning to the Canon in question, the circumstances of the piece's composition are virtually unknown. There is the odd hypothesis that it may have been composed for the wedding of Pachelbel's student, J.C. Bach, on 23 October 1694, which Pachelbel attended and for which he supplied music; however, its correctness has been put into question. At any rate, by the time the canon was first published, in 1919, it had already become an antiquity. However, when the work was recorded by the Jean-François Paillard chamber orchestra in mid-60s, it became popular virtually overnight (its use in the film "Ordinary People" (1980) may have also been a contributing factor for its rediscovery). From then on, hundreds of arrangements of the Canon for every conceivable instrument have appeared, and the work began rivaling Wagner's Wedding March as the prime music for weddings. Music: Our understanding of the Canon has been somewhat hampered by the numerous revisions, rearrangements and transcriptions - versions for brass quintet by the Canadian Brass, for flute and voice by Galway and Cleo Laine, for string quartet by George Rochberg as part of his String Quartet No. 6, for synthesizer by Tomita as something called "Canon of the Three Stars" etc. - which the piece has went through in the fifty years since its rediscovery. All of these have served to over-amplify and over-stretch an essentially straightforward, if disarmingly handsome and cleverly managed, piece of music. Structurally, the piece consists of a simple eight-note ground bass which is the foundation for a relentless canon in 28 parts for three violins, stating a compact two-bar theme, somewhat derived from the bass line. There is actually surprisingly little real harmonic development of this principal theme which, in all of its guises, remains bound to two bars (it's more of a phrase, really); instead, Pachelbel achieves variety solely through the latter's elaboration and through the unification of the various canonic lines of the violins into a coherent whole. And, certainly, one marvels on what the composer does with this short musical idea: after an introduction of the bass line (0:08-22), an idyllic tableau is created in the violins' modest, clear lines, gradually growing in intensity and passion. This charming image soon transforms into a full rustic dance, as the first violin introduces an ornament-laden variation of the melody (2:25). A brief pizzicato episode, during which the harpsichord returns us to the understated opening phrases (3:23), soon begins to grow into a full crescendo, as the melody moves into a glowingly warm quasi-prayer (5:22). Choosing a correct tempo for the canon still remains a major issue for modern performers: while it does seem to be, from a musicological point of view, more authentic to play the piece at a moderate pace, performing practice has progressively evolved to a much more deliberate adagio. In my opinion, the latter is preferable as such a tempo underlines the beauty of the lyrical pages of the work (though the extroverted episodes (2:26-3:26) sound underpowered at this speed). The Canon is followed, in Pachelbel's original design, by a lively Gigue which is traditionally omitted, and I follow this decision, as I do not find it as appealing as its predecessor. All in all, the Canon really is simply a great piece of music which demands nothing less than a thoroughly involved and yet completely unselfconscious interpreter. Score: The complete score of the piece can be found here (pages 2-9): http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/e/e1/IMSLP44549-PMLP04611-Pachelbel-KanonundGigueFS.pdf Recording: Choosing an ideal recording of the canon is almost impossible and I seriously doubt it exists. I've considered at least fourteen versions, ultimately arriving to the 1968 rendition of the Jean-François Paillard chamber orchestra which first brought the piece back into prominence. While controversial in tempo (7+ minutes) and realization (the recorded sound is slightly overpowering and the harpsichord is not ideally captured), I strongly believe it to be one of the better versions of this difficult work. Hope you'll enjoy =).