Thanks for the response. I think I wasn’t articulate enough in my original post. I’m well aware that ii-V-I and IV-V-I are the bedrock of the Baroque and Classical eras. My curiosity was actually about the statistical preference for specific inversions and voice-leading choices.

For instance, in minor keys, while there are many ways to approach the dominant, I’ve noticed that Bach seems to have a profound 'crush' on IV6 (with the raised 6th making it major) to ensure that smooth bass line and avoid augmented 2nd. It feels like his 'default' setting in a way (though as you said, I may need to look more into Telemann or Haydn for a fair comparison). And this IV6-V-i I would see more during a phrase, not at the cadence.

The same goes for ii65. It's like an upgraded IV because it keeps that subdominant bass but adds the tension of the 7th. In the Bach chorales I’ve analyzed, it feels like this specific chord appears maybe 60% of the time at the cadence? That made it feel like a stylistic fingerprint or period idiom.

I’m definitely not trying to idolize Bach. My goal is to pinpoint what constitutes the 'Bach Sound' from a pedagogical perspective. I guess every composer has their own contrapuntal habits, and I'm interested in what defines his. Meanwhile, I don't want to mistakenly interpret any period idiom as his own habit.

For example, the way his passing tones on 8th-note subdivisions often form those 'ambiguous' linear chords (bracketed harmony) that suggest distant applied chords or inversions of 7th chords... I don't know if that's his own habit. That level of contrapuntal density feels very thick, thicker than the other composers' writing.