Orchestration: Introduction to Strings

Attached is a PDF of an incomplete draft of the Introduction to Strings section. Note that there's many many holes right now (often filled with the placeholder "blargmonster" ) that will be filled in eventually. This is just to give a taste of what's to come. Also attached are some of the audio files for the excerpts. Do play them back when you read though the excerpts.

Feedback is welcome as well as technical corrections that may have slipped in.

PDF: YC Orchestration Strings.pdf

Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 2: Tchaik 2 bowing.mp3

Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 6: Tchaik 6 bowing.mp3

Brahms Symphony No. 1: Brahms 1 bowing.mp3

Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 4: Tchaik 4 pizz.mp3

As I am doing Geneaological research, I will be critiquing this in two parts over tonight and tomorrow. So, for the errors found so far:

1. The violin and viola, while sharing some roots with the Lira da Braccio were also influenced by several other 'early' string instruments (among them, first and foremost, is the 3 string and 4 string violetta's that were around in the early 1500s.) The 5 string Lira da Braccio, while clearly resembling a violin, had many different models. Some of these had resonant strings which were not bowed while others did not. This instrument, actually, shares many similarities with the violins including being used contemporaneous with the early violins from the 1540s - this has caused some historians to wonder if the instrument inspired the violin OR evolved with the violin during it's development.

2. Violoncello are a little more harder to state exactly what their predecessor was. While they appear to have the same appearance as the many instruments in the Viol family, the strings are tuned to that of the violin - and the overall shape, as well, is Violin and not Viol. The roots of the instrument, it is generally agreed, owe to both the violetta/Lira da Braccio/and Viol.

3. The Contrabass, on the other hand, is NOT a member of the violin family. This is an old misjudgement of the instrument. The instrument shape is Viol in origin as our almost ALL of the characteristics of the instrument.

4. The 5 string bass is extremely rare. I really wouldn't mention it, actually, because the odds of a composer actually finding a bassist who plays this instrument are rather astronomical. Most of the majority of Bassists use what is called a 'C - Extension'. This extension allows the instrument to reach down to the low C. Generally, you can expect about 1/2 to 3/4 of bassists in MOST professional orchestras to have this.

I'll look over the bowings and technical portion tomorrow. If you're curious, I've played viola/violin since I was 10 years old (thats 20 years).

Excellent job so far! My only suggestion is perhaps diversifying your audio examples. There is a lot to learn, especially for a beginner from the scores of Beethoven and Mozart in the basic elements of orchestration.

It looks like you have done a lot of hard work so far, Justin. One thing I noticed after a quick read through was the comment on not using phrase markings in string parts, but this is done ALL THE TIME....Here, the first example I looked at was Beethovens fifth. Here are the string parts: http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/f/f6/IMSLP22733-PMLP01586-Beethoven_Symphony5_arr_piano_4hands_vlvc_Parts.pdf

Orr.. Debussy's La Mer: http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/7/7e/IMSLP33282-PMLP06033-Debussy-L109FSmuz.pdf

phrase markings and slurring is marked all over the place. Those were just the first two scores I happened to look up...I've never seen a piece of music with no phrase markings...

As far as I could tell the slurs in La Mer where all bowing markings with maybe a few phrases here and there. There were no excessively long slurs that would be impossible in one bow as far as I could tell but I didn't look that hard. An exception would be at Rehearsal 56 where he uses bows AND phrase markings. The Beethoven I saw a similar situation. The long slurs in the first movement are probably bow markings because the tempo is very fast (h = 108 ish).

THUS, I'll probably have to clarify that section. The reason I made a hard and fast rule is because almost every orchestration text I've read uses that rule. What do you think? This section I was certainly wary about because slurs are incredibly confusing when it comes to string parts because there's no real "rules" to slurs. It really is the equivalent in difficulty to transposition in the winds.

What you just said makes more sense and I even agree with it I think. In the text though, it came across to me as if you should never use a slur marking in string writing..the slurring generally indicates bowing though as you just alluded to. I would agree with that. I tend to write slurs for strings as slurs for winds are written though not all composers do so... As you said about Debussy, I have also seen and used a phrase marking and then slurs indicating bowing..

As promised, I finally had time to pour over the techniques you listed in this. I must say, you made quite a few errors (probably due to heavy reliance on an orchestration book that didn't go into great detail on string technique - causing you to wing it).

First, let me correct your errors:

• For string players, there is no term called non-legato.
• There are two types of legato: slurred, obviously, and bowed. Bowed legato is indicated with a tenuto (dash) above the note. This will tell the string player to play long, even bow strokes. Slurred legato, often used in runs (8th, 1/4, and 16th), can be rather long. Most string players can play up to 11 notes under 1 slur. Keep in mind that more than this, and the string player will even switch from down bow to up bow for the remainder of the notes. In slower music, the string player can play MORE notes by drawing the bow slower across the string. Personally, I've played as many as 20 1/4 notes on one really slow down bow.
• The opposite of legato is NOT Detache. Detache is a separation of the note. For the most definitive notation, use a dash with a dot above it. This will tell the player to leave a slight space between notes.
• There are two types of Detache bowing: elastic (stopped) and detache traine. Elastic is the basic and can cover off-string strokes (rapid). Detache Traine is one that involves smooth bow changes that leave no gap. This is similar to legato - and, I've not seen much of this one - except in really slow music.
• Slurring/Ties: Okay, I'm not sure where this information comes from that you using here BUT multiple notes CAN be slurred! String players can play, as mentioned, at different bowing speeds. Bowing speed should NOT be confused for loud and soft.
• Dynamics are caused by the pressure applied to the string by the bow and NOT the speed at which the bow is played. Therefore: UP bow =/= cresc. AND down bow =/= decresc. If a player does equate bow direction to dynamic increase then they are doing it wrong. There are COUNTLESS etudes and pieces that are meant to correct this very natural beginner mistake.

• Martele: a type of detached bowing that calls for a strong attack. This gives the note a 'hammered' sound.
• Colle: This literally means stuck or glued. This begins with a heavily weighted bow resting motionless on the string.
• Spiccato: a type of staccato (the opposite of legato) that calls for a light bouncing on the bottom 2/3 of the bow.
• Legato: notated with a tenuto above the note. No silence between notes. This can be done with varying bow strokes (full bow, half bow, 1/3 bow).
• Sautillie: rapid bowstrokes using the middle of the bow. This is notated with dots or arrowheads (no really clear designation). The sound produced is similar to spiccato.
• Jete: 'ricochet': This is a spiccato 'special'. To execute the player throws the bow on the string in the upper third. This causes a rapid bouncing of notes in one stroke (from 2 - 6 UP TO 10 - 11).
• Loure: This is a slow tempo slurred detache. Many notes can be played under this type of bowing.
• Arpeggiato: bouncing stroke playing, broken chord, notes on each string.
• Shuffle: This is a repetitive pattern of slurs and accents often used in fiddle music.

I hope this helps, Justin. I like how you did this in .PDF - very professional.

For extended techniques, you might consider stuff like:

Scroll kiss: Exactly what it sounds like, very rare and have never seen it in a score, but is pretty funny and sounds like a huge kiss.

Bow crunch: The player loosens the hairs on the bow and applies pressure to the bow while rolling it on the back of the instrument (hairs down). The effect is a bit like loud chewing or something being crushed.

Among more "conventional" techniques are:

Bowing behind the bridge: Very screeching, high sound, especially on the violin. Look up therenody for the victims of Hiroshima, and I think there's some in the Rite of Spring.

Bowing the bridge: Not using sul pont, but actually bowing the bridge. The sound is a bit like a car braking.

Pressing down the fingers without bowing: pressing down a note percussively. Sounds the note audibly, more effective on the lower strings.

Pressing the screw of the bow on a string, pizzing then sliding the screw up and down the string: Harder to do with thicker strings and bigger isntruments. Weak rising or descending effect.

Using your instrument as a drum: Self-explanatory.

I can think of that off the top of my head, a lot of which I have used to annoy friends and relatives in the past :shiftyninja:

Scroll kiss: Exactly what it sounds like, very rare and have never seen it in a score, but is pretty funny and sounds like a huge kiss.

Kinky. So you actually kiss the scroll?

You could also lick your hand and rub it down the back of the instrument for a squealing effect. This also works well on people :P

Kinky. So you actually kiss the scroll?

You could also lick your hand and rub it down the back of the instrument for a squealing effect. This also works well on people :P

Yes, you actually kiss the scroll. Preferably on the third date.

- Page 4: "However, composers are excepted to still use the traditional five groups no matter how complex they are". I think you meant "expected?"

Also: You are generally right that a majority of compositions still respects the division into 5 groups, but by far not all of them. There are quite many pieces that use, say, 5 Violin sections, 4 Cello sections, or some that even use one violin section, some that write individual lines for every single instrument (and not just split up Violins I and II into individual lines), or some that simply give numbers of desired players to parts without saying whether they are "Violin I" or II or whatever.

And of course there are quite many pieces that work with different orchestral groups that are placed at different positions in the room, in which case the orchestra is divided into these groups, and not into the classical sections.

So I'd rephrase this to "If there is no compelling reason to do otherwise, it is recommended to still use the traditional five groups."

- Page 6, regarding bowing: You wrote: "One should also be aware that regardless of how specific composers’ markings for bowing will be, they will often be rejected by the musicians for a more “correct” bowing that usually varies on their specific tastes. Thus, it is the most prudent to only specify bowing when specific sounds are needed."

I don't have something to actually correct there, but it may be necessary to discuss this. To me, bow markings are a notation element as any other, and if I write them, I want the performers to play them. I think it's a good general advice to avoid writing bow markings when one isn't sure whether they will work. But bow markings that are well placed by a composer will save valuable time, especially since many orchestra musicians won't practice a new piece very much before the first rehearsal (and there won't be many rehearsals before a concert, usually). When time is limited, it can thus be helpful if the composer already provides some markings and I've been in situations where the orchestra actually required me to do so. So maybe that whole passage shouldn't be worded so strongly.

- Like benxiwf, I also strictly disagree about saying one should not write phrase markings. Ligatures are used commonly and are no problem in most cases, since they often have a length that makes it clear they are not to be played on one bow. If the length is such that there might be a confusion, there are ways to avoid this: For one, if there are -also- bowing indications/slurs below the phrase markings, it's immediately clear that the larger ones denote phrases. If that is not the case, one might, for instance, use dotted phrase marks that clearly set them apart from the slurs (I like this practice a lot, personally). Saying that one might use dynamics to indicate phrases instead might just go against how the composer conceived those phrases.

Page 11: "Slurred Staccato" is called portato. I'd rather use that term and use "slurred staccato" as an explanation of how it looks.

Page 12: Maybe mention the term "ricochet" as an actual term next to "jeté", mention that sometimes both are used interchangeably, but that often "jeté" designates a more uncontrolled effect, whereas "ricochet" means a more controlled, rhythmical variant.

Sul ponticello/sul tasto: It's fine if you separate them as two specific effects, since that's how they are generally used. Personally, I might consider however to treat all such things more as parts of a continuum than as separate things: It is important for a composer to know that there are -many- positions on where one might place the bow, which all produce gradual differences in sound. Instead of saying how sul pont. and sul tasto sound, one might describe in a more general sense how the bow position changes the sound - so that it also becomes apparent what happens when one writes sul pont. estremo, poco sul ponticello etc.

- Page 13: Sul tasto: (I assume "Itallian" is meant to be Italian:P) Equating it to flautando may be misleading. It -is- sometimes used instead of sul tasto, but that doesn't mean they necessarily mean the same thing, but much more that some composers are somewhat sloppy at times. According to a more universally accepted definition, flautando merely designates a fast and very light bow, which is -often- played sul tasto. It may however quite as well played in the normal position or even sul ponticello!

Speaking of bow speed and pressure: The same thing applies as for bow position considerations, really. Rather than mentioning specific techniques, you might write a passage where the influence of bow speed and bow pressure is discussed in general, after which one then can mention several "established effects" that make use of this, such as flautando, or playing with excessive bow pressure to produce a creaking sound, up to producing subtones with a very controlled excessive bow pressure and a very slow bow. (That last one might be only mentioned in the individual discussion of specific string instruments however, since I don't know how well it's possible on a viola or even violin. It works well on cello and doublebass however. But maybe it's already too specialised for an -orchestration- class, since it usually requires specially trained performers.) Excessive and very light pressure in general should definitely be mentioned though. (In the same chapter as discussing bow pressure would of course also fall the use of rosin, which can have quite a drastic effect on sound - especially for contrabasses where really conflicting "schools" on this matter exist.)

Page 13: Col legno. You seem to be referring to "col legno battuto" (striking the string with the wood of the bow), seeing that you describe it as a "percussive" sound. That is only one kind of col legno playing however, the other being "col legno tratto", i.e. actually bowing with the wood. A normal passage which is marked "col legno" would by played "col legno tratto" by default, unless staccato marks, short notes followed by pauses, or similar indicate clearly a percussive sound. But since both techniques exist, it's recommended to always clearly state which one you mean. (c.l.b. and c.l.t are often used to abbreviate them). It should also be noted, that string players will sometimes play col legno tratto parts not -entirely- with the wood, but also add some bow hair to the mix. You can of course also ask for this specifically, or ask clearly that this is -not- to be done.

Oh and this reminds me: After your special effects descriptions, always write how to get back to the normal way of playing. For most techniques this would be a simple "ord.", for pizz. you already mentioned arco. In the case of "col legno battuto/tratto" there's also (next to the common ord.) the less common variant "(con) crini" ("with the hair"), which is used by some (mostly Italian) composers.

Page 14: I don't get your remark about the first notated glissando. First you say it's "poorly notated". Then you say it clearly implies a four-bar glissando. Well, if it's a four-bar glissando the composer wanted, how is it poorly notated then? And if it is, why aren't you saying why and offer an alternative instead? (There -are- of course some alternatives, but I think that goes more in the realm of general notation than orchestration, and for most purposes the top example on page 14 seems perfectly fine for a four bar gliss.)

Variants of the glissando that -might- also be mentioned: Gliss with the tuning pegs (although orchestra musicians tend to hate this for understandable reasons and should therefore only be used with -great- care). Harmonics gliss.

Page 20: Pizz: Regarding the left hand pizz: I somewhat disagree about saying it's not worth in orchestral writing (likewise for the fingernail pizz). While it may often not be -necessary- it will still create a different sound, because of the different position on the string where one is plucking. Plus there are solo passages even in orchestral works, or sections where, for various reasons, one might definitely want the whole section to play and pluck.

Page 24: You write: "Artificial harmonics are the same as natural harmonics in production.". Might be worth mentioning that because one already has to stop the string, the range one can still play artificial harmonics to is very limited. (So things like artificial octave harmonics are impossible.)

But the limitations and preferences of each instrument might be better discussed in the individual string instrument sections.

Regarding the notation: I wouldn't say "diamond notation is the best way to use". It -is- pretty much the standard way for artificial harmonics, but much less so for natural ones, which are more often simply written by a small circle above the sounding note, with an indication of the string on which to play ("sul G" or "IV" for example). In some of the less common cases of artificial harmonics it can also be useful to notate the sounding pitch (possibly with a small notehead plus a circle) besides the normal note and the diamond.

More general notes:

- You wrote on page 8: "We will discuss different strings with each individual instrument since it is different for each."

Does that mean you will also discuss the particular sounds of those instruments in all registers (next to how the sound differs from string to string)? If so, good!

- Maybe add some considerations regarding placement of the strings in the orchestra: Discuss the different seatings that were used in the past and the advantages and disadvantages of them. (This might also be described in a general chapter about the orchestra however - but it -does- concern the strings most strongly.)

- It's good that you don't mention too many extended techniques. The list would never end otherwise. But I -would- write a sentence explaining that there are many more extended techniques, but that explaining them would be beyond the scope of your text, plus optimally some pointers to where one might learn more.

4. The 5 string bass is extremely rare. I really wouldn't mention it, actually, because the odds of a composer actually finding a bassist who plays this instrument are rather astronomical. Most of the majority of Bassists use what is called a 'C - Extension'. This extension allows the instrument to reach down to the low C. Generally, you can expect about 1/2 to 3/4 of bassists in MOST professional orchestras to have this.

Hmm, maybe that's also a geographical question, because I know quite a few contrabassists who play 5 string basses. They seem relatively common here. (Often those used to be normal 4 string basses to which they have added a fifth string, which they can remove when it's not needed.)

Bowing behind the bridge: Very screeching, high sound, especially on the violin. Look up therenody for the victims of Hiroshima, and I think there's some in the Rite of Spring.

It only screeches at loud dynamics. Otherwise it can be a very soft effect, giving a clear tone (which is of course not clearly knowable by the composer).

Bowing the bridge: Not using sul pont, but actually bowing the bridge. The sound is a bit like a car braking.

That depends on the pressure. With normal pressure, it's a normal flat noise (somewhat between "white" and "pink", speaking electroacoustically), related to the noise created when bowing on a string with damped strings (i.e. damping the strings with the left hand), or bowing on the body of the instrument (which of course many players won't like doing since it damages the finish).

But yeah, as I mentioned, I wouldn't go too deeply into extended techniques.

Great feedback Gardener! That was very helpful.

To all: Any suggestions for full string section excerpts? Esp. ones that are "quintessential" examples of using the strings. Also, examples with the full strings doing different techniques are appreciated.

I sincerely applaud your efforts. This, along with the comments, helps me tremendously, as I have no experience in Stringland.

Thanks!

Great feedback Gardener! That was very helpful.

To all: Any suggestions for full string section excerpts? Esp. ones that are "quintessential" examples of using the strings. Also, examples with the full strings doing different techniques are appreciated.

In the end of the introduction of Stravinsky's Firebird is a nice example or flageolets (CB on a single note; celli in a huge glisando, violins in a glissando of a bit shorter length. These glisandi can demonstrate the overtones, since they are fully written (at least in my Dover edition), the next measures contain tremelos and normal notes as accompagniment to a flute/oboe melody, later that melody is in the strings themselves.

I think a pretty good example of a few techniques.

Something like this?

Here, I'll help you with your articulations:

Stacatto - Probably the most common articulation in string writing. The player will simply use a short, controlled bow. Staccatissimo is even more so, maybe played closer to the frog, more sautillie.

Tenuto - Played with long bow strokes, minimalize the bow changes. Also, on a side note, if a long note or phrase is written then the player might break it up with a tenuto bow stroke.

Accent / Marcato will be defined by heavier pressure by the hand. Marcato is generally played in the lower half of the string.

The bow placement isn't as extreme as you might think. Playing ON the bridge is a no-no. It sounds icky. Playing closer to the bridge makes it louder and bolder, closer to the fingerboard (but really, only on about the first inch)makes it quieter and duller.

The diminuendo/crescendo thing associated with down/up bows... Jaw already covered it. Although it is easier to play stronger on downbows.

Thats about all I have to say. Fine as far as I can see.

-MF

The bow placement isn't as extreme as you might think. Playing ON the bridge is a no-no. It sounds icky. Playing closer to the bridge makes it louder and bolder, closer to the fingerboard (but really, only on about the first inch)makes it quieter and duller.

That depends on your intent... a good player will have no problem getting the same sound out of his instrument whether he's playing more sul pont or sul tasto. It's also a natural reaction to play more towards the fingerboard as the dynamcs get quieter. Playing on the bridge (sul ponticello) isn't at all icky, it's a very effective texture that needs to be used correctly.

Also, it might be mentioned that with an extreme sul ponticello, you can get all sorts of harmonics without even touching the string. In other words: The focus on the overtones may get so strong that the fundamental is lost altogether and that you only get (fluctuating) isolated overtone "melodies".

So (amongst other reasons) I definitely disagree that bow placement can not have some rather extreme effects on the sound. (Particularly if you don't try to even out the differences by changing bow speed and pressure.)

Oh, and I just remembered one more thing that was forgot in the tutorial: Vibrato. There should definitely be a section discussing different degrees of vibrato in there.

So (amongst other reasons) I definitely disagree that bow placement can not have some rather extreme effects on the sound. (Particularly if you don't try to even out the differences by changing bow speed and pressure.)

That's why I said "more" sul tasto... when you actually get to the fingerboard or the bridge, it's a whole different story :D . I was just trying to say that variations in bow placement that aren't extreme are natural and can be controlled and compensated for by a competent player.

Looking forward to the whole thing Tokke. :w00t:

But why would a good player want to compensate for it? If the composer asks for a sul tasto, obviously he wants a different sound.

But why would a good player want to compensate for it? If the composer asks for a sul tasto, obviously he wants a different sound.

Yes, but not written! In p, a player could easily get the same sound as mf or mp all while playing a bit more towards the fingerboard.

Ah, now I see what you mean.