Cello | In-depth

Cello | In-Depth

This page will contain information about:

• Construction

• Acoustics

• Timbre Analysis

• and more

Construction

“Its fittings are very much the same as those of the Violin and Viola with the addition of a long metal “ peg ” or “ rest,” so arranged at the lower extremity that it can be slid through a hole into or out from the body of the instrument. In the latter case it is used by the performer as a firm support when playing: in either position it is held tight by a metal screw-head. Theoretically the Cello shares with the Viola the disadvantage of being too small for its pitch, but this disadvantage, as we have already seen, is counterbalanced by the great height of its ribs and bridge. This difference in construction is only made possible by the player’s use of the sitting-position. And it is worth noting that this position has the effect of reversing the bow-attack, which is now normally from the bass-side of the instrument upwards and not, as in the Violin and Viola, from the treble-side downwards. The result of these differences in construction is an instrument which is acoustically nearly as perfect as the Violin, and much more perfect than the Viola. Occasionally, in instruments of a poor quality, there may be some note or notes of a “wolfy” quality. ” (Forsyth, 1914, p. 409)

Historical considerations

“It need hardly be said that one of the principal functions of the Cellos, in their middle and bottom registers, is to play the bass, and this they do quite efficiently, provided there are enough of them in the orchestra. “ Remember that violoncellos supply a perfectly adequate and sonorous bass without any double basses at all, and that the double basses are only an adjunct to them in this capacity for purposes of reinforcement and not vice versa.”1 This is true in a general sense, but more particularly with regard to the String legato, as can be seen from the many pages in Die Meistersinger where the Basses are omitted. In other cases even when the Cellos are the main support of the harmony an occasional pizzicato for the Basses helps the Cellos without robbing them of their dignified task.

As more and more Wood-Wind is added to the orchestral mass the addition of the Basses becomes more imperative, and when the weight of the Horns is superadded, they cannot be dispensed with, even in the concert-room. On the other hand, in those theatres which are devoted to light Opera—that is to say, in the vast majority of Houses —where the orchestra averages about 35, the Cellos are, except on the rare occasions of quiet legato String-harmony, a not sufficiently solid foundation. The Basses, therefore, have to be used much more con­tinually, though, even when both are playing the bass, in a manner different from that appropriate to the Cellos.

One may note that, in those cases where the Cellos alone are sup­ porting the weight of the other strings, they do so more satisfactorily when their notes are fairly near the rest of the harmony. When, in these circumstances, they descend to their bottom-string, a certain hollowness becomes apparent. This may be an acoustic fact or it may be due only to our ideas which associate this type of passage with the Double-Bass, and so call for its solidity of utterance and its easy power of reinforcing the harmonies with its own wealth of upper-partials.

The union of the Violas and Cellos as a separate tone-group has already been discussed under “ Viola.” Nothing more need be said on that point. Two other combinations may be mentioned.

1) The union of Cellos with Basses in a low-pitched harmonic or contrapuntal combination. In passages of this sort, provided the String-quality is called for, there is usually only a choice in the arrange­ment of parts. If there are not more than two of these the arrange­ment is obvious. The Cellos take the upper and the Basses the lower part. In three parts it is usually better to divide the Cellos, and, if necessary, to reduce the number of Basses. The Cello divisi is better than double-stopping even when the latter is practicable. This applies more especially to the p and the mp. In the rare cases where there are more than three parts and the top-part cannot be played by the Violas, it is, as a rule, better to subdivide the Cellos again. However, if the two lower parts are merely playing in fifths and octaves, there is not so much danger of the unpleasant clash of overtones resulting from the divided Bass-parts. If the Basses are divided it is always better for safety’s sake to indicate the use of more Bass-players on the bottom part.

(2) The Cello Divisi. This highly effective combination is occa­sionally used to form a rich harmony accompanying the 1st Cello. The chords are generally well spread in four or five parts so that the two top Cellos at least are playing on their A-string. In arrangements of this sort a Solo Cello usually plays the melody, while each of the middle parts is assigned to two players; a couple of Basses doubles the bass-part either in the unison or the octave below. See the well- known introduction to Rossini’s William Tell overture and the passage at the beginning of Die Walkure, where Siegmund drinks (full score, page 11). It may be mentioned that though this Cello divisi is gene­ rally used in a sort of full-dress way, it is highly interesting when employed merely as a passing effect. The rich sound of three or four Cellos playing in harmony on their top-string makes a delightful change from the eternal Horn-harmony. In smaller combinations and in arrangements from larger works it can, of course, be used to repre­ sent the Horns, and, in doing so, it often throws a new light on the orchestral prospect.

Up to the end of the eighteenth century the Cello in the orchestra was, like the Double-Bass, merely a bass-player. The two instruments ran together, a stag and an elephant in double-harness. Haydn and Mozart,1 asking only for a quiet uneventful journey, drove the pair well enough. So long as the ground was smooth and the pace easy the arrangement answered admirably. When, however, the musical coach was enlarged, rebuilt, and furiously driven by Beethoven, the old ruts and the old yoke-fellows were found unsatisfactory. Beethoven unyoked his pair. He saw that, except when every solid ounce of strength was needed for collar-work on a heavy road, the lighter animal would do better in a light cart of its own. In other words, he recognized the possibilities and the greater individuality of the smaller instrument. And his curriculum in these matters can be followed easily step by step from its first starting-point in the Eroica Symphony to its goal in the G minor and Choral Symphonies. Reference has already been made to the numerous places in his Symphonic works where he detaches the Cellos for purely melodic purposes.2 On such occasions he usually doubles them either with a Bassoon, with the Violas, or with both. But his reformation is not merely the discovery of the Cello as a vehicle for orchestral melody. He also discovered the fact that the Cello demands a sort of writing different from that of the Double-Bass. If the student will take a Score of the Choral Symphony, and, turning the pages quickly, will follow the bottom two lines, he will see at once many places where the outline of the upper part is distinct from that of the lower. Greater freedom and range is allowed to the lighter instrument. In a Mozart work these differences scarcely exist. In a Beethoven work they do exist. Of course it would be an exaggeration to say that they show the same width of divergence as would be normal in a modern work. But the patent—in this case of nobility—goes to the inventor.

The Cello then is bequeathed to modern orchestral music in a three-fold capacity:

(1) As a plastic bass-instrument, either alone, in unison, or in octaves with the Double-Basses. (See the Storm at the beginning of Die Walkure, where for the first sixteen bars the Cellos and Basses are in actual unison and afterwards in octaves.) This use is, in modern music, rather more strictly confined to the quieter modes of expression.

(2) As a melodic vehicle. (See any modern score, for instance the top part of the Cello divisi in Act I. of Die Walkure or the Preislied phrases in Act III. of Die Meistersinger.) In this use the Cello may be said to stand to-day very much where Beethoven left it. The character of its tunes is altered, and their upward range a good deal extended, but otherwise there is little difference.

(3) As a medium for elaborate passage- and figure-playing. It is in this particular that the modern Cello writing differs most from the ancient. Beethoven foreshadowed the change, but did not bring it bodily forward. If, however, we open any score of to-day, say Strauss’s Don Juan or Ein Heldenleben, we shall be at once struck by the fact that for a considerable portion of the time the Cellos are wholly detached from the Basses, and are playing difficult complex passages which have comparatively a much greater value in the general orchestral ensemble than is apparent in the classical style of Cello-writing. It is not merely that the compass is extended, but that the whole outlook on the instrument’s capabilities and its proper place in the orchestra is enlarged. To illustrate this point adequately one would need to print a dozen or twenty pages of brilliant passage-work from the most modern Scores. That is impossible in a book of this size. The student, however, can hear its importance by attending any concert where a late eighteenth century work is brought into juxtaposition with one of the late nineteenth or early twentieth century.” (Forsyth, 1914, pp. 431–434)