Dot Interpretations

September 28, 2004 at 05:26 AM · My primary musical education began on the piano, where I was first told that if I ever saw a dot over/under a note, it was called a staccato, and the note was to be played short. That was that. Years of simple, crisp, punctuated staccato notes ensued. When I began playing the violin, I simply took as much piano knowledge that was transferrable and applied it to my new instrument. Dots were simply short notes, and I played them whichever way was most comfortable, which was mostly off the string. Later, someone informed me that this was not staccato, but Spiccato, with a P. I continued playing spiccato all the way to college, with a thought in the back of my mind that perhaps there was more to this marking than what I knew. Sure enough, my college instructor told me that I was doing it all wrong. He was shocked that no one had ever taught me how to keep the bow on the string to play. No one taught me how to take it off, either, so I wasn't exactly doing that correctly, either. He stuck me on martele excercises, so from that point on, I felt obliged to apply martele wherever the dot presented itself. I still snuck in some spiccato, rather guiltily, when no one was looking.

I finally left my major as a musician, partly due to dot incompetence. Ever since then, I've been haunted by the mysterious dot and what it means. I've studied quite a bit and found that dots with slurs are called staccato (like the old days on the piano!). Other than that, I find a lot of confusion about when I'm to play on or off the string for the short notes.

Tell me, how do I play the dots in the first measure of Bach's Preludio, Partita #3? How about the dots in the bowing variations for Kreutzer #2? The dots in Danse Macabre? Viotti #23? I've kinda been going by some kind of gut instinct, but I wonder if there's a manual or rulebook that explains how one knows to interpret dots. I see dots in the Suzuki Book 1 pieces and I start to get flustered and stumble around as I try to show my beginner students what to do. On or off the string? Is it as simple as just starting and stopping the bow at this level, or do they need to know the mechanics of proper martele, spiccato, sautille, ricochet, colle, and up-bow staccato?

Of course, I keep it as simple as possible for my beginners; I want to shelter them from the madness of bowing complications for just a while and let them focus on making it back and forth the right direction at the right time, with good bow hands, all the while keeping the bow straight. But eventually, they will have to know about martele. When's a good time to break them into the many faces of staccato?

Replies (100)

September 28, 2004 at 07:25 AM · I agree with you that it's quiet confusing.Generally speaking, Staccato means ,including in some composers mind,"détaché" ie not legato .We,Violonists make things confusing. I think the best way to teach those bowing is to consider, in a first approach, accentuated and unaccentuated detache in separated bowing and one bowing (all notes up or downbow)the subtilities sautille spicatto et so on will (almost)naturally appear with string crossing exercices and experiment on bow division. Surely many of you will disagree

September 28, 2004 at 02:30 PM · I was similarly confused when I saw staccato markings in my first piece when I was doing grade 1, and I also first tried to do a "flying off the string" to get the piano-type staccato sound and was immediately corrected. Later I noticed that the gr. 1 repertoire was chock full of staccato and concluded that it was arranged that way because we beginners would not have a good legato stroke, i.e. they were asking for détaché with those dotted notes. I have gotten a good insight and overview of bow strokes through the masterviolinist site www.masterviolinist.com . I don't know if he mentions when each thing is taught or in which order.

September 29, 2004 at 02:38 AM · Emily, your post made me gurgle with delight as, having always been secure with staccato=short/on string, spiccato=short/off string, I arrived for lessons at college level to be told that staccato=off the string, and that's that. When I whispered something about spiccato, I was chided for apparently trying to stick labels on everything. I personally do not believe off-string playing is - nor should be - a requirement at Grade 1, and teach my beginners on-string staccato... but the words of my college prof continued to haunt: what if one of my little ones got downmarked for daring to play staccato dots on the string?? With this in mind, I recently tried to teach a Grade 2 standard adult student off-string staccato for the Water Music Bourree (her previous teacher had marked in the word spiccato, so had obviously had the same notion). She found it extremely difficult, and I found myself returning to my original approach. Btw, I remember my own first attempt at spiccato (there, I've said it): it was a Neil Mackay piece called Puffing Billy, and I'm sure I didn't deal with Mr Mackay until third position at Grade 2-3 level.

September 29, 2004 at 03:20 AM · Greetings,

Emily, I think it is importnat to spend a lot of time on Detache so that the concetiosn is as seamless aspossible. This can takes months. Youngsters don`t need to learn staccato in pieces for a while.

But, at the same time you can sneak in the idea of breaks between notes by practicing full length notes with rests in between. Have students get abolutely pure beginnings and endings, perhps on simple open string exercises. Then, when students need or want a staccato note it is simply a question of sort of eliminatig the rest somewhat.

For baroque music avoid playign off the string , especially in ensembles. The solo stuff is debatable and most top soloists use spciatto in the sonatas and partitas. Makes for good contrast. In playing chamber music and orchstra one should aim for as much on the stirng or as close as possible. Off the string is just so diffcult to coordinate it can make four good players sound like a bloody silly quartet.

Brahms hated off the string and preferred pasages in his symphonies and chamber music to be as on as possible. Some conducters prefer this. Indeed t is one of the major differences between conducters.

When you are trying to interpret your own pieces it can be a real problem. A useful point to bear in mind is that up to and including some Beethoven (but very variable) the dot often just means -not= slurred. You have to think very carefull about the relationship between the note in question and the notes adjacent to it. Is it just some kind of phrasing indication? This occurs frequently in Beethoven quartets.. Also there is a longer dash mark which means play with an energetic accent and a litlte short which is kind of the way we see heavy staccato these days.You see this a lot in Haydn. You could read the book on violin playing by Mozrts father. very importnat and helpful.

The non standardization of these kind of markings can make life really difficult.

Often it helps to just sing a passage and also try to create different kinds of sounds that correspond to different qualities and textures of staccato. And even from quite near the beginning students can practice bouncing the bow from differnet heights and at differnt angles to see what comes out. That can be fun.

This is the really artistic part of violin playing...

Cheers,

Buri

September 29, 2004 at 03:41 AM · Greetings,

just rambling, but since the basis of the martele stroke is the cole type finger action I think studnets should leanr to do this very quickly. It helps to free up the finger swhich need to be able to react in a relaxed way to what is happenign during detache. So, to contradict myself compeltely, a very short note played with the fingers can @perhaps be introduecd early one. Little hand scan work on this with a penicl firrst,

Cheers,

Buri

September 29, 2004 at 10:15 AM · Yeah, I've been picking up on that idea. They start with a pencil and work on curling and straightening. We point the bows to the ceiling and call it the Rocket Launcher. Ooh, fun. Then they see if they can move the bow on the string using only their fingers. There's a lot of great exercises in Basics. My grade 3/4 Suzuki kids are trying out martele. Suzuki throws sautille at them right in the first piece of Level four, and I don't know whether to just shrug and move on if they never get it or what. We keep coming back and trying, though.

It's nice to know there's room for artistic license with staccatos. If I'd known that in college, I could have slipped on by just by playing the "artistic license" card. I suppose I misunderstood at the time that They (the professors) were insisting on specific types of bowings for instructional purpose, simply because I needed to practice being able to do all of them correctly.

I can't stand it when my beginner students come to a screeching halt and a stiff beginning for each short note. Just as bad is the whispy, non-committed start/stop. Yes, staccato is difficult. Detache all the way!

September 29, 2004 at 05:01 PM · Buri, I've read that the line above a note means tenuto, or 'full value'... although I use your definition in practice.

September 30, 2004 at 02:33 AM · I think he was referring to a vertical cousin named Marcato. No, nevermind, Marcato's the ^ guy. Staccatissimo, his little brother, is very uptight and punctual. Looks like this: ' Not this: --

Now, tenuto is another funny fellow who could mean all kinds of things, depending on the company he keeps.

September 30, 2004 at 03:25 AM · Greetings,

tenuto is what you need after a bad case of frost bite,

Cheers,

Buri

September 30, 2004 at 10:50 AM · Lines above notes are named 'Loure' in French which is a smooth détaché with not attack equivalent to slight tongue attack in wind instruments

September 30, 2004 at 06:42 PM · interpreting the dot, at least to me, is a combination of a couple things. 1. research, beethovens dots aren't necesarrilhy the same as beethovens, etc. 2. examine tradition, you dont necesatrily have to follow it but it helps to know the norm. 3. create an interpretation that fits with your overall presentation of the piece.

January 15, 2005 at 08:41 PM · I have this entire piece that is supposed to be done in staccato. It's 5 pages long and requires a lot of shifting into 8 and 9 position. I'm not if the staccato's on or off the string. Anyone know?

January 15, 2005 at 08:57 PM · lynn does the piece happen to be called moto perpetuo op 11?

January 16, 2005 at 12:38 AM · Unless it's a bowing excercise, I'm guessing you will be off the string. And, depending on the tempo, You will either use spiccato or sautille (sautille for the faster). Are they nonstop sixteenths, and are there any staccatos with slurs?

January 16, 2005 at 04:21 PM · I'm not sure what the piece is called: The title's in a different language. It looks like BEYHOE ABHKEHNE though. No, it is not an exercise and does not contain slurred notes.

January 16, 2005 at 04:32 PM · its probably russian

who's the composer?

January 16, 2005 at 04:26 PM · Emily:

Sounds like you know this already, but articulations are the definitions of the beginnings AND endings of notes. Of course, how the articulations are interpreted depends on the composer, the style of the music, the time period (baroque, classical, romantic, etc.) and, to some degree, your technique.

Personally, I don't teach spicatto until much later. I initially try to teach young people how to change their bows without stopping at the change (the hardest skill on violin and one that bears practicing the longest).

After they learn to coordinate finger changes with bow changes and rhythm changes (so bow division comes in there soon after basic legato bow strokes), then I start teaching stopped notes. Staccato is a note that begins crisply and stops short of the next note - like a little block of sound. Time is taken away from the end of the note. How much depends on the speed and style of the staccato. It is done on the string so it is the next basic articulation that I teach. Probably that is what is in the basic Suzuki book but I am not familiar with that repetoire so I don't know that for sure.

After staccato, I begin teaching the basic detaches and spicatto comes much later.

But a good question to ask yourself when deciding articulations is what do I want the beginning and ending of the note to sound like? How do I sing it? Many people listen to the beginnings of notes, but forget about the endings. Once you have defined the sound you want to hear, then you can decide what the stroke you want to use is.

By the way, there are no dots in the beginning of the EM Preludio.

Lisa

January 16, 2005 at 09:53 PM · The composer looks something like O. HOBAYEK

January 16, 2005 at 11:31 PM · Both the title and the author's name look strangely like the letters could equally be in Cyrillic rather than our Latin fonts. ???

January 16, 2005 at 11:33 PM · Greetings,

Lisa, couldn`t agree more. I have a lot of trouble withparents who want their kids to learn spicatto and sautille because it looks like they are doing better than everyone else. The idea tha lots of work on a beautiful detache not only sounds better but make these strokes more or less automatic at a slighly later date seems to elude them...

Cheers,

Buri

January 16, 2005 at 11:56 PM · Lisa,

Thanks for the response. This thread is actually four months old, and I've done some studying and opinion forming since then, so it doesn't really portray my current standing. Although, it was quite humorous to read through again. Wow, only four months ago, I was that confused!

My copy of the Bach does indeed have staccatos on the eighth notes in the opening. I'm sure Bach didn't put them there. I can't picture those notes as being completely legato, but I've heard several lengths applied to them by various performers. So, I suppose it's up for debate.

January 17, 2005 at 10:09 PM · 'Absolutely pure beginnings and endings', 'perfect detache.'

How? Is a pure beginning after a rest, from stationary bow on string, possible and worth practising without any colle? What is the 'secret' of ending a note cleanly?

One more staccato question. Should we be able to do Kreutzer 4 etc. equally well with downbow staccaato?

On the question of language, my childhood teachers like Sue's college teachers rejected the categories of stroke (or assumed I would not understand). They called everything with a dot 'staccato.' In a way language does not matter but the teachers would avoid a lot of confusion if they warn students about the existence of terminology they chose not use.

January 18, 2005 at 02:37 AM · I just figured out that the thread was old, Emily! DUH! Sorry.

Actually, had I read the whole thread first, I would have just let Buri's response stand alone. ;-) It was good. hehe

John:

Not all detaches are:

'Absolutely pure beginnings and endings'

You asked:

How? Is a pure beginning after a rest, from stationary bow on string, possible and worth practising without any colle? What is the 'secret' of ending a note cleanly?

Those are hard questions!

I always give a mini lecture before beginning detaches. I start with a question that goes like this:

aah ou uheraah whah eye aayeen? (That is: can you understand what I'm saying with no consonants.) Music needs consonants, just like speech does, to make it interesting and understandable. There are all kinds of consonant sounds from sharp "t's" to deep duhs to soft wha's. Learning how to use the bow to make those sounds takes time and a lot of analysis.

"Pure beginnings" are not necessarily from a stopped bow, although they could be. How do you like that for muddying the picture? Detaches are ways of detaching the sound from the previous sound. They should be clear in terms of beginnings and endings of notes, but they all use different consonant sounds. A lot of time you can get (what I guess you might mean by) a pure beginning (I almost wrote prune beginning, god help me!) by just changing the bow with constant weight. If you do that without changing the speed of the bow, it will stop the string dead on the change and create a pure beginning. Try it and watch the string. Use a fair amount of weight so you can really see the string vibrate and then you'll see it stop when you change the bow. Do not TRY to make the string stop - just keep your speed the same and simply change. The weight will do it all for you. (Sometimes playing violin is easier than it looks - but hard for the brain because we have so many preconceptions of HOW we should make the sound we want to hear.)

I don't use colle for any of my detaches. I use colle in the lower half of the bow, mostly at the frog, to add a tremendous burst of speed at the beginning of a note when I want a very explosive sound (first note in last movement of Tchaik comes to mind).

How to stop a note cleanly? Stop your bow on the string. Your violin will continue to ring, but the note will have a clean end to it.

Good practicing!

Lisa

January 18, 2005 at 02:32 AM · Now, that was a wonderfully informative response, Lisa. Thank you for the vowel illustration; I will steal that to use on my students.

January 18, 2005 at 02:40 AM · Thanks!

I meant to reply to your comment on the EM Partita too. I do separate the eighth notes because I sort of hear the beginning of the movement kind of trumpet-like. It is an announcement. I'm not committed on my stroke though! Sometimes I do a weighty porte detache and other times I do a very loud fast sort of lance stroke (about a half a bow - lots of speed). You could think of that as a long staccato I guess.

How do you do it?

Lisa

January 18, 2005 at 06:37 AM · Honestly, I think about how I want it to sound every single time I play it. I play it, then I stop and say, "No, that's not right." I have to deliberately focus on a clean, solid entry/exit that comes slightly off the string, like a long staccato.

January 18, 2005 at 08:34 AM · Emily:

That sounds like a porte detache to me. Try this:

Do a rubbing detache slowly in the upper third of the bow. Then, instead of equal weight for the whole stroke, vary the weight on each bow by using the index finger to carve out an even cres. dim. Think of it as spreading peanut butter that is slightly cold (in other words hard to spread). The sound of the consonant is a soft "wha" sound. It is basically a baroque stroke.

Here's the kicker. Just as you wouldn't stop the bow on a rubbing detache stroke when you change bows, don't on the porte either. Your desire to make it clean is what is making you lift it off the string - but you don't want to do that either. You want to stay on the string, with the same constant speed as a rubbing detache, but just gently release the weight at each bow change. The string will ring and the change will make the soft consonant sound. It should be a big, ringing, kind of bubbly sound. Let me know what you think.

Lisa

March 12, 2005 at 05:58 PM · Interesting thread.

I used to have a totally straight ( ie horizontal) execution of detache , gleaned from 4 years with the the erstwhile Jurgen Hess ,who was a sensational leader and London chamber player .He was open to critism on his exquisite ,though uniqie bow technique ,epecially on points of length of stroke in the transition from colle staccato to martele /spiccato.His detache was short and flawless .It's compactness was multifunctional ( unlike the soviets -which seemed intent on driving the nails of overceartainty into the coffin of politically programmed musical statements - of which Hirshorm was a victim ,at least to my eyes)

I deceided to find out for myself ,and set off discovering various ways of nuancing the detache over all lengths of stroke.The bow hair speed thing seems crucial ,if oistrak's u shaped movements are anything to go by ,but it is too often missed that the enormous detache that the modern soviet school advocated was actually dependant on

(1) vertical awarness of planar integrity ,ie staying withing the infinite variety of curves that a bowed string has before another string is even approached

(2 fractional slowing down of the bow at both ends before changing bow.

(3) stroke lengths are dependant on some variation of similarity of speed of attack and speed of departure from passage as a whole .

Yet why does Le Grand detache have to be separated in concept from porte because of the lean in that Lisa refers to before releasing the stroke ?

I've also noticed that asymetric planar movements are studiously ignored by the flattened matrix ' fixed height' right elbow exponents,which is why basics by Fischer falls short of recognising what actually separates him from Capay.

I have yet to see reference to rapid elastic silent tapping of the bowhair ,within a constant bouncing speed on the string , used over the whole bow to practice groups of 4 ,6 and 8 16ths to join soviet ,belgian and perhaps the Delay stuff .

The object is to use motion ,not sound , to determine the resistance of the string ,within the planar awarness of four strings ,not one.It is a heck of a useful way to approach chords too. Paul rolland simply advocated it for extending spiccato resonance.

The context of what happens to the arc of the elbow within the string change patterns begs the question of bow hair deceleration or acceleration producing dense or less dense sounds, without changing pronation .

Yet no straight line ever occurs in any movement ,unless two joints are rotated in opposite direction against each other.For this reason

I would like a more vertical focus on how horizontal one may allow one's detache stroke to be realised.Because it is the vertical placing of the first movement from the elbow that determines how far the locus of the stroke will extend.(Hence it's closeness from the resonant colle question.)

But now Lisa really needs to give us a thorough post on precisely how the string changing of the Kreutzer 8ve study might relate to this.

from under the lake

Mark N

March 12, 2005 at 06:11 PM · Mark, my tiny still forming violinistic mind latched onto one word: vertical, or as I have put in past notes "verticality!" Over and over again in the course of a horizontal stroke, when a sense of verticality comes into it and having to do with the curved shape (cross section) of a string, something nice gets added to the detache stroke. I think I'll read your post a couple of times more and let the learned and expert pundits do with it what they will. The edge of my mind and of my fingertips are grasping a whisp of the thought.

March 12, 2005 at 08:36 PM · sugestion... does Laurie or Robert have one gig web space for rendering free viewing of Rolland video series?

March 12, 2005 at 09:09 PM · Ah hah! My abstruse friend emerges from the lake... must have found his password! LOL

Did you know that abstruse is right above absurd in my dictionary? ;-) At first I thought it was obtuse that I wanted, but I remembered that I always got that one wrong, so I looked it up. Well, that more describes me when I read your posts! LOL So then I thought, abtuse must be it (but that wasn't a word) and it was only upon searching that I found my way to the right word, but then realized it was all absurd! (giggle)

"I used to have a totally straight ( ie horizontal) execution of detache"

Question: I agree with the horizontal, but you haven't said anything about your vertical (which I realize I assumed in my post when I talked about weight! hehe). So how much weight (vertical) did you use when you had this totally horizontal detache? And what was the resulting beginning and end of the note in this particular type of detache?

"length of stroke in the transition from colle staccato to martele /spiccato"

Probably we should define terms, otherwise we could end up in a trainwreck of misunderstandings.

For me, colle means a short stroke using the finger propulsion for the speed necessary for lots of brilliant resonance. It starts off the string, but as soon as the bow silently makes contact with the string the fingers make a very, very clean attack and the bow is pushed off the string by the quick movement of the fingers pushing out, or, on an up bow, pulling back in. Is that the same as what you mean?

Staccato: (good thing you spelled it right, I never know how many c's or t's to put!) I think this stroke is on the string, speed is variant but faster is more resonant, starts and ends from a stopped bow (on the string). Length depends on length of note - basically the time of the note is shortened to create the stop between the notes. I never take staccato to mean off the string, which I do take colle to mean.

Martele: I think martele is a biting attack (similar to colle), with a burst of speed and stays on the string.

Spicatto is a dropped stroke from above the string in an arc similar to the bottom half of a circle with the bow meeting the string on the bottom-most point. It is what we usually mean when we say "bounce the bow."

What is a politically programmed musical statement as it relates to detache? (hehe)

Could you describe "Oistrakh's U-shaped movements" more? This is the primary point where I lost you (and became obtuse) on U's and pronations in Buri's buried thread on Capet. Please include in this clarification: "infinite variety of curves that a bowed string has before another string is even approached."

"and set off discovering various ways of nuancing the detache over all lengths of stroke.The bow hair speed thing seems crucial"

I agree with this if I understand you correctly. I think detaches can have any length of bow and the speed is crucial to that relationship.

"fractional slowing down of the bow at both ends before changing bow"

Hmmm... not quite sure how this contributes to an enormous detache, but I find this change in bow speed to not contribute to a good detache (if talking about the basic one). To me, if you were doing regular bow changes (same amounts of bow) in a repeated detache and slowed each bow change fractionally, you would hear it as a sound change. Since my understanding of "rubbing" detache is a continuous sound broken only by the bow changes, it seems that a change of speed would spoil that. But maybe this speed change is making a similar sound to the weight change I described in porte detache?

"stroke lengths are dependant on some variation of similarity of speed of attack and speed of departure from passage as a whole"

yes, agreed.

"Yet why does Le Grand detache have to be separated in concept from porte because of the lean in that Lisa refers to before releasing the stroke ?"

To me, they are separated in sound, not in concept. In fact, the concept is the same (same speed as "Le Grand", same weight, same amount of hair, same sounding point, but a weight release at the bow changes to create a different consonant - a softer one. But I practice them back and forth so that I only make that one change - start with "rubbing" and change to porte, go back, etc.

"asymetric planar movements"

I need a definition here again. I think of the bow in a plane, not my elbow. Is that what you mean?

"I have yet to see reference to rapid elastic silent tapping of the bowhair ,within a constant bouncing speed on the string , used over the whole bow to practice groups of 4 ,6 and 8 16ths to join soviet ,belgian and perhaps the Delay stuff ."

I have become obtuse again... do you mean just allowing the bow to bounce up and down by itself, like dropping a ball?

"The object is to use motion ,not sound , to determine the resistance of the string ,within the planar awarness of four strings ,not one."

Do you mean "speed" by motion? I use speed to HELP determine the resistance (weight also, sounding point also). How do you use sound to determine the resistance? More help in definitions here. And by refering to the awareness of four strings, not one, are you meaning that you are aware of the range of planes between the four strings, rather than only thinking microcosmically (one string at a time)?

"The context of what happens to the arc of the elbow within the string change patterns begs the question of bow hair deceleration or acceleration producing dense or less dense sounds, without changing pronation .

Yet no straight line ever occurs in any movement"

Maybe here is my confusion with your abstruse words. :0) When I think of all these strokes, I think of the movement of the bow, not my arm! (Well, at least not past the initial basics of arm movement to get the idolized straight bow.) Once the basic arm motion is established, then I think of bow planes not arm planes, etc. Is this where we diverge? Because, to me the bow can be in a straight line, but the arm can't when making the bow straight. Methinks you have taken this thing of no pronation to an extreme that is not possible or desirable.

"I would like a more vertical focus on how horizontal one may allow one's detache stroke to be realised.Because it is the vertical placing of the first movement from the elbow that determines how far the locus of the stroke will extend.(Hence it's closeness from the resonant colle question.)"

More clarification please. When you say you would like a vertical focus do you mean to talk about the vertical motion of the elbow or the bow? The vertical motion o fthe elbow that has to happen to keep the bow horizontal?

"But now Lisa really needs to give us a thorough post on precisely how the string changing of the Kreutzer 8ve study might relate to this."

ROFLMAO! I don't know because I never got that etude good! LOLLL (For me, the octave study is no. 24, which is what I'm referring to.) But I assume you mean no. 7... do I need to go read buried Buri's column on that? For no. 7, there's a ton of vertical movement! LOLL (I am too obtuse for your abstruseness.)

Lisa, who has drowned in the lake.

PS. Just saw your posts. Why not post a link to where the videos can be seen? I'm not familiar with them either.

March 12, 2005 at 10:03 PM · Hi Lisa ,

yes the Rolland videos are hard to get ahold of.I have the last european complete set ,and would be delighted to get them online,about one gig online is needed .

Pretty much all your lakeside doubts would be resolved by the soundless application of a stroke between colle ,spiccato and drumstroke - used on Rolland videos to get an upward feeling of contact with the string from the elasticity of the bow and hair ,and how that grips the string at different parts of bow.

The divergence is indeed in my hesitation towards focusing on the bow at the expense of the arm

By 8ve Kreutzer I indeed begged for your in depth take on Kreutzer 24

The Rolland silent hair tapping excercise prevents removing elasticity from weight prepartion....

I know we're agreed on that,

love

mark N

March 13, 2005 at 12:13 AM · Mark of Lochness,

I did a search on video hosting (of which I know nothing) and there are several places that you can put a gig of material - or you could divide it up. (Why not on your website with a buried link? grin)

"Pretty much all your lakeside doubts would be resolved by the soundless application of a stroke between colle ,spiccato and drumstroke - used on Rolland videos to get an upward feeling of contact with the string from the elasticity of the bow and hair ,and how that grips the string at different parts of bow."

I don't know how to get an upward feeling of contact with something underneath!

"The divergence is indeed in my hesitation towards focusing on the bow at the expense of the arm

By 8ve Kreutzer I indeed begged for your in depth take on Kreutzer 24"

That was the only way I could ever get that etude passably good - by not thinking about my arm, just the sound and motion of the bow. It was the thing that most brought to the fore my stiffness and unbalance everyday when I practiced and the thing I struggled against in myself. I forced myself to do it everyday after my little Galamian bow exercise routine (which I always did first). I hated it and loved it when I would finally break through my struggle into "the zone" (as athletes say). Between that etude and Kreutzer 1 I can't think of anything harder on the violin. (And they say that Kreutzer is the easiest etude book!)

Anyway, I found (thinking after about my bow - when it worked and when it didn't) that the whole bow eighths (and slurred sixteenths) need to have almost a colle/martele like push (LOL the light just began to dawn on me!) at the beginning of each stroke at the frog and tip with a lance-like lightness inbetween (but not too light or the bow would skitter across the top of the lake!). The wrist and elbow had to be loose, relaxed and heavy (somnabulent). ;-) My elbow was low for each level, but too low and I couldn't do it. If I thought about the elbow, then all was lost - too intellectual, not feeling enough. Probably the most important thing was I had to stop caring whether I could do it or not. I had to learn to say each day that was the best I could do that day, and observe what went on, and wait for the next day to come to try again. That was the greatest hell.

So, does that answer your question about vertical elbows? :-P

Of course, it is all about elasticity. But if one is holding onto one's forgiveness, then one can't be elastic, can one?

Lisa, who is retiring back into the simplicity of technique for the rest of the day.

March 13, 2005 at 12:59 AM · Greetings,

Lisa said:

>I don't know how to get an upward feeling of contact with something underneath!

Yes you do!

Sometimes even saying crudely 'just imagine the string pressing up into the bow instead of the bow pressing down" (I know you don"t use that appraoch anyway) often changes the sound of a player radically.

More felcitious? 'The string supports the bow?' The bow is played by the string?" 'The bow reacts to the string tickling its botty?'

Cheers,

Buri

March 13, 2005 at 12:33 PM · Buri ,many thanks for helping me de-supinate there .I think we both wish to rescue our maiden in distress.,but she may require some restraining !

The Camerons are from around Loch Ness ,although how Lisa managed to conjure my partial ancestry I have yet to discover .

W. Blake commented on the " programmed artistic statements" query

Each man is in his spectre's pow'r

until the arrival of that hour

when his humanity awake

and he cast his spectre into the lake .

Here goes,

soviet detache had too much historical necessity to stand up to anything except an interrogation. .It's why Hirshorn was as a child frequently woken up at 2 am to produce perfect KGB responses to musical questions.Whole concerts were performed in contexts of sleep deprivation.(Sound familiar?)

Perhaps this 'sonambulance' would be the horizontal abscence of hilarity

" bouncing up and down by itself, dropping like a ball?"

(Between my son and I , I get to walk the plank more often )

Yet they had sophistications undreamed of ,in the west.

I like to refer to this as functional shamism .No foaming at mouth ,no out of body experiences ,simply regarding musical good intentions as a

historical vacuum temporarily filled with permitted states of playing .It takes the the Jeckl and Hyde out of playing by making a technical necessity of sound itself intrinsic to music .Bad news for those who seek the social function of music as the heart of the definition.

It may even be why Carl instinctively dislikes the erstwhile Vengerov.

Greatly preferred personally is ( Hollenweger's non perjorative )

shamanistic anger setting a bonfire on a hill

consuming the sound with love

no water can quench.

This would seek to give range to any shadow of sound as valid

Simply put , I am guilty as charged of,if Lisa will permit the term , of conditional 'unforgiveness' as the basis of playing

(why should dostyevsky get all the fun) .

(1) I do not ( ever ) forgive my instrument for not being better than a strad.(I have some very good instruments and the better the instrument ,the less willing I am to declare war on it)

(2) I do not (generally) give it permission to exist ouside of my desires

(3)The bow is neutral .A kind of treaty writer between sound wars .

(I may ask Lisa if she had access to the intrusive sound lawsuit protective body armour.I may have to test the exellence of insured lawyer coverage )

Against which is one practical adapted Rolland solution.

The innanely repetitive silent, rapid metronome 16ths at 50 -70 ,bouncing exact/ sometimes inexact , momemtary grip on the string

( from about 2-4 cm high at point ,and a lot lower vertical silent bounce at heel less than 1 cm -unless consciously raised .It is this last raising that benefits the gradual experience of the richochet return speed as an elongated U.)

The axis of rotation ( refusing to adjust pronation except as airborne elasticity permitting this "chattering false teeth excercise " )

-- between more than two joints on any one plane.This is where the fun starts.It gives an opportuniy to dissasociate sound from motion ,while at the same time concerntrating on calibrating rebound directly from string resistance ,in a way that silent focal points are sought .

Capay was on to this.

First Pag Caprice not entirely unrelated.

Oistraks bowed U is within a very clear series of impulses passing themselves off as one.On his DVD from EMI 's classicarchive there are good examples of how he seems to shorten the bow itself through muscular adjustment .The variety of shortend patterns are typically projected "from above" before he hits the string.This is not visible to the naked eye .It comes from a reversal of up and down awarness ,at 90 degrees tangentally to bow plane parallel to bridge.This awarness is not commonly adjusted through weight concepts alone.

It is known as the ' return speed' of hair through string ,back to bow.Oistrak follows the inverted richochet of the bow in every extension,especially curving the right elbow "knobble" ,(to borrow a wonderful dutch expression ) to coincide with the length of bow stroke in a "one rotation fits all" kind of fashion. All silently prepared.

.Even his compressions of stroke have shades of muscular "echoes" .These are not restricted to any single dimension.

Harder than position orientated chords is that humbling Kreutzer no 10 ( if we count the slow one as no.1 ) .It can be treated like the whole of each section is one chord

The experience of the resistance of the string as part of string change is often best prepared by midair continuation of (previous ) stroke.This gives a split second longer to adjust the perception of separation of string rebound within elbow arc and its projection of bow change ,but from an extended legato pronation .

Perhaps the single knottiest problem facing string players today.

Bow execution "at ground zero " would broaden into any plane the placing of this U as an entirely separate issue from whether sound can be said to occur .The parallel illusion with the bridge is somehow only visible to external (planar) mirrors .That's why we need each other to hear what was not said ,echoed , or intended.

It's why music making is rarely merely interrogative ,

It's also why I agree with One Sam Li 's link to that rather amazing canadian break dancing violinist.

It's why Giles Apap wont tango to a script he didnt write .Anyone heard that amazing silk trail cadenza of his Mozart 3 ?

bleat

Mark N

March 13, 2005 at 08:54 PM · Mark, the Loch Ness monster...

Monsters are the Jungian shadow figure which is not a bad thing. ;-) If restrained they unbalance the psyche! LOL

Your William Blake poem reminded me of the movie, The Big Fish, which I have recommended to several of my friends. You must find it and watch it (came out last year I think, was up for a couple of Academy Awards). It is a commentary on the mythologizing of our lives through narrative. Since it is a Loch Ness type of mythology, I think your fish will relate to the movie's.

"It takes the the Jeckl and Hyde out of playing by making a technical necessity of sound itself intrinsic to music .Bad news for those who seek the social function of music as the heart of the definition.

It may even be why Carl instinctively dislikes the erstwhile Vengerov."

Yes, but there is an argument to be made for that side. And you, by the way, have made it in your recordings with the violin you used and through which you still got a sound as a result of all the technical necessities of sound itself intrinsic to your music, which arose out of your consideration of its social function. (HAH! Did I understand you???)

ROfLMAO about Carl. We need to wake the 18 year old giant and get him in this conversation... wonder if his ears are burning. Yes, could be why he "instinctively" doesn't like Vengerov. That kind of playing does tend to regard the violin as the "other" doesn't it. But, on the other hand, when I follow the technical necessity of sound itself is when I find the "thou" in the violin. (which is why I so liked the Zukerman classes... hehe)

"This would seek to give range to any shadow of sound as valid

Simply put , I am guilty as charged of,if Lisa will permit the term , of conditional 'unforgiveness' as the basis of playing

(why should dostyevsky get all the fun) ."

LOL Agreed. Now I am feeling somewhat relieved and less guilty.

"( from about 2-4 cm high at point ,and a lot lower vertical silent bounce at heel less than 1 cm -unless consciously raised .It is this last raising that benefits the gradual experience of the richochet return speed as an elongated U.)"

OK, the morning fog from the lake is beginning to dissipate a bit. But I don't get how you can "bounce" at the frog, whether less than a cm or not. The bow is too heavy - even suspended above the string by this planar elbow it still won't bounce (she says, mostly sure of herself, except really needing to go get her violin to try it). AND, all of this bouncing around means the bow is suspended above the string by an elbow that is too high, holding too much weight, and therefore quite tense in the shoulder, no? This frog bouncing would have to be in a finger motion, no? The curled fingers that Zukerman talks about? Or a Russian straighter pinkie? You should do a video of this on your site - it would make it easier to discuss (not having the Rolland videos or the Capet book to help out). OK, just saw a page or two of the Capet on the internet and referred to the Galamian book a bit. I think I know a little more what you mean about pronation now (this I take for granted, I guess because there is no way to move the arm without it, no?)

"The axis of rotation ( refusing to adjust pronation except as airborne elasticity permitting this "chattering false teeth excercise " )

-- between more than two joints on any one plane.This is where the fun starts.It gives an opportuniy to dissasociate sound from motion ,while at the same time concerntrating on calibrating rebound directly from string resistance ,in a way that silent focal points are sought ."

OK, are you saying that the arm is pronated the same for all parts of the bow for this bouncing exercise? Is that why it is higher at the tip than the frog (which I still highly doubt is possible at all)? Or is it pronated differently in each part of the bow, but just not moved once established? (hehe! less fog now!) I guess the former.

So, is this what you were doing in your recording of Pag 1? I think maybe. Here is what I noticed about it. First, and most importantly, the sound is very exciting - especially at the end of the caprice, almost otherworldly, scampering away - great for the social implications! lol BUT, IF you were keeping your elbow in one plane for all the string crossings (I suspect you did that a bit), and IF you favored the plane angle for the G string (I think you did that a bit), THEN you lost resonance on the E. This would be a kind of hanging elbow, I think (again without violin to try it). Is there a way to compromise so you keep some of the vertical excitment and crackle, but move the elbow more into each string's plane (which makes a more lyrical sound)? (maybe not, I don't know). If you did that, you would be moving into that square of arm (still with pronation unmoving) and moving that square up and down ala Galamian to get that bounce. Then you wouldn't need to drop the bow as much, making less starts and stops, but achieving a very much less clownish aspect. The resistance to the string is a different one - more horizontal, less vertical. I wonder if there is a mid-point. I'd love to hear (and see) you try that. How about a streaming video?

more later... Lisa

March 13, 2005 at 10:13 PM · Er yes Lisa,

-- most definately ,

< Is that why it is higher at the tip than the frog (which I still highly doubt is possible at all)?>----- Er the frog is a thrown bounce executed from wrist swoops alternating with the Rolland axis of about a palm down from the shoulder ,and a palm up from the wrist .Implied elbow movements anathema to soviet 'canons.'

The ( swooping wrist ) heel bounce is actually from the balance middle of the bow.The silent tapping is like emptying salt from a shaker with alternating movements of wrist down elbow up..Quite the opposite of consciously practising a stationary elbow.

< Or is it pronated differently in each part of the bow, but just not moved once established? (hehe! less fog now!) I guess the former>. ---Right guess ,but the silent tapping is to establish antinodes of sound.The performance orientated stroke becomes simply a raised controlled portati when contrasted with silent antinode practice .

The crazy thing is to slow this caprice down to the limits of functinal return speed . Wierd is how slowly the eastern bloc executes this in performance compared to the virtual machine gun western approaches.But pag only wrote 'andante' .So Emily Grossman has wonderfully focused dichotomy on how east verses west on this.

.I cant stand the idea of it not being free.

March 14, 2005 at 12:20 AM · Er yes what? lol

most definitely what?

No fair! I thought the bounce was a dropped one! Now you are using the wrist at the frog. You changed the rules. (or is that in the capet that I don't have?) The "swooping wrist bounce" just sounds like spicatto to me. (And I thought it was special...)

"but the silent tapping is to establish antinodes of sound.The performance orientated stroke becomes simply a raised controlled portati when contrasted with silent antinode practice"

antinodes of sound = vertical depressions in the string?

Interesting that you conceive of it as portati. I think completely legato in a tiny, tiny space, which bounces up rather than down. :0)

I think you played it Andante. Are you sure if you modified the elbow level slightly it wouldn't be free? I wasn't advocating for the more lyrical way (those comments were to point out the things you wouldn't want from that technique) but only to see if there is a way to get resonance on all the strings equally without changing the end result too much if at all.

Lisa

March 14, 2005 at 05:55 PM · I was referring t the cost of setting up the rolland videos on streaming something. That's far from free.

Unless Robert's feeling generous?

The" wrist swoop" is how galamian describes his colle in the dutch translation of his book.Rolland also uses that in his continious tapping preparation for several strokes.

Pag caprice 1 is kindof the summing up of all 24.So Caprice 2 is more what I had in mind for silent node placing ,to gain a seamless string crossing.

from under the lake

Mark N

March 15, 2005 at 07:44 AM · Mark, Lisa,

I have not read this entire thread, but I'll reply anyway.

Mark, are you saying that Vengerov regards performance as being for the sake of the music in itself, rather than with consideration to social function? This is exactly what I think he is not - as far as I can see, he is one of the least erstwhile performers out there. I don't really want to open up this debate again, but my thoughts are that he recognises social function far too much, but makes dishonest and self-serving choices with regard to it. For example, he may kid himself that he is musically enlightening audiences with his endless repetitions of Bazzini, but I see them as self-indulgent showing off, putting himself 'centre stage'; an attitude I find distasteful in the context of 'classical' concerts. I am frequently appalled at some of the audiences at his concerts, that they so readily go along with and encourage his ego trips. And that I still meet serious musicians who are taken in by his indulgence and distasteful sentimentality and who say "He's such an amazing musician, look how he feels the music". I yearn for the days when performers 'thought' as well as 'felt' the music.

Carl.

March 15, 2005 at 08:16 AM · Y'all are misuing "erstwhile" and it upsets me.

March 15, 2005 at 11:56 AM · I know what you mean Carl , there is something in the idea of historical necessity in Vengerov's playing ,which is why I see him as striving for avoidance of western political incorrectness.But in the context above of functinal shamanism ,that may yet have a place as something valid quite beyond soviet playing .I agree that he has elided personhood into showmanship,but that is a charge few escape.What I really wanted to ask you is your take on shamanism within music.If there's amanuesis (faithfulness in altruistic form) there must be its range of apposites?

Mark N

March 15, 2005 at 11:59 AM · Please enlighten us as to the correct use of erstwhile Jim.

March 15, 2005 at 02:20 PM · Mark,

I'm not sure what you mean by functional shamanism; isn't Shamanism a kind of religion? Also, I'm not sure what you mean when you say Vengerov strives to avoid western political incorrectness. I didn't know there was a 'political correctness/incorrectness' to performing/musical approach.

Jim,

Dictionary.com definition:

Erstwhile: In the past; at a former time; formerly.

Carl.

March 15, 2005 at 03:41 PM · I think he's saying vengerov goes to a shaman instead of a more politically correct traditional medical practicioner and that it works as well as the soviet style of violin playing. Correct me if I'm wrong.

March 15, 2005 at 05:17 PM · Good one Jim ,

but if you do a google on " christian shamanism " you may come up with various forms of political correctness ,especially from mr Hollenweger.

Carl ,as a budding musicologist ,you will be adressing anthropology in several subjects ,not least in associative epistemology .It might be handy to familiarise yourself with aspects of shamanism within ritual ,one of which is music making.Dont take my word for it though ......

Gould -the clikking, the faces,Vengerov -the darling--- no link?

how blithe.

March 15, 2005 at 05:27 PM · LOL I think the energy of big brains at work pulled me out of my dreams this morning!

My back is better!!! YAY!

Carl, isn't it lovely that so many people care about your education? I think that means you're loved. ;-)

I'm off to google now...

Lisa

March 16, 2005 at 12:00 AM · Jim, you made me laugh! Now I can die happy!

March 16, 2005 at 04:46 AM · Mark N wrote:

"So Emily Grossman has wonderfully focused dichotomy on how east verses west on this."

I just wanted to add that everyone here lost me way back there somewhere, before the Paganini.

March 16, 2005 at 05:42 AM · Notes with dots sound like "chuk" and notes without dots sound like "rummmmmm."

March 16, 2005 at 08:23 AM · Emily ,

Perhaps you said more than you thought you knew when you referred to " The many faces of staccato -- they seem to haunt me!"

Not one of us could dissasociate with what you were referring .Even If we'd never played a dot...

Now in germany the dot still means something totally different than in england ,or belgium .The dots in the former(germany) actually indicate broad detache lines in Barenhieter urtext of Mozart.Yet Leopold Mozart took pains to explain the other possible separated strokes too.None of his explanations refer to a detache line as we know it.

So publishers are using code to hide meaning.

Simple shamanism.Arguably disassociative .

It's no wonder napster was attacked on its authenticity.

The mystery of the market is its strength.

Hence the need for great interpreters ,with their clicks whirrs ,and faboulous machinations.

Theirs is a high priesthood of ignorance ,that is ,like it or not , economically demeaning to those not within it's canons .Or is it not a fact that the greatest respect is rarely considered misapplied to the simplest magic formulas,whether that be a simple dot from the hands of a depressive scot writing the subliminally out of body Harry Potter , or from a sincere violin bow of a demigod.

After studying at length with the russians ,ie the top russians - Lieberman and Hirshorn - to get to the reason why russian dots are so much more resonant than anything I ever heard in the west ,a few things have come up and bitten me on the nose.

(1)Listen to Markov on pag first Caprice .Slow meaty thuds of voluptous sound.Hirshorn was also into this.

(2)Then listen to any westener, especially those trained in the reaction towards the holocaust -ie Feya in Israel .Listen to Zimmerman listen to the great pag exponents in the west.

(3)Not one of the above mentioned performances escapes the overanalysied dream that Descartes had of circling round a church spinning anticlockwise,left shoulder stooped down .Which ,among other things posits the shame of poetic knowledge as prevalent in every aesthetic in the west.

And we were just talking of dots are we?

Who can join them ,who can dare to.

Or is one in need of a medical license to breathe quickly or shortly.????

How many anti death certificates do we need to live like we're alive ?

A practical example of where laughter becomes symbolic ....

Laughter is a repetitive dot formation .A simple " HUH!" is a dot.

It is difficult to sustain a laugh with humour that is not really funny.

It's opposite the sarcastic ,perhaps gallic shrug of the shoulders the "HUH" is impossible to sustain with a smile .

Put these two things together , add an existential fear of the moment ,Heidegger will do ,and hey presto ,anyone who can sustain their position on anything is a functional ,well ,the s word.

This did not hit me until ,in mission in BC ,halfway between harrison springs and Vancouver , ten years after giving in my first lifetime contract as a performer ,my wife and I were stuck near snow level with the bears ,and we went in for a plate of soup and to be shouted at by two dutch missionaries stuck in the firs.

Others being shouted at included a chappie sitting next to me ,a Cree indian ( the "service" was 'for ' them) .His bible was upside down ,his specs were held together with sellotape ,and chances were on that he was addicted to alcohol because a couple of my scottish forebears rekoned that the neatest way to avoid war while trading,was to make it free .Mind you he was on his reservation ,so well within his rights to kick me off .

Instead he was being screamed at in the hope he would get a bowl of soup .He was keen to learn how not to molest his relatives.

And this desire of his was induced by dividing ethics against economic interest.They still log his reservation with techniques used and discarded 400 years ago in the destruction of the Black forest.He still cant walk his paths or reservation roads because the logging trucks ,run by the prison industry , are impassible,so high is the incidence of reckless truck driving.He even cannot get into his hot springs without asking a logger ,prolly a con ,for his personal permission.

Ok so he is free on his reservation.Free enough to be bossed around by prison louts ,even.

But the permission is iatrogenic ,ie it causes the problems at the deepest level.

That is what somehow resonates for me Emily when I hear of those haunting faces of staccato .

(the monster blows ballast ,

dissapearing in its own ink)

Mark N

March 16, 2005 at 08:31 AM · Mark,

I read that post three times, and I think I understand what you are saying.

And I concur.

Benjamin

March 16, 2005 at 08:49 AM · Mark,

Ah, Harry Potter.

My sincerest apologies for the missionaries' mission, as my husband and I are of the same lot, only we are the ones serving the soup instead of preaching.

You have caused me to open my dictionary more times in one reading than I usually do in an entire day. Thank you for the brain activity.

It was, in fact, a little comforting to discover that I was right all along, and that dots are mysterious and subject to change. It has been the focus of the week during my practice sessions, and I listen to how many different ways I can punctuate the note. It becomes infinite. Yes, it does remind me of laughter; I hear Mozart laughing at me as I scratch my head. I will laugh back with my bow.

March 16, 2005 at 09:03 AM · Just because Mark brought up the memory - one of my youngsters when still a youngster defined laughter as "vocal staccato". I wrote it down. He'll probably be mad that I remembered and wrote it here. I think we need a lot more vocal staccato in this world, and I wonder if anyone is up to the challenge of making his next violinistic staccato sound like laughter.

March 16, 2005 at 04:04 PM · Inge

"vocal staccato" is a lost art ,as far as the "hallelujah chorus" ( the canon) , is concered.

The speed of breath over the larnyx ,as any top french baroque singer will tell you ,is completely slowed down in contemporary definitions of breath control.So Mozart's advice to the "soloist"quartet in one of his operas to speak more than sing is today a simple matter of regalvanising old corpses,oops ,the definition of so much modern scholarship by default.

And Emily ,please dont apologise , " the wrath of man shall praise" ... Your blog was fantastic today tho.No shortage of inducement to the more previous above.

(less ink now ,but darker

as depth increase ... )

Mark N

March 16, 2005 at 05:00 PM · Mark,

That was just lovely.

Thank you.

Blowing bubbles,

Lisa

March 17, 2005 at 05:04 PM · (a) If a bow can be sincere , matter can be panentheistic

It's like someone at the niagra saying the waterfall is sublime ,and then being told that the sentiment is valid ,but not materially functional .

(b)Ok so the first bows were around 20 cm long ,appearing through moorish spain after 8th cent.

The pple of 'class' would not be seen dead bowing anything .Real pple plucked at strings.

So why is the whole bow not a dot too?

March 17, 2005 at 10:32 PM · It is! Depends on the speed.

Lisa, a sincerely long dot

March 17, 2005 at 10:41 PM · Some days:

... --- ...

March 18, 2005 at 03:09 AM · Greetings,

I think it is better to view the bow at sub-atomic level as an organized set of dots.

Cheers,

B

u

r

i

March 18, 2005 at 03:14 AM · B

R

I

T

N

E

Y

is much cooler

March 18, 2005 at 03:28 AM · I know Britney, and I invited her over here. Believe it or not, it's really her.

March 18, 2005 at 03:55 AM · of course it`s cooler. Brain-death is characterized by low temperature,

Cheers,

Buri

March 18, 2005 at 04:11 AM · Let me give you some advice, son. Nobody talks that way to Britney except me and her daddy. You better watch it.

March 18, 2005 at 04:15 AM · any chance she`ll whip me?

March 18, 2005 at 04:17 AM · I'll see what I can work out with her.

March 18, 2005 at 04:18 AM · I owe you one.

March 18, 2005 at 04:30 AM · She says she'll trade you a whippin for some of them flying Chinamen videos.

March 18, 2005 at 04:45 AM · does she want `Wong flew over the cuckoo`s nest` or Hitchcock`s `Birds 2- the Revenge of the Asian Chicken.?`

March 18, 2005 at 05:01 AM · She just don't want to see no wires on them thats flying mainly.

March 18, 2005 at 05:12 AM · perhaps it would help if she tried to see wires as a collection of dots and then move her vision between them in a judicious manner?

March 18, 2005 at 05:05 PM · joining of the dots (especially in oistraks vl conc. edition) was worth a glass of choice.A man could die laughing.Or build an empire on it.

March 20, 2005 at 07:45 PM · At first glance seemed off topic.Second glance spot on .It's why the soviets may be right after all.

Serious laughter

Jeremy Clarke ( From the Spectator )

The very last out-take in a compilation of humorous out-takes I saw about five years ago has stayed in my mind’s eye ever since, evergreen and distinct, like a favourite fantasy, to be played back in times of boredom or emergency. During an interval in the class, a local television news reporter is interviewing the teacher of a new-age therapy called Laughter Yoga. To the right of them, three of the teacher’s students are standing obediently in a line facing the camera and trying to keep a straight face.

All three are fighting a losing battle, but the chap in the middle, who looks as if he only popped out for a packet of Mayfair and somehow got roped in to make up the numbers, has already lost it. He’s got his chin dug into his chest, his eyes tight shut and his shoulders are convulsing wildly. After a while he thinks his crisis is passed. He opens his eyes and lifts his head. But the world strikes him, if anything, as more ludicrous than before, and now he’s bent double and clutching his stomach as if he’s been shot.

The interviewer is also trying not to lose it. In a wavering voice he asks the teacher, a tiny Indian man, and the only person present fully in command of himself, to demonstrate one of his Laughter Yoga techniques. The yogi nods gravely, composes himself, then lets out the most ridiculously artificial falsetto cackle, like some evil pantomime villain with a dastardly plan. And everybody, students, reporter, literally falls about. It’s as if someone’s lobbed a hand grenade.

Exactly why everyone laughs so helplessly at the yogi’s ersatz laughter is unclear. Perhaps the moral and religious undertone of the endeavour lends it a piquant absurdity. Maybe the students are racists. Even in enlightened times such as these, it’s not unknown. But it’s the mental image of that one student, laughing in spite of himself, and trying to suppress it, and failing utterly, with such undignified results, that stays indelibly in my mind. If life’s going badly I summon up this man and try to see things from his point of view at that particular moment.

Last Saturday afternoon, however, I was able to go one better and attend a Laughter Yoga club myself. Yogic laughing has caught on, apparently, and now there are 13,000 Laughter Yoga clubs worldwide, including a new one, I was overjoyed to discover, in a nearby town. The one featured in the out-take was held outside in bright sunshine. This one, unfortunately, took place indoors, in a large empty room on the third floor of a community centre. It cost £8 a head, payable at the door. You couldn’t even set foot across the threshold without letting them see the colour of your money first.

There were seven of us, three men, four women, including May and Eva the co-organisers, who expressed a profound disappointment at so few turning up for the first meeting. Going by the interest shown and the promises they’d had, there should have been 25 of us, they said. We pulled our chairs into a sad little circle in the middle of the room and gave it another five minutes in case there were latecomers. ‘Too nice to be indoors, I suppose,’ said Eva, looking at the blue sky outside the window. As we waited silently, the happy shouts and occasional laughter of Saturday afternoon shoppers filtered up from the high street below. We may as well start, then, said May, gloomily, to Eva.

In turn we introduced ourselves to the group with a few biographical sentences. To make it fun, said Eva, we must introduce a deliberate lie and the group had to guess which it was. My deliberate lie was that I’d once had a trial for West Ham United. The rest of the group swallowed that, but were having none of the ferrets. The elderly man to my left, Malcolm, told us that he had loved the Lord Jesus with all his heart since 1997, and his deliberate lie, which was spotted at once, was that he was in fact a woman. A shy lady whose name I couldn’t quite catch whispered that it wasn’t in her nature to tell lies, even in a game.

We played a succession of daft party games, many of them involving the wearing of hats. No one laughed. We were like a firm of off-duty pall-bearers. After about an hour of this, Eva ordered us to laugh. Even if we didn’t feel like laughing, she said, we must ‘fake it until we make it’. So we pretended to laugh. And by jingo it worked. Our fake laughs were so excruciating it was actually very funny, and before long even the shy lady who didn’t like to tell a deliberate lie was crying with genuine laughter. We were laughing so much that when it was time to stop I felt slightly ashamed.

__________________________________

It may be that we need more insincere laughter attempts.

rolling around floor in silence

Mark N

March 20, 2005 at 11:19 PM · Mark,

That was great. I could use a good hard laugh these days.

Benjamin

March 21, 2005 at 02:19 AM · You aren't accusing anybody's comic talents of begging for insincere laughter are you?

March 21, 2005 at 04:15 AM · I think shoes that fit are hysterically funny!

Rolling on the floor laughing!

Lisa

March 21, 2005 at 08:56 AM · I think I'm saying that until I''m happy with being 'unsincere' (though 'undistilled in emotion' would also do) , ie non monoemotional ,it could be said that my bow will remain insincere.

Further still , if the levels of insincerity in my playing ,(as shadow of the bowed insincerity ,) help me to develop a technical illusion of monoemotion ,ie joy ,longing , etc - that I would beg to name 'functional shamanism'.

It's opposite 'non functional shamanism' might posit the material echo of monoemotion as if 'real in itself'.

If this ' monoemotion ' then gets treated as talent , tendency to over polarisation might become something of a norm.

normally

Mark N

March 21, 2005 at 09:07 AM · As in Larry the Cable Guy and Professor Irwin Corey?

March 21, 2005 at 10:57 AM · Greetings,

Mark said (or groaned in ecstasy)

>Further still , if the levels of insincerity in my playing ,(as shadow of the bowed insincerity ,) help me to develop a technical illusion of monoemotion ,ie joy ,longing , etc - that I would beg to name 'functional shamanism'.

Why would you name it functional shamanism in particular?

What is the difference between functional shamanism and regular shamanism?

Are you using types of ecstasy to explicate what people manufacture and label music ?

Cheers,

Buri the sham

March 21, 2005 at 04:32 PM · Help me out Jim ,those two are unknown over here.

Buri

(1)"Why would you name it functional shamanism in particular?" -because shamanism ,as we know it ,is in part an anthropological model that seems to fit wierd things such as pretending that music means something other than that which is read into each interpretative experience.It's the place where we say "that's magic" .Even in silent aquiescence .

(2)"What is the difference between functional shamanism and regular shamanism?" --- lying well,ie creating a structure in which the 'willing suspension of disbelief ' is a choice ,not an obligation..Declaring the limits of what can be known.

(3) I'm not sure if regular shamanism ever existed,as most folks are not as dumb as many early anthropologists would have us believe.Unless a pple group were pretty aware of the gaps in their thinking /world experience ,they would never have hired insomeone to link up to 'other worlds' .

"Are you using types of ecstasy to explicate what people manufacture and label music ?"-- No ,a lawyer emotionally involved cannot win his case,and it is not so very different for the other performing arts.

What the above spectator article and the soviets have in common is the experimental willingness to brush aside searches for authenticity that posit the illusion as if real in itself.

I 'm using 'my sincerity/bow technique 'connumdrum' as a model of limitations ,if you'll allow that.

I was also positing reified associative norms as non functional shaminism.An example of that is the spinning dream of Descartes ,mentioned above,left shoulder down.

I feel it vital that youngsters/students can get free ,as soon as possible, from the traps of oversincerity ,that can lead to manifold forms of anxiety.

There is no way that mere obsession with practice ,music ,no matter how good the teachers ,can ever produce a musician,if the functional shaminism above is allowed as a possibiliy .

I do think that the place where your last question becomes relevant is how music has become manufactured ,and how many labels inhibit association at any level.

It also has to do with the way a metaphor dies by overuse.Muscle (musculus) means 'little mouse' in the Latin .But few surgeons will study mouse dissection as a means of improving human dissection ,once at medical school.

Although peeling grapes and sowing their skins back together can be a good substitute,a muscle is a literal entity beyond metaphor ,in the prescence of a knife.Sincerity is no guarantee of the knife's power to heal ,either in specialist hands ,or otherwise .

In a sense ,the surgeons approach to the transition of mouse to man could be said to parallel a violinist's distance from the material being interpreted.

It could be in that context that sincerity is become outdated.

sham ,

Mark N

March 21, 2005 at 07:11 PM · I almost saw my way through the thorns and then I got stuck.

Isn't regular and functional shamanism the same? Both set up the performer as the hired link, right? When would the willing suspension of disbelief not be a choice?

Is functional shamanism Carl's position that music is more than each individual experience, or the opposite?

>I feel it vital that youngsters/students can get free ,as soon as possible, from the traps of oversincerity ,that can lead to manifold forms of anxiety.

>There is no way that mere obsession with practice ,music ,no matter how good the teachers ,can ever produce a musician,if the functional shaminism above is allowed as a possibiliy .

Ever practical, I am wondering how you help children to be free from oversincerity. And how does one produce a musician?

Lisa

March 21, 2005 at 08:10 PM · This is first of all a postulated shamanism as proposed by anthropologists studying the phenomenon from the outside and within their own belief systems, and possibly getting a "show" rather than the real thing, or not the real shamans. The core idea is not shamanism, however, but an attitude toward music, with a metaphor using a symbol for practioners of "majick". I understand the concern to be one of mystical ideals brought into music creating a perpetual state of anxiety by those attempting to reach said mystical rhealms that a) they will always fall short b) they can't find it so they feel inadequate and c) what they are seeking is a sham. This is what I understand from the expressed ideas. The solution to all of this might be a dose of simplicity and knowing that what magic comes from music is as natural, if profound, as what comes from all the other arts when we least expect to be doing producing it. There was a time when the arts, including that of Leonardo da Vinci (my favourite among the visual artists) was considered a craft. By being craftsmen, they somehow created magic and the illusion that Mona Lisa was actually smiling at us. By trying to be magicians, perhaps we fall short of the craft and the magic.

Did I get it, I wonder?

Musicians produce themselves with the help of those who teach and guide them.

March 21, 2005 at 08:19 PM · Wonderful post ,Inge S ,you ,as usual get to the essence rather quickly .

There are 'anti anthropology ' approaches which encompass something of what you wisely reduced to craft .I think you get it (,perhaps I'm seeking too far into the 'mists' myself ,but I'm trying to speak from personal experience as much as from ideas -as much as a handicap as a blessing !)

Nothing like hard nosed practical questions Lisa , (who can stand?)

..... here goes,

(1)Isn't regular and functional shamanism the same? -- the barrier between them would be the pretense that what they are doing is anything other than allegorical. Functional shamanism is a disinterested attempt to get the allegorical functioning as just that.No more ,no less.Non functional shamanism is to set a series of taboos in place that gets patterns of expected behavoir passing istself off as choice.It is a power struggle between performer and the world.

(2)When would the willing suspension of disbelief not be a choice?---when the world is considered as something less than being fully experiencable ,without a mediator ,lens or drug.The performer's need for a lens would perhaps be greater than bringing the viewer into focus himself.Light can be used to hide the viewer and the viewed.Look at vermeer's paintings .A camera obscura removes choice in this sense.

(3)Is functional shamanism Carl's position that music is more than each individual experience, or the opposite?--not sure ,would like to ask Carl to answer that one himself.he seems to want his cake ,and eat it.

(4) I am wondering how you help children to be free from oversincerity?--overhonesty is not usually a presenting difficulty to any profesional ,it is only the cynical manipulation of it that I was referring to ,-"traps" of oversincerity.What use is the assumption ,that by being sincere , truth can be communicated ? Half truths are much easier to be really sincere about.Jeremy Clarke (see above spectator art) was not dishonest about the falseness of the laughter that became funny through its falseness.Functional Irony is rarely taught- it's left as a character trait begging for maturity.

(5)And how does one produce a musician? Not by reducing accomplishment to /musical technical perfection ,anyway

Rabin committed suicide in the west around about the same time as ,Korsakov in the USSR ,if my memory serves.

These two giants still bear silent witness to that .

I would like to see character being defined as something less individualistic ,and my arguments for functional shamanism would limit the power of taboo to determine a person's course of life choices ,musical or otherwise.

March 21, 2005 at 08:55 PM · Inge, I understood you! You're far smarter than me! :0)

Mark, I have a preference for eating my cake also. HAH! (Big dot! (with frosting))

Everything else I have to think about. I'm off to teach irony to children now in the form of the absurdity of playing violin (which I think they all get better than me!).

Lisa

March 21, 2005 at 10:47 PM · Greetings,

Mark, I suggest you call your new book 'The Impotence of being Ernest,"

Dribble,

Buri

March 22, 2005 at 07:21 AM · Actually Buri ,it was once to be

'androdgeny at my elbow'

....lost in translation

crackle

Mark N

March 22, 2005 at 03:29 PM · Well, at least it was genderless!

HAH! Hah Ha ha ha hahahaha.....

Lisa

March 22, 2005 at 03:55 PM · Inge said:

"Musicians produce themselves with the help of those who teach and guide them"

I like that. Inge, I used to teach music, now I teach technique - a long slow process of change over thirty years. People of all ages come for lessons (youngest: 2.5, oldest: 70) and I always ask them in their interview, "why the violin?" The ones who choose me as a teacher (we choose each other) always say, "the sound." Even the little ones who only have it in their minds and have never even really heard a violin, when they do, you can see it in their eyes - something in them lights up and becomes alive! Even in demonstrations to classes you can see it. Some look curiously and think, "oh, interesting." Others thrill to the awakening feeling in their very being.

So I try to lead them in on that tangled, difficult path to their sound/soul. They are all so different. Some are so rhythmic, some so melodic, some don't really care about the music at all, just the SOUND. I figure if they can find their own voice, they will make their own music, so that is the path we go down. It is paradoxical how teaching a standardized technique like a modified Galamian's to so many unique individuals can produce so much variety in terms of musicians.

I see my job as one of leading, pushing, cajoling, pleading, encouraging, demanding them to keep going in until they have the tools they need at their disposal to make their own voice come alive. It is as hard a job on my end as theirs, but so cool when it comes together and actually creates those moments when you can see that their initial desire/attraction comes to fruition in moments of true expression of their souls.

Am I being a functional shaman? ;-)

Lisa

March 22, 2005 at 05:01 PM · Mark said,

"Functional shamanism is a disinterested attempt to get the allegorical functioning as just that.No more ,no less.Non functional shamanism is to set a series of taboos in place that gets patterns of expected behavoir passing istself off as choice.It is a power struggle between performer and the world."

As a functional shamanIST (teacher) I am far from disinterested - more like passionate. I have to get into each person's allegory to get it functioning. I have to be a mediator.

As a performer, I always experienced it as a power struggle between my violin and me, not the world. To me, it is a struggle between "truth" (or reality) and or fantasy. There, I need to be "disinterested" - I would say more clinical than disinterested. I have to have the strength to face my truths/realities in order to become an effective voice for myself... well, who can control what the world perceives, eh?

The choice, to me, is to decide where the real is (as opposed to the taboo) so I can truely realize me/my voice in the face of the patterns of expected behavior.

"(2)When would the willing suspension of disbelief not be a choice?---when the world is considered as something less than being fully experiencable ,without a mediator ,lens or drug.The performer's need for a lens would perhaps be greater than bringing the viewer into focus himself.Light can be used to hide the viewer and the viewed.Look at vermeer's paintings .A camera obscura removes choice in this sense."

I think at first we all need a mediator. There is no way to get there without it. A (w)hole has to be created. The way to a fully experiencable world has to be opened.

What about this thought: the camera obscura creates choice rather than removing it. It creates the opportunity to choose what to see and what to illuminate. It is the performers way in (to find and view the holes, to discover self) and way out (to focus the attention of others on the "truths" discovered). And as a viewer, there is still choice in recognizing the limits or possibilities in the view presented. The viewer chooses to see what has been focused on, or more, or less - one can find much in the exclusion of the camera obscura's focus.

A true mediator shows HOW to become aware of the exclusion which has been disguised as completeness. Once aware of that, one can begin a process of destroying illusions of wholeness and then rebuilding (w)holes. (Derrida) ;-)

Performers need to find that lens to see in and then to use that lens to project out. That is all choice.

"Jeremy Clarke (see above spectator art) was not dishonest about the falseness of the laughter that became funny through its falseness.Functional Irony is rarely taught- it's left as a character trait begging for maturity."

It became funny through the recognition of the falseness - the choice of using the lens. The camera obscura focused on the sadness/absurdity of that falseness, which allowed a choice to be made to reorder the world and truly participate. Finally everyone in the room participated in that choice and went through the hole.

"(5)And how does one produce a musician? Not by reducing accomplishment to /musical technical perfection ,anyway...

Rabin committed suicide in the west around about the same time as ,Korsakov in the USSR ,if my memory serves."

Agreed, not by reducing accomplishment, but by teaching how to use tools to create (w)holes of choice - experienced and performed. Those giants (Rabin and Korsakov) got lost in the hole and couldn't perceive they had a choice. They couldn't see the opportunity for the darkness to reveal the world and they got lost in the darkness. But they mediated a choice for us to see through that hole.

"I would like to see character being defined as something less individualistic ,and my arguments for functional shamanism would limit the power of taboo to determine a person's course of life choices ,musical or otherwise."

Teaching choice limits the power. Choice is HOW to use the lens.

Just the musings of a big dot. Still distracted by the thought of having and eating cake.

Lisa

March 22, 2005 at 05:23 PM · what a wonderful two postings ,Lisa.

my biggest nightmare is to be agreed with !

Brings me out in a nasty rash.

Or rush perhaps ,

Buri?

March 22, 2005 at 04:57 PM · Since I seem to be nursing the flu and feeling miserable I can't seem to concentrate as much as usual. I saw "camera obscura" and I have a counter-proposal. This comes from a book that blew me away as a teen, The Crack in the Cosmic Egg (I think, John Pierce). Imagine a reality that "is" but we need to organize that reality into patterns in order to function - we filter it, mould it, arrange its components (does it even have components) into groupings individually and as a society. Societies are so locked into their particular models that they are not even aware of having created models. As a digression, it could be that our autistic individuals are to some extent "unfiltered" and "unmoulded" and see the whole in its raw state. In a very superficial way - the Oriental medical thought perceived things in terms of energies, and the Western thought perceived them in terms of matter, when in fact all is both energy and matter and the simplest atom defies either definition since you have these electrons (energy?) swirling about. The "systems" have a way of trying to understand each other by interpreting, or reinterpreting, each other by remoulding the thought into the other system, and then thinks it understands when it doesn't really. When I read Pierce's book as an impressionable teen some decades ago I thought it would drive me mad. I played with the idea. I tried to portray a tree in a poem without alluding to treeness. I tried to perceive THE world through a bat's "eyes" in order to break through my own filters and perceptions and ended up with something that started "I did not hear the bat cry. Ultrasonic sound resounds soundlessly against me again and again ... The bat's cry unheard and my vision unseen by the bat..." Eventually I dropped it for the sake of my own peace of mind but was left forever with a new flexibility of thought. The personal conclusion in that experiment was that one cannot enter a chaotic perception of reality (assuming that it IS chaos which I don't believe) - all we can do is exchange perceptions and frameworks. Perhaps it is akin to discovering what a mouse is by smelling it, observing it, listening to it - well you don't want to taste it - and each sense gives you a different perception of mouseness. But even there we haven't broken through because we're still thinking in terms of a unit called "mouse" and we're probably still thinking in material terms because that is the framework of our society, along with digital, linear, "logical", unspiritual, etc. The idea that the best we can do is to switch "frames/filters/paradigms" (FFP)I think was central to Pierce's thesis. If one realizes that for any "it" we are trying to comprehend or work with, we are working within our own FFP which will of necessity be a filter or interpretation, then we are free to kind of float in and out of these FFP's into others and get a brand new perspective.

It's all rather useless philosophical musings, really, unless one can bring it to practical use (or is that another 'perception' - practicality?). But it can be useful. For example, in these arguments between Galamian, Auer and Suzuki - external and internal bow holds - tapes or not tapes for beginners - these arguments are all generally speaking within ONE SAME framework and that in fact makes the ability to argue them possible. You can't argue differences unless you have something in common binding those differences. There is, beyond these arguments, however, an "it" which people are trying to reach, which is more raw and primordial than any object of their argument. And it is possible, in a moment of time, to reach that "it" in a totally illogical (outside of our modern frameworks?) and unexpected way. It is useful to KNOW that these are frameworks and interpretations, that there are "its" under them, and probably "its" under the "its" because then we can just step out of our cosmic egg through the crack for a second and have the Eureka effect that had that fellow leap naked out of his bathtub because he had discovered displacement when he was no longer thinking about it.

There is a freedom to this if used wisely. The systems are still needed, but if we know that they are systems and interpretations, that most of what we do on a daily basis is built on still more filters and arrangements, then we are given huge possibilities.

The question of what a dot really is, what staccato really represents, is a profound one.

Nonetheless we should keep our feet firmly on the ground. The bottom line is K.I.S.S. - keep it simple, stupid (I believe it's an engineer's adage). Or like someone wrote on Maestronet, "Playing the violin is not rocket science." Or as Buri put it, "Get out of the way."

Maybe being aware of our frameworks and our filters is the best tool for helping us get out of the way.

March 22, 2005 at 06:00 PM · Inge read Derrida in her dreams.

I use cortisone for rashes.

LOL

Lisa

March 22, 2005 at 08:10 PM · Inge , what's it like to have a brain the size of a planet?

Consider this pure ,unadulterated , fan mail.

(Not sure if wishing you get well soon will get us less of that clalibre of posting )

I've never seen Suzuki ,Galamian or Auer bow hold ,tho plenty imitations.

crackles ,pops,

Mark N

March 22, 2005 at 11:07 PM · Help! Although I flirted with Derrida and "La difference" (or is it "Le differance") in my mis-spent youth, this discussion of the difference between martele and staccato is beyond me.

March 22, 2005 at 11:03 PM · You actually liked that, Mark? I kind of got lost in it. Amazing what a fever can do. ;-) Human understanding is supposed to be infinitely expandable if we can let go from time to time. But you have to remember to let it sproing back to the everyday or risk confusing yourself (not to mention everyone else). So ... about that staccato (which I will attempt to tackle, fever and all, in about half an hour. Apparently my fingers have no respect for any purported brain prowess, and they're probably right.)

March 23, 2005 at 12:46 AM · martele vs. stacatto is pretty simple actually.

martele is on the string, accented with your right hand. stacatto is off the string, accented by the natural drop of the bow, but it is a controlled stroke.

March 23, 2005 at 01:51 AM · Greetings,

thats intersting.

GFior me, martele (the two kins- fast and slow) are acented staccato because of the space between the notes . Staccato is space between the notes and I place it in oppostion to detache. The question of on and off the string doesn`t arise in this way. That is technique whereas staccato is an articulation,

Cheers,

Buri

PS yep. It is a confusing area...

March 23, 2005 at 01:54 AM · If you have ever felt that some bowing technique was going to drive you insane, then I suggest you visit www.jonroseweb.com. You will definitely have some sort of experience, although I'm not sure how to describe it.

Benjamin

March 23, 2005 at 08:22 PM · What is desperate is the fact that the note is often examined postumously whenever staccato or articulated -shortness is discussed.

Where misreports of Galamian and several other hybrids simply vaccuate is in the fact that the determining criteria is where the bow finishes ,ie on which string ,in preparation for the next one ,or set of strings.That the resonance far beyond the end of a note is therby accomplished in organ like potential is my point .This was the secret of Hirshorn's fuga chords ,which were always whole bows ,as well as his ( semi -porti) sixteenths.

Puzzling is the redundance common to many approaches ,(barring Capay and Rolland ) ,in examination of the curve of the arm as inverted from the curve of the bridge.

That's why both Owen and Buri are right.

But being right is not an issue here, as consensus has shown.

The issue is that the dot describes a curve in mid air ,however minuscule or gigantic .The permission allowing the dot to grow is therefore not established within micro or macro concepts ,but simply within pattern contexts,establishing associative connexions .It may be why Flesch described the stroke as aproximating human energy .

The channeling of human energy is the most shamanistic aspect of the question.Or not?

rattle

Mark N

March 23, 2005 at 09:27 PM · Try this site:

http://www.theviolinsite.com/bowarm.html

This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.

Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram Email

Violinist.com is made possible by...

Shar Music
Shar Music

Yamaha Silent Violin
Yamaha Silent Violin

Pirastro Strings
Pirastro Strings

Find a Summer Music Program
Find a Summer Music Program

Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases

Violinist.com Business Directory
Violinist.com Business Directory

Violinist.com Guide to Online Learning
Violinist.com Guide to Online Learning

Dominant Pro Strings

Antonio Strad Violin

Bay Fine Strings Violin Shop

Bobelock Cases

Fiddlerman.com

Fiddlershop

Los Angeles Violin Shop

Nazareth Gevorkian Violins

Violin-Strings.com

Metzler Violin Shop

Leatherwood Bespoke Rosin

Warchal

Barenreiter

Johnson String Instrument and Carriage House Violins

Potter Violins

String Masters

Bein & Company

Annapolis Bows & Violins

Laurie's Books

Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.

Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn

Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine

Subscribe