Forming String Quartets

January 15, 2006 at 05:19 AM · Hi Teddy, Usually the best of the two is the 1st violin. If you're in a school orchestra together usually the one with the best seat will be 1st. At least that's my experience. If not, you'll both know who's better so it makes sense for him to be 1st, but you can switch around. As for what to play, libraries are a good place to listen to quartet recordings to find things you like, along with suggestions from teachers. The teacher might have the sheet music, or you might be able to get it from a college library. You can write out parts from a score booklet or something else if you have to.

January 15, 2006 at 05:26 AM · Make sure that the cellist is good (well everyone should be good, but cellist is really important). If the base is out of tune or not played well, the piece is usally ruined.

January 15, 2006 at 05:56 AM · Depends: if you want to perform, both players should be very good, and the second violin parts can be played by either, taking turns in the limelight. Alternatively, the second violinst might remain in that role because they just enjoy it, but they must be a very good player.

For amateur fun, usually both players will enjoy playing 1st violin parts, but often one violinist is rather weaker and the quartet just puts up with that.

January 15, 2006 at 07:57 AM · Arnold Steinhardt, first violinist of the Guarneri string quartet, wrote, "Still, while the second violin may have fewer melodies to play, it is often the engine that drives the quartet, laying down a contrasting rhythm and leading the rest of the group while the first violin is off whistling his tune." That's from Indivisible by Four, a great book about the inner workings of a longstanding successful string quartet.

Yeah, second violin parts are typically lower and less demanding, and therefore usually go to the weaker link of the two violins in a quartet. But the best quartets have equally able musicians. I personally prefer the second part, due to the lesser percentage of irritating high notes, and also for the reasons Steinhardt mentioned.

And yeah, I like to deedle. What can I say, some people are meant to play second fiddle. To me, it is the mastermind of the quartet.

January 15, 2006 at 06:23 PM · 4 soloists, who are good enough musicians to LISTEN to each other--that is the requisite for a fine quartet. Each player should be EQUAL to the others, and a match on musicianship is essential. They also need personal chemistry, and patience to be able to work together in an intimate milieu.

January 15, 2006 at 11:24 PM · The first and second violins shouldn't swap around, because the roles are so different. As has been said - the first violin carries the tune, and needs to be strong in that sense, but the second violin also needs to be strong in that they hold most of the rhythmic and harmonic material. Decide who will take what part, and keep it that way. It might be that for the first few months you might swap around to see what sound is produced and whether you like one combination or the other, but once you have decided, don't swap around any more.

January 15, 2006 at 11:30 PM · The violist's role is extremely underrated. The violist gives birth to strong rhythmic stability, and propulsion of inner voices. It is crucially important to have a strong viola player in a quartet--despite the viola jokes, that position is often a anchor in terms of stability. Look at case in point--Michael Tree in the Guarneiri.

January 16, 2006 at 02:40 AM · Teddy, the ideal balance of a string quartet is that of course all four players should be equally capable, technically and musically. If any one of your colleague is behind and cannot, for example play this difficult dotted 32nd note tied rhythm or make that hard shift as the rest of you can, you will surely be ripping your hairs out in frustration.

With that said, there should not be a huge disparity between the first and second, ideally, of course. I would recommend switching alternatelly, so that you and your violin partner can experience both important roles and learn how to influence the quartet both as outer and inner voices. Having dual roles also enable you to have larger repertory. Chamber music requires flexibility. God help you if you are a professional violinst and can only play first violin.

Don't rush into the Romatics! I highly recommend Haydn to begin with so your quartet and establish each's roles and connection with each other. I also found that Bach's Art of Fugue forces one to listen to one another; I highly recommend it if your quartet is up-to-par. The key is to LISTEN! If you are absorbed by your own music at any point of time and don't know who has the melody, that should be a red flag signaling you are not listening enough.

January 16, 2006 at 01:34 PM · Thank you, so far. Don't stop responding.

Nick, which fugue in the art of fugue would you suggest because I'm not familiar with them? Or is this a situation in which I should form a strong group and just sight read them together?

January 16, 2006 at 04:39 PM · Even if your intention is to put together a group that will play together regularly (is this for fun or gigs?), I would strongly suggest that you start out by only scheduling individual get-togethers. Don’t bring up the possibility of anything long-term until you’ve actually played together & you’ve determined you have people that are well matched playing-wise and get along well. Trust me, it’s worth the trouble.

January 16, 2006 at 04:39 PM · the scores & parts for the Art of the Fugue are available here for free:

http://icking-music-archive.org/ByComposer/J.S.Bach.html

January 16, 2006 at 07:24 PM · One thing to consider when deciding on a first violinist is the fact that the first will usually set the tempo and 'lead' the start and end of the piece, as well as leading ritards, accelerandos and fermatas. Having played in a string quartet for years, sometimes as second, sometimes as first, and sometimes as violist, I have found that there is definitely an added feeling of being in the 'hot seat' as first violinist. It's not just about playing higher/harder notes...it's about actually leading the group. Some violnists love it, some hate it (and some are good at it and others are less than good at it).

January 16, 2006 at 08:22 PM · Well, I've seen some professional quartets successfully swap the roles, and amateur ones do it all the time. Personally, I love playing the melodies, and also have a slight shoulder problem that makes playing on the G string for long stretches difficult. However, I fully appreciate the responsibilties and difficulties of all the roles, having played viola and even cello for a while.

The old saying goes: The quartet is like a bottle of wine: the 1st violin is the label, the cello is the bottle, but the 2nd violin and viola are the wine!!

January 16, 2006 at 09:38 PM · Not everyone enjoys switching roles...I've 'subbed' in some quartets where violinists won't play first.

January 16, 2006 at 11:19 PM · Doesn't the Emerson String Quartet swap between 1st and 2nd?

January 17, 2006 at 04:42 AM · I've been following this interesting discussion without contributing. That would be because I've got nothing to contribute.

However, this time I read the heading and thought it read "Foaming String Quartets" and thought, "Oh ggrrrreat another Audubon thread"

Neil

January 17, 2006 at 05:40 AM · Julie, yes they do. If you read the liners, they specify who is playing first on what. I think there is great benefit to switching parts. First, it keeps everything fresh. I recommend switching even on the same piece while practicing. This is good for everyone to develop their ears as well as pick up on little distinctive quirks the players have. It is a great way to force players to look beyond a certain range of repertoire, and take them out of their comfort zone. Christina's suggestion about doing the Art of Fugue is an excellent one, as everyone gets the melody, but as it gets thicker, the players need to learn how to adjust to each other to bring out all the voices at the appropriate time.

In the best of quartets, there is rarely a case of one player being better than another. Generally, you want a quartet of equally talented people. Their skill level needs to be slightly higher than zero, but that's it. There are many wonderful arrangers writing with a beginning quartet in mind. Classical quartets tend to focus quite heavily on the first violinist, and show off their chops. Getting into the Romantic string quartets (late Beethoven and onwards), there's a shift, and the quartet is seen as a whole and not 3 members supporting a soloist. But, with that development came an overall increase in the amount of skill necesssary to play the pieces. So, I would start out classical and alternate between first and second violin, to build technique, and slowly work up to the bigger repertoire.

January 17, 2006 at 06:15 AM · Greetings,

you might even consider starting with Bocherrini rather than Haydn, although the latter tends to be the most effective road to a good quartet.

The best known Mozart Divertemento is very accessible. the first thirteen quartets of Mozart are sublime but tend to get ignored.

Bach`s ART of Fugue is a canonic quartet forming work although it seems to have gone a bit out of fashion these days. There is an excellent recording by the Julliard Quartet.

Cheers,

Buri

January 17, 2006 at 10:08 PM · I would check out Musica Antiqua Koln too for the Art of Fugue, some of the best ensemble playing I have heard.

I am not sure one can say that Romantic quartets are more soloistic for the first violin than Classical. Mozart's quartet writing is very "democratic" most of the time, at least in the mid to later quartets, no less than Beethoven's I should think, and more so than Schubert. I don't think there's anything with greater prominence to all parts apart from counterpoint.

As for swapping parts between first and second, the first part will often require more virtuosic technical ability, but apart from that it's a matter of personality and preference - who likes to take the tunes, who likes to support the harmonies more.

January 17, 2006 at 11:28 PM · Hi Teddy: Regarding The Art of Fugue, I would start from the beginning and then perhaps choose several early contrapunti to work with (the entire Art of Fugue is about an hour long, I don't think any beginning quartet would have the stomach for it yet :)) Keep in mind that the Art of Fugue is not specified for a string quartet (nor any instruments). Therefore some of the later contrapunti are only duets, for examples. Oh, the notes are also deceptively simple - I strongly recommend the metronome. But with all else said, have fun!