Function of vibrato?

Edited: September 1, 2018, 12:15 PM · I was wondering the other day, what is the function of vibrato?

The first thing most string players will say when asked is that it is an expressive device. And it could be, if one made full use of the speed/width combinations. But if you look at most violin players, none of them have very developed vibrato nuances, and in fact, a lot of them have a ‘one-size fits all’ approach to vibrato, a bit à la Karajan.
Also, the frequent advocates for vibrating every single note fail to realize that doing so nullifies the point of vibrato, which is best used as a means of adding certain colors to the sound, sometimes.
And I do find that the right hand is much more efficient as an expressive device than the left anyway.

You could also argue that vibrato can be used to very distinctly recognize a person’s playing, but I find that while it used to be true with some of the old school players like Heifetz or Kreisler, it’s not the case anymore.

I thought about other possible uses, and the only one that made sense to me, other than as a way to add color, was using vibrato as a mean of increasing the resonance of the string.
So, especially since vibrato is quite a recent invention, I don’t understand why there is all this fuss about it being so important in modern day violin education.

What is your view on vibrato?

Replies (36)

September 1, 2018, 3:00 PM · - vibrato as ornament
- vibrato as amplification of sound
- vibrato as relaxation of muscles (can't squeeze and vibrate properly at the same time)
- vibrato as color (both left hand and right hand vibrato)

The concept of left hand vibrato has already been documented and commented by Leopold Mozart and Geminiani in the 18th century and in much earlier sources as well. It's very important in both old and modern repertoire. Different uses, of course.

Edited: September 1, 2018, 4:06 PM · Also: Vibrato as an intonation "help"...

Subjectively I feel that a vibratoless violin tone has an aggressive edge to it, even on very good instruments (Anne Sophie Mutter likes to suddenly go completely senza vibrato for a small section and she certainly plays on a decent instrument. I find it irritating). Vibrato takes some of that edge off. Maybe this is why it became the sauce for every dish violinists serve up.

Another question would be: Why do singer use vibrato? Since the violin is an instrument that can "sing" it would be only logical to do what singers do.

September 1, 2018, 4:24 PM · To be fair, many modern players do use it well, in context with the music (I understand that some less than others, and that a few may lack a certain subjective "individuality" in its usage)

It's an expressive device to emulate a singing tone+ (+, because a very developed one can sound "better" to *me* than that of many good singers-not to mention the ones with a wobbly sound.) There's nothing wrong with using it on "every note" if the music and style calls for it. Obviously Bach and many classical pieces require a different vibrato application, but being too dogmatic about it is not my personal approach-I am thus able to enjoy many good performances with the "wrong" vibrato style if otherwise played convincingly. Vibrato should "sing" and adorn the musical phrase-even if the player mostly uses one "type", many speeds and nuances should be developed.

Many younger players that have an incredibly beautiful vibrato only learn to develop it as a more nuanced musical tool as they keep growing and evolving (I.E. maturity.) This is more obvious the younger the individual is, but even having a gorgeous, developed vibrato can fall into the trap of sounding the same all the time.

Edited: September 1, 2018, 11:14 PM · I think the most important function of vibrato on a string instrument is to enlarge the palette of overtones that combine with the fundamental tone to bring your interpretation of sound to your own ears and (hopefully) to your audience. The increased range of acoustic overtone frequencies produced with vibrato interacts with the human hearing mechanism to give the impression of increased loudness and greater projection. You see, the overtone strengths of given pitches on any given instrument are not equal. Vibrato sounds out overtone pitches over a wide enough range to sound louder to an audience. By varying the width of vibrato the violinist thus creates "timbre" along with the notes and phrases being played.*** Along with some creative "rhythmic devices" this can resonate with the emotions of the audience. I believe that fine players learn to "fake emotion" in their playing through practice of all these various "devices" so that when it is time for a performance - they can just "follow the numbers."

Thus by combination of vibrato, bow pressure, bow speed and bowed sound point every violinist (or violist or cellist) creates "their" sound and their musical interpretation. Whatever instrument one is playing there is always an attempt to get "their" sound out of it to their own ears, and as well as they can tell, to their audience.

In my own experience, it doesn't matter if you are playing your familiar instrument or a "strange" one - you will try to get "your sound" and vibrato is one of the main tools you have to do that.

*** Violin maker, Joseph Curtin had a fascinating article on this subject in The STRAD magazine sometime in the past 15 years (or so). The information really resonated with me because about 30 years earlier I had the experience of having to play a principal cellist solo part in an orchestra concert on a really awful substitute cello and the way I had to vibrato to get "my sound" was so vigorous that my left had flew off the fingerboard at one point. Thinking back to that experience really proved Curtin's ideas for me.

September 1, 2018, 7:36 PM · We say we vibrate to emulate the voice, but why does the human voice vibrate to begin with?
Many of the reasons are the same.

Pressure, projection, and a large space all require vibrato. The more projection and the larger the space, the wider the vibrato is required. Opera singers are noted for their insanely wide (often cartoonish) vibrato, but it's an acoustic necessity for singing to a large opera house without amplification. Notice the difference between opera singers, and popular singers that use amplification. Vibrato only gets wider as the sound level increases--seldom narrower. Projection and vibrato are intimately connected, almost two sides of the same coin.

There is also a connection between the number of overtones and the width, which explains why violinists have to vibrate more widely on the G than the E, or why the viola requires a wider vibrato.

Both singers and string players that attempt to play loudly without vibrato sound like they're yelling. Rock singers that cannot vibrate well sound like they are simply yelling.

Another aspect may be the brain itself, which quickly turns off to steady input. It's known, for example, that the eye must keep moving lest the brain shut off input. It's the same for other senses as well, including sound: the source has to vary somehow or the brain quickly begins to ignore it. The oscillations of vibrato make the brain keep paying attention.

Edited: September 1, 2018, 8:36 PM · I think the psychoacoustic explanations are interesting, and not entirely without validity, but really? The reason most classical players use vibrato is because they are told to do it by authority figures from a young age. It is "the way it's done."

Though I am trained in the classical European tradition as a composer and on the piano, I learned to play the violin as a fiddler in several traditions, and in the last few years have started playing the Bach S&Ps. Many oral-tradition styles use aspects of vibrato, but in my experience it is as Dorian Fu stated above, as an ornament--a very personal expression. To someone whose ears come from outside standard-practice classical violin-playing, critical thinking about vibrato comes naturally. It makes sense in 19th/20th-c. literature because that was the sound that composers had in mind, but to me it sounds awful in Bach or much of the music I play, unless it is very subtle. It is something that can work if you have control over it, but just as classical players expect it because that's the way it's done, it is not something technical that just makes music sound better--it's a feature of your musical style/language that, um, might not sound great in other settings/traditions.

One person's yelling is another person's strong voice; one person's deep vibrato is another person's ridonkulous tremulosity. There is truly no objective standard, no matter how scientific you want that to sound.

When I read Scott Cole's post, above, saying that playing without vibrato sounds like yelling, I think--well, to a player who can only get intensity with their left hand, and doesn't know how to handle their bow to play expressively--even loudly--without vibrato, then that sounds like an issue that isn't technical, but a limitation imposed by their training.

When I have tried to teach violinists how to play fiddle music, one of the most difficult issues is to convince skilled musicians that, while they can play Brahms, that doesn't help them all that much with Irish music. So much has been drilled into them, that they are not even aware that they are "speaking with a thick accent." Vibrato sounds terrible in traditional Irish music, unless it is the natural sound of a traditional singer--nothing like the bel canto warbling of an opera singer, which can make you want to run screaming from the room, rather than keep paying attention.

September 1, 2018, 9:29 PM · "Both singers and string players that attempt to play loudly without vibrato sound like they're yelling."

I have full faith you had a good technical training and you can play loudly without vibrato and not sound like you're yelling. :)

But the selective acceptance of vibrato is quite fascinating. We are OK listening to organ — it has no vibrato. And we're OK with modern clarinet that plays basically in straight tone and sitting nearby in the orchestra the modern flute that vibrates a ton. Funny.

September 1, 2018, 9:36 PM · I never notice someones skillful use of vibrato...the only time I'm aware of it during a performance is when it's problematic.
September 1, 2018, 10:24 PM · When it comes to the voice, a healthy vibrato is also a sign of good tone production - you’re producing your tone without stressing the muscles and allowing it to just happen. It is possible to control vibrato with the voice, sing with or without it. However, singing excessively without tires out the voice and puts unnecessary strain on the muscles. My teacher would get upset at our choir director who liked to have late night rehearsals a couple days before aconcert. He always wanted the singers to hold back on vibrato to blend the sound better. The next day the students would come into studio class feeling tired vocally.
Edited: September 2, 2018, 2:59 AM · I'm sure most of these ideas are partially correct and there's no single reason for the use of vibrato in music. My theory (or did I read it somewhere?) is to do with the psychoacoustic phenomenon of co-modulation masking release.

In the context of let's say a concerto the frequencies produced by the solo instrument, the fundamental and its overtones, often overlap completely with those concurrently produced by the orchestra. It's one of the great marvels of hearing that we are able single out the harmonic series produced by the soloist (and indeed many of the accompanists) and perceptually bind them together into discrete sound objects, even though several instruments in the orchestra may even be playing the same note.

Experimentally it's been determined that a complex harmonic tone stands out more clearly against the background noise (is released from masking) when its constituent frequencies are modulated synchronously (co-modulated), i.e. fluctuate in either frequency or amplitude at the same rate. Wiggling your finger of course has this effect on a violin, helping it to be heard over a background which may be considerably louder. A clarinettist apparently just has to blow harder.

September 2, 2018, 8:37 AM · There's nothing wrong with not using vibrato for musical reasons; just make sure it's not a crutch-excuse to avoid developing your vibrato.

I can honestly say that, while vibrato can be addictive for many to the point of not being able to distinguish its judicial application, classical players, I believe, do not use vibrato just because "they must", but more because it works for the music being played. There's plenty of classical music where a more restrained vibrato is called for-or none at all (be it passages or whole works.)

Of course it's also OK to love the violin tone without vibrato. It should be "good" anyway, with or without.

Many seem to imply a false dichotomy, making it an all or nothing, us vs them issue that does not exist.

I listen to lots of piano music-that doesn't make violin vibrato inappropriate or "excessive". Indeed, it's one of the limitations of the venerable instrument-it's not a "special feature", other than making a piano sound like a piano (same with the other instruments alluded to.)

Liking or not vibrato is not the issue, IMHO. It's both good and bad depending on usage and application, not just good OR bad.

Edited: September 2, 2018, 10:29 AM · Adalberto, remember the piano has its own "vibrato"...although the speed increases as one ascends.

"When I read Scott Cole's post, above, saying that playing without vibrato sounds like yelling, I think--well, to a player who can only get intensity with their left hand, and doesn't know how to handle their bow to play expressively--even loudly--without vibrato, then that sounds like an issue that isn't technical, but a limitation imposed by their training."

Paul, you took my comments and applied them to a different context. My statements did not involve Scotch-Irish fiddling. Fiddlers don't have to fill giant spaces, or soar above a large orchestra while playing long melodic lines. Fiddlers don't do a lot of things, including playing double-stops, spicatto, or 7th position.

I stand by my statement that playing (or singing) at the loudest maximum volumes in large halls does sound like yelling. And that vibrato and intensity go hand-in-hand. This is especially true with the large 3- and 4-note chords found in much of the literature. That includes Bach played on a modern instrument at 440.

There's a reason Florence Foster Jenkins was ridiculed.

In fact, I could accuse all the period-music wackos who declare "Bach should not be vibrated" of being brainwashed by a 1970s Dutch cult.


Sure, maybe we're all brainwashed. But the desire to vibrate pitch seems pretty widespread across cultures. I'm not just a product of "Big Music" as you say. Not everything about music is passed down as a cultural bias. Much is hard-wired into us, such as the primacy of the octave, or or our preference for consonance over dissonance.

September 2, 2018, 11:35 AM · Scott, I think you're pushing yourself into a corner. Some of your logic is just increasing hard to comprehend:

"Fiddlers don't do a lot of things, including playing double-stops, spicatto, or 7th position."
What do those have to do with vibrato? Does that mean double stops and spiccato and 7th position requires vibrato?

"I stand by my statement that playing (or singing) at the loudest maximum volumes in large halls does sound like yelling."

When you play loud, you sound loud. When you sound like you're yelling, it's because you are yelling. I have complete faith then you can play fortissimo senza vibrato without sounding like you're yelling.

Florence Foster Jenkins problem wasn't just because of her lack of mastery in vibrato...that's for another thread.

And what's your proof that vibrato is "hard-wired" into us? Just from the top of my head, much of the traditional Chinese music I know of does not feature vibrato, or only very sparingly again as an ornament much like Western art music before continuous vibrato became norm. But I do see an influence of Western-style conservatory training influencing the modern generation of Chinese music musicians. That's my counter-example for you.

"In fact, I could accuse all the period-music wackos who declare "Bach should not be vibrated" of being brainwashed by a 1970s Dutch cult."

Actually those people in the "70s Dutch cult" like Sigiswald Kuijken uses vibrato in Bach and other pre-1750 music quite frequently. Not continuous of course. I don't know what you're talking man. I find your statements not only at times not helpful, but sometimes plain inaccurate.

Edited: September 2, 2018, 12:18 PM · Albrecht wrote, "Anne Sophie Mutter likes to suddenly go completely senza vibrato for a small section and she certainly plays on a decent instrument. I find it irritating." I think one of the great things about Mutter's playing is how she uses the entire spectrum of vibrato as its own musical dimension. She rejected the "motorized" vibrato of her forbears (e.g., Stern) and decided that more could be done with it. Kudos to her. I'd certainly rather listen to her Franck Sonata than Zino Francescatti's or Arthur Grumiaux's, hands down.

As for loud passages played without vibrato sounding like shouting, I think that's a pretty apt characterization. But even in opera there is the occasional shout. It's not something a violinist would do all the time, just as one would not choose ponticello too often (but Nigel Kennedy uses it in Bach and I think it's ingenious).

I also feel there's something to Scott's idea about vibrato and projection. But I also feel there's merit in the idea that singers go for a traditional sound in their own genre. Take a singer like Jane Monheit. She's exceptionally skilled and could easily develop an operatic vibrato if she wanted that. But when one is singing from the Judy Garland songbook, why would one want to?

My impression of Scott Cole from reading his comments over the years is that he is not at all arrogant or ego-driven. But he does speak (write) plainly. I don't always agree with him, but I respect his training and experience, and I always find that there's something to think about in what he's written.

September 2, 2018, 12:50 PM · IMPORTANT correction, Sigiswald Kuijken is Belgian, not Dutch :-)
September 2, 2018, 12:57 PM · All I can say is that as a child I was very envious of the older kids who could already produce vibrato, and I did not rest until I could do it myself! So at least personally I agree with the "innateness".
September 2, 2018, 4:37 PM · 'paul smith
Edited: September 1, 2018, 8:36 PM ·Vibrato sounds terrible in traditional Irish music, unless it is the natural sound of a traditional singer-'

Most Irish pipers, flute and whistle players use a lot of finger vibrato, particularly in slow airs. Many, if not most Irish fiddlers use vibrato in slow airs. But yes, not the syrupy, continuous 'classical' vibrato.

September 2, 2018, 5:04 PM · If Scott Cole is right, then 19th century musicians must have been very 'shouty' when they were playing --in many the same large concert halls that are still in use today-- without the continuous vibrato that came in vogue in the 20th century.
September 2, 2018, 5:46 PM · ""Fiddlers don't do a lot of things, including playing double-stops, spicatto, or 7th position."
What do those have to do with vibrato? Does that mean double stops and spiccato and 7th position requires vibrato?"

Dorian, exactly my point. I was simply answering Paul Smith's comment about fiddling.

Yes, I guess Kuijiken is Belgian. My point isn't actually to trash the period performance movement. I've enjoyed playing in many period ensembles. But I often see a kind of rigidity from people who perform baroque music. They sometimes (not always) reduce the music to a set of rigid stereotypes, like "one should never vibrate Bach" or "one must never use a chinrest or shoulder rest" or things like that.

September 2, 2018, 7:16 PM · "Fiddlers don't do a lot of things, including playing double stops..."

Scott, that doesn't make you seem very knowledgeable about fiddling. And actually, amongst all the fat double-stops in this famous Kenny Baker tune, you can hear a typical narrower-than-classical-style vibrato, used sporadically here, characteristic of many bluegrass fiddlers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkMhshZtvl8

September 2, 2018, 8:02 PM · A minority from a movement can be extremist — but that's not representative of everyone in the movement. Out of the "70s Dutch cult", I can only speak for Sigiswald Kuijken because I studied with him, and I can say he never said or would had said "One should never vibrate Bach." because he uses vibrato playing Bach. Different vibrato than continuous vibrato of course. He even talked about teaching wrist vibrato to students who came to him knowing only arm vibrato.

The "one must never use a chin rest or shoulder rest"...well if you're going for historical performance of pre-mid-19th c. music, it's hard to use something that hasn't been invented yet ;)

But seriously, what are your sources — who are the people who explicitly say "one should never vibrate Bach." I'm curious to know for my edification.

September 2, 2018, 8:26 PM · "I can only speak for Sigiswald Kuijken because I studied with him, and I can say he never said or would had said "One should never vibrate Bach." "

Dorian,
I didn't say that he advocated this. I was not quoting him. I've heard his recordings.

What I'm saying is that many people out there have a rather simplistic view of what period performance means.

Paul,
Fiddlers might occasionally do some double-stopping (yes, there are guys like Donel lLeahy that can do incredible stuff), especially when it involves one open string. But my point about double-stops and vibrato is that fiddlers don't do the type of high-intensity double, triple, and quadruple stops that really benefit from vibrato. I'm specifically thinking of passages in the Brahms concerto and the Romantic works in which lack of vibrato on this kind of chordal playing can sound quite harsh.

It kind of goes back to my original point: that a major function (not the only one) is that it enables intensity and projection. That was the OPs original question.

September 2, 2018, 8:44 PM · ' Scott Cole
September 2, 2018, 5:46 PM · But I often see a kind of rigidity from people who perform baroque music. They sometimes (not always) reduce the music to a set of rigid stereotypes, like "one should never vibrate Bach" '

Vibrato is probably as old as music itself. Geminiani recommended to use vibrato as frequently as possible. The presence of Tremulant stops in organs is tangible evidence that there were at least some in the baroque period who could tolerate extended periods of continuously vibrated music.

That said, it is my personal opinion and preference that Bach is better not vibrated (much). I believe that Bach did not care much for vibrato, using it as a special effect which he specifically notated, for example in the penultimate measure of the Grave in the solo Violin Sonata II. Here he wrote sinuously wavy lines over the F and D, before the trill on the Dsharp. Most 'modern' violinists (in actuality playing in a kind of 1920's style) play this incorrectly as 2 trills--since they are heavily vibrating throughout, they can't conceive of this symbol as denoting vibrato. Our Belgian Boy has it right:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGcprRFh5oI
(Kuijken does use some tasteful vibrato elsewhere in the piece). Bach used the same wavy symbol in Brandenburg 5.

Edited: September 2, 2018, 9:38 PM · @ Scott Cole... Right, but if you throw a big Romantic vibrato on those same chords in the Chaconne, it will sound awful and you can't hear the elegant part-writing. They are intense enough, and project just fine, without any extra vibrato dripping all over them. In my opinion, of course.

That Kuijken Sonata #2 was NICE, btw.

September 2, 2018, 11:20 PM · Paul,
One factor in the necessity of vibrato also seems to be the quality of the violin. It seems to me that really fine violins require less of it, and violins of a lesser quality need more. I've also found this to be the case with many (not all) modern violins, especially brand-new ones.

One thing I've said in other contexts is something I remember the violinist Stanley Ritchie telling me:
"There are as many ways to play it now as there were in the 18th century."

September 3, 2018, 11:02 AM · "I'm specifically thinking of passages in the Brahms concerto and the Romantic works in which lack of vibrato on this kind of chordal playing can sound quite harsh."

Scott, I'm sure you're aware of the major sources on usage (or lack thereof) of vibrato in 19th century, and I argue we're imposing 20th/21st aesthetic onto Brahms, et al.

I can dig up my school books and Clive Brown and get the quotes...off the top of my head there's that review/diary entry about Joachim Quartet concert, to paraphrase, "And then at this passage, they did something extraordinary — they all vibrated." Even much later you have Leopold Auer complaining none of this students listen to him and do the new-fangle continous vibrato. It's a change of time and aethestic, neither better than the other.

I'm sure Joachim didn't become famous because he sounded harsh to his audience. At the same time if Joachim made tapes to conservatory pre-screens today, he might very possibly not get invited to any auditions. Different eras, different tastes.

"There are as many ways to play it now as there were in the 18th century." Stanley is course right. And we can also know what the general trend. We can always find odd ball people and sources. The Geminiani "vibrate as frequently as possible" is an odd one — but continous? I don't think so...more like, use it in moments appropriate whenever you can because it's beautiful.

Isn't it curious we don't have any instructions on how to do vibrato in pre-19th c. sources if it's so central to music making then? That's what I'm aware of anyway, I would love to be proven wrong if someone can find a pre-19th sources that teaches you how to do left hand vibrato.

September 4, 2018, 6:07 AM · Dorian, I think it is typical of vibrato that it was never actively taught, even well into the 20th century. Most violin methods wrote things like "At some point in his or her development, the violin student will display an innate desire to vibrate, blah blah blah". Seriously. This has been remarked often here on this forum. It is only with the expansion of music pedagogy in the late 20th century and early 21st that pedagogical approaches to vibrato were worked out and discussed in detail.
September 4, 2018, 6:53 AM · It's interesting how early recording affected vibrato. First listen to this 1894 recording of violin on cylinder:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efisha4dRpE

Certainly this player plays without vibrato. Other early recordings are also devoid of vibrato.
What's known is that cylinders were notoriously wobbly in pitch and yet the Edison company as part of their sales pitch would send out performers to perform live in and attempt to show that there was no difference between the live performer and recording! Did they add some wobble as part of the sales pitch? Seems likely. Did artists add some kind of vibrato to hide the pitch variation? Was it a way to make instruments sound more distinct on recordings where it was otherwise hard to tell which instrument was which? Did students of the violin listen to recordings and emulate what they heard, wobble and all? Certainly, the style of playing for all kinds of instruments and voices coming out of that period had that tight, consistent vibrato. For wind instruments and voice the trend seemed to die out. For violin it seemed to persist.
David Byrne also talks about this in his book "How Music Works".

September 4, 2018, 7:02 AM · https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-p8YeIQkxs

Joachim recorded in 1903 - not with the schmalzy 19th century vibrato which we've been taught was going on!

September 4, 2018, 9:08 PM · "...violin student will display an innate desire to vibrate."

What's your proof?

I think students of 20th c.–today will have a desire to vibrate every note because our teachers and artists we look up to vibrate. We imitate and follow our teachers.

Did strings players before 20th century have "innate desire to vibrate" — as in continous vibrato? Heck no. You'll never find any source from the Renaisance, Baroque, Classical, or Romantic eras that advocated for continuous vibrato. Geminiani might be your closest bet, but I don't know anyone who would interpret that as continuous vibrato.

But vibrato or oscillation as ornament? Yes.

Curiously I recall there were some old treatises that even talked about right hand bow vibrato, but it doesn't mention left hand vibrato...

September 5, 2018, 2:44 AM · I agree that the 20th century habit of applying constant vibrato like a coat of paint is a bad one that should be resisted. I sort of believe there is an innate "desire to vibrate" that comes with our emotional response to the music. Singers must undoubtedly have started it and instrumentalists came after. Something similar happened with portamento which singers have always employed but in the early 1900's came to be applied indiscriminately by violinists. We cured ourselves of that one but sadly seem to have virtually lost the impulse to apply proper, emotionally driven portamento also.
September 29, 2018, 10:23 AM · Opera singers and violin concerto soloists would sound awful singing or playing so loud without any vibrato, just harsh and strained.
But I'm sure that one function of vibrato is to "detach" the violin tones from their surroundings, be they piano or orchestral.
September 29, 2018, 1:40 PM · in an interview Erick Friedman states "the function of vibrato is to protect the bow". in the same interview he states that the right hand is the most important and all the expression comes from the bow. he also refers to the left hand as a typewriter. at the same time Friedman played with a continuous quite fast vibrato.
September 29, 2018, 2:07 PM · Where did he read that I wonder?
September 29, 2018, 3:01 PM · Just use portamento as needed-no need to be afraid anymore.

Some younger soloists are using it well, in good taste, and quite a lot.

Very much dislike the playing of many violin works with next to no portamento, to serve a "proper" way of violin playing that doesn't really exist. We play violin, not a keyboard-take advantage of every musical nuance you can.

Edited: September 30, 2018, 8:53 AM · In any case, the likes of Heifetz, Hassid, Hahn have the most wonderfully flexible bow stroke.

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 Violin Finder
Yamaha Violin Finder

Pirastro Strings
Pirastro Strings

Corilon Violins
Corilon Violins

Warchal Strings
Warchal Strings

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

Gliga Violins
Gliga Violins

Metzler Violin Shop

Bay Fine Strings Violin Shop

Bobelock Cases

Fiddlerman.com

Fiddlershop

Nazareth Gevorkian Violins

Los Angeles Violin Shop

Pluhar Violins

Potter Violins

Pro-Am Strings Ltd

Violin Lab

Violin Pros

Wangbow Violin Bow Workshop

Subscribe