Bach Suite Project

The Recording of the 6 suites

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:51:00 +0000

This July, I recorded Bach's six suites and two "bonus suites", (in other words; 8 suites!), in 10 days!

I recorded the suites the same way that I had performed them in six concerts across Alberta in April and May:
Suites 1 and 4 on my 1870 Mirecourt,
Suites 2 and 5 on the baroque cello, tuned to A=415 (suite 5 with a scordatura, in this suite that means that the a string is tuned down to g),
Suite 3 on the Luis and Clark Carbon Fibre cello, and finally
Suite 6 on my lovely violoncello piccolo.
The 3rd bonus CD will be the 5th suite 3 times; on the baroque cello, the Mirecourt and the Carbon fibre, all with the scordatura.

Recording the six suites by Bach is the most difficult thing any cellist will ever do. Doing it on 4 cellos adds yet another dimension to it. The entire process is very exposed, very vulnerable. I feel very lucky that I had a recording engineer with whom I felt safe enough that I could allow myself to be just that.

The sessions were about 4 hours each. The interesting part is that it depended a lot on the instrument on how I felt afterwards.

(my Mirecourt cello)

In past posts you have read about the differences between the cellos, about their strengths and weaknesses and about the effect that has on the performer and the audience.

While all of that still holds true, I was now truly confronted with the instruments on a much more intimate level than ever before.

But before we get to all of that; let me describe a little bit of the recording process and the emotions that come with it.

I recorded at a fantastic, huge Catholic church which sits in a big field in the middle of nowhere just outside Edmonton.

(Holy Trinity Catholic Church, Spruce Grove)

The church was amazing for the occasion; the acoustics are perfect for unaccompanied Bach and it is completely quiet, so there is no traffic noise or other noise to interfere with the recording.

(a huge space with wonderful acoustics)

In all of his years recording, my sound engineer has never ever recorded in a quieter place and that includes Edmonton's amazing concert hall, the Winspear Centre.
Well...; except for the day when a next door farmer decided to mow his field...
Needless to say we quit early that day.

On the very last recording day, Edmonton had the very first, much needed, rain of the season. I had wished the weather gods had waited another day, because the church was not entirely leak proof, nor silent when it rained! It threatened to ruin our recording day and postpone it for who knows how long, but it slowed down, thank goodness, and we were able to finish the project.

The first day of recording, a Tuesday at the end of the school year, in the middle of my very last week of teaching, I played the first suite. I figured that would be a good suite to "get my feet wet". I played it on my Mirecourt and it went well. The instrument did what I needed it to do (and I guess so did I). I walked away from that day of recording very confident and pleased with myself.

Over the next few days I travelled to Toronto for a gig on Wednesday and Thursday, taught on Friday and Saturday and had all of my students play in two recitals (one for the younger ones and one for the adults) on Sunday.

(student recital)

Needless to say that life had gotten a little in the way of personal practice time and more importantly it got in the way of mental preparation time, of being able to completely focus on the huge task at hand.
I had decided that on the coming Monday and Tuesday, I would like to record, if possible, the 2nd and 5th suites, both on the baroque cello. Just two weeks prior, I had put a set of new strings on this cello, which I had ordered directly from Italy, where they are (hand) made.

On Saturday morning, eager to start practicing before my afternoon teaching got on the way, I opened the case, only to find that the C string had broken! In the 30-some years that I have played the cello, I have never broken a C string (this is the lowest, and fattest string) so it was a bit of a shock. But it being an authentic gut string; perhaps it was faulty. That could happen, right? Thank goodness I had ordered two strings, so I put on a new one, a little upset that I now had only a few hours to play it in before recording. It usually takes a few weeks to break in a gut string to its full vibrancy. My practice time was precious, and I now had wasted too much of it changing strings.

I taught the rest of that day and opened the case again on Sunday morning, anticipating a day of practice before my first student recital at 4:30.
Imagine my despair when I found yet another broken C string! Now I no longer had a good spare string, so I needed to try to tie a knot in this string. The C string is silver wound gut, and it had broken just above the tail piece (Which I suspect was a little sharp and thus cut the string, causing it to break). Tying a knot in a wound string is not easy. So I first stripped a bit of the silver winding off, then tied a knot, hoping it would not have made the winding so loose it would buzz. My quiet practice day was gone, I had to play the role of teacher the rest of that day and evening and I just hoped for the best on Monday.

A brief note about the strings: As far as I understand, the difference between an authentic wound gut string and a modern wound gut string is that the modern winding is flat and is lined with silk. The authentic gut winding is round and has no lining in between. That also means it could buzz against the winding when the string dries and thus shrinks. I have certainly had that happen in the middle of a concert in dry spaces. Old editions of cello methods, such asDotzauer , describe how to get rid of that annoying buzz; rub a drop of almond oil on the string. The string will expand and: voila, problem solved!

If you are curious how they are made, check out this website of the maker of my strings (after you are done reading the rest of this BLOG post of course): http://aquilacorde.com/production_index.htm.

Monday morning the C string was still fine and sounded pretty good also, despite being a new string. I went to the recording session tired and stressed. I performed the prelude of the 2nd suite, which I can play in my dreams and upside down if I had to. "This is a toughy" my engineer said. Oops! Not a good sign. I tried again. And again. This was much too hard work. We started the Allemande. After about two hours my engineer said "Hey; I have an idea! let's go home and try again tomorrow". Good thinking, indeed! We really had no usable material from this day.

(Let's go home!)

On Tuesday I went in a little less confident, wondering I was doing the right thing, recording these most difficult of pieces. I started with the Sarabande of the 2nd suite and immediately knew that it was going to be all right. But by no means was it easy!

After 3 hours I had the Courante, Sarabande, Menuets and Gigue to my satisfaction, but had no energy left for the Prelude and the Allemande. That would be Wednesday's task, in addition to, perhaps, the 3rd suite. I was emotionally so drained that I could not think straight anymore. Even when I spoke, the sentences came out slurred. This was definitely the hardest thing I had ever done.

As I said earlier, I feel I was very lucky with my recording engineer. Aside from being amazingly good with sound, he is a nice guy (that helps!) and musically very knowledgeable, critical and honest; he wouldn't hesitate to tell me what I need to do when I play it again, or to compliment me when it went well.

(this will be "easy" today)

The next day I decided I would start with the third suite on the carbon fibre cello, and if I had time, I could always go back to the 2nd suite.
That was a great idea. Minutes into the recording I knew it would be great. That carbon fibre cello sure does give me confidence! Every note came out like I wanted. Within two and a half hours we competed the third suite and I decided to give the Prelude and Allemande of the second suite another try.
I now realized how difficult the previous day had been because of the instrument. The baroque cello doesn't always speak when I want it to and it is much harder work. It also has much more depth, character, complexity. It is very hard to play it well according to current standards. With the confidence of just completing the third suite in record time, I played the Prelude and Allemande much to my liking and we were done in another 45 minutes.

(finishing the day on the baroque cello)

The hours on the carbon were emotionally much easier than the hours on the baroque cello. I found that the 45 minutes on the baroque cello took everything out of me, where 3 hours on the carbon didn't. I wonder if you will hear that on the recording. I played the third suite well, gave it the musical intention I wanted to, but was emotionally still strong after. On the baroque cello it was hard work to reach the level that I wanted and I was emotionally drained but very satisfied after.

The rest of the suites went much like that. The fourth took one recording day, after which all that was left to do was the Gigue, only because my muscles couldn't play fast in the brutally difficult extended position that the entire suite (in Eb Major) requires anymore. I had just spent 3 hours extending; that was it, my body said! I needed to play the gigue another day, when my left hand muscles were relaxed again.
The 5th suite on the baroque cello was hard work and took a day and a half.

The 6th suite on the piccolo was a lot of fun. The sound is so sweet! To capture that, it was a little closer mic-ed than the other suites. Again, this was more difficult than on the modern instruments; it took a session and a half to get it all down.

The second day on the 6th, I also recorded the Gigue of the fourth on my Mirecourt ("easy"!) and played once through some movements from other suites that I had felt not quite sure about. (Yes: I played 4 different cellos that day!)

Now I had all six suites "in the can" and the rest was going to be "gravy".

Remaining was the recording for the 3rd CD in the set; a bonus CD with the 5th suite played on 3 of the cellos. My initial concern was: am I going to play them so that I can show off/magnify, the strength of each of the cellos, and their weaknesses? And if so; how should I do that? That might mean I could play more "virtuoso" on the carbon, perhaps? Or would each of the instruments' qualities be obvious no matter what I did anyway?
I decided that I did not want to compromise the integrity of the suites, so I would interpret it, the way I feel good about.
Now here is the big question, which is what it has been all about for all of these months:

Is there a huge difference in how I perform something, depending on the instrument?
Or is there a difference in the final product.
Does the instrument play me as much as I play the instrument?
If there is a difference, does it really matter?
And... is one "better" than another??

(the Violoncello Piccolo)

I have so many answers to that. And even more questions.
One musician friend whose opinion I value greatly, said he really did not care which instrument I played; it was my music that spoke to him, no matter what the instrument. And, he added, whatever cello you play, unless you compare them directly, they all sound like you expect a cello to sound. When you do compare them, perhaps one would find himself more drawn to one instrument or the other, but in the end, it doesn't matter.

Some of that it true. But... doesn't playing Bach require gut strings and a baroque bow? Perhaps so. But I suspect that for someone like me, it really doesn't matter; I know what it feels and sounds like with that equipment, so I will try to channel my sound in such a way that I mimic that, even on a steel string or a carbon fibre cello. I grew up in an era and a country (the Netherlands) where music was performed in a manner that was consistent with the era the piece was written. That meant performing Bach on baroque instruments, or at least "stylistically correct", whatever that means.

It is safe to say that I could not play the Bach suites with many of the notes slurred, bow changes that are too smooth and lots of fast vibrato. I am not suggesting that it is wrong to do that (well; actually I do...), but it is absolutely not the way I like it.
In other words: no matter which instrument I play; I could not play it that differently.

Even so, I find that I played the 5th suite very different on each cello. As a musician, we respond to the strength and weaknesses of the instrument with our interpretation. We let the instruments play us somewhat.

I love the depth of my Mirecourt, so I while I play it and hit a low note I keep thinking; "O yeah!". It probably makes me linger there a little longer, or emphasize it just so. You hear that in the result, I think. The low F has a slight wolf-tone when you play it lightly, so any time I play that note, I have to play it quite deliberate, which, of course affects the interpretation too. Plus: this instrument has been my companion, for 20 years; we have some sort of a "love-affair" going on, that is bound to be obvious.

(On my Mirecourt for the recording of the 5th)

I like the crispness and ease of the carbon fibre, so in the fugue of the prelude, or the 2nd gavotte and in the gigue, I had great fun making use of that. I took the tempi of those movements a little faster, after all; on this cello I did not compromise clarity if I sped things up a little. I had assumed that the Sarabande of this suite, which is so peaceful and reflective, would be the least attractive on this instrument, because it responds so quickly. To my surprise though, it was amazingly effective on this cello...

(The 5th on the Carbon fibre)

I love the colour of the gut strings and the slightly husky voice on the baroque cello, so that makes me want to take advantage of that quality. I also like the difficulty on the baroque cellos; that "struggle" gives the music something that you can not easily reproduce on the modern instruments.

During the entire recording process, it has been interesting how I felt after a recording day depending on the instrument. As I mentioned before; I was much more exhausted after recording on the baroque instruments. The recording of the 2nd, 5th (baroque cello) and 6th (baroque piccolo cello) each took more than one recording day. On the modern instruments, only the fourth suite had one movement to be done after one recording day!

In addition to not getting the entire suite "in the can", I also was exhausted on the "baroque instrument days". More so than on the other cellos.
Does that mean the other cellos are better?
No!
During the performances, or even at home practicing, I never felt that particular difference. So I have tried to figure out why it was so much more difficult during the recording.

(Piccolo Cello)

I suspect that it has to do with the level of "perfection" (I dislike that word!) that is required for a recording.
During a performance no one really notices (or at least most people don't really care) if one note in chord does not quite speak properly. As a matter of fact, if you noticed it in the first place, you'd probably have forgotten about it a moment later or at least not cared. But in a recording every note has to speak just right. And it still has to be musical. For me this meant that it required many more takes to ensure that I had enough material to work with.
And that's exhausting, because every take you do, you have to play the most beautiful and technically the best you have ever, ever, ever played. That is hard. And that is so much fun!!
Having said all of that; what have we lost in our search for "perfection"?

(The Baroque cello)

What will be the result?
I think will be obvious that it is all played by the same cellist; the larger musical lines are obvious (I hope!) and the ideas that I have of the structure of each movement will come through all of them in a more or less similar way. Aside from the fact that I interpret a piece somewhat differently every time I play it regardless of the cello, the biggest differences of the particular instruments are in the details.
A slightly quicker response on the carbon, more depth on my Mirecourt, more intimacy on the baroque.

Do I have a preference? Sure I do!!
But I am not going to tell.
My answer would probably be different tomorrow anyway...

I suspect that the opinion of the listeners will be as varied as the responses I heard after my concerts. It will range from enthusiasm to disgust for the carbon, from feeling strongly that it should have all been on the baroque cello to; "why not all on your Mirecourt"?

But really; all that really matters is BACH, right?!
It is the most amazing music, no matter the interpretation or the instrument!
Even after all of this, I am even more excited to continue exploring these suites. I suspect that, like all cellists, I will continue to do so until the day I die, or go senile.

The next big step for me will be listening, editing. It probably will be another 100 hours or so. I have 17 CDs of material to listen to in detail...gasp!.. I hope to be able to release the 3 CD set this fall/early winter. I will post a notice on my blog and on facebook but also keep an eye on my website: www.josephinevanlier.com.
If I have any discoveries while I listen to it all, I will certainly share it in my blog.
With my recording engineer, I will make an analysis of the sound, the overtones, the range of each instrument, make a graph, and that too, I will share here in a couple of months or so.

(The last CDs of the 17... I have work to do!)

This project is way too much fun, and still ongoing, as you see!
These projects are artistically necessary...unfortunately my line of credit isn't so happy...!
If anyone has any great funding ideas though, let me know!

Finally:
It would be ultimate compliment if the listeners impression would be exactly like my friend's: It really doesn't matter which instrument it is played on; all that matters is that the music speaks to you.
Because music; isn't that what it is really all about?!

(The parish priest, a music lover and violinist himself)

A brief note about the microphone set up.
They were set at the same distance for the Mirecourt and the baroque cello.

Not too close to me, so that we would be able to record the amazing acoustics as well.

(Setting the microphones just right)

When it came time for the carbon fibre, I assumed it would be the same set up. Not so. Because the carbon fibre cello already sounds like it has a "built in re-verb", it was almost too much in that church. Listening through the headset you could hear the sound bouncing around inside the cello and then colliding with the acoustics of the church. He put the mics higher up, to catch the sound a little differently. That worked well.

(the microphones are initially much higher for the carbon fiber cello)

When I came back to the carbon fibre cello on the last day of recording, he set up the microphones exactly like he had for the 3rd suite. Since for every session the mics were set up according to exact measurements, he assumed it was good this time around too. But for the first time in 10 days of recording, he stopped me after a few bars and said: the sound is not right. It seems to be bouncing off something. One note in particular seemed completely unbalanced with the rest. Why this happened: who knows? It could be because of the scordatura (a tuned down to g), which makes the instrument resonate differently. It could be because of the humidity, which might change the air density, it could be a variety of factors. So the mics came closer and lower and more like they had been for the baroque cello and Mirecourt!

When we recorded the piccolo, the mics were much closer, to capture the intimacy of the instrument, which would have gotten lost if they were further away.

The Concerts

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 16 May 2009 03:04:00 +0000

I have now performed the six suites entirely five times in the past month. And I am still as excited and humbled as I was when I started this. Perhaps even more so!

(Convocation Hall at the University of Alberta)

Playing six suites is a mesmerizing experience for both the performer as well as for the audience. When I set out to perform the 6 suites in one concert, I assumed it would be too much for most audiences to do in "one sitting", and the audience who would come to the concerts would probably be a select few.

(warming up before a concert)

I created the idea of performing the suites four times in Edmonton, in 4 different venues, but the audience needed to buy a ticket only once and come and go to each concert as they pleased; perhaps to listen to two suites at the time and come for more a next concert.
I was wrong: audiences came in very large numbers at every concert and most stayed through the entire performances! About 25 people came to all four complete performances, even!

(Robertson Wesley United Church)

Of course performing on four different instruments is very interesting, and people really seemed to enjoy that variety. Don't underestimate the power of the Bach suites though; How could one get up and leave in the middle?!

(All Saints' Anglican Cathedral)

The feedback on the different instruments has been very interesting.
Of course the carbon fibre cello stirs the most debate. No one appears to be neutral on that cello: they either really like it or really dislike it.

(sharing thoughts after the concert)

I was talking to two people after one concert and one person pointed to the carbon and said: "...you could have left that cello at home". The other person apeared not to have heard that comment and said: "why don't you play them all on that carbon cello; it is so far superiour!"
Those two comments seem to sum up the opinions of all audiences. It is almost funny!

(introducing the carbon fibre cello)

As I introduced the instruments before the suites, I talked mainly about the carbon fibre's perks of being unaffected by humidity, temperature, abuse of airport baggage handlers.
Then, when I started the first bar of the C Major suite, I could predict to hear the stir in the audience."WOW" seemed to be whispered everywhere. Yes: it is loud and clear, that cello!
One audience member found that it sounded "like an over-edited CD; too perfect, no soul". Another found that it was "so easy to listen too; so clear, so soothing".

(the television was interested in my concerts)

The opinions on the Mirecourt (with which I just celebrated my 20th anniversary!) and the baroque cello were not as black or white as on the carbon.

My Mirecourt is initially exactly what people assume a cello sounds like. It looks like a cello, it sounds like a cello. That means that people enjoyed it, but no one gave it much thought either, until the fourth suite.

By that time they had heard the Mirecourt once at the very beginning in the 1st suite; at which time it sounded the way a cello is supposed to sound and they had nothing to compare it with. By now they had heard the baroque cello and the carbon as well and as they listened to this cello again, they compared it with the other two.

(Jasper Yellowhead Museum and Archives)

Now they heard the depth that this cello has, especially after the carbon and even in this most difficult suite, which is in an uncomfortable key on the cello (Eb Major), and the instrument does not ring at its best.
It was at this point in the program that most people started to form strong opinions on the cellos!

With the baroque cello a few people initially had trouble with the fact that it did not project like a modern cello. Or they had difficulty with the vibration of the gut strings, the different types of overtones or the occasional buzz in the string.

They had one more chance to hear the baroque cello, in the 5th suite, with scordatura.

Because of the scordatura (the a-string is tuned down to g), this suite lends itself extremely well for the low baroque tuning. That also meant that people changed their minds on their initial opinion. Had they not felt particularly strong one way or another when I played the 2nd suite on it; "it looks like a cello, sounds like a cello, just a little softer and with a lower tuning and a funny way the cellist plays it without an endpin!"

(the ARTery)

Now that they heard the 5th suite, most people really enjoyed the richness of the overtones (a result of the much lower tension, the gut strings and the instrument itself). Many people commented on the deep sound of the bass notes.

The piccolo was an instrument that everyone loved, without exception. Even some people who are generally sceptical and thought that they preferred the modern cello for the 6th suite, were sold on it.

It truly is an amazing little instrument and I hope to do much more with it. People were surprised at the "silver" sound and clarity of the high strings. It still has plenty of depth as well.

Surprising to me was that it appeared to reach further than the baroque cello, even though it is only 3/4 of the size! Almost everyone commented on the richness of the sound both in the upper as the lower registers.

How does one feel after performing 6 suites? Dizzy, wired, excited, inspired, happy, confused.
I will perform them once more next weekend and then I will record them. I have 12 recording days booked this summer and I am very excited about it!!

(...and how does one fit 4 cellos in a smaller car?)

Bach

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:11:00 +0000

I am on the homestretch, getting ready for the concerts in Alberta.

The Concerts

Sunday, April 12, 2009, 1 PM. Jasper Yellowhead Museum and Archives, Jasper.
Sunday, April 19, 2009, 2 PM. Robertson Wesley United Church, Edmonton.
Saturday, May 2, 2009, 2 PM. All Saints' Anglican Cathedral, Edmonton.
Sunday, May 3, 2009, 2 PM. The ARTery, Edmonton.
May 23, 2009, 1 PM. University of Lethbridge. Part of the University of Lethbridge Cello Festival.
May 24, 2009,1 PM. University of Lethbridge. Part of the University of Lethbridge Cello Festival

The Venues

Each venue that I chose for the performances is very different.

In Jasper it will be at a museum, at a contemporary art exhibit in a mountain town in the Rockies. The acoustics there are great and audiences can look around at the art while they listen.
Two of the concerts in Edmonton will be at great churches.
Churches have been popular concert venues throughout the centuries. Their acoustics are generally very good for instrumental music. It might be hard on the audience's bums though...
One concert will be at 10 AM and is a so called Coffee Concert at Convocation Hall at the University of Alberta. This is a true concert venue with good acoustics, though not as "forgiving" as some others. For once the audience will have comfortable seats!
This performance time may seem unusual in North America; at least here in Edmonton it is uncommon, but many concerts in Europe are on Sunday morning at “coffee time”. Usually this means about 11 AM, but since the 6 suites are a bit of a marathon, I decided to start early so that people can go for lunch after..
At the end of the 17^th century Coffea Arabica reached Western Europe. For a long time it was regarded a kind of medicine. Contrary to tea, which was served in fancy salons, coffee was served in more ordinary “coffee houses”. Coffee soon became wildly popular and became synonymous with having a good time together. Many of those meetings at the local coffee houses involved concerts, some more spontaneous than others; Bach even wrote a “coffee cantata”! At this concert coffee will be served to honour an old tradition.
The last concert in Edmonton is at a very alternative venue. It is in the rough part of downtown Edmonton, in an old, decrepit but very alive building, where a lot of "cool" arts events are happening; from poetry readings, to contemporary dance to provocative visual art. At this concert the audience will be much closer to the performer so it will feel much more intimate.This follows another tradition of performing music in a chamber setting. The audience is close to the performer, sitting relaxed around tables, enjoying a drink and nibbling food while listening to music.
The concerts in Lethbridge are part of a cello festival, where participants and audience are immersed in "everything cello" for a few days. The buzz will be quite different there!

The Music

If anyone is under the impression that it has to get easier by now; it doesn't!

Bach keeps surprising me, challenging me and keeps me on my toes!
Hooray!

Part of this is something every musician is familiar with: the better we get; the more critical we get as well! Which means we loose track of the progression we make, and we tend to just notice what else still needs to be done. And believe me; there is always more to do! The good thing about that is that this keeps us practicing very hard until the last moment.

And that is just what I am doing. Did you think I was done with the metronome? I thought so too, but I resurrected it this week. And just when I figured I played the 10 million or so double stops in the suites exactly the way I wanted to, I changed my mind and since a few days I execute them all very differently!

Of course I have listened to so many recordings of the suites that I have lost track of the numbers. And I still listen, after a hiatus of about 3 months, during which I felt I did not want to be influenced.

I started listening again, and feel more intimidated by the suites than ever before. Don't get me wrong; I know every note of these suites intimately. I have studied so many versions of manuscript that I think I am able to distinguish whose version people are performing from, or even which version of manuscript the editor of the performance edition used. And still I feel humbled and at awe by them.

I still discover little and not so little things in listening and studying the manuscripts. I just changed a note in the first Menuet of the second suite. I must have played that suite since I was 16 years old or so, and yet it is only yesterday that I changed the a-e double stop just after the repeat to a-c#! It was such a revelation! And yet I have heard Bylsma and Rostropovich play that note "forever". Almost everyone else plays a-e though. Anna Magdalena writes a-c#, other sources write a-e. Who knows; I might change my mind again. And again. These kinds of revelations are huge for me, but may seem nothing for someone else. And certainly for my audience, who will listen to it; they won't care and most of them won't even notice!

A movement that every cellist perpetually struggles with is the first Menuet of the second suite. I mentioned the double stops before. The lengths in which they are spelled vary a lot. Bylsma writes about this in his "Fencing Master":

"Only a few movements have a bass as complete as the first Menuet of the second suite. The bass is logical in itself, and when playing it alone, what one suspected all along immediately becomes apparent; the notation is in a strange way "conventional". Without good musical reason the basses and other accompanying notes are given the same length as the melody notes to which they belong."

He continues:

"There are more conventions like that. For instance in the score of the St. Mathew passion, the basses of the secco recitatives are notated short and in the St. John passion the same notes are written long but they must be played exactly the same way (short). Why? I don't know. Tradition?

....

There are two things to be learned from this: the notated length of the bass really has no meaning, and when another voice is a long note, another note may very well be bowed back and forth(!)." Judge every bass note on its own merits. Arpeggiate in such a way that the logic of the bass does not suffer. Therefore, break 2 string chords as well, when in the midst of 3 and 4 part chords."

I have read Bylsma's book numerous times, and listened to so many recordings, including his, of course, but suddenly... click... something made sense:

Don't try so desperately to hold on to more than one note in a chord!

Duh!!

And it has made a huge difference already.

Yes: that Menuet of the 2nd suite isn't so bad after all!

Suddenly the Sarabande of the 6th suite is a lot easier too.

The Sarabande of the 4th suite has had a few challenges for me, because the fingerboard of the cello that I play this suite on (my Mirecourt), has a dent (playing too much) exactly at the bflat on the G string. (yes; I know; I need to get the fingerboard shaved). The chord in bar 3; b-flat and f, should be exactly across from each other, but they aren't on this cello, so it has been a terrible issue. The b-flat is shown as a dotted half note, but the quarter notes in the melody are all separate. I have always tried to get around that by at least holding b-flat and f together as long as possible, and even experimented with slurring the entire bar (I did not like that).

But if you just break the chord, and play the b-flat arpeggiated before the f...

Now I am laughing!

Then there are tempi. If you listen to 50 different performances of the suites, you will hear 50 different tempi. Even if you listen to a live performance of a suite by a cellist who's recording you have played a million times; the tempo choice is often different. I sure change my mind a lot! It keeps the suites alive and it does say a lot about Bach's genius. Casals called them "Masterpieces in constant state of evolution". Listen to any recording of any other piece and the tempo may vary by a notch or two, but never as drastically as with the suites. That is great and a little unsettling too. What will I do on stage? I make a strong commitment to a tempo one day and completely disagree with it the next!
Every cellist feels challenged by the suites. Pieter Wispelweij plans to record them every 7 years to keep putting out his new ideas. Rostropovitch was very reluctant to record them because he did not want to put a "definitive" interpretation out.

I play a Gavotte I fast and Gavotte II slow one day and I want to reverse it the next day, or suddenly feel they should both be rather slow...or both fast!

To feel the Prelude of the 4th suite in 2 makes it a lot easier to listen to.

And easier to play, to give it shape.

Or the Courante of the 3rd suite in 1.

I think... For now...

I think I will be humbled and challenged by this music forever!

Genius!

The Instruments

The constant change of instruments is challenging and great fun. I do feel like I finally have a grip on it.
When I say challenging, I am not just talking about the distance between the fingers or between the strings with the bow though. Sure; that will always be a challenge. The Mirecourt has a length from the bridge to the nut of 70.2 centimetres. The the carbon fibre cello is about the same, the baroque cello 69 and the piccolo 64 cm.

The bridges are cut so differently. I have to be careful on the piccolo that I don't bow on the G string when I mean to just play the d. But muscle memory (which truly is in your brain) is amazing and I seem to have found my way with that.

Initially I tried very hard to get the same volume out of the baroque cello that I got out of the carbon. That really sounded bad! Now I am very content with a softer sound. It still takes my ears a few minutes to get used to it every time I switch, but I really like it.

Even more challenging is to be able to get the intended expression out of each instrument. And to adapt my expectation to each cello. I do need more dynamic differences on the modern cellos than on the old ones, just because they can and it sounds silly not too (and it sounds really great when I do).
I can not go to those same extremes on the baroque cellos, even though you can make lots of dynamic differences still, of course. More importantly; the warmth of the gut strings on those allow me to play with the colour and make me search for overtones that I can not find on the steel strings.

A few weeks ago I played a short concert where I played the entire fourth suite, on 3 cellos. The Prelude and Allemande on the baroque cello, the Courante and Sarabande on the Mirecourt and the Bourree I and II and the Gigue on the carbon fibre. I spent little time preparing that, just because I figured I was in good shape, I practice the 4th suite on my Mirecourt all the time and I know the other instruments well. To my surprise I had a lot more difficulty on stage than I had anticipated.

The Prelude of that suite is of course a challenge at the best of times, but was hard on the baroque cello. It took me a while to realize that I needed much, much more bow than I was used to playing this on my Mirecourt. And when it came to the Bourrees and Gigue, I took a tempo that was much faster than I should have for my own comfort, just because I wanted to "show off" how easy the carbon fibre cello was.
Weird as it may sound: I have come a long way since then (and that was only 3 weeks ago). I guess that concert made a few things very clear to me and I have practiced differently since. Perhaps I became more aware? A concert is always different than time by yourself in the practice room.

The promotion; creating a "buzz"

The challenge for every musician is always to try to get people to your concert.
My husband is a painter and his work is done months prior to an exhibit opening. That means that he has a lot of time that he can devote to promoting the exhibit. He can write press releases, mail outs, call people, visit people and do whatever else is necessary to let people know that you have an event coming up. It also helps that he is quite shameless approaching people.
Musicians are in the practice room until the hour before the concert! That leaves us very little time to interact with our potential audience. Thank goodness for me, my husband is also a graphic designer, so he makes my website, updates it whenever I want him to, and he makes posters and hand outs for my concerts. Yes; I still have to write text, but at least someone else is taking care of the distribution of flyers and posters, etc.

I started early this time around, so that I do have time in the practice studio closer to the performances, but also to make sure that people know about it well in advance. People are busy; they need to be able to plan ahead. With these concerts, the "buzz" seems to be happening; the word spreads quickly. I am excited!
It is an expensive profession though: I have had to rent the concert venues, print posters and hand-outs. O yeah; and I bought two cellos and a bow...
There better be a lot of people to break even!
But it is so much fun!

The tickets:

I decided to make my Edmonton concerts work in such a way that the audience can buy a ticket once and then come to as many of the concerts as they would like. For many people 6 suites in one sitting is a little much (especially if they are sitting in a church pew).
I will play 2 suites, have an intermission, 2 more suites, another intermission, and then the last 2 suites. Every "set" starts on the hour. People can decide to leave after every set and come back for the next set or two on another date. Or they can come to all 6 suites 4 times, of course!
The options:

Listen to all six suites in one afternoon
Leave after two suites and come back for more at the next performances
Listen to all six suites several times!

• 1st hour: Suite 1 and Suite 2 (Mirecourt cello, Baroque cello)
• 2nd hour: Suite 3 and Suite 4 (Carbon fibre cello, Mirecourt cello)
• 3rd hour: Suite 5 and Suite 6 (Baroque cello, Cello piccolo)

To perform from memory, or not?

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:02:00 +0000

With the performances just around the corner, I can not tell you how many people have asked if would be performing the six suites from memory.

Let me begin by saying that I strongly believe that in order to perform a piece well, one should know it from memory in all of its details.
However... should one always perform it without the music at least nearby?
Yes.
No.
Yes.
No.
...

I have decided that I will NOT perform the suites from memory!

While the ability to perform all suites from memory is hugely admirable, I don't think I could enjoy the performance the same way if I were to perform all six suites from memory. I would be too afraid I might loose sight of the "big picture", would feel restricted, too worried if I might possibly end up at the wrong end of a passage and having to improvise my way out of it.
Instead I think I would prefer having the music comfortably with me, giving me the freedom to re-invent my interpretation every time again.

I think that this way I would enjoy the performance.

How would the audience feel if I played from music? Would they care? Would the enjoy it more? Would they find it distracting? Would they find it embarrassing?

Some cultures emphasize the importance of performing from memory. The North American culture (if such a thing exists) is one of them, and so seem the Eastern European and Russian schools to be. For some of them there simply is "no other way".

When I am in an audience, I do not care if the performer does or does not have the music. What I care about is whether it is clear that the musician knows the music well and that the performance moves me.

I have, on occasion, felt very uncomfortable when musicians (some very famous ones!) lost their place and either had to start over or improvise to get out of their predicament. In those cases I never fully relaxed again in the audience, because; "what if he or she gets lost again?!"
Some musicians get consoled by the idea that even very seasoned performers get lost. "if it can happen to them, it does not matter so much that I struggle with these issues as well!"
I feel differently: "they" can get away with it; "they" will be forgiven very easily, given their status. However when I loose it in performance, I have to prove myself all over again.

On the other hand; I have listened to ill prepared performances where the performer was clearly just reading the notes. This too, is very uncomfortable, if not irritating, no matter how talented or famous the performer.

Hence my first sentence: in order to perform a piece well, one should know it from memory in all of its details.
For me, however, to be able to be creative, free, expressive and to enjoy it myself, I like to have the comfort of music in the vicinity.

Last fall I went to the second Amsterdam cello biennial. Every morning started with a different Bach suite, performed by a different cellist. These were all played from memory. At many other concerts including some cello concertos performed by very seasoned cellists, as well as most concerts involving cello and piano, the musicians had music in front of them.
I asked my former prof what he thought of the whole issue of memorizing. I remember that during my university years it was never insisted upon that we'd perform from memory, though we did need to be able to play the pieces from memory in our lessons.
He said: "you'd be an idiot to play that concert from memory" (referring to performing six Bach suites in one afternoon). Then he quoted famous Viola da Gamba virtuoso Jordi Savall to emphasize his point.
At a masterclass for Savall, one particular student was playing one of the gamba sonatas by Bach from memory. Savall apparently did not like that. Apparently he said "when you are playing from memory, you are placing yourself between the composer and the music. What you will hear is the performer, not the composer, and who are you to think you are better than Bach!"

You have to remember that I did not hear him say it first hand, so it may have been quoted incorrectly, but I do agree that for me, playing with the music, especially with the manuscript, allows me to interpret the composers wishes more truthfully.

Now that we are on the topic of manuscript: when you read manuscript, it gives you a great insight in the composers' head. Just by the way notes are grouped, slurs are placed, where notes are placed in relation to others, we tend to change the way we perform them.
Unfortunately we do not have an original copy by Bach of the suites. Thank goodness we have several good copies, including the one from his wife Anna Magdalena and some, that appear to have come from the same source, are remarkably similar. It gives us as close a glimpse into what he wrote as we can have.
Will I perform from one of those? Probably not, but they are always there when I practice. It is amazing how much the interpretation changes depending on which copy I play from!

This art of music writing will soon be lost forever. Many music students don't even learn to write music by hand anymore!
With composers largely writing on computers now we are on one hand relieved that we never again have to read badly copied scores but we are on the other hand sad, because we can no longer see the personality of the composer...

...and the winner is...

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 04:05:00 +0000

A much needed update on my blog is definitely required!

What have I been up to all this time?

Well...

I practiced...

and performed....

and practiced....

And performed some more...

At the end of this week I am going to Harbin in China to perform three, possibly four Bach suites on “Canada Night” as part of the opening ceremonies of the 2009 Universiade Games. This concert will sort of be the jump start of many performances; see my website for details!

In the mean time my journey with my four cellos has been an exciting one. I have grown to respect and admire the qualities in all four instruments.

I have done a few performances already, each teaching me more about what I am playing with.

Concert in Spruce Grove, Alberta. Explainations are in order.

With a project like this, audiences almost inadvertently want an answer to the question:

“which instrument is better?”

Opinions are much divided.

AND...; is “better “truly what I am searching for?!?

My personal answer to that: Not really; they are all so different, and each has its strength and weakness. And sometimes its strength can also be its weakness...

For my audiences... AH!... to be part of such discussion and clashes of opinion: excitement!!

I will share some of my experiences and findings with you.

In today’s environment we tend to relate all live performances to recordings we have. The expectation on the performer is to be “as good as the recording”.

If that is the prerequisite, the carbon fibre cello is the all round winner. It is clean, easy and fast. Everything I do on it sounds much cleaner than on any other instrument.

However: what is the sacrifice? The older instruments have character, complications, temperaments...

Have you ever listened to old recordings of master players such as cellist Pablo Casals, pianist Claudio Arrau or guitarist Andres Segovia, to name just a few? Many of those recordings were done just in one take and then never tampered with. It is difficult to listen to that today, if what you are looking for is so called “perfection”, but it sure gives us a connection to the performer and pure music does shine through. These recordings are much more like a live performance, and as a listener you feel as if you are a little bit part of the art as it was being created.

Today’s recordings are done in multiple takes, and performers take from those only the sections they like, splice parts of other takes in there and “voila”; we have the perfect recording!

There is both good and bad to this. With the old style recordings, the listener anticipates certain mistakes or out of tune sections after having listened to a recording several times. With today’s recordings, that toe-curling experience is now eliminated. You lose some of the flow though, and the sense of being part of the art. Only very few performers will still record mostly complete takes and use them in order to keep the emotion, the flow.

For the live performer this search for perfection has created a huge obstacle; we have to measure up! This too is good and bad; we have in general become much better performers because of it, but have we sacrificed some of the true art? When I listen to some very old recordings of the great cellists like Casals, Piatagorsky, Fournier, and many more, I wonder if that statement is true; are we really better players? Maybe not; those guys sure could play!

Spending some time in the practice room.

My old Mirecourt cello had his good days and his bad days.

I know that sounds funny, but it is true. Some days I will pick him up and he sounds absolutely fantastic, and thus: so do I!

Other days he sounds terrible. He will be cranky, moody, and uncooperative. And thus, I sound much like that!

I do, however, have a much stronger “relationship” with this instrument, than I do with my carbon fibre cello. On the other hand; when I get frustrated with the Mirecourt, the carbon fibre allows me to cool down, regain my confidence and does not complain. At what cost? Well, strictly technically speaking, the carbon is superior; I sacrifice character and depth. It is not the instrument for every day. But if I am cranky or just PMS-ing: give me the carbon!

For the Mirecourt, I also make sure I create the “ideal” environment for him: I try to keep the humidity around 50% and check temperature and barometric pressure, so I can adjust anything at any time.

On a stage, the instrument will do what it feels like doing anyway. If I haven’t played him enough he’ll get back at me and misbehave, or reward me when I have spent a lot of time together with him in the practice room.

Did you notice how I refer to this cello as “him”? It has been like that from the moment I got him and I have never had that with any other instrument, except briefly with a cello from California maker Andrew Carruthers. Had I not been so attached to this cello it would have become my companion for sure. I still think about that cello....

The baroque cello is an entirely different beast. It is much less predictable...yet!

The gut strings do not help either. The strings are made out of sheep gut and are extremely sensitive to temperature or barometric pressure changes. If it is not “just right” they will squeak and squawk. I have come to like this cello a lot; it is so warm and the bass is deep and resonant.

Tuning the baroque instruments frequently during performance.

In Bach’s time the expectations on the instruments were very different than today. Of course some of the very best instruments ever were created around that time, but most of the time many of the instruments were kept in less than ideal situations: too dry, too humid, usually cold and damp in the winter, kept in unheated rooms and then suddenly brought into a space heated by a fireplace. ..You can imagine the stress on the instruments. Many string instruments were cracked and had open seams, altering their sound and response enormously.

The gut strings broke frequently and musicians, poor as they often were, could not afford to buy new strings so they would just tie a knot in the string, even if it were in the middle of the string. Because of this, the instruments were also much more out of tune so larger orchestras emerged, since being out of tune was less noticeable in the larger ensemble.

Gut strings tend to get false quickly. This either means changing strings very regular (which is very expensive!), or live with it and change strings only a few weeks prior to important concerts. This gives the strings just enough time to allow them to stretch and reach their maximum sound quality, not long enough for them to become false again.

To the modern ear, many baroque string instruments sound indeed a little out of tune if they are not part of a larger ensemble. To our ear they also sound quite soft.

Because the neck is set in at a straighter angle, their bass bar is shorter, they are tuned at A415 rather than A440 and for many other technical reasons I won’t discuss here (Google it, if you are interested) they project much less than their contemporary brothers. It does, however, gives us a glimpse into the era that Bach wrote it in and the type of instrument he had in mind.

But how far do we want to go in trying to reproduce that?

This is exactly the issue that this whole project is about.

And I don’t want to commit to an answer, since I change my mind just about every fifteen minutes!!

The baroque instrument has its limitations to modern performers and audiences. But at the same time it has huge advantages, if you are open to it.

If, as an audience, you are willing to put aside your perfectionism, your need for extreme clarity in sound and are willing to open your mind and replace all of the above with character, colour and intimacy, then you will find it a very rewarding experience to listen to period performances.

The words “period performance” opens an entirely different can of worms... This will be a future blog entry!

I feel that I have very strong opinions about how a Bach suite ought to be performed. I either agree or disagree; seldom do I find myself neutral.

I do want to mention that I disagree that one should approach Bach the same way one approaches Brahms or Shostakovich. That does not mean you should get too fundamentalist about it though. I will discuss this in more detail a future blog entry.

This whole project so far has been a humbling experience. Because... I am such a different player with each instrument! And while I find I have a strong opinion about performance practice, I have to compromise somewhat, depending on the instrument I play. And to my own surprise, I can’t say that I prefer one over the other; it is just very different! I do sometimes feel strongly that I prefer one cello, but the next day I change my mind again. In general I find that, even during a performance, every time I change from one instrument to the next, the previous instrument sounded much better to me than the next one. As I am playing it and get used to it, I find that the instrument I play right now is always the best one though!

Generalizing quite a bit;

The carbon fibre is a great instrument to show off virtuosity.

With the baroque cello and the Mirecourt cello, I can move people with expression and sensitivity.

This just means I end up working very hard to get that expression out of the carbon fibre cello and the virtuosity out of the Mirecourt. They all teach me to become a better player and... it keeps me humble!

Like I have said before; I find myself searching for some qualities of the carbon fibre cello in the baroque cello, and vice versa. In addition, I cherish some things on each instrument and use them to accentuate the qualities of that instrument.

I will try to explain it through a few examples out of the suites (I repeat myself a little from previous blog entries):

Example 1:

The fingering choice is different depending on the instrument:

Prelude to 2^nd suite, opening bars; d-f-a:

· Open strings are very nice on the baroque cello. The a-string sounds warm, mellow and resonates just right.

· This fingering is OK, but a little harsh on the Mirecourt, so I prefer to play an open d and a stopped a.

· Open strings are just unacceptable on the Carbon I have to play a stopped d and a, or it sounds just silly.

Is one “better”?? Not persé; just very different!

Example 2:

Tempo choice is very different, depending on the instrument as well:

Bars 45 to 61 in Prelude of the third suite:

· Nice on baroque, but slower and obviously difficult. On this cello the pedal point sounds very mellow and actually very nice; easy to control; it will not “bark” at you when you play it and stands out just enough to not be obnoxious.

· Quite easy on Mirecourt. The pedal point is still nice, but much harder to control.

· Super easy on Carbon. The pedal point stands out almost too much if you don’t control it. But then again: at this speed it will be over before you know it!

Is one “better”?? Not persé; just very different!

Example 3:

Expression is very different.

The Sarabande of the 5^th suite:

· Very slow and haunting on the baroque cello. The gut strings demand time and effort.

· A little less slow on the Mirecourt. The steel strings respond quickly. To play it as slow as on the baroque cello would sound very artificial.

· Very different on the Carbon. This instrument responds almost too easy for the expression that I am looking for. I need to pull out a whole new series of “tricks” to try to mimic the emotional effect the piece had on the baroque cello.

Is one “better”?? Not persé; just very different!

The 6^th suite.

Now we are comparing 3 instruments against one; the piccolo. And the winner is....

Yes: this suite is brutally difficult on a 4 string instrument; forcing the cellist to go way up on the fingerboard and execute nearly impossible double stops.

It is close to impossible on a baroque cello, since its fingerboard is much shorter than that of a modern cello, and thus forces the cellist to play past the end of the fingerboard: pretty nasty sounding!

On the modern instruments it is slightly easier, but inconvenient (although I found that I can play it better on a four string now that I know it so intimately on the 5-strings: it has taught me to think about fingering quite differently!)

On the piccolo you could almost say it is “easy” (I said almost; it is not an easy suite by any stretch of the imagination!).

With the 5^th string you rarely venture above the 4^th position.

Of course the 5 strings pose their own challenges. Initially the fact that you now have the d string sitting on the highest point of the bridge poses some right hand confusion and unintended double stops. In addition, the fact that the instrument is quite a bit smaller and you have 5 string very close together is challenging for intonation. But once you get past that, it is pure bliss! I don’t understand why not every cello has 5 strings; it would make our life so much easier!!

This piccolo cello is a baroque instrument. But because it is so much smaller and so different than all the others, I find that I don’t compare it as much. It just has its own place, without competition, where the other three instruments truly behave as competitors!

My Violoncello Piccolo

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:57:00 +0000

I now officially own a violoncello piccolo.

(My first seconds with the new piccolo)

Last week I picked up the piccolo from Ifshin at their new store in El Cerrito, California. They had just moved there from Berkeley.

(The new Ifshin building in El Cerrito)

Haide Lin had arrived with my piccolo from China on April 1, and on April 10 I arrived on their door step to pick it up.
This was unusually soon after it had come from China. The instrument was built in China in the shop of Ifshin. Their luthiers over there work much the way they would have in the shop of Vuillaume in Mirecourt in the 1800's: one highly skilled person carves only scrolls. The other one carves top plates and yet another bends sides and one person makes varnish and applies it. Because they do only one thing, these people are remarkably good at it. Haide goes there every few months to help and instruct.
They make a lot of different instruments, most of them are more or less mass production.

However; my violoncello piccolo is another story. As I have told you in previous blog entries: very little is known about the violoncello piccolo. The exact size remains unknown. There are violoncello piccolo's as small as 1/2 size cellos, and some as big as 7/8 size cellos. People such as Dmitri Badiarov seem to have discovered proof that the piccolo was really more like a huge viola played on the right shoulder of the performer. Cellists of course, love to dispute that, since the Bach suites are sacred to us and certainly a violist should never touch them! I guess we cellists shouldn't be too protective of the suites. After all: it is such beautiful music: who wouldn't want to play them! The whole debate about the violoncello piccolo is great. The more people are talking about it, the more it will get researched!

I had opted to have a piccolo built that is roughly 3/4 the size of a baroque cello, but with the sides as thick as that of a regular cello, so that there is more air volume inside. This increases the chance that there is a decent C string on the cello, with enough depth.

For the people at Ifshin, both in California and in China this seemed an exciting challenge.

And?
It worked!
It is great.
It is exciting.

When Haide arrived in El Cerrito with the instrument the beginning of April, he first put it in a kind of dryer to make it suitable for the ridiculous climate it would be going to. It stayed there for 4 days until there was not a drop of moisture left in the instrument. He made a fingerboard, soundpost, two bridges (he liked the 2nd one better) and set up the cello.

As I said: I arrived the afternoon of April 10 and spent a few hours with Haide moving the soundpost and bridge until it seemed right for the moment.

(Haide works with me on the perfect set-up of the violoncello piccolo)

I brought the instrument to my hotel in San Francisco and played it for a few hours. I was to be back in El Cerrito the next day to tweak some more.

Playing 5 strings for the first time was so interesting! Can you imagine: I have never played the 6th suite. Sure: I have tried to "plough through it" on numerous occasions, only to be frustrated by the difficulty. On this Thursday evening, in my hotel room in San Francisco I played it without interruption from the beginning to the end! I couldn't help wondering: why don't all cellos have 5 strings?!?

The biggest challenge was not even the new high e-string; it was trying to find the d and G strings! More about that in later blog entries.

It turned out that the C string was hitting the fingerboard too much when I played.

The next day at the shop of Ifshin, we decided to put a resonator inside the instrument to take care of the small wolf and Haide would take the fingerboard off the cello that evening and shave it down. This meant leaving it overnight for the glue to dry. It also meant we would have to leave a day later than we had planned to drive back to Edmonton (yes: we drove down to San Francisco).

(Jay Ifshin and Haide Lin are debating what to do next)

On Saturday we were back at the shop in the morning. Haide usually does not work on Saturday but ended up being there all day to set up my cello well. He made a new soundpost. That worked. The only thing was... the C string still didn't vibrate freely. Gut strings vibrate very wide and it kept hitting the fingerboard.
And that surely wouldn't get any better in Edmonton.

(In Haide's workshop on Saturday morning)

Eventually Haide cut a small incision in the neck, where it connects with the top plate. The neck now came forward and the fingerboard dropped. It worked. In order to do this he had to open the top plate seam and of course glue it back together once he was done. It had to stay in the glue clamps for a while: preferably overnight. But we were leaving the next morning at 6 am!

We took the cello, clamps and all, and dropped the clamps off on Haide's door step on our way out the next morning!

Of course playing it at home is so different. Now it is suddenly real! I have started practising the Prelude and Allemande of the 6th suite. It is so much fun!
I also rushed in an order for some e-strings! They are so thin: I am sure this e string will break soon.

I had (shallowly perhaps) requested that the piccolo would look different from the baroque cello that I have from them. The varnish did not quite turn out as dark as Haide had wished but it is still quite different from the baroque cello that I have.
They also antiqued it differently, so to the untrained eye it really shouldn't look like I am playing the same instrument when I play them back to back.

(The baroque cello and the piccolo together)

I also have sight read through some Boccherini sonatas. They are difficult! But not so much on a piccolo. How fun!

While in California we went to visit Andy Carruthers and spent a great day with him and his family.
I also got to play "the" cello again. It is still so great!! It is such a powerful instrument. And so intimate at the same time. Someone will fall so in love with that cello! It made my heart beat faster and ache, that is for sure... I seem to have such connection with the instrument. Unfortunately my bank account won't allow me to have yet another instrument.
When I do some performances of the suites in California I will certainly include a Carruthers cello in the series! (I secretly hope it will be this one, but for Andy I hope it will sell before that time!).

The other thing about going to California in this time of year: THEY HAVE FLOWERS!!

While I love Edmonton, there is a two month time that I would rather skip every year.
From mid March to early May. It is brown. While it is usually sunny; I do miss the flowers.

(Calla Lilies are really tall!)

And this weekend here in Edmonton is ridiculous: it is snowing... (yes: that is unusual, even for here)! I feel energized though, by the spring that we had there. And it sure is less busy here!

(California Poppies)

ENGLAND Update:

For those of you wondering how my England experience was: I had a lot of fun.
The performance was fun. It is difficult to imagine that no one even noticed that I had a carbon fibre cello!
But I was sure glad I had brought it.

Even though Air Canada had promised to hand carry the instrument in and out of the plane and put it on the belt for fragile items: it came tumbling down the regular luggage belt and even landed on the bridge...
Needless to say that I nearly had a heart attack.
But the cello was not even out of tune!

(Performance at Canada House on Trafalgar Square in London, UK)

The Violoncello Piccolo is ready!

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 03:55:00 +0000

I just heard from Ifshin that my piccolo cello is ready! I am going to pick it up mid April!
As soon as I have it, you will hear all about it. I can hardly wait.
If it is as good as the baroque cello that I have from them, I will be in for a treat!

The recording with the Strathcona String Quartet is done. We did a day of recording today. Try playing jazz music at 8 AM on a holiday Monday!
It was really great fun though and I think the CD will be very good.

My focus can now go to playing suites 1 through 4 in London on Friday. Playing them on the carbon fibre cello is interesting, especially since I have not been playing it that much lately (I really do love my Mirecourt after all!)

I changed strings on both cellos.
It started last week when I changed the strings on my Mirecourt again. I kept the Larsen soloist soft a string, but changed the rest to Larsen Soloist medium. I did not like the wire core after all: they were buzzing too much.
It is such an expensive experiment with all these strings!
I kept the a soloist soft: that string sounds great on this cello.
I thought that the d, which also was a soloist soft, could use a little more "oompf" and the soloist medium does just that.
I changed the strings on the carbon too! It now has almost the same set-up: all soloist Larsen, all medium. And to my surprise: I like it!
Let's hope the cello "survives" the flight to London....
I thought I had decided to bring my great Roy Quade bow, but I am getting cold feet. What if something happens to it?! I may take my husband's Coda Bow after all...

I have also decided how to present the six suites in concert next season.
Last week American cellist Zuill Bailey performed in Edmonton and we were talking at intermission and after the concert with a glass of wine. He had the brilliant idea of performing all six suites on one afternoon, but perform a suite every half hour on a few consecutive Saturdays or Sundays.
I would play it as follows:
1:00: Suite 1
1:30: Suite 2
2:00: Suite 3
2:30: BREAK
3:00: Suite 4
3:30: Suite 5
4:00" Suite 6

The audience can decide if they want to listen to all 6 suites, walk out after two suites or just come for one suite.
That would take a lot of pressure off both the performer as well as the audience.
It means I as a performer won't have to worry about whether I still have a captive audience: they could leave after every suite for a break or just to go home.
And the audience doesn't have to worry about having to be polite and sit through all six suites when all they really want to do after hearing one or two suites is to throw a steak on the BBQ at home.

Different cellos, different interpretation?

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:15:00 +0000

This is the million dollar question of the project.

During the last few weeks I have been playing all three cellos a lot.
The Mirecourt sounds fantastic. I am using it daily because my Strathcona String Quartet is recording a CD, consisting of original compositions and arrangements of jazz standards by George Andrix. About half of the works will be for string quartet alone. For the other half, the Quartet will be joined by Joel Gray (trumpet) and John Taylor (bass), both widely respected members of the Edmonton Jazz Community.
We recorded the string quartet pieces last week. The sextet pieces will be recorded on the 24th.
Of course I have been using my Mirecourt for this, and it is great!

Since I am going to London with Edmonton Economic Development at the end of the month, I have been practicing my carbon fibre cello a lot as well. And since I love the sound of the baroque cello so much, of course I have been playing it regularly too.

As you may remember, I had decided which suite to play on which cello.
Until I was asked to go to London, I was faithfully practicing the suites on the instruments that I had decided to play them on. So I practiced the 1st on the Mirecourt, the 2nd on the baroque cello, the 3rd on the carbon, suite 4 on my Mirecourt and #5 on the baroque.

Then came the London trip. I will take the carbon fibre cello, so... I need to make sure that I have played suites #1 to 4 (which I will be performing there) on the carbon.
What I have now discovered is that I play the suite completely differently, depending on the instrument. I choose completely different fingerings, different tempi, different dynamics even!

I shall try to describe the differences:

The baroque cello is set up with gut strings: unwound a and d, and silver wound G and C. It is tuned to 4:15. Because the bridge is lower and the strings are tuned lower, the tension is much lower. This gives the strings a lot more "slack"; therefore, the strings respond slower. The overtones are much richer, the sound more intimate.

The Mirecourt has an unequaled character. Every string is a little different, making fingering choices challenging, since the string I play it on changes the feel of a section a lot. Having said that; I will contradict myself and say that this cello sounds very even across the strings. The mood can just be different from one string to the next, much more than on the carbon fibre cello.

The carbon fibre sounds like it has built-in amplification. It is very fast, very smooth, with almost no change when you go from one string to the next.

Let's take a look at the prelude of the first, G major suite. Towards the end of the movement we get the following passage:

I like to bring out the bass notes on the d-string.

On the baroque cello this happens almost automatically. The open a-string is so mellow that it never screams at you or demands attention. It sounds exactly the way I believe it should sound.
On the Mirecourt I have to try hard to get the sound that I got so easily on the baroque cello. The a-string tends to stand out. In spite of a "Larsen soloist soft" string, I have to work really hard in order to have the a-string not bark at me when I play this passage.
On the carbon fibre cello I get confronted with an entirely different problem: the notes sound much too equal. It is so "nice". There is absolutely nothing "offensive" about the sound, but it totally lacks character, unless I work really hard at making one note stand out over the other.
So in a way this cello demands the most work to get the sound I want, even though it is the easiest to play. Go figure!

Another example:
The opening of the 2nd suite:

On the baroque cello this sounds so very sweet with open d and a strings. You can manipulate the sound, partly because the strings are so loose. It sounds warm, intimate.
On the Mirecourt the open strings sound great as well, in a very different way. With steel strings the colouring is less complex, but still has a great depth. It sounds a little less haunting than on the baroque cello, partly because of the higher tuning, partly because of the greater projection and higher tension. I take a slightly faster tempo with this cello.
On the carbon fibre, I tend to play the opening of this suite in the 4th position with no open strings. For those who know me, this probably comes as a surprise, since it seems so against my "religion" to play the opening of this suite anywhere but on open strings. But that sounds very boring on this instrument since it allows for so little colouring on open strings. It sounds beautiful in the 4th position though.
Vice versa is true too. Playing this opening bar on the baroque cello in the 4th position sounds choked and unhealthy. On the Mirecourt it sounds good but I personally don't like it as much.

Yet another interesting example:
The following section in the 3rd, C Major suite:

On the baroque cello I keep the same tempo that I started the movement with throughout this section. I take time on chord changes.
On the Mirecourt I gradually increase the tempo. I do keep the first three notes of every four 16th notes slurred. I get back to the Tempo Primo in bar...
On the carbon fibre cello this section is a breeze! It is so easy I barely have to think. I decided to separate the notes completely (so no slurs!). And I play it at lightning speed. It sound phenomenal this way, but trying this on the baroque cello sounds pathetic!

Now comes suite #4, the Prelude.

On the baroque cello, I use almost a whole bow for every 8th note! If I don't it sounds scratchy and squeaky. I choose quite a moderate tempo. It takes a little time to get the low notes to sound.
It is difficult to keep the 4/4 or 2/2 feel of this movement. I remember that I got a phone call from my parents many years ago. They are both professional musicians (classical guitarists) of the highest caliber. They were listening to the 4th suite by Anner Bijlsma. Apparently they had trouble deciding what the time signature of this prelude was upon listening to it, so they called me to find out. It is true: it is so easy for the second 8th note to become so dominant that it appears to become the first beat. The listener is at a compete loss after a while.
I found this particularly difficult on my baroque cello.
The other thing I am struggling with this particular suite on this instrument is with is the key. The E flat major suite is difficult for cellists, partly because there are so very many extensions. Upon completing this suite the left hand is quite tired. On the baroque cello I find this even more stressful because the instrument has no endpin. It sits very straight, which is even more stressful for the hand. In addition this cello is a little big anyway.
On The Mirecourt this suite is much less stressful now than it used to be. With the new bridge it seems much more manageable. I can choose any tempo I like to, which is a little faster than on my baroque cello, and the instrument responds well. After the Gigue I still feel the urge to shake my left hand and loosen my muscles! I do find though, that the slight struggle which is almost inevitable with the string changes in this suite, gives it a character that I really like.
I use a much more compact bow stroke on this instrument with this suite. The faster bow necessary on the baroque cello makes it sound airy and flaky on the Mirecourt. Even when I use a baroque bow on this cello, I use much less bow on the Mirecourt than on the baroque cello.
The carbon fibre cello does this suite with great ease, but almost too much so. The string changes are a non-issue. The C string speaks as easily as the a-string, so one could play this as fast as one would like. So the work I find that I create for myself is to make it sound as if it is more labourious than it actually is.

The interesting thing about this journey is that I find myself searching for some qualities of the carbon fibre cello in the baroque cello, and vice versa.
When things are too easy on the carbon fibre cello, I try to mimic the struggle I have on the baroque cello.
When I struggle on the baroque cello, I try to find ways to make it sound more like the Mirecourt or carbon fibre do.

On the other hand, I cherish some things on each instrument and use them to accentuate the qualities of that instrument, like in the prelude of the 3rd suite, where I love the speed and virtuoso sound I can get on the carbon fiber, the warmth and depth on the Mirecourt and how it gets so lyrical and slow on the baroque cello.

The excitement continues...!

A personal update

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 03:53:00 +0000

It has been almost 3 months since my last post, and so much has happened since!

I received a subsistence grant from the Edmonton Arts Council. It makes me really happy, because this project is turning out to be more costly in many ways, than I ever imagined! Receiving this grant means I can breathe a little bit easier, at least for a little while. I am applying for more grants and will need to find a few more ways to help me fund this project (any ideas?).
The granting agency wants four copies of everything.....

I am loving every minute of this huge project though!

I received an award: “Celebration of Women in the Arts Award of 2007” from the Edmonton Arts Council. I feel so very privileged, humbled and honoured!

I have just been asked to represent Edmonton in London, UK at the end of March for a sales mission which Edmonton Economic Development Corporation is working on with the Mayor's Office, Edmonton International Airports, etc.
It will be great to go there and… I will be playing Bach!
Unfortunately there is no money to buy a seat for my cello, so instead of risking it, I decided I will take my carbon fibre cello. It will be quite different from what I have been doing lately!

During the past few months I have reconnected with my good old fiend Mirecourt. During all of my performances and for most of my practicing and rehearsing, I have been enjoying playing it again. Since it got a new bridge, the instrument has become reliable and wonderful to play. It has been so interesting to find out how large a role a bridge plays in the overall manageability of an instrument!
Apparently the previous bridge, while well cut, was a little soft and therefore moved ever so slightly under the string. This caused the intonation to become unreliable and the instrument to be moody.
We cellists tend to be hypersensitive when it comes to the set up of the instrument (violinists tease us with that!). The soundpost has to be "just there" and nowhere else. The bridge has to stand "just so" and not differently. And when the bridge moves even a fraction of a millimetre, the sound changes, the playability changes, the character changes! Hard to explain to a non-cellist, but it can be a source of great frustration and anxiety. I have much less to worry about now!

I changed the strings on my Mirecourt again and I have gone back to Larsen strings. “Soloist soft” (doesn’t that sound like an oxymoron?!) on the a and d strings and wire core Tungsten on C and G. I love the power.
True: I do miss the depth and wealth of overtones of gut strings, but this climate here in Alberta makes it too much of a hassle to attempt to play gut.
It took me a month to play the gut strings in, which I expected. Then, for the next month, I enjoyed them immensely. The third month was filled with frustration because they lost their shine; they had dried out!
Changing them every other month is much out of my budget range, so the Larsen is my pretty happy compromise. If I lived in a more humid climate, I would not hesitate for a moment though: I would continue to play gut.
Compare the steel C string on the cello to the gut C string that I am holding!

Nothing beats the warmth and richness of gut strings. Colleagues have asked if I didn't mind the more frequent tuning that you inevitably have to do with gut, or their slower response. I don't mind at all. Tuning is easy, just a little more frequent. And the slower response: I like it. I grew up on gut strings, so I know how to handle them. It gives the playing more depth, it seems more "true", more "honest".
Now that I once again play steel, and wire core tungsten even, I have to keep reminding myself to feel deeper in the string than I instinctively would. What I mean by that is that the response of steel is so fast and easy that the performance can easily lack depth. Because one does not really have to work at one's sound, it is easy to leave it at that and just play. It is important for me to keep in mind my "ideal" sound and work at that.
Is it too easy to "blame" the string? I think as a player it is important to remember what you want to hear. To not just let the instrument play you. I am getting into a discussion here that could go much further than that. The bottom line is that I play my Mirecourt again because the Carbon Fibre lacks that kind of depth. The Mirecourt has even more of what I am searching for when it has gut strings, but I can get it with the current set up as well, as long as I keep working at creating a certain sound.

So what am I looking for? I had not played my Mirecourt for nearly two years because the carbon fibre cello was so very easy to play. So I do want an easy playing instrument. The new bridge on the Mirecourt gave me more ease, but I want the depth of gut, even though it is "harder" to play. I am not playing gut because it isn't practical in this climate, but I would if I were located elsewhere. If this isn't complicated...

I am putting fine tuners back on the cello.

The Jay-Haide baroque cello exceeds my expectation. And it keeps getting better yet. The sound is very warm and rich. I get raving comments on it. It does have gut strings (Aquila), but somehow I don’t have the same issues with it that I had with the Oliv gut strings on my Mirecourt. Might it be because I don’t have the same demands from the instrument? With the Mirecourt I play a lot of different music. I play with my string quartet, I regularly play with the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra (I guess it must be “flu season” because I have been happily playing a lot with them). I am in the middle of a recording with my string quartet (all jazz music!). The sound of the Mirecourt has to project a certain way, and it has to be clean.

A Performance with the Strathcona String Quartet at Edmonton's City Hall.

My baroque cello has a different character and purpose altogether. It doesn’t project the same way, nor should it. It squeaks a little sometimes, but it doesn’t seem to matter the same way it does on the Mirecourt. I also have not found that these strings have lost their shine. Perhaps the string quality is different, perhaps the instrument responds differently, I don’t know what it is, but it works.
In ensemble playing the Jay-Haide is very strong. As basso continuo instrument it has power, depth and flexibility. I like it a lot!
Practising suites 2 and 5 on it have been such a treat. I never want to put it down. What a shame I can't use it while I am teaching (because it is tuned down to 415 instead of 440)!

The carbon fibre cello has been "demoted" to teaching instrument again. This really is why I bought it in the first place. Except for the odd rehearsal this winter when I chose to take the instrument in -35 degrees Celsius weather, rather than risking my Mirecourt, the cello has not been played “professionally”.
This of course will change next month, when I will take it to England for a concert. That will be fun though. The carbon fibre cellos, once again, are great. They are so easy to play and so reliable. The don't care about barometric pressure changes, humidity, temperature. They project like no other instrument, and really: they sound any way you would like them to sound. For me though, I miss the character of wood. Perhaps the "crankiness" of wood. It is very personal though. I did play it for two years exclusively and loved every minute of it. It is a worry-free cello, so I will be glad to take it on the plane next month.

The piccolo will probably be ready for me at the beginning of April. I can hardly wait!

Getting to know my new Basil de Visser baroque bow has been very exciting as well. It is so different (of course!) from my Roy Quade bow.
It is fascinating to compare the sound of my two bows on the different cellos. My absolutely fantastic Roy Quade bow is a perfect match for the Mirecourt as well as the Carbon Fibre. The baroque bow is very nice on the Mirecourt as well. It definitely has much less depth on that instrument, the overtones seem thinner, but for certain music it actually is quite nice. If I play Bach on the Mirecourt with the baroque bow, it has a very different quality than with my modern bow. The phrasing is instantly different. Summarizing: the Quade bow is warmer, richer, sustains easily and responds quick. The de Visser bow demands quicker bow strokes and won't sustain the same way.
On the baroque cello both bows are different again. Here the Basil de Visser bow responds with ease, speed and produces a complexity of sound that my Quade does not. It is almost as if the Quade bow is too powerful for it.
On the carbon fibre cello, the baroque bow sounds absolutely terrible. Interesting, isn't it?
I will discuss this topic more in depth in later posts.

Here I am, working on the Bach suites, playing different instruments, different bows, different strings.
I am researching, discovering, practising.

One of the many things I wanted to find out during this journey is how the equipment a performer uses affects the interpretation. The next few posts I will discuss that in depth, but I can tell you this much: the difference is bigger than I ever imagined possible!

I have changed which instruments I will use for which suite. This is what I probably will present at the final concerts:

Suite 1: Mirecourt Cello
Suite 2: Jay-Haide baroque Cello
Suite 3: Luis and Clark Carbon Fibre Cello
Suite 4: Mirecourt Cello
Suite 5: Jay-Haide Baroque Cello
Suite 6: Jay-Haide Violoncello Piccolo

I may or may not play all 6 suites in one concert. I have gotten conflicting responses to that. Some find it would be too long. They think I should spread it over two days. Others think it would be great to do it all in one shot, so that they can compare all instruments immediately.
I don’t know yet…Any thoughts?

The Baroque Bow

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 01:34:00 +0000

I found a baroque bow!!

My two bows: Basil de Visser (top) and Roy Quade

In the past few months I have received several shipments of baroque bows from different makers. The shipping company really is beginning to know me!

But: WOW! They really are all very different.

There are no original cello bows left from the baroque era. That means that the few bow makers who specialize in bows from that era, have to loosely modify a copy of a violin bow, in combination with getting their ideas and inspiration from old drawings and paintings. The result is that I have not seen a single bow that looks even remotely like another one.

Tips left to right: Basil de Visser, Stephen Marvin, Pieter Affourtit (2 bows).

Starting this project, I had no idea how much variety there was in baroque bows!

Of course I know how different one bow is from the next bow, with any bow, including our contemporary bows. I also know how much one bow can change the sound of an instrument so very much. No one will ever tell a player after a concert how much they enjoyed the bow, but will often compliment on the sound of the instrument. That the bow is for a very large part responsible for that does not cross many people’s minds. I experienced that strongly when I purchased my Roy Quade bow a few years ago. I suddenly got so many compliments on the sound of my cello!

Frogs left to right: Roy Quade, Basil de Visser, Stephen Marvin, Pieter Affourtit (2 bows). See how differently the baroque bow hair is attached in the frog?

When students, who just spent what is for them a significant sum of money on a cello, want to save money on a bow I usually strongly urge them to reconsider that thought and buy a better bow. It really does make a great difference.

Frogs Left to right: Roy Quade, Basil de Visser, Stephen Marvin, Pieter Affourtit (2 bows).

I can safely say that I did not expect an “easy ride” looking for a suitable baroque bow. But what I did not anticipate is that I ended up not only looking for a baroque bow that just “felt right” and brought just the right sound out of the cello, but that I had to decide what kind of “model” I would like to play. Would I want an early baroque bow or a late baroque bow? A low frog or a high frog? A short bow, a long bow? A clip in frog, a cremaliere frog or a screw frog? How “authentic” did I want to go? Did I just want a bow suitable for Bach, or did I want to play
Boccherini and Vivaldi with it as well?

Frogs, top to bottom: Pieter Affourtit (2 bows), Stephen Marvin, Basil de Visser, Roy Quade.

What I did not anticipate either is how competitive these baroque bow makers are. Most of them claim to be the only one who really knows what he is doing! Understanding a little bit of the history, that is a difficult claim to make. I am very happy that all of them are experimenting, and thinking about it though! It keeps the art of historic bow making so alive.

Bows, top to bottom: Pieter Affourtit (2 bows), Stephen Marvin, Basil de Visser, Roy Quade.

In the 17th and 18th centuries the bow changed every decade or so. Before they developed the screw mechanism in the frog, people clipped their frogs in. The frog was at one time very low, quite high another time. The sticks were longer, shorter, the tip very pointy or not so much. Most bows arch up (like a bow and arrow bow would). They are much stiffer than our contemporary bows, which are arching down even when tightened and made to be able to bounce more. The baroque bow has a very different weight distribution as well.

The wood used for a baroque bow is mostly different from our contemporary bows as well. Snakewood (letterwood) was very common and many bows have an ivory frog or button. The snakewood is a much stiffer wood than the pernambuco wood of our contemporary bows.

Tips: Basil de Visser, Roy Quade

I decided I wanted the higher frog, and definitely a screw frog. For some purists this would not be the thing to do, but for me convenience is quite important also. With a clip in frog you can not change the tension of the hair. Which is not so bad in climate with a consistent humidity. But here in Edmonton it poses a serious issue. I need to be able to loosen and tighten the bow according to the humidity. I also wanted a bow that could play a wider variety of baroque music, so perhaps a later baroque model would be more suitable.

Generalizing (which I really should not do, but it would take me 60 pages otherwise!) the baroque bow bounces less easily than the contemporary bow. The higher arch makes it really difficult to connect notes as smoothly as a contemporary bow does. This gives you a very different sound, without even trying, than with a contemporary bow. Generalizing again, you have to use a lot more bow with a baroque bow than we are used to with a contemporary bow. Of course the set up of the instrument plays a large role in that as well.

If you are a student playing baroque music, your teacher may have told you to hold your contemporary bow further away from the frog. It is often referred to by teachers as a “baroque bow hold”. This mimics the weight distribution of the baroque bow a little bit and you can’t quite “dig into the string” as much as when you hold the bow at the frog. You will also find that the bow changes are not as smooth, but a little lighter and more easily separated. Try it out the next time you practice Bach or play basso continuo: it really works!

My last shipment of bows I got from the Netherlands. Two bow makers, both friends, which is refreshing in this competitive business, sent me a few bows. Two were quite light and with a very high arch. They were really beautiful bows, but did not give the low strings on my baroque cello any attack. Like most bows I had tried, they were fuzzy on the lower strings. But one bow, by Basil de Visser, immediately responded. It is quite a heavy bow, has a little less arch (especially when loosened) than some of them and is very long. But it works great on both my baroque cello as well as on the Mirecourt cello. I guess it is the same with every bow after all: you really do know right away when you have the right bow!

Performance at the Sugarbowl in Edmonton (paintings by Erik Visser).

I had a solo performance only two days after this last shipment arrived and I decided to use Basil de Visser's bow for it. That is quite risky. Mind you; it was not a high stress performance, but nevertheless enough of a risk for a performer. It felt so natural, so easy! A good sign, don't you think?!

And the Jay-Haide baroque cello? It keeps getting better. I am very happy with it!

Performance at the Sugarbowl in Edmonton (painting by Erik Visser).

The length of the bow did pose one minor issue: it did not fit in my cello case! Nor did it fit in my bow case. I do happen to have a handy husband, who modified my cello case so that it now does fit!

Bows left to right: Basil de Visser, Stephen Marvin, Pieter Affourtit

The four bows that I had in the end, by Toronto maker Stephen Marvin and Dutch makers Pieter Affourtit and Basil de Visser, were all of a superiour quality. I did try many other bows and there were some very mediocre ones that were surprisingly high priced.

There were moments that I doubted myself. Was I being too critical? Had I forgotten what a baroque bow should feel and sound like? Should I change my expectations?

I am glad I was patient. I am also very grateful that the different bow makers were so willing to let me try their bows!

Basil de Visser and Roy Quade frogs

Some very informative sites are:

Stephen Marvin, Canada: www.historicalbows.com
Pieter Affourtit, the Netherlands: www.affourtit-bowmaker.com/html/about_historical_bows.html
Basil the Visser, the Netherlands: www.baroquebows.com

Roy Quade, Canada: www.quadebows.com

Roy Quade and Basil de Visser tips

MIRECOURT UPDATE

If you are curious about my Mirecourt: I did have my luthier make a new bridge. And... It worked!!!

I have a very difficult time believing that something as seemingly simple could make that kind of a difference. It is true though: it is easy to play now! And I am loving every minute with it!

The Roller Coaster Continues

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 04:18:00 +0000

A difficult decision has made been made...

Andrew Carruthers Cello 44.

Let's start last week.
As you know, I had fallen head over heals in love with the Carruthers cello. A great instrument. The quartet loved it, I certainly did. And still do.

But...
I took my old Mirecourt out of his case again.
And started crying.
What was I going to give up?!?

The Mirecourt has a very special sound. Rich, warm and something else magical.
However: I have not played it seriously for two years. The only reason for that is, that it is difficult to play.
I have always been willing to live with that, but after I played the carbon fibre cello, I realized that things could be much easier.
For a while, I forgot that I missed playing wood; it was just too comfortable.

The carbon fibre cello is a great "work horse".
It is great for teaching, for outdoor gigs, for endless symphony rehearsals: it almost impossible to injure yourself on them. But they lack the warmth of wood. I guess they sort of lack personality.

That is why I started to look for a different cello. Wouldn't it be great if I found an instrument that would have the carbon-fibre-type ease, and the depth and warmth that I was searching for?
I found it in the Carruthers!

But playing it against my Mirecourt changed everything...

Mirecourt.

I played the instruments at the next quartet rehearsal.
I played both of the cellos for my quartet friends, in a variety of pieces. I played Bach, Elgar, Andrix; they preferred the Mirecourt in all of the solo works.
But... as cello in the quartet they preferred the Carruthers! The Carruthers has a much more focused tone, very clean and easy.
The Mirecourt is more sluggish, obviously harder to play, which you hear.

That did not make things easier for me! I did not know a person could cry so much over such a thing!

I took both cellos to my luthier, Ross Hill in Calgary.
He restored my Mirecourt years ago and really loves that instrument. But he knew that I was looking for something else, and he is really honest.
He examined the Carruthers and really liked it a lot. It is obviously an instrument of the highest quality. A great buy, he assured me.
Then I explained to him my feelings about my Mirecourt...

A colleague of mine, who was there at the same time, played both cellos for me. He asked if I had considered a different set-up for my Mirecourt.
Ross agreed.
The bridge of the Mirecourt is a little soft and it has a tendency to "walk". This can make an instrument sluggish, unpredictable and difficult to play. Changing the bridge, possibly the sound post (the soul of the instrument) and tweak things like the tail gut, he figures he could make the instrument easier to play.

The current bridge on my Mirecourt.

I have decided to give that a try. I know that I could never buy this instrument back if I sold it. I need to know that I tried everything before I could give it up. If this does not work out, I will at least know that I have given it all that I can. Perhaps I will then be ready to sell it.

People have asked why it is so difficult, especially since I have not played the Mirecourt much and since I love the Carruthers so much.
I don't have a good answer except that I always knew that the Mirecourt was there anyway. I read a short story the other day, about a woman who had not had contact with her father for four years. Now he passed away. For four years she had not missed the man or even thought about him very much, but now that he passed away, she felt a sharp pain, missing him terribly. While missing a person like that is very different, I somehow felt that that story described to some extend what I was going through with my Mirecourt.

I consulted more colleagues. They all agreed: first give the different set-up a try.
I will.

Mirecourt bridge.

I do have to say that it is with pain in my heart that I will send the Carruthers back. If only I could afford both: they would have such a different place in my performances.
I also can not say that one is better than the other. Perhaps, if I am perfectly honest, the Carruthers is better in many ways. But I have such a history with my Mirecourt. It is such an extension of my personality....

Carruthers bridge. Nice bridge!

One of my students said something, completely intuitively that stuck with me. When she heard me play the Mirecourt, she said:
"Grandpa has experience, but he is sure stuck in his ways".
It does describe it well. The Carruthers has a youthful energy that the Mirecourt does not have. The Mirecourt has "experience", character perhaps, that maybe the Carruthers does not yet has.

Mirecourt.

Carruthers

No, none of this has been in vain. I have needed this to reconnect with my old friend Mirecourt.
I am, however, not willing to permanently injure myself. I will give this an honest chance, and if the Mirecourt will still prove to be a difficult instrument... well: I do know where to find Andrew Carruthers (http://www.andrewcarruthers.com)!

Carruthers.

Cellos

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 04:35:00 +0000

Two cellos are safely at home.

It arrived in one piece!

Customs did give me some minor grief at the border when they searched our entire car. At least they did let me handle the cellos. The Jay-Haide cello is very heavily "antiqued" to make it look 300 years old, so the customs officer didn't quite believe me when I told her it was brand new! They looked inside with a flashlight, to check the actual year it was made, but probably also to check for drugs or so. They also researched the cellos, to make sure that I told them the truth about the price. After all; I could have brought home a $400,000 cello, right?
We have driven 6600 kilometres in 9 days, and stayed only in the San Francisco Bay area!

The first bow strokes...

The Carruthers cello is my new big love!!
It is absolutely amazing. I briefly pulled my bow across the string when I came home, but sat down seriously on Sunday and played it all day.

I was a little nervous:

Would it still be as great as I thought it was when I played it in Santa Rosa?
Is it really better than my Mirecourt?
Is it better than (or at least equal to) my Luis and Clark?
Would it like my Roy Quade bow?

I am happy to say: YES!!!

It is so easy to play. It is powerful, yet warm. It projects so easy. It is a great match for the bow.

I really drove down to San Francisco for the baroque cello.
While I was there anyway, I figured, I should try some "contemporary" cellos.
The purpose of trying all of these cellos (and I played about 45 of them while in the San Francisco Bay area!) was:

to see if my Mirecourt is a good instrument in its price range.
to see if the Luis and Clark instruments are indeed so much better than most instruments up to about $50,000
to justify for myself that perhaps playing the carbon fibre cello was all right, so to stop feeling guilty about not playing the Mirecourt.

To answer those questions:

The carbon fibre cellos are competitive, and they are much cheaper.
My Mirecourt is a very nice instrument.

None of the 45 or so instruments that I played spoke to me. Sure, they were nice, some were very nice, but so is my Mirecourt and I was not playing it.

But the Carruthers... now that is a different instrument alltogether!
I fell in love with it after the first bow stroke.

This morning I took it to my string quartet rehearsal. I was a little nervous again, because they all like the carbon so much. They have found it easier to play with than the Mirecourt.
Their advice? "You'd be crazy not to buy this cello!"

Phew!

The difference with the carbon fibre cello? That instrument sounds like it always has a built in re-verb. That makes it sound like you are always in a big concert hall.
The Carruthers is as big (or perhaps bigger) in tone, but much warmer and without the "echo". And the bass of this cello is un-equalled!
What I have missed on the carbon fibre cello is fine colouring, and subtle soft playing. It is great for playing big and it is easy.
This Carruthers cello will do whatever I ask it to do. And I have only played it for two days!

Andy Carruthers said before I left with his cello: "please don't tell me if you find the carbon fibre is better than mine; make up another excuse, but don't tell me when it is better!". He can breathe easy: his cello is far superiour than any cello I have played!

Playing the Carruthers. To the side are: Jay-Haide, baroque cello of a colleague, Luis and Clark, Mirecourt.

My Mirecourt? I had some good laughs with it yesterday. As I played it against the Carruthers, he was cranky and difficult. But at the end of the day, when I wanted to record the instruments to listen on a distance, it sang like it hadn't in a while. I laughed and remembered that this is so typical for him: he is a moody cello.

Playing the Mirecourt.

Our violist this morning had an interesting comment about the Carruthers. He said: "this instruments really likes you". That made me feel good!
Perhaps the Mirecourt is just too moody for me? It may be different in the hands of someone else. And once again: it is a very nice cello. Of all the instruments I played, the Mirecourt is still nicer than most!

Needless to say I am exhausted and excited. It is such a personal and emotional journey! The Mirecourt has been such a friend for almost 19 years, yet I hadn't played it in two years. I felt guilty about that! As I had mentioned before: I have no personal bond with the Luis and Clark; while I really like what I can do with it, it is very replaceable. My husband always jokes that the carbon makes his life easier, since I am not so "paranoid" about it. He can put it in the car without me worrying. He is even allowed to carry it!
The Carruthers cello is great. I am really happy that I know who made it too. It makes even more personal. And he is such a nice man!

Having such a strong connection again with an instrument is great. A colleague who recently sold a cello and bought another one said that letting go of the old instrument was like getting out of a bad relationship, where you didn't realize that it was bad until you were out of it. I think I know what he meant!

The Luis and Clark, the Carruthers, the Mirecourt, the Jay-Haide

I have not yet spent much time with the baroque cello, but the hour or so that I played it I found it beautiful! Rich and warm.
I have commissioned Jay-Haide to build me a piccolo cello as well. It will take about 3 months. I will be curious how it turns out!

Now: back to the practice room: I will be playing Bach!

New cellos

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 05:09:00 +0000

I am in San Fransisco and... I bought 2 cellos!

I first met with builder Andrew Carruthers in Santa Rosa. It was the first cello I played and... I fell in love! But I did not trust it. How could I: it was the first cello I tried after all!
I immediately connected with the instrument though. He had another cello, which I did not like at all.
I left him after playing the cello for quite a while. I had many more to try!

Next on my list was Ifshin in Berkely, for the baroque cellos. They had four instruments set up for me. Two had the Stradivari pattern and two a Montagnana pattern. They were all very different. I did not like the Strad instruments as much.

Generalizing, the Strads sound higher and lighter. The Montagnana's sound deeper in the bass and have lower overtones. For those of you who know me, it is pretty obvious which I liked better!

The two Montagnana's were very different, but one was significantly better. I decided to buy it. For that price I could not dream of owning an instrument this good!
I talked to the co-maker, Mr. Haide.

He knew I was going to bring the instrument into Canada and that it would probably suffer in the dry climate. (his sister lived in Edmonton, but he had never been there: "o no!, no!, no!; I just always bought her a ticket to come here. Too cold there, too cold").
Leave the cello with me, he advised. He would take the top off, dry the instrument and glue it back together, so that it will not go through such a rough transition.

He is also willing to build me a piccolo, as long as I tell him the specs.
Help!!
As far as I know I want a 3/4 size baroque cello, wider neck, thicker/wider ribs (for more bass). I understand that there is some debate how large or small the body of a 3/4 is! I guess I need to figure that out first, but we are at least a step closer.

While I was there, I tried a dozen or so "regular" cellos in my price range. None that I liked at all.

A highlight of the trip was a visit with Bill Lazar from Lazar's Early Music in Sunnyvale. What a nice man! He has everything a person could want for early (medeval, renaissance and baroque) music. From the weirdest looking old wind instruments to an amazing collection of Viola da Gamba's (viols).
How unfortunate that he did not have a baroque cello that suited my needs. I would have really wished him my business!
Unfortunately I forgot to take pictures as well while were there.

Another day of cello hunting followed. I must have played at least 40 cellos at different shops. I tried 21 in one shop only! Yes, sure they were nice, but... not like the Carruthers...! Could this be it?!?

I have decided to bring the Carruthers home... I am so excited and afraid at the same time. Will this be my new voice, my new identity?

Getting the instruments across the border may pose a slight challenge, but we will cross that bridge when we get there!

Well... decisions, decisions...! If anyone wants to buy a nice 1870 mirecourt cello...?!

California here I come!

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 04:01:00 +0000

It has been a few weeks, and the project has taken me places I did not expect. Where to start!?

I still have two bows from the Quebec bow maker, and am expecting another one from a Toronto maker any time now. I have gotten re-acquainted with baroque playing and am loving it.

I am starting to realize that I have really missed type of the baroque performance practice that I grew up with. In Alberta I miss hearing baroque music performed the in a manner I can identify with.
We do get rare visits from leading baroque performers such as the Tafelmusik orchestra (from Toronto) or a soloist like Anner Bijlsma. But those performances are far and few between.

I have started to practice the 6th suite! No I do not have a piccolo yet, (more on that later) but have felt the urge to start practicing the 6th.
While somewhat awkward without a 5th string, it certainly is playable on a regular cello. Great fun even! I had a chuckle when, after I read through it the first time, at the end if the gigue, in the Henle edition, it said: "end of the 6 suites"!
Rostropovich called this suite "a symphony for solo cello" and characterised its D major tonality as evoking joy and triumph.

I practice it on the baroque cello, so that I will at least keep it in the baroque tuning ( a=4:15HZ, rather than 4:40HZ).
This suite has a much more free form than the other suites.

It is also the only one of the suites that is partly notated in the tenor clef, and even the treble clef! None of these clefs are used, or even necessary, for the other five suites since they never go above the note g4 (g above middle c; the 4th finger in the 4th position for the cellists among us). That will certainly help in performing it on 5 strings. For those on the inside: a little trick some beginners at the use of the tenor clef use; the notes in the tenor clef are played "a string above" the notes in the bass clef. While that involves some more advanced "geography" on a regular cello; it becomes very logical on a 5 string.
For me: it will probably confuse me for a while. I am excited to find out though.

Which brings me to the highlight of the week: I am going to California shortly, to try out several baroque cellos! There are four baroque cellos set up for me in one location. I am so very excited!! There even is a chance that I am going to commission them to build a piccolo for me! It depends on the quality of the baroque cellos that I find. I am eager to find out.

And while I am there, I am going to...
Dare I say it out loud?!?...
Look for a possible replacement for my Mirecourt...

PHEW!!! That was difficult to write down!!!

And I haven't even told my parents yet! My father helped me find this cello... O! I won't even go there!

My Mirecourt has been my faithful companion, my musical identity, for almost 19 years.
I have always loved its sound. Loved its warmth, its depth.
I have always struggled with its moods. I struggled with its size (it seems very large!). I also have found it difficult to play. And I am not getting younger and instrument related injuries are accumulative. Do I sound as if I am trying to justify it? Perhaps!
But I have always accepted all of its flaws, because I was so in love with the sound.

Over the past two years, my faithful Mirecourt and I have grown apart. (My husband jokingly wonders if he is next, since I started dating both my husband and my Mirecourt in the same week in 1989!).
I blame the perfect Luis and Clark carbon fibre cello. While that instrument certainly has its flaws; it will mostly do whatever I ask it to do, without much complaining. The weird thing is: I have no personal bond with the instrument. I feel so very closely connected to my old Mirecourt, I feel totally blank with my Luis and Clark, but... I am only playing the carbon fibre...

Lat week I had a performance, which was also recorded by the learning channel (TV), for a documentary on the maker of my contemporary bow, Roy Quade. I had decided that I should probably play the Mirecourt for this, since the instrument would not distract from the craft and artistry of a conscientious maker such as Roy.
I was sincerely excited about it: I had not performed a solo concert on it in nearly two years! I played it all of the week, also during my string quartet rehearsals. I got mixed reactions there. Our first violinist was disappointed that I used my Mirecourt: it was so much more difficult to play with, so much fuzzier!

I asked her to listen to my solo piece on both instruments. She found it no contest: the carbon fibre was far superiour in clarity, sound quality, even character in her opinion. I asked several people, all with the same answer.
In the end I decided against playing the Mirecourt!
I justified it by telling myself that I would be playing in a very dead space (the heavily carpeted ballroom of a hotel), with about 200 guests, finishing their dinner, so I would need to project with ease, and compensate for the dead space. The only answer: Carbon Fibre...
I performed, it was great fun, I was glad to have the carbon fibre.

But this sent me on a completely different train of thought...
Perhaps I should look for a different wooden cello?!?!
Perhaps I have now been somewhat spoiled with the ease of carbon fibre that I finally realize that perhaps I should sell my Mirecourt and buy a different instrument?
Perhaps this isn't my instrument, my voice anymore?

And thus: I have approached several luthiers in California. I was going to go there anyway, right?!
I will visit them while I am there. There is much more choice there than we can possibly dream of here.
It will make for some very long hours in the car! My husband, who will go with me, just planned the trip, based on the addresses of luthiers that I gave him, and figured we would drive at least 6000 kilometres. At an average of 100 kilometres an hour that is 60 hours. And that is not counting any stops.
It better be worth it!!

I am hoping to fall "head over heels in love" with an instrument, so that I will feel no regret letting my old friend Mirecourt go.

I have strayed so far from my original blog idea of talking about baroque interpretation, performance etc. I will certainly come back to that; My world is currently in such upheaval.

Trying to justify and getting used to the idea of replacing my cello.
Possibly buying a baroque cello.
Perhaps commissioning the building of a piccolo.
Choosing a baroque bow.

It is quite the emotional roller coaster.

I should say that in my search for instruments and bows I have had the most interesting conversations with musicians and luthiers all over the world. It is great fun!
Talking to a leading baroque specialist, a cellist, just this week, I discovered a lot of common ground.
It will be fun to share my experience and thoughts on interpretation and performance practice with you in the coming months. I will be so excited to share the enormous differences the instrument and the bow makes in the interpretation! This project makes me such a different player and teacher already.
It is important for any artist to keep challenging themselves!

Bows!

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 04:15:00 +0000

A shipment of 3 bows from a bow maker in Quebec arrived this week. It is so very exciting!

Finding the right bow is a very difficult journey. It is often underestimated, but a good bow is almost more important than a good cello.

(The bows were shipped in a large tube).

Given the choice between a mediocre bow and a great cello or a great bow and a mediocre cello, most serious performers would choose the better bow over the instrument. This is, after all, what you make all of your sound with!

No one will ever say :"wow, your bow sounds so great!" I do remember when I bought my "modern" bow a few years ago, I suddenly got many more compliments about my cello than I ever had before.

All performers understand the value of a good bow. The journey to find one is difficult and personal. Not only does the bow have to feel good and do what you want it to do; it also needs to be the right bow for the instrument that you play. When I bought my modern bow it was a great match with my Mirecourt cello. When I bought the Luis and Clark, I had to find the right cello to fit with that bow!

I remember having to play my husband's cello for a few months when my Mirecourt was being restored. The bow that I had at the time sounded great on my cello, but really terrible on his!

Many students have to buy different bows when they buy a different cello. When the instrument doesn't quite sound the way they think it should, it is often difficult for them to understand that sometimes their bow doesn't "match" the cello!

Now I am repeating the journey that I took a few years ago with my modern bow, but with a baroque bow this time. Since it has been so many years since I have seriously played with a baroque bow, I had forgotten which qualities to look for in a baroque bow. It took me a few hours of playing to remember and be so very excited about it again!

This time I shouldn't be looking for a bow that easily sustains sound, or makes quick transitions from legato to spiccato. It has to be a different type of playing that it compliments. It is hard to describe. Since the weight of the baroque bow is so differently distributed, it makes the types of bow strokes very different from the contemporary bow. The down bow is definitely a much stronger stroke and the sound tapers to the tip. It is so easy to play "inegal" or uneven with it for example. It takes no effort!

While I am trying to simplify it here in an attempt to explain it; it goes much

deeper than that of course!

It is so exciting to hear the baroque bows bring such different overtones out of the instruments!

I am having fun with it right now. All these bows are very different. I will keep you updated.

Gut Strings

I put all Oliv's on my Mirecourt. I had forgotten how terrible these strings sound when you first put them on!

But have they ever changed already! The cello sounds better than it has in years and I enjoy practicing it!

I really enjoy the different approach. On gut strings you have to work a little harder, because the strings have such a different tension. They vibrate so much wider! This brings out all sorts of different sounds. The vibrato requires a different approach as well. Colouring with the vibrato on gut strings is so much more effective!

(In this picture you see the difference in thickness between an Evah Pirazzi C-string and an Oliv.)

Totally off topic: I suddenly have to perform a solo piece by George Andrix next week at an arts council conference. A camera crew from the learning channel will be there to film the performance as well, because they are making a documentary about the bow maker of my contemporary bow; Roy Quade. I really should play the Mirecourt, since playing it on the carbon fibre would be making too much of a statement. But since I just put these gut strings on, the instrument squeaks and squacks a lot!

I have my work cut out for me in the next week: I have many practice hours to look forward to, not only to practice the piece (which is great!), but also to try to speed up the "play in time" of the strings!

Bows, Piccolo, Baroque Cello

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:40:00 +0000

Piccolo

Let me start with an update on the piccolo.

This project is becoming more and more interesting! I am communicating with people from all over the world, trying to find what I need! I have emailed with builders and performers and have received so much new information! I don't know where to begin.

I wrote to several builders and performers in Europe. At least now I know what the instrument should look like. Or at least: what I want it to look like!

More or less.

Apparently Bijlsma plays a piccolo as small as a 1/2 size cello. Wispelweij's is a little larger: 3/4 size.

But there is also a full size 5-string cello in the instrument museum in Vienna, built by Posch in the 18th century.

It is therefore still uncertain for which instrument the 6th suite was written.

Some research suggests that it was likely written for the Viola pomposa/da spalla, which I briefly talked about in the "first steps".

I know that last instrument will not be what I am going for. I am now searching for a nice small (half or 3/4 size) piccolo.

I have several emails out to more specialists, now that I am narrowing down my search. I will get there eventually!

Bows

Now... All of this is great fun. But... I need a bow! I am borrowing my colleague's bow, but it is terrible!

A few years ago I went through a very emotional and exciting experience of buying a new (contemporary) bow. I love that bow. It was built by Roy Quade in Calgary. I contacted him, hoping against hope that he would make baroque bows, which, of course, he doesn't. He did give me some names of good baroque bow makers though.

So now begins the unexpected (I should have seen this coming though) emotional search for a nice baroque bow. I talked to two makers in Eastern Canada. Very nice people. I will expect a shipment of bows to try out soon.

If you want some interesting reading on the complications of building a baroque cello bow, take a look at this website: http://www.historicalbows.com/ . Read some of the articles too. There is so much we don't know yet!

Baroque Cello

I am running into another unexpected issue, which I am afraid to say out loud (let alone write it in a blog for the whole world to see!)...

I don't really like the baroque cello I am borrowing...
When I first got it a few weeks ago it seemed so nice, so sweet. But now that we are becoming more intimately acquainted we don't seem to get along so well...

I am obviously beginning to remember what I want a baroque cello to sound like. This isn't it!

So... (my wallet does not want to talk about it any further!)...

Sigh...

Some more interesting reading (follow the links also)

http://www.cello.org/heaven/baroque/baroque.htm

Strings and Piccolo

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 03:59:00 +0000

Strings

I ordered new strings! They'll take a while to get here (from the States). I ordered all Pirastro Olive (silver wound gut string) for my wooden cello. It has been years since I have used gut on it! That should be fun! I know that my cello likes it.

For the carbon fibre I ordered Jargar Forte a and d and Obligato G and C.

Those Obligatos sound great on the Luis and Clark, but terrible on my Mirecourt! It is always interesting to see that it makes such a huge difference from one instrument to the next! What sounds great on one cello, sounds really terrible on another. It is trial and error. Too bad that my pocketbook doesn't allow me to keep experimenting unlimited!

I also took my Mirecourt to my luthier, still with the Eva Pirazzi on. The instrument has been sounding very tight lately, especially on the top. He moved the sound post and I have to say that it is a huge improvement! I look forward to the gut strings on it.

While looking for the right strings to order, I came upon some interesting string making sites. Check this out: http://www.aquilacorde.com/production_index.htm

Piccolo Update

The saga of the piccolo continues. While I did get a response from a builder in the States that he is willing to build a viola da Spalla/ pomposa; this is not the instrument for me. Only violinists and violists can play it. It has to be played using violinists' fingerings and will have to be held against the shoulder. Not very practical or useful for us, cellists. Siegiswald Kuyken, a phenomenal baroque violinist, has taken this instrument on.

I touched base with a friend form university and asked her if she could recommend some luthiers in the Netherlands who might sell or even build a piccolo (and what does it look like?!).

This is the response I got from one builder:

"Hello Josephine,

I make two models of violoncello piccolo, a small Castanieri en a larger Stradivari model.

Currently I only have the larger model available, but it has 4 strings. And of course you do need a C string!

It costs 8000 Euro and I could change it into a 5-string instrument.

(BTW: It sounds very beautiful!)".

While this is all nice: I don't have 8000 Euros laying around (too bad!) and I would have a slight preference for the smaller size. The larger size has a string length of 68 cm (instead of 72 cm for a regular cello). The smaller size has a 63 cm string length.

At least I am one step closer to understand the actual size. Or am I?!?... My friend in the Netherlands wrote me the following:

A short while a go I played a gorgeous little piccolo cello at a colleague's house. She had the instrument on loan for a little while, which was exceptional, since the particular luthier does not habitually loan out instruments. Only Anner Bijllsma has been able to borrow it from time to time. It was a very small instrument; almost as small as a half size, looking absolutely awful but it sounded heavenly!"

A half size eh...

So the search continues.

I may need to take the suggestion to purchase a small regular cello and have it rebuilt to a piccolo. I don't know yet.

First Steps

noreply@blogger.com (Josephine van Lier) — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 06:00:00 +0000

You can comment on this blog at the bottom of the page.

INTRODUCTION:

Let me start with a description of what this blog will be all about. I will elaborate after that.

The project I will be working on for the next 10 to 14 months will be the preparation and performance of all six cello suites by Bach on four different cellos:

a baroque cello
a “regular” wooden cello
a carbon fibre cello
a violoncello piccolo (a 5 string baroque cello, slightly smaller than a regular baroque cello).

As far as I know this project is unique, even worldwide. Tracking down a violoncello piccolo will be a challenge. That journey I will share with you in the coming days, weeks and months. The instrument is seldom played in North America. Bach wrote his 6th suite for the violoncello piccolo, which is why I find it necessary to include it in the performance. Later I will explain more about the instrument.

Preparation of the performance requires an unusual amount of time. I will need to learn to play six suites on four instruments.
I will need a lot of time to get to know all of the instruments intimately, so that during the performances, I will be able to switch back and forth between each cello without compromising sound quality and intonation!

Every instrument will be very different in its approach and set up:

The baroque cello, built between 1600 until about 1780, has a neck that is set in differently from the “regular cellos”, the rounding of the bridge is different, and it uses gut strings, which have a tendency to dry out, squeak and be generally temperamentful. In addition, the tuning is lower than the current practice. In the dry Alberta climate I will have to replace the strings at least once a month.
The violoncello piccolo is a much smaller instrument and has a fifth (e1) string. The strings are quite different and so is the playing technique. It also uses un-wound gut strings. Including this instrument poses some challenges, but more about that later.
The “regular” wooden cello that I will use is my own French cello built in 1870 and is quite a large instrument. The strings I will be using on that cello for this particular performance are silver-wound gut strings, which are stronger than the un-wound gut, but still very vulnerable to humidity- and barometric pressure changes.

All three above mentioned cellos will have to be kept in a perfectly humidified (50% minimum!) environment to protect them from cracking or warping.

The carbon fibre instrument is made by Luis and Clark in Boston and is a very new instrument. Over the past 500 years violin builders have experimented, trying to improve the cellos sound and manageability, without much success, until now with Luis and Clark’s carbon fibre cellos. I play cello #117, built in 2006, which on a global scale means that they are still relatively unknown. The strings on this cello are 2 steel and 2 “perlon-core” strings. This instrument is totally unaffected by outside influences such as barometric pressure changes, humidity or cold. (Phew!)

There will be four different cellos from different time periods and eras, with very different sound and playability, but the music is from one composer, one era.
At the performances, I will show the audience (and myself!) how much the instrument that you play may affect the interpretation of the music.

In my musical career I have always had a strong affinity with baroque music and with the solo suites by Bach in particular. Over the years I have performed all of the suites, except the 6th one (which, to do it justice, should only be played on a 5-string Violoncello Piccolo), on various concerts.

I have never played a violoncello piccolo, which will be a fantastic challenge for me.
As a musician is essential to stay current on music performance practice. That also means staying current on development in “period” performance practice (performance in the style of the period that the music was written). While I have kept current as much as I can, this project will inspire me to become more prominently involved.

The challenge to perform all the suites on four completely different cellos is very exciting! I will learn so much in attempting to handle each instrument so differently.

I will need to do a lot of research in the use of the different instruments, their strings, bows, style and approach.

And this is where I will start my journey with you. I am looking forward to hearing your feedback and sharing my experience. It will be educational for all of us!

So I have started.

I ordered, and received, several copies of the Bach suites. I have always worked with the Barenreiter edition. In 1998 I bought Anner Bijlsma’s book “Bach the fencing master” which gave me a different inside in the interpretation and the bowing of the suites. In the past few years new editions of the suites have been released, such as a scholarly Barenreiter edition which includes several different old editions and comparing their differences. The other one is a Henle edition, which appears to my delight to be quite close to Bijlsma’s bowing ideas. I am sure that I will share many insights and out loud thoughts with you about that in the coming months: I am just starting!

The next step, of course, was the instruments. I own a beautiful Mirecourt cello. It is not easy to play, but has a warm sound. I also own a Luis and Clark carbon fibre.

The Baroque Cello

A colleague was so generous to lend me his baroque cello! I am so happy about that. It is one less worry. I do not know how long I can use it for, but I am really happy to start on it and may be able to complete the project on it. It sounds very deep and mellow. I will tune the a to 415, the tuning common in Bach’s time, rather than the 440 we are accustomed to today.

My first hours on the baroque cello were, to put it mildly, a disaster! I had forgotten how the different tuning can upset your ears! I must have played the prelude of the first suite a thousand times before, and the suite has a certain ring to it. But on the baroque cello I felt so lost! A g did not sound like a g! The ring is different; the overtones are so completely different!

Oddly enough I did not find the string crossings to be a problem, even though the strings are much further apart on this cello, the bridge is much lower, and they are gut. Nor did I seem to have difficulty with the action on the left hand, again in spite of the greater distance between the strings. The measurement of this particular baroque cello is very large, which will cause me some intonation grief in the coming months, I am sure!

Day 2 on this cello was much easier, and I have to say that now, after a little over a week with the instrument, my ears are getting used to making the switch to the lower tuning and it is getting easier!

On Friday played with some colleagues. Violin with basso continuo (harpsichord and cello). Such great fun! That too, started with quite the intonation issues, partly due to the fact that the harpsichord was out of tune, but it gradually got better as the violinist and I got used to the different type of intonation.

I have decided to play the suites all in one concert (probably a Sunday afternoon) as follows:

Suite 1: Baroque cello
Suite 2: “Classical” wooden cello

Intermission

Suite 3: Baroque cello
Suite 4: Carbon fibre cello

Intermission

Suite 5: “Classical” wooden cello, with a scordatura (the a-string tuned down to g)
Suite 6: Violoncello Piccolo

Pieter Wispelweij once said in an interview: "Instruments are not all the same, so one's technique varies from instrument to instrument. But certain things become very clear, like the fact that intense vibratos, pressing deeply into the strings, and certain attacks are not feasible on baroque instruments."
As I said; it will be an interesting journey to see how my own interpretation will vary on all the different instruments.

The Violoncello Piccolo

When I decided that I needed to include the piccolo cello in the performances, it was a decision based on my musical upbringing. My teacher in university was an avid baroque musician, being an amazing baroque cellist as well as a gambist. During my years with him, it became understood that one does not play the 6th suite unless one plays it on a violoncello piccolo. In the Netherlands there was (and still is) a very strong period instrument and interpretation tradition, where the piccolo regularly appears on the stages.
So my decision was made without much thought. But… WHERE TO GET ONE? All right, that is what local luthiers are for, right? Well… they are all very enthusiastic, but have no clue where to get one, or even what it would look like!
Ok, so onto the internet to baroque specialty string stores, right? Hmm… no piccolos there either, except for the odd very cheap Chinese one. This may be a terrific instrument, but I can’t risk it.

More internet research suddenly makes the whole instrument dubious!
There is a lot of controversy about it. It has been referred to as a Viola Pomposa (pompous viola), viola da spalla (spalla=shoulder) and violoncello piccolo.
At this point in my research I certainly do not claim to be an expert yet, but let me try to share the controversy with you. I will start with some photos and drawings, which will probably leave you (as did it leave me!) with a lot more questions:

Yes, this is what we all imagine a piccolo looks like, isn’t it?

Hmmm… odd way to hold a cello…

Wait a minute…: a VIOLA??!!!

Gee-whiz, that must be challenging!

Ok, so that confused us, didn’t it?

The violoncello piccolo appears to have been an invention of Bach, who wanted to have a cello that could play higher. As it was not custom in Bach’s time to use the thumb on the string, it was uncommon to play above the g1 on the a string. The first five suites never venture above that g1. Some scholars have noted that this may be proof that the instrument that we call cello today, may have been held on a shoulder (likely the right, since the instrument was too large to fit on the left shoulder like the violins), much like the other members of the violin family.

When you consider that it was also not customary to play one single instrument, like we do today, but more, this makes sense. It is much easier to move to another instrument if it is held in a similar matter.

There are, however also drawings and paintings that show the instrument being supported on a stool or table, standing on the ground, or even held between the knees.

And then there is the name. There is some evidence that Bach called the violoncello piccolo a viola pomposa. It also may have been called a viola da spalla (shoulder viola).

Viola da Spalla by maker Dmitry Badiarov:

Most sources are unclear, since little appears to have been written down about it.

So here I am: looking for a “regular” violoncello piccolo”. An instrument that I have always simply referred to as a “smaller cello with 5 strings”.
So what do cellists such as Bijlsma and Wispelweij play? Why are there no pictures of them on the web? Yes, of course I have seen many piccolos in the past, but never paid close enough attention to their actual size!

Is it as small as a ¾ cello, as some builders tell me? Or more like a 7/8th size, as others are certain of? Or is Mister Badiarov correct in suggesting it should be more like an “oversized viola” and played on the shoulder?

For now, I am looking for what I always believed a piccolo to be, but who knows where that will lead…