Actually I should have directed that post to JeffPO6.

In any case, I agree 100% that sul G samples would be way over the top. When you want that kind of subtlety, it's time to call in a few real string players to layer on top of the VSL!

Well,

Working on the "Adagio for Strings" example, I'd really like to hear these 2 "sul G" bars, with and without "sul G".


[8-)]

Sul G isn't that over the top at all.
Garritan's Orchestral Strings has them. In that library they're just called Sul Altra Corda. With another string.
Sul G is probably the most common one. Jeff didn't ask for Sul D, A or E.

Anthony Lombardi

@tonylombardi said:

Sul G isn't that over the top at all.
Anthony Lombardi

I do agree, it is not that much over the top, as long as you do not want include every note transition in every possible string combination. But high notes on the lowest string, especially on Violine G string, would be a request for me too.

Iwan

Okay, it's under the top. I can now officially Not Even Use the VSL until I have Sul Gs. What could those Austrians have been thinking?!

Seriously, to me this is a subtle technique compared to many others. Open strings, sardines, harmonics, sul tasto, sul ponticello, and so on come way before that in my list.

And why just sul G and not the other strings? Why just violins?

@Nick Batzdorf said:

Seriously, to me this is a subtle technique compared to many others. Open strings, sardines, harmonics, sul tasto, sul ponticello, and so on come way before that in my list.

[:D] Do you want them with olive oil or grilled [*-)]:

Sorry, no, now seriously; The "sul G playing" on violins is very often used in the standard literature of famous composers and is a very typical effect. One of the famous examples is Maurice Ravel's orchestration of "Pictures" of an Exhibition 6. movement called "Samuel Goldenberg und Schmuyle" If you listen to it, you will understand. The effect is not only the sound of the G string, but of course if you play over an octave range on one string the result is lots of portamentis.

Iwan

@Iwan Roth said:

The "sul G playing" on violins is very often used in the standard literature of famous composers and is a very typical effect.

Then I must be really famous, because I tell the string players what strings to play almost 40% of the time. I also occasionally write in which valves to use for the brass, and fingerings for the woodwinds maybe 5% of the time. The brass with their unique structure of partials combined with their few valves, typically allows for as many as 5 permutations for each note getting progressively more dense in permutations on the upper ranges. And some fingerings against other fingerings can be so dramatic that just about anyone, even with untrained ears, can hear the difference. Of course I only write those in in slower passages where 1) it'll be heard enough to warrant it 2) it'll be reasonable enough for the player to use it.

As someone who is a multi-instrumentalist, I find it important "get involved" in the performance of my music by writing beyond simply just the notes, articulations, expressions, and dynamics. I have requested certain mouthpieces on occasion as well.

I grew up playing Violin, Trumpet, Flute, Piano, Drums, Clarinet and Saxophone, as well as synth (but of course).

I think, although definately unreasonable, that Violins (but maybe even more importantly teh solo violin) sampled such that every note within an octave or two between each and every string and back, would be great. It would give us MIDI guys the ability to have multiple choices for each note destination as well so that we could have the same line performed 4, 5 6+ times each, subtly different. But for those who know WHY to write "sul" any string, they're the ones who are going to understand how to use such an instrument to it's best. It is simultaneously something that affects performance and tone. As a composer I find the choice of string as important as the choice of harmonic fingering, which of course in real classical music MUST be specified.

Evan Evans

It looks like Evanevans is in the notational tradition of Mahler, who wanted to specify everything (and would have made a great - but very demanding - orchestral sampler composer) as opposed to J.S. Bach, who sometimes didn't even bother to specify INSTRUMENTS.

@William said:

It looks like Evanevans is in the notational tradition of Mahler, who wanted to specify everything (and would have made a great - but very demanding - orchestral sampler composer) as opposed to J.S. Bach, who sometimes didn't even bother to specify INSTRUMENTS.

LOL. Oh. That is great. Well said William. You've got me rolling on the ground laughing. What a funny comparison at two opposite ends of the spectrum of two of the most accomplished composers of music int eh history of mankind. It just shows that nothing really matters. Maybe people like Mahler and I need more spice to polish our meager piddlings, and people like Bach needed only to notate the pitches and rhythm because his ideas were so astounding. You know, "Blah" expressed very elegantly by Mahler can sound quite good!

Evan Evans

@Another User said:

As a composer I find the choice of string as important as the choice of harmonic fingering, which of course in real classical music MUST be specified.

Which kind of “classical” music do you mean? Composers from the so called classical period did NOT write any fingerings for string players in there scores. It did start in the late romantic.20 century composers do sometime. Bartok did in his String Quartets but in Stavinsky’s “Rite of Spring” and also “Firebird” scores there is not one single indication about fingering for the strings.
Here some elementary info:
The highest note apparently available on a violin is all four fingers pressed down on the E-string (sounding a B). However this is only the highest note in 1st-position. A higher note can be achieved by sliding the hand up the neck of the violin and pressing the fingers down at this new position. In 1st position, the first finger on the E string gives an F or F#. Pressing the first finger on a G is called going in to 2nd-position. 3rd position is achieved when the first finger presses down on an A, and so on. The upper limit of the violin's range is largely determined by the skill of the player, and a good player could easily get more than 2 octaves out of each string. Violinists often change positions on the lower strings even though this seems unnecessary. This is done to produce a particular timbre or to handle a piece which would otherwise require fast switching of strings.


Ande here a question?
Suppose a violin player plays an A3 in 5th position on the G string. How many other possibilities a violin player would have to play the same note on his violin? You do the math – and Herb the samples [8-)]


Iwan
http://www.iwanroth-sax.com
The only thing I do know for sure, is that I do not know much

Iwan,

I am not referring to the highest note on the Violin. I am referring to the highest harmonics onthe Violin. And the fingerings are demanded as there are many ways to produce the same harmonic, such as "Touch 4" etc. In fact there is even ways to achieve artificial harmonics both through odd "Touch" combinations, and even in doubling back teh harmonic series to get a harmonic of a "stud" note. Very very complex stuff, especially on teh physics side of things, but some players know how to do them, and the more knowledeable the player the more "lost" they are going to be when you just notate a little circle above your note. In some cases there are as many as 8 ways to play the same harmonic, for instance on a Cello.

Furthermore, I was referring to the difference between Brass fingerings for the same note being easily discernible, not Strings. And the untrained ears I am speaking of must have an IQ of above 80 to hear it. But that pretty much covers everyone not in an institution.

The classical era I speak of is the era where harmonics came into common repertoire. Late 18th Century, early 20th. Stravinsky did specify the fingerings of all harmonics, sometimes with the exception of glissando harmonics which were his invention.

Evan Evans

@Another User said:

The classical era I speak of is the era where harmonics came into common repertoire. Late 18th Century, early 20th. Stravinsky did specify the fingerings of all harmonics, sometimes with the exception of glissando harmonics which were his invention.

[:D] Stravinsky had kind of a veryyyyyyy long life [8-)]


Iwan
http://www.iwanroth-sax.com
The only thing I do know for sure, is that I do not know much

Iwan,

If it's any consolation I have no idea why I started talking about Harmonics. Maybe it had to do with how subtle differences are found throughout repertoire, and "Sul" indications although sublte, do have an expressive effect on the performance.

Yeah. That was it.

[:)]

Evan Evans

@Iwan Roth said:

The classical era I speak of is the era where harmonics came into common repertoire. Late 18th Century, early 20th. Stravinsky did specify the fingerings ...
[:D] Stravinsky had kind of a veryyyyyyy long life [8-)]

My goodness. Sorry about the typo. Sure you know what I meant.

I thought stravinsky died at 170 years of age, no?

[[;)]]

Evan Evans

evanevans wrote:

'but some players know how to do them, and the more knowledeable the player the more "lost" they are going to be when you just notate a little circle above your note.'

Sorry Evan but the opposite of this is correct. The more knoledgeable the player, the less information you need to supply. So by simply putting a circle above the note, the player will use his/her experience to find the best/easiest combination of fingering.


Andy.
[/quote]

Ansy,

let's put it this way. The more ways a performer can play your piece, the more their going to wind up playing it the way they'd compose it instead of you!

Evan Evans

@evanevans said:

let's put it this way. The more ways a performer can play your piece, the more their going to wind up playing it the way they'd compose it instead of you!

Evan Evans

Evan, I agree in general - but a string harmonic pretty much sounds like a string harmonic, whether it be natural or artificial, especially when a whole section is playing.

Andy.

@evanevans said:

My goodness. Sorry about the typo. Sure you know what I meant.

I thought stravinsky died at 170 years of age, no?

[[;)]]

Evan Evans

No problem, I think concerning typos I can compete with you. It just was funny....

Iwan
http://www.iwanroth-sax.com
The only thing I do know for sure, is that I do not know much

@evanevans said:

I also occasionally write in which valves to use for the brass, and fingerings for the woodwinds maybe 5% of the time. The brass with their unique structure of partials combined with their few valves, typically allows for as many as 5 permutations for each note getting progressively more dense in permutations on the upper ranges. And some fingerings against other fingerings can be so dramatic that just about anyone, even with untrained ears, can hear the difference. Of course I only write those in in slower passages where 1) it'll be heard enough to warrant it 2) it'll be reasonable enough for the player to use it.

And those brass players will more than likely refuse to play in those positions. Playing third valve for E and A, playing most of the high notes above Bb on any valve combination, and even playing the chromatic scale completely open -- sounds nice except for one major flaw. The alternate fingering and methods of producing the notes sound horrible. It's not an issue like the strings, where you choose the string for the different sound you want to project for a certain lyrical passage. The alternate fingerings sound *HORRENDOUS* and unless you're doing atonal music there really isn't a place for them.

Plus, dictating what to play and in which manner to play it in is arrogant. You're projecting the feeling that you know more about the violin than the violinist himself and that's just conceited. Sure, maybe this isn't what you intend, but it's arrogant to tell someone this is how you're going to play each note when the person in question has spent their entire life learning their instrument as though it's an extension of |his| body thinks of you nothing more than an upstart. 99.9% of those times they're going to ignore what you write anyway and play what works for them and is easier to perform but still sound close. If you told the trumpet line that they're going to be playing C5 and above all open positions and the line is entirely chromatic, they will give you the one finger salute and do it their way.

Sure, doing so is fine for a small passage, but you sound like you do it the *whole* piece. It not only doesn't sound practical to the players, but also seems overly arrogant of you to say, on musical notation, that this is how they must play because they *obviously* aren't smart enough to play it in the correct fashion. Probably not what you intended to sound like, but this is how it comes across from composer to composer (and also form multi-instrumentalist -- flute, clarinet, oboe, trumpet, german horn, baritone), so I can imagine just how it must seem to the players when they are handed a score that slaps them in the face.

What ? Stravinsky is dead ? [[:D]] [:D] [[:D]]