Is this Cello Double Stop possible...?

[Mobius]

Hello everyone,

I have been trying in vain to find out if this double stop is possible on the cello: it's F#2 (just below the bass clef) and the A2 above that (where middle C is C4).

I have consulted every orchestration book I have (Adler, Berlioz, Blatter, Forsyth, Jacob, Kennan & Grantham, Piston etc.) and none of them mention this as a possibility. However, I tried the plug-in in Sibelius 3 for this very purpose and it states that it is easy! But I am not confident enough in the rely solely on this for a definitive answer.

So if there are any friendly cellists out there, or anyone else in the know, I'd really appreciate an answer on this. What I'd really like is a manual, however large, that lists every possibility, and ranks them in order of difficulty for each string instrument. Then I could just turn to it and know for sure without constantly having to flip through half a dozen or so books. [8o|]

Many thanks,
Mobius. [:)]

[Dar32]

Mobius

If thats a tenth you are refering to, Which I think you are. then the Chello is capable of stretching using the index finger as a capo. Thats the maximum stretch. It could be strummed or Arpegiated arco. When Lowest note gets above a low G, The effect becomes rather pinched and loses effectiveness.


Best
Regards

[DG]

Sounds like a minor 3rd to me, and yes this is possible, although down in that region don't expect it to sound clear.

DG

[Mobius]

Thanks or your replies.

Yeah it's an interval of a minor 3rd. In the Cecil Forsyth Orchestration book he lists each possible cello double stop in 3rds but misses out this particular one. I've re-read the text about 3 times incase I've misunderstood, but it seems not. Perhaps it's a bit of a stretch and therefore he deemed it unsecure to use within the cello group?

DG are you absolutely certain a group of cellists would be able to play this, and at fff, but not too fast? I also need them to carry on sustaining the F#2 for twice as long as the 2 notes together (the F#2 is a minim, and the A2 is a crotchet @ 100 bpm). I presume they could just angle the bow off the G string and carry on playing the C string for a short while longer?

My piano teacher is asking his cellist friend so should be able to try it out first hand (or whichever hand he finds easiest! [[;)]] ).

And don't worry, it's meant to be dark as hell.

Cheers,
Mobius.

[Dar32]

Sorry , I get confused somtimes.
Thanks for bringing me back down to earth.
Quiet an inspiration.

Best
Regards

[gugliel]

Since the normal hand stretch for a 'cello in first position is a minor third on one string, and the double stop you ask for would be a major third if both fingers were placed on the same string, it would not be possible with normal fingering.

With a little time to place the hand, the cellist could use a thumb for the A2, and then the stretch is not bad at all. But I'd agree the sound would be pretty turgid and unlovely for most purposes.

The fingering is the same, of course, as C#3-E3 or G#3-B3.

[edit] -- just read your second post, where you say fff, and a group of celli: for that, divisi is far better [/edit]

[Mobius]

@gugliel said:

[edit] -- just read your second post, where you say fff, and a group of celli: for that, divisi is far better [/edit]

Thanks for that Gugliel. I have now been reliably informed by 3 cellists that it is possible.

Unfortunately I cannot divide the strings because it would ruin the balance. It is only a brief instance within the piece, and again when the tune repeats. The violas are playing the melody an octave below both violin sections, unison, Sul G. The melody dips briefly below the lowest viola string and the cellos will cover that and the bass together. It's all doubled with brass so the difference in tone won't stand out too much. But I cannot risk a drop in power at that point, as it needs to be full force. It is right at the start of the melody which requires as much energy as possible.

[DG]

@gugliel said:

[edit] -- just read your second post, where you say fff, and a group of celli: for that, divisi is far better [/edit]

Thanks for that Gugliel. I have now been reliably informed by 3 cellists that it is possible.



Told you [8-)]

DG

[magates]

orchestrators I have talked to say that you will get less sound out of a double stop than a divis because the tuning discrpincies cause it to sound less full. This would be especialy true of a slightly dificult double stop.

If the piece is rehersed a lot and the players practice the part a lot maybe that changes.

[gugliel]

It may be one of those situations that seem incredibly important at the level of detail where your nose is next to the manuscript paper -- but I still say you'd get more power with divisi than with a doublestop, and that you'd distract your cello section with trying to perfect the doublestop, and thus lose the musicality. But ... to each his/her own ... good luck!

Also, the notion of celli taking one note of a viola melody is ... problematic, to be polite -- why not just give the melody to cello with the violins an octave higher? Or transpose, give some new power to the music with harmonic richness. Or leave out the strings altogether, and let brass and woodwinds take care of it. Or mask it with percussion. Or rise up an octave at an appropriate spot. Or let the 'celli play a significant part with double stops more frequently. Or let the bass play divisi. Or magnify the harmonic structure with woodwinds/brass on some of the harmonics of the melodic note.

You sound poverty-stricken when in reality the full power of 60-70 people is at your disposal!

[DG]

@magates said:

orchestrators I have talked to say that you will get less sound out of a double stop than a divis because the tuning discrpincies cause it to sound less full. This would be especialy true of a slightly dificult double stop.

If the piece is rehersed a lot and the players practice the part a lot maybe that changes.

This is sometimes true and sometimes not. It is a very complicated subject and often the only way to be sure is to try both in rehearsal and make the decision then.

FWIW string players often avoid double stopping as it can be tricky, so you have to make a decision as to when you are flogging a dead horse if you insist on the double stops.

DG

[William]

"but I still say you'd get more power with divisi than with a doublestop"

This is total MISINFORMATION and I am surprised that DG accepts this.

A double, triple or quadruple stop increases the sound level, and a divisi divides it. You have effectively more strings playing simultaneously with multiple stops. Beethoven knew this, and used it prominently in the Eroica for sforzandi.

Any questions?

Contact him via a psychic. Don't complain to me, because I don't really care. I just am waiting for some spackle to dry on walls I am trying to paint and had nothing better to do than attempt to be irritating. [6]

[magates]

actually andre geneaut - the principle violin on every John William's session and almost all los angeles studio recordings told me the same thing. Don't write double stop's they don't sound as big or as good as a divisi.

[William]

This is wrong also. A double stop sounds very good in the right place. Obviously it is not the same as a fluid single line, and you can't use it for that purpose since the players are being forced to play two notes simultaneously. This is done sometimes in solo writing and sounds quite different. But in orchestra, on single notes, it sounds BETTER THAN DIVISI in many instances - for example, Borodin, In the Steppes of Central Asia, not to mention the Beethoven. In fact, this is an obvious orchestration question. So why am I responding?

Because I am still waiting for spackle to dry.

[William]

Sorry to be obnoxious about the double stops!! (This is one of the few places on earth one could make a statement like that I suppose.) However I was simply trying to state that they do have a strong, full effect if used for certain purposes, like accents, etc. , as in those powerful triple/quadruple stops at the end of the Eroica 1st movement. Also "In the Steppes" actually replaces the melodic line in an ff orchestral tutti with all triple stops throughout the strings precisely for that effect.

[DG]

@William said:

"but I still say you'd get more power with divisi than with a doublestop"

This is total MISINFORMATION and I am surprised that DG accepts this.

A double, triple or quadruple stop increases the sound level, and a divisi divides it. You have effectively more strings playing simultaneously with multiple stops. Beethoven knew this, and used it prominently in the Eroica for sforzandi.

Any questions?

Contact him via a psychic. Don't complain to me, because I don't really care. I just am waiting for some spackle to dry on walls I am trying to paint and had nothing better to do than attempt to be irritating. [6]

Show More

William, the theory of twice as many on more strings is correct, but reality is not quite as clear cut. The volume of the double stop has just as much to do with the positioning as the number of notes. For example, as soon as you get out of first position (particularly on the middle strings) the sound decreases, whereas divisi, the length of the string would be longer.

Another thing to remember is that with Beethoven's multiple stops (to use your example), most of the time one of the strings is an open string and the rest are in first position. Therefore the sound is increased by multiple stopping. However, you will find that many times players still play these chords divisi, although not usually only one note. If you want to check with Beethoven, I suggest that you call John Lill, and ask him to pass on a message.

The last point is practicality, as many double stops are possible, but not reliable at speed, without a great deal of practice. Therefore in an orchestral situation human nature will mean that these notes will be played quieter, after all who (apart from me) would want to come crashing in on an out of tune double stop [:D]

DG

[William]

Thanks for that very useful clarification DG and please forgive my ranting.

[gugliel]

spackle could make anyone rant -- I still say THIS doublestop is better divisi, and as DG said, Beethoven's use of them in general is a very different matter.

[DG]

@William said:

Thanks for that very useful clarification DG and please forgive my ranting.

I never have a problem when people are passionate about what they do. In any case Double Stopping is a can of worms, and even the best orchestrators miscalculate on occasion.

DG

[Martin Bayless]

it might be helpful for some to relate the difference in double stops and divisii by thinking of a guitarist playing power chords (double stops) and two guitarists playing single lines in harmony. obviously a completely different sound but a big difference in attitude. double stops work for their particular sound; not as a voice leading solution in isolated areas because the difference will pop out of the texture - just as a power chord would suddenly if a guitarist was playing a lead line.