I have read and considered with care everything that has been said so far. And I do understand that there is difference in tone between divisi and multiple stops. But I have to say that I still believe double stops will be more effective in this context. Without any of you hearing the section of music in question, there is no way for you to know whether your advice is fitting or not. I have given a loose description, but words are not a very good alternative to actually hearing it. OK, so my programmed version is not 100% real either. I accept that laying down 2 notes in my sequencer for the cellos, will not sound the same as each cello playing a double stop for real. I understand the fact that the soundwaves of the 2 strings resonating inside the body of the instrument will interact with one another and emerge as a different tone, than with 2 cellos playing each note side by side. So without a set of multiple stop samples, or a real cellist, I cannot hear the true sound.

However, the reason I believe it will work is that we are talking about the lower octave of a fairly low melody, that is doubled by 4 horns in unison, and 2 tenor trombones in unison. The passage is fff. It is meant to be dark and rough and tense. The upper octave is strong with both violin sections in unison, sul G, and doubled (or tripled?!) by 3 trumpets. The lower octave is also strong and heavy. The bulk of the lower melody is taken by the violas. So even if there is a discrepancy in tone, which I accept will likely occur, it will not stand out like a sore thumb. The very first note of the lower melody and upper bass is taken by a double stop on the cellos (E2 and B2). This is meant to be a strong beat. And the double stop I posted about, the F#2 and A2, comes towards the end of the melody, before repeating again. This substitutes the viola section as the lower melody dips below their range.

I cannot afford the upper bass and lower melody to weaken. That is why I am sticking to my guns. While I understand everything you guys have said, I believe double stops will work. If the melody had been higher, quieter, and with less intensity, then you would be right. Divisi would have been better. But here I feel it is not.

Incidentally, as a result of this discussion, I will be amending a section of music earlier in my piece to divisi (a 3 as it happens) rather than multiple stops.

Cheers,
Mobius.

@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]

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.



Hi DG,
i agree with your arguments.

In my opinion, the most important argument, if a passage should be played divisi or by ms-s, is the fact, that with ms-s, the intonation will be much rougher than played divisi.
That means, the sound becomes in reality more harsh with double stops - which, psychoacousticaly results in a sound, that because it's broader, is better audible in context with other instruments; so it sometimes results in a sound, that seems to be louder, even it's not.
Thats the reason, why it makes sense not to play some passages divisi, when there are double stops in the score.

Greez:
HTF

One thing additional (to beat a dead horse) on this topic - though DG is of course right (as usual)...

In ordinary orchestration, the use of double/triple/quadruple stops needs to be understood in context. It is a different effect to use them, as opposed to playing a single line. It is basically a "special effect" (or close to that) and not something that one would use as an ordinary single-line expression for any stringed instrument, though a good player is used to them. What I was alluding to (and that is what I generally do, being a largely subconscious person) was the situation of having a very commonplace doubling of octaves. Write this for 1st and 2nd violins, playing single lines, and it is as American as apple pie or as German as sauerkraut or Indian as curry, or as Mexican as red peppers or fill in the national blanks as you wish. (Hey! I'm getting hungry!) However, score this for double stops, in both sections, and you have done something rather WEIRD. Not unplayable, but... WEIRD.

Though of course, I tend to like... WEIRD. Being a surrealist.