|
Post by Tim Marko on Jul 30, 2018 17:01:13 GMT
I'm working on a piece that uses a double string quartet w/ bass, piano and ww quintet.
I know that 2 violins in unison is problematic due to phasing issues. I've been studying Copland's original "Appalachian Spring" to see how he handles this and for the most part he used a doubling with one of the other instruments or at the octave.
The question is, will I still have a problem if I double 1 violin and 1 viola in unison, or viola and cello in unison? Will the different timbres overcome the phasing.
Any help would be appreciated!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Jul 30, 2018 18:36:45 GMT
I'm working on a piece that uses a double string quartet w/ bass, piano and ww quintet. I know that 2 violins in unison is problematic due to phasing issues. I've been studying Copland's original "Appalachian Spring" to see how he handles this and for the most part he used a doubling with one of the other instruments or at the octave. The question is, will I still have a problem if I double 1 violin and 1 viola in unison, or viola and cello in unison? Will the different timbres overcome the phasing. Any help would be appreciated! If I can respond with one of my recordings: soundcloud.com/davedextermusic/airs-and-graces-workshop (score attached) It's a 2yr old score now so ignore my clerical issues When writing for this session I took the "don't unison two violins" as gospel, and often 8va unison'd them to add weight. I also made liberal use of octave unisons across the instruments: b29 vc and vla, b26 both vns and vla. The intonation issues in the piece are more likely because they only had time to play it twice. Or there's this which starts with a unison in four octaves, still a little piece of writing I'm very happy with. Moving from octaves, I can't assure you that unison between vla and vn, or vla and vc etc, would work - but I feel it should, thanks to the timbre issue as you mentioned. It's never something I experimented with, but if two violins can sound good in 8va unison, surely a viola and violin in unison would follow the principle. Perhaps you could indicate different strings where not obvious, to emphasise the timbral disparity? I assume that would work to some extent on two violins as well, if a unison was played on two strings with their different characters and maybe helped along with different bow positions. But we know what assume does, don't we. It makes an ass of you and me :/ Mainly me.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jul 30, 2018 18:58:12 GMT
This is the first time I've heard about issues with two violins in unison. Usually, I think of it as a question of timbre: two violins in unison isn't really the same as 1 violin twice as loud, but rather a "double-violin" with a slightly different sound than a single violin. (In the same principle, a string section has a markedly different timbre from a violin solo due to the phasing / other effects that accumulate the more violins you add at unison.) So I wouldn't really avoid violins at unison per se, but I would treat it as a virtual instrument with a different timbre, rather than two solo violins.
But this could just be my ignorance talking, so take it with a (big) grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Jul 30, 2018 19:32:25 GMT
This is the first time I've heard about issues with two violins in unison. Usually, I think of it as a question of timbre: two violins in unison isn't really the same as 1 violin twice as loud, but rather a "double-violin" with a slightly different sound than a single violin. (In the same principle, a string section has a markedly different timbre from a violin solo due to the phasing / other effects that accumulate the more violins you add at unison.) So I wouldn't really avoid violins at unison per se, but I would treat it as a virtual instrument with a different timbre, rather than two solo violins. But this could just be my ignorance talking, so take it with a (big) grain of salt. The way it was put to me that's stuck in my head was: two violins is phase, three or more is chorus. Three or more creates an "average" tonal centre across the tiny differences in intonation, two can be quite bad unless you specifically want that sound. I would absolutely avoid two violins in unison! I often record or monitor my guitar amp with two microphones, and similarly phasing issues can weaken/cancel the sound instead of offering a more powerful and complex range of overtones.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jul 30, 2018 19:43:49 GMT
Hmm. OK, I guess this is something new I need to learn. Though now I'm wondering in what context I could deliberately use that out-of-phase sound. Maybe to imitate a cheap pair of fiddles? Or a psych'd eerie sound? Is there any precedent for deliberate use in the literature?
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Jul 30, 2018 19:45:41 GMT
Dave, never thought of different strings. hmmm?
HS, Dave explained it quite well. Copland would add flute, cl. or piano to the pair and all is well. He also doubled the octave with another string part.
For those not familiar with the original "Appalachian Spring", the string section consists of 2 vln1, 2vln2, 2 vla, 2Vc, 1 Db. That's why I keep referring to the work. It maintains a nice full sonority even with the unique pairings. (If there are other works like this, I'm not familiar with them.)
Here's a performance of the original orchestration.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 30, 2018 23:01:29 GMT
Having worked in a violin shop for a number of years, here are a few things I can tell you about violin phasing.
The people who know the least about the sound of a violin are the players themselves. They are too close to the sound. No two players play the same piece the same. No two violins sound the same, even if played by the same player. The instrument makes a difference. The strings make a difference. The bow makes a difference. Density of fingers and pressure make a difference. Vibrato makes a difference. The room makes a difference.
One of the things that determines the sound of a violin is the placement of the sound post. The sound post is a spruce dowel inside the violin under the bridge. Fitting and placement are critical. So much so that concert masters would come into our shop to have the post adjusted. After spending an hour tapping the post about, the player would still not be quite satisfied. On occasion, we would pretend to move the post ( though not really)and the player would suddenly say it was perfect. We called this adjusting the player. Never mind that we just set the instrument up to sound great in our shop. That doesn't mean it would sound good in a large hall.
Here's the point. I'm not saying phasing isn't a problem. But it's going to be different every time, if at all.
Do I know what I'm talking about? Maybe, maybe not. Our shop used to work with the former 2nd violin player for the Moscow String Quartet. Man, she had some great stories about the KGB.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jul 31, 2018 15:07:38 GMT
I think my point is that most any two same instruments playing the same part can have similar problems. Seems to me that in a small ensemble, more volume should never be the point of doubling a part. Rather use it to get the effect produced by the doubling. Writing for small ensemble is probably one of the harder things to do. What to avoid and what to use, and when. A simple rule like not doubling violins is fine, but then you miss out on the possibilities. And, it might be a problem for one group, but not another.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Aug 12, 2018 4:58:55 GMT
I think my point is that most any two same instruments playing the same part can have similar problems. Seems to me that in a small ensemble, more volume should never be the point of doubling a part. Rather use it to get the effect produced by the doubling. In fact, it's standard orchestration textbook advice that doubling (at pitch) should never be done merely for volume (except in tutti passages where some instruments may be inaudible otherwise), but for timbre. For volume, doubling at the octave (or less frequently, other intervals) is the standard approach. I'm just surprised that Dave and Tim appear to be saying that two violins should never be doubled at pitch even if you're going for a different timbre. That's something new to me.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Aug 12, 2018 12:18:03 GMT
3 vlns are better than 2 in unison for a more even spread of tuning and timbre (and hence thicker sound), so Dave has a point there imv. Having said that, the term phasing is surely a misnomer is it not? Tuning and ensemble issues may be more prevalent with just 2 players on a unison, depending on the standard of playing, but phasing as I understand it in recording is impossible. I'm with Teoh too in that there is no reason for not having 2 violins on a line unless it is a soloistic one, for example divisi by desks is a common practice as is divisi by stand and in both cases, 2 violins will be playing the same notes. In a smaller group with competent players, I see no need to avoid unison with 2 violinists in orchestral lines. The idea of each player using different strings should be for a timbral effect only I feel and that depends on the notes and playability. As I'm typing I'm listening to the Copland above, what a wonderful sound and performance.
|
|