THE TRANSITION TO THE TOURTE BOW
AND ITS EFFECT ON BOWING ARTICULATION
Pamela Goldsmith
Today I propose to give a brief overview of bow development through the eighteenth century, and then discuss and demonstrate bowing articulation as it changed and developed from Baroque through the Transitional period to the Tourte achievement.
I am a violist, a performer. As such I am a re-creator, reproducing in 1989 the creative efforts of composers from all periods and all styles. It is my responsibility to re-create as closely as possible the way the music was originally conceived. One of the ways I can do this best is by studying and using the tools, that is, the instruments and bows in their original condition, that were used by violists at the time the music was written. Through both research and performance, I have spent many years pursuing a goal -- if you want to call it 'authentic' performance, so be it, but there are so many variables and exceptions to every piece of information I have gleaned, I hesitate to use the audacious word 'authentic'. Perhaps 'educated' or 'historical' performance is a better term.
In any case, when I began this research in 1962, there were very few string players convinced of its appropriateness and applicability. Often I met incredulity or outright hostility: "No one knows what music sounded like 200 years ago", "Those violinists weren't any good, anyway" and "I play the way I feel the music -- that is the only way". These were just a few of the things that were said to me in the late 60's by very well known performing string players, and I am pleased to tell you that now there is a whole generation of young performers as excited by this information as I have always been. The information comes from two sources: first, the treatises, books, newspapers and journals of the period; and second, the tools, the instruments and bows, used at the time.
The most important idea I can impart to you is that pre-Tourte bows are not primitive, crude, unformed sticks. Some were great bows of their type, and many were first class works. After all, can you imagine the Amatis, Strads and Guarneris being played with poor bows? In fact, there is some evidence that the great violin makers also made bows. It is unfortunate that bows are so very fragile that far fewer older bows have survived 250-300 years than violins of the same vintage. That is one of the reasons why it is difficult to find these original models.
A second important idea is that there has always been a close relationship between performers and bow makers. Pre-Tourte bows generally have been categorized by the famous violinists who used them, rather than the makers themselves. Hence, we have the Corelli bow, the Tartini bow, the Cramer bow, and the Viotti bow (which we now call the Tourte model). A scenario which must have taken place many times is as follows:
Performers seek out the best makers in their own locale, or perhaps travel to a distant location to visit a new maker. An exchange of ideas takes place in which the performer plays the maker's bows, gives much feedback, offers suggestions, makes requests for future sticks, and so forth.
(I know I myself have participated in this scenario and I'm sure that you can see how important it is for us to have this exchange .) Therefore, bows of any given period are keys for understanding performance practice. How the bow sounds, what it wants to do (not what I want it to do) -- these are revelations to a modern performer delving into the wonders of 18th century music. It may be argued that the violas were also in a very different condition than they are today, and that the lessened tension, gut strings, smaller bass bar and shortened neck made a great difference. This is true, and yet another large subject. For today's purpose, I will be limiting myself to a discussion of bows only, and for purposes of comparison, I will be using the same viola, an Otto-Karl Schenck made in l986.
Now, the bows themselves. The early 18th century bow, the Italian 'sonata' bow, is also referred to as the Corelli-Tartini model. This basic Baroque bow supplanted by 1725 an earlier French dance bow which was quite short with a little point. The French dance bow was held with the thumb under the hair and played with short, quick strokes for rhythmic dance music. The Italian sonata bow was longer, from 24-28 inches (61-71 cm.), with a straight or slightly convex stick. The head is described as a pike's head, and the frog is either fixed (the clip-in bow) or has a screw mechanism. The screw is an early improvement, indicative of further changes to come. As compared to a modern Tourte-style bow, the Corelli-Tartini model is shorter and lighter, especially at the tip, the balance point is lower down on the stick, the hair more yielding, and the ribbon of hair narrower -- about 6 mm. wide. If you will consult page one of the sheets which were handed out, that is example number one. That is the early bow, the Baroque bow. The natural bow stroke is a non-legato norm, producing what Leopold Mozart called a "small softness" at the beginning and end of each stroke. A lighter, clearer sound is produced, and quick notes are cleanly articulated without the hair leaving the string. As an example of a truly great bow of this type I would cite the bow described by David Boyden in The History of Violin Playing, p. 207, which is part of the Ansley Salz Collection at the University of California at Berkeley. It was made around 1700, perhaps by Stradivari, and I was fortunate to have had the opportunity to play with this bow. It is not only aesthetically beautiful (the stick is pernambuco and the frog is an ivory pandurina -- a little lute with strings -- the hairs weave in and out of the strings), but a superb stick to use. This is what I mean when I say there were great bows made before Tourte.
As we progress towards the middle of the century, move into the Transitional period, the separation of hair from stick becomes greater, particularly at the head. This greater separation is necessary because the stick becomes longer and straighter, approaching a concave shape. The one feature, separation of hair, is dependent on the other, the straight stick, and it is difficult to say which came first. (I think you all understand the concept of that: if the stick is straight the hair can be closer, but as it approaches a concave shape, there has to be greater separation of the hair at the head, otherwise you would be scraping with the wood on the string.) The result is more tone and the possibility of a more precise attack at the beginning of bow strokes. The hair is wider than the Corelli model but still narrower than a Tourte, the screw mechanism becomes standard, and more sticks are made from pernambuco, rather than the earlier snakewood, ironwood, and china wood, which were often fluted for a portion of the length of the stick. Fine makers of these Transitional model bows would be Duchaîne, La Fleur, Meauchand, Tourte père, and Edward Dodd. There is absolutely no standardization of bow features during this Transitional period, and every bow is different in weight, length and balance. In particular, the heads vary enormously, even by a given maker. Can we find page two of the drawings? I have been extremely fortunate to explore the wonderful collection of Hans Weisshaar, which contains three bows by Edward Dodd (1705-1810). The two violin bows are 54 and 55.5 grams. The viola bow, weighing in at an astounding 71 grams, has an elaborated square head. An interesting variant head is what David Boyden calls a 'battle-axe' head (I'm not too happy with his choice of terms there -- somehow associating a battle axe with a bow is not quite what I had in mind): the wood comes to a peak both in the back and the front of the tip. He calls this the 'Cramer model' bow, after the violinist Wilhelm Cramer (1745-99), who lived in Mannheim until 1772, thereafter in London. You will see a tracing of a Duchaîne bow, only 51.5 grams, also from the collection of Hans Weisshaar. It demonstrates a modified version of the 'battle-axe' head. Look at that Duchaîne bow in the drawing. You see how it comes to a peak both in the front and the back? If you will look directly above that one, that other Edward Dodd is a modified version of a 'battle-axe' head -- it is much more curved but it has the same feature. The Duchaîne bow also has an ivory underslide. It is an absolutely wonderful bow and I would like to say that these bows are historical treasures.
Another viola bow on this page is a John Dodd, the head of which is a 'massive, blunt snout', and which must be looked upon as an experiment. That is the second one down on the drawing. (This is one of my own bows.) In fact, all Transitional bows are experiments, as performers and bow makers searched together to improve the tools for making music. In general, we can say that bows became increasingly longer, heavier, the sticks approaching a more concave cambre. The separation of hair from stick increased and the tip of the bow became heavier and stronger, the balance point therefore becoming further up on the stick. Approximate dates of this Transitional period are from about 1740-1790, although one or more of the features of Transitional bows were still being used well into the 19th century. Iconographic evidence is always interesting, if not terribly precise; I have a list here of Transitional bows pictured in use, if you are interested. As a prime example of late use of a Transitional bow, I would cite a lithograph of Paganini by Karl Begas from around 1820 -- the bow is clearly a battle axe head and the stick straight.
Just as the Baroque sonata bow is associated with Corelli and Tartini, and the Transitional bow with Cramer, so is the modern Tourte bow associated with Viotti. In 1782, a 29 year old Italian, Giovanni Baptista Viotti, made his debut in Paris. In this one performance he established himself as the foremost violinist of Europe. He had been a student of Pugnani, from a line of violinists extending back to Corelli, but there was something extraordinary and different about his playing. Reading contemporary reactions to his performances, we are impressed with the emphasis on his expressivity, his fire, his tone. I'm going to read you some quotes -- these are from magazines and journals of the time:
-
A strong, full tone, indescribable fluency, purity, precision, shadow and light.
-
The ease and clarity with which he performed the most difficult passages.
-
He performs both expressive and difficult passages perfectly.
-
An accurate performance, an exquisite polish, and an admirable quality of tone in the Adagio.
-
What energy and what grace combined! What polish in the adagios! What brilliance in the allegros!
-
Nothing could be more exquisite than his tones in the second movement.
-
His power over the instrument seems unlimited . . . he awakens emotion, gives a soul to sound, and leads the passions captive.
When I read these I think back to that violinist who said to me, "Oh, those violinists weren't any good way back then, anyway". I beg to differ. Viotti must have been a great artist, to make such an impact on his listeners.
He became recognized as a great master and was acknowledged as the founder of a new school of violin playing, the outstanding characteristics of which were: a strong, full tone, singing legato, and variety and diversity of bowing. In spite of his short career, his reputation persisted well into the 19th century. His influence was greatest in two areas: the first was upon his students and disciples, and the second was through his compositions, especially the violin concerti. The master's teaching took the form of guidance and inspiration, rather than formal lessons, and he did not accept money from his students. His style spread rapidly all over Europe by means of his students. Here is a list, I'm not going into detail here, just let me read you their names: Paul Alday, Louis Labarre, Jean Baptiste Cartier, Auguste Durand, Philippe Libon, Nicholas Mori, Friedrich Pixis, and Andre Robberechts. Each of them went to a different place and became the prime leader of violin playing in that area. An interesting family tree of violinists given by Marc Pincherle in the Encyclopédie de le Musique et Dictionnaire du Conservatoire shows the large percentage of famous performers who trace their lineage back to Viotti.
The three most important men to establish the Viotti method were Pierre Baillot (1771-1842), Jaques Rode (1774 -1830), and Rudolphe Kreutzer (1776 -1831). Their relationship was cemented by their relationship to Viotti, their similar activities at the Conservatoire, their age and their contemporaneous careers. The influence of these men on scores of violin students cannot be overestimated. Here is a contemporary account of the efficacy of the method:
Formerly, the string players of an orchestra were individually accomplished players, but everyone had a different method of bowing . . . The result was a totally different method of attacking the string and thus an inevitable lack of finish and perfection in execution. Today these drawbacks are erased: Messrs. Rode, Kreutzer and Baillot, who are the principal professors at the Conservatoire, have certainly each an individual method of bowing; but as a whole their methods greatly resemble that of their great master Viotti . . . The students of these three masters all have a broad and energetic approach; the result is such a unity of execution in the symphonies that, from far away, one could think that there were only one violin to each part.
Paris was the center of fine performance; its advanced standard was promulgated by the Conservatoire. The Conservatoire's teaching methods were preserved in two publications, the Méthode de Violon by Baillot, Rode, Kreutzer, 1802, and the more detailed L'Art du Violon by Baillot alone, circa 1830. Unfortunately we have no method book by Viotti himself. Now we are going to tie Viotti to Tourte.
The greatest of all bow makers was François Tourte, who lived and worked in Paris during the years 1775-1835. It seems plausible that Viotti, who came to Paris in 1782, influenced Tourte, not only because of the violinist's fame and influence in Paris at the time, but because the style if his playing demanded such an improved stick. If we think back to those characteristics of his style so vividly described, we remember he had a "big", "strong", "full" tone, a "powerful " approach to the instrument, the legato was "admirable", "penetrating", "singing", "exquisite". All these factors are better and more easily produced with a Tourte model bow than with any kind of earlier bow. The "diversity of bowing", the "shadow and light" are subtleties much more available to the player with a Tourte bow. Unfortunately there is no documentary evidence that links any violinist with Tourte; all we can say definitely is that the Viotti style and the Tourte model bow rose concurrently, around 1785-90, and together they established the modern bowing techniques.
Let us look at some of the details of the bow itself. Apparently (I'm reading this) when unstrung, it is mathematically found to form a logarithmic curve. (I'll take someone's word for that.) Tourte settled on pernambuco as the best material for a light yet strong and elastic bow. He standardized the length of the bow at 74-75 cm. (I'm talking about a violin bow here), loaded the frog and screw with metal to help balance the heavier weight of the tip, set the length of hair at 65 cm. and the center of gravity at 19 cm. from the frog. What François Tourte himself did not 'invent' was the screw mechanism and ferrule which were present on earlier bows, and the concave curve. He experimented with differently shaped heads, from a modified swan-like design (before 1790), to a more rounded shape, to the final sharp, more angular 'hatchet head'.
An interesting factor is the work of John Dodd in England. Just as scientific discoveries are made simultaneously in separate parts of the world by people working independently, so also were innovations of the bow produced by Dodd in England at the same time as Tourte in France. Dodd was only five years younger than Tourte, and probably had been hearing the same sort of comments from English players that Tourte had been hearing from French performers. I'd like to remind you that Wilhelm Cramer spent his life from 1772 on in London so you can see the connection between Cramer and Dodd in London, and Viotti and Tourte in Paris.
The increasing subtleties and sustaining power demanded of the players by the developing compositional styles, the popularity of the "Peril and Rescue" operas with their dramatic contrasts, the long singing lines of Mozart, the heavy sforzandi of Haydn, all these musical factors contributed to the demand for a bow with more power, clarity, facility and subtlety. In addition, the demise of the patronage system and the rise of concerts performed for a paying public required larger halls with more seats, thus greater air spaces to be filled. There is a sociological explanation for this in addition to all the other factors.
It is impossible to state exactly when the new bow came into general use, but it must have been by the time of Beethoven's works, around 1790. It is surprising that we have no contemporary reaction to such an outstanding innovation, but, as we have seen, there were all kinds of Transitional model bows incorporating one or another of the new features. To a violinist of the time, the Tourte model bow was just a better tool, rather than as we see it in retrospect, a milestone.
Now I'd like to talk about Transitional bowing. Apparently the 18th century bow grip used a lower elbow than in modern technique, but not as low as the exaggerated 19th century school of bowing which is sometimes referred to as the "old German school". [Demo] The 18th century is a lower elbow, but it's not this really exaggerated low elbow. I was told by some people that when they were children they had to practice with a book under their upper arm to keep it close to the body -- that's the old German school. This is not like that -- it is more like this, and the bow is suspended more from the hand. The French dance grip with the thumb under the hair disappeared by 1725, and the hand was generally up on the stick above the frog, not directly over the frog as most of us play today. [Demo] Some treatises instructed that the thumb be fairly stiff, some emphasized flexible fingers. Some felt the first finger should be separated from the others on the stick, some did not. There was no agreement as to whether the bow stick should be inclined toward the fingerboard. It was not until the pedagogic works of Baillot, Rode and Kreutzer at the turn of the 19th century that the French Conservatoire method standardized a true school of violin bowing. (Today we can think of the Franco-Belgian or Russian school and see immediately around us players with those recognizable characteristics.) [Demo]
A most important source for information on how the bow was used in the Transitional period is the didactic treatise. Much information may be gathered from (here is a list of people I consulted) works by Geminiani, 1751; L. Mozart, 1756; L'Abbé le fils, 1761; Labadens, 1772; Löhlein, 1774; Reichardt, 1776; Corrette, 1782; Schweigl, 1786; Crome, 178-; Hiller, 1795; Bailleux, 1796; Cartier, 1798; and Bornet, ca. 1807. I list these as evidence that the information is there for the sincerely interested performer. (There have been many times when string players have said to me, "Well, all that stuff is hypothetical, anyway -- nobody really has any evidence to go on." There is a great deal of source material out there, if you're willing to go exploring for it.) In addition, there have been some articles published in easily accessible contemporary journals which elucidate the material I am presenting encapsulated today -- I have copies of this list for you, if you wish to pursue further. Of course, there is no substitute for hands-on experience, so now let us venture into the varieties of 18th century bow use, and I will demonstrate each type as we progress. In general, there were fewer varieties of attack than in modern bowing, but there were greater nuances within the stroke itself.
The basic bow stroke of the Transitional period was the 'non-legato' stroke. Because of the 'give' of the hair, the bow does not produce the full tone immediately at the beginning of the stroke, but only after some finger pressure has been exerted. There is a momentary softness followed by a crescendo in each stroke. ( I'm using a modern instrument to demonstrate all the bows because we need to have one standard to go by. I do not want to get into reconstruction of early instruments -- that's quite another subject altogether.) The modern bow makes the connections much more easily. The older bows quite naturally produce spaces between the notes. Regardless of the speed of the notes (which can be quite fast), each note is clearly articulated because of the space between the notes. Here are some fast notes. [Demo] You can hear a great deal of clarity, even though I'm playing very fast. As an example of that, some passage work from the Stamitz viola concerto, because that is a good middle 18th century work. [Demo] Let me play that same passage work with the modern bow -- you hear that it has a much harder sound -- much more attack at the beginning of the stroke. [Demo]
Another characteristic of the basic bow stroke was the greater dynamic variation given an individual note or stroke. For example, Geminiani (1751) recommended "in playing all long Notes the Sound should be begun soft, and gradually swelled till the Middle and from thence gradually softened to the End." [Demonstration with the Baroque and Transitional bows] The characteristic softness at the beginning and end of bow strokes was developed into a stylistic mannerism of a crescendo and diminuendo on each long note, corresponding to the 'messa di voce' vocal ornament. Sol Babitz carries this one step further by emphasizing that many different kinds of dynamic gradations were used:
The primary source of emotional expression, 'the soul of the violin' was the bow, with its constant rise and fall of dynamics producing in skilled hands not only a singing but also an elegant, chiaroscuro speaking quality.
Although Babitz uses Leopold Mozart (1756) as his primary source, the practice was continued well into the late 18th century; on the rhythm
in an Adagio, Löhlein (1774) instructs "one strengthens the tone in the middle". Corrette (1782) gives instructions for
