How can a contemporary violinist

approach performing in different styles?

Student: David Pablo Bellido Herrero

Main subject: Violin

Student number: 0013247

Date: 07-03-2016

Main subject teacher: Vera Beths

Research supervisor: Gerard Bouwhuis

Circle Leader: Eleonoor Tchernoff

Format: Research Paper

Presentation: 04-04-2016, 13:15 at Koninklijk Conservatorium Den Haag

Contents and Chapters

Foreword

Chapter I. Conversations and discussion

Chapter II. Finding the sources

Chapter III. The baroque style and the classic era

Chapter IV. Romantic music

Chapter V. Music of our days

Conclusion

References

Bibliography

Foreword

Art is infinite. Dozens, hundreds, thousands of disciplines can be encompassed in the idea of art. The interpretation of art is also infinite. Each creator understands art in a certain way, and each receiver understands it in his own way.

Music, as an artistic discipline, shares these characteristics. However, music has a quality of its own, and that is: between creator and receiver, in most cases, there is an interpreter: the musician.

The musician has in his hand infinite choices, as each performance is unique and unrepeatable, but at the same time, has a goal: the pursuit of perfection.

Perfection is often associated with a branch derived from this: the technical perfection that we highly value and that is appreciated in the performance world. However, there are other elements that often go unnoticed, such as the musical knowledge of the work or the knowledge of the style in which the composer wrote the piece.

Style.

This word comes to my mind as an enormous book full of blank pages. The contemporary musician finds this book closed with several locks with written questions on them: how should a modern violinist deal with an early music piece or how the violinist should approach the study of a contemporary work? How can you get more from one of the great famous violin concerts that have been played so many times?

In order to narrow the search for answers to all these questions, I will focus on the violin and the figure of the violinist. The violin is an instrument that has centuries of history, and therefore the evolution throughout the ages has been evident in its repertoire and its way of playing. Then, the question at hand is:

How can a violinist be ready to play each style?

Why to research and write about it? Because that is a question we face every day of our study life and even further. This is not a book research, this is a life search. We should be worry about it and take care of it.

- CHAPTER I -

Conversations and discussions

First of all, let me clarify a few things that are important for the comprehension of this essay that you are reading. There will always be different opinions about the way we play. Some musicians will defend one school or way to play and other musicians will defend another. What I'm trying to show with this research is not a critic to one way or another. As much as I can, I will try to focus in what I think it's even more important than this discussion: the respect of the sources.

This has nothing to do (or almost nothing) with the evolution of the violin techniques or the way we understand the sound, for example. The information and the ideas that the composer added in the score will always be there in the same way as the day they were written.

We all are students of analysis and harmony, and in some cases composer or amateur composers. In my case, I also had the chance to live with composers and work with them at the same time that I was trying to understand how they think when they are composing. That makes me wonder if we are careful enough when we play a musical piece.

But one question doesn’t need to have influence with the other: we don't have to play all the same way, as far as we all respect the source and the ideas in it in the way it was thought.

Once this is clear, we can start to talk a bit about the styles. As violinists, we can find three big styles of music that we will face in our practice time and in our musical life. Of course there are a lot of different styles and periods in music history, but it will be a good starting point to divide it into three general periods: baroque and classical music, romantic and post-romantic music and contemporary music.

Each one of these styles has its own elements, their own way to be performed. At the same time we develop our knowledge of technique we will also learn to find the differences between the styles, both in the score and through knowledge of history and analysis. Although, are we taking enough care of the way we perform different styles? While we grow as musicians, we develop some skills to make the differences between these styles, and of course, different points of view come with it, but in general we can find a common answer to the first question: we are not careful enough.

The reader should also understand something before continuing: this research is not something developed in a few months; this research came with my own evolution as a musician along the years of playing violin. Why is this important? This research is not trying to solve an occasional problem; it’s trying to answer something that we can all face from the beginning of our development as a musician.

Over a year ago, I spoke with a pianist. It was one of those talks that musicians have often. He showed me a book, The Art of Piano Playing (1958), by Gustavovich Heinrich Neuhaus (1888-1964). Together we read a portion of the text dealing with an issue that we both used to argue: the styles in music[1].

In the text he wrote about four difference styles to perform music.

The first style he even considers there is no style at all. He continues with how musicians apply some really unnecessary and in some cases ridiculous comments and descriptions of how to perform a concrete composer, for example: “Bach should be played with feelings”.

The second style he calls “mortuary”. Here he writes about musicians who are obsessed with playing in period style. He defends that they are obsessed with being strict and forget that there is music behind it.

The third, called “museum style” is close to the second, but in essence is just being respectful to the composer and to perform it like it was sounded during the time it was composed. He is still critical about this, because he considers that sometimes it can be too excessive.

The fourth, labelled “live style”, clearly he thinks is the best way to perform: the musician shows love for the composer at the same time makes it alive with the knowledge about the style and the composition itself, combine with a fresh lecture of it.

He closes this exposition with a final opinion where he defends once more the fourth style but paying attention also to the third way as an addition to the “live style”.

Neuhaus showed there he had really clear ideas about how to perform music in this text and how he thought about other musicians performing.

The text made me wonder several things: What can I find when I listen to a violin concerto played by one of the great interpreters of our day? You are finding decisions. Taking decisions means to analyse what you found in a composition, and with the knowledge the musician has, try to transmit to the audience in the way you think is more correct or appropriate. Obviously these decisions are taken by the performer. The same piece could sound in different ways. But are these decisions always a good approach to what the composer wrote?

Neuhaus again, showed me in this text a little light on the road. When he wrote about the “museum” style and the vivid performance he spoke in both cases about something that we, as performers, sometimes forget: the composer. The composer is not a person who wrote some ordered notes in a score, the composer tries to transmit and idea that we should show to the audience.

That opens a huge discussion. The first thing is quite obvious: there are different ways of understanding the music and performing it. As stated by Neuhaus, some of the interpretations are meaningless because the interpreter is not concerned about showing the ideas embedded in the music by the composer within a context and a framework of the composer. So there is a statement that we can apply easily: as interpreters, we must engage in the idea that the music should be convincing in one way or another. The next question is, therefore, in what way should it be convincing?

Neuhaus writes about two ways that are acceptable when we perform a piece of music. The first style is the one that he called "museum style". It is a clear reference to the historicist movements that began to emerge in the late nineteenth century in Europe and that have been developed throughout the twentieth century[2]. From his point of view, these ways of performing music are exaggerated; however, some of its provisions and basic ideas will serve to the contemporary violinists as a base to achieve their goals.

In my opinion, the fourth style he argues, the "living style" or “vivid style” doesn’t clash with the "museum style." That is, a piece of music can be performed following the interpretations that each musician makes with the ideas in the score by the composer, while the technical issues of the style of the piece are respected as it was composed. Contemporary violinists who face the interpretation of a Haydn string quartet must first know the technical and musical resources to be applied in a work of early classicism music. Once they have that knowledge, they can bring out the ideas described on paper giving a personal interpretation.

Thus, after the conversation on the text of Heinrich Neuhaus, I decided to investigate the elements that contemporary violinists have to become an accomplished musician and then to be able to carry out interpretations which are maintained and transmit the spirit and the musical ideas of the composer. To do this, the first thing we have to face is: find the sources.

- CHAPTER II -

Finding the sources

The researches go deeper into that every day. New works are written and new books appear on different themes, all of them useful. I will try here to give some general approach that could be useful for the students (and not only students at the end) as a starting point that should be develop by the musician itself. As I mentioned earlier, I decided to divide the styles in three big periods that will make easier for us to understand and to research about the music we are playing. Of course, we can find differences inside the same periods of time, but that division will give us general knowledge that we can shape while we get new information.

The sources for the classical period are basically the information we obtain from books and methods. There are, of course, a great pile of options in this field. However, I decided for this text to focus on the books written during the classical period, and not in books written during the present day. The reason is simple: with these books the violinist will have the chance to check at firsthand the original sources as they were written and as they were thought to be played. Other wise, we run the risk of reading an interpretation of this information, that may be useful, but it also could be confusing.

The romanticism music is less problematic. Our knowledge about this period is bigger and part of the education we receive in the instruments comes from this period and beginning of 20th century. That is why we will take a look at this period to clarify a few details to take into account.

With the contemporary music we have an interesting situation. The information is easier to achieve than in classical style, we even the chance to acquire information at first hand. But, unfortunately, we face contemporary music with very little information about two things: the specific new technique elements of the piece and the conceptual knowledge attached to the music or the composer, which, in contemporary music, sometimes is more relevant than the playing itself. We also used to make mistakes based on the heritage we have from previous styles. It means that really often we apply some concepts like the kind of sound or the use of vibrato as an element include in the piece, however, we do it unconsciously, because we don’t take enough care to be worry about it.

- CHAPTER III -

The Baroque Style and the Classic Era

After the arrival of the historicist movements, the methods written during the Baroque period have been revalued again. I propose as a starting point for the violinist a number of "favorite books" as well as some ideas and references that I think can be very useful when it comes to dealing with pieces of different styles. These methods are related to both general music and its interpretation, as well as with the violin in particular. They are based on a subsequent stylistic development for us as musicians, because it gives us the keys to the common way of executing and performing of the time.

The baroque music period (from approximately 1600 to 1750)[3] was a period where the violin started to gain a higher profile. Maybe the most famous and used treatise about the violin in the baroque era is written by Franceso Geminiani (1687-1762).

The book, The Art of Playing on the Violin[4], was written in 1751 and is divided into two sections. The one that interests us is the first section, in which Geminiani explains first the apprenticeship basic technical issues of the violin. He also talks about the correct interpretation and application of the bow for the best possible performance of the music following styles of the time. It also shows great concern to explain how all this helps to make music, awakening feelings and imagination.

Of course, reading this book by itself from top to bottom could be useless. It will be appropriate to take firstly a general look at the entire book, but, as with the rest of the books I will talk about, the best we can do is to use them as a reference book. After a while, we will learn the basic procedures and we will internalize it in our way of playing.

When we have to face a classical piece as violinists we have a number of methods written in the epoch that will help us to go deeper in the realization of musical elements, as well as the implementation of certain technical resources.

For violinists, the violin concertos by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791) are part of their life as musician. I will use them as an example, because in most auditions they are mandatory, in addition to being very popular pieces, this makes them reference works inside the style, and these concertos should be interpreted with lot of care. For this, we have a great help. The Versuch einer gründlichen Violinschule[5] (A Treatise on the Fundamental Principles of Violin Playing) is a textbook for instruction in the violin, published in 1756 by Leopold Mozart (1719-1787).

In the book, Leopold Mozart explain clearly the correct way to perform embellishments in the music, the correct way to use the bow and the realization and execution of the most typical figures we can find in classical music and also in late baroque pieces.

That will give us already an enormous difference of concept. It is not the same to play something we learnt by experience than to play something that we can also demonstrate with original sources. Our version will be richer and more precise.

We can use these two treatises as a key and a good starting point to perform a baroque or classic piece with some notions of how to do that. In the Leopold Mozart treatise, over all, we will find ideas about some of the typical well discussed elements of baroque pieces, as the executions of trills and its resolution, or the use of bow articulations. Also we find in both books good explanations about how to make good musical phrases, at the same time we respect the traditional way to do it in the style.

We should also mention two other treatises, though they are not dealing exclusively on the violin, they can provide a lot of extra information to enrich our way of interpreting baroque or classical music. Both are treaties very informed in the field of historical interpretation.

The first is the Johann Joachim Quantz (1697-1773) treatise: Versuch einer Anweisung die Flöte traversiere zu spielen[6]. Despite being a method for flute, in the second half it gives us clear examples of the realization of ornamentation, musical phrases that are perfectly valid to apply to the interpretation on violin. It also analyzes the role of string players in the orchestra section by section, which gives us ideas on what should be the behavior of one violinist in the orchestra and Baroque styles of classical music.

One of the reasons this Quantz treatise is more interesting for us is that we can use it as a comparison to the ideas written by Leopold Mozart in his own treatise. After that, we will have more arguments to support a good performance. These sources will be our bigger guaranty of success when we have to defend the way we play. The performance could be unique every time and with every violinist, but the ideas we show should respect the composer.

About appoggiaturas, an example of sources

There are a lot of elements that we can attend when we are practicing a classic score, and in most of them, we can try to solve part of it revisiting the sources. For example, I would like to talk about some of the obvious elements we can easily recognise as problematic when we are playing music of the classical period: how we perform appoggiaturas and shakes.

We will find these ornamental notes in most scores of classical music: They are in Mozart concertos, they are in Haydn string quartets and in Beethoven symphonies. But the more versions you hear, the more different ways to play them you will find. Sometimes, of course, the way to perform them could be discussed: there are different schools or ways to execute it, and we also can find unique cases where the performance depends on how the executer understands it.

But at least, in these books we can find some indications that will help us to choose the better option and over all, the option that does not ruin the idea of the music written by the composer.

In Quantz’s book, we find in Chapter VII[7] a great explanation about how we should perform appoggiaturas. In these pages he makes a difference between what he calls “Accented appoggiaturas” and “passing appoggiaturas”.

There are two kinds of appoggiaturas. Some are tipped as accented notes, or notes on the downbeat, others are passing notes, or not on the upbeat. […]

Passing appoggiaturas occur when several notes of the same value descend in leaps of thirds. […]

Accented appoggiaturas, or appoggiaturas which fall on the downbeat, are found before a long note on the downbeat following a short one on the upbeat. […]

Here the appogiatura is held for half the value of the following principal note…[8]

Quantz explains this case very clearly: when we find the appoggiatura before a long note and this one can divide in two half, the appoggiatura will take the first half on the downbeat. It will be later our responsibility as violinists to give to this note the correct weight in the bow and the more appropriate meaning.

If the note to be ornamented by the appoggiatura is dotted, it is divisible into three parts. The appoggiatura receives two of these parts, but the note itself only one part, that is, the value of the dot. […][9]

This last part is also very well explained by Quantz: when the note could be divide into three parts (dotted notes), the appoggiatura will take the two first parts. Once more it will be our decisions to see how we make it as musical and interesting as possible.

I will take this chance to explain something that could be important and I should insist about it: as we saw right now, there is a clear way to resolve these kinds of conflicts when we are reading a score. We have the sources to know how the proper way to execute it is. But that is not everything: once this is clear it is our responsibility to give it a meaning. Here is where different ways to play and perform should come, but we should avoid also happened in things like the proper way to perform something in a piece because we don’t have enough knowledge about how to do it.

Only with that information (the book is full of examples where we can check every case in a staff) we already have a good starting point to decide how to perform the appoggiaturas we can find in most of the scores of this musical period. But, of course, this is just one of the sources that we have, let us see what Leopold Mozart wrote about it in his own treatise.

On his Versuch einer gründlichen Violinschule[10], in the Chapter IX: Of the Appoggiatura, and some Embellishments belonging thereto, we will find an extended explanation with a large amount of different situations and appoggiaturas that will help us to face most of the situations we will find in scores. For example: we will see what he has to say as general remarks.

[…] There are both descending and ascending appoggiatura, which, however, are divided into accentuated appoggiatura and passing appoggiatura. The descending appoggiaturas are the most natural, for according to the most correct rules of composition they possess the true nature of an appoggiatura. […]

If the appoggiatura stands before a crotchet, quaver, or semiquaver, it is played as a long appoggiatura and is worth half of the value of the note following it. The appoggiatura is therefore sustained the length of time equivalent to half the note and is slurred smoothly on to it. […]

Here we found the same explanation that we read before in Quantz book: when the principal note could be divided in two equal half, the appoggiatura will take the first half of the note.

The second kind of the long appoggiatura which may be called the longer appoggiatura are found firstly before dotted notes. […] In such cases the appoggiatura is held longer. With dotted notes the appoggiatura is held the same length of time as the value of the note. […]

And again he explained the same about the case where the note could be divided in three parts. The appoggiatura will take the two first parts, which is equal to the value of the note without the dot.

As we can see, in both books we start from the same concepts with the same explanations: our sources then are strong and if we follow these rules our performance will have a good base behind it to support the version we are playing.

Both books contain many examples that we can compare. Of course some of them can show some contradictions, but in most of the general points we will find explanations really similar that will give as a lot of confidence in what we play and how we do it.

There are a few more books and treatises with information about the way to perform music in the baroque and classical style and it will be a research that every one of us must do during our musical life to learn as much as possible about music performance.

- CHAPTER IV –

Romantic Music

Once we move into the Romantic period, especially in the Late Romantic period, the research process seems to have more sources where we can find support. The violin was developed extensively during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and then we can find good methods written by the finest violinists. However, today we have within our grasp recordings dating from the early twentieth century, which we can easily access thanks to new technology and it can serve as a direct reference to how the music of certain composers was performed by some of the most famous musicians of the time. Some of these interpretations will surprise us, because they show that some preconceived ideas on how to execute the music of these styles is wrong or at least contradictory.

We can easily find on sites like YouTube recordings of the early twentieth century. For example, we can listen to Joseph Joachim (1831-1907) interpreting pieces composed by Johannes Brahms (1833-1897)[11]. These recordings were done in 1903. We can also listening to Eugène Ysaÿe (1858-1931), one of the greatest violinists of the romantic and post-romantic period playing the third movement of the Felix Mendelssohn (1809-1847) violin concerto or the Rondino by Henri Vieuxtemps (1820-1881) in 1912[12]. These recordings will give us a new vision to performing these pieces, because they play in the same period style of the pieces they are playing, over all in the case of Joseph Joachim.

It is true that the recordings, because of being so old, don't allow a perfect listening of the pieces. However, it is interesting to see how the kind of sound we hear is different in later recordings of violinists of mid-twentieth century. We can find a good example in some of the recording of Jasha Heifetz, for example where he is playing the Tcahikovsky violin concerto.[13] There has, therefore, an evolution in the way of playing within a relatively similar stylistic era. These small but clear differences make us see that the evolution in the way of interpreting has been continuous.

If we listen carefully to one of the early recordings and one between the 40's and the 60's we can appreciate evident differences. For example we can listen again to Jasha Heifetz playing the Tchaikovsky violin concerto and compare it with some of the Joseph Joachim recordings. Then we will listen to evident differences. Even in a period shorter than fifty years we can appreciate how the technique and the way to play changed.

We can recognize a different way to play vibrato. In general, as we go back in time we can recognize a smaller vibrato. It is true that in recordings like the Joachim it seems sometimes difficult to appreciate the sound because of the quality, but at least we can say that the vibrato in this recording seems smaller than in later recordings.

These early recordings tell us also something about ritardando, accelerando or change of tempos in general and we see the ‘taste’ change during this period of how to perform these indications. We can hear how sometime they do some not written changes on purpose. But we can see that these changes in general never goes against something written by composer, they just try to emphasize something implicit in the harmony or in the structure of the sentence. The conclusion for me is this: once we are respectful with the text and we have a good comprehension of the orchestra we can start to give our fresh interpretation of the piece, because the things we execute will make sense and will follow the ideas of the composer added in the score.

We can also appreciate a different way to make changes of position and of course a different way to develop the sound. But these two examples are not random. In both of them we can listen to a delicate treatment of the score. The respect of the composer is clear. That, in my opinion, makes both recordings a great example for the violin student.

What should the violin student conclude from this? The music is always evolving, and also how to interpret it. That's why, to my understanding, it is more important to respect the essence of the work and the composers writing. That is once again, that the sound and playing form will change, but the information that the composer leaves in the score must always be respected and understood.

Of course, we still have reference treatises written during the nineteenth and twentieth century on the violin and the interpretation of the music of the time. This is undoubtedly the historical period in which we need less help to understand, it is the period that has more knowledge. This is because the nineteenth century was one of the most prolific in terms of teaching the violin. Great violinists and teachers lived in this century in which expanded and important technical schools that have survived until today were formed. In this period we can find violinists like Charles Auguste de Bériot, Joseph Joachim, Rodolphe Kreutzer, Édouard Lalo, Henri Vieuxtemps or Henryk Wieniawski.

The methods and the way they play were extended really fast throughout all Western Europe, and still today we can easily find the school of violin that they developed. Much of the violin methods and books on studies and techniques that were developed in this century are still used for a lot of teachers today.

The Vibrato War

One point that has provoked more discussion in recent years is the use of vibrato in the interpretation of classical and romantic pieces continuously, something that has been extended until being quite common in the way of interpreting by a large number of violinists, both soloists and members of orchestras.

I decided to delve into this confrontation because it explains partially the problems we find when we have to decide one way or another to perform a piece. We will deal with this kind of discussion often in our musical life. Of course we already have an advantage: now we have the sources. It will help us to defend our way of doing things the way we think is needed. But not everything is that easy. No one has the absolute truth about everything, and some discussions seem to have a difficult answer, what some people call the ‘Vibrato War’.

It is interesting to see the opinion of some renowned musicians such as British conductor Sir Roger Arthur Carver Norrington (1934). Here are some lines from an article published in The Guardian by the British musician.

[…]Vibrato did not become common in European or American orchestras until the 1930s. […] there was only one orchestral sound: a warm, expressive, pure tone, without glamorised vibrato.

 […]The Berlin Philharmonic does not appear on disc with serious vibrato until 1935 and the Vienna Philharmonic not until 1940.

[…]So what are we missing when we hear a modern orchestral tone? […]The texture becomes transparent; you can hear right inside the sound. Discords are more serious and astringent[14].

As we read in the article, Roger Norrington advocates a free interpretation of what is called continuous vibrato, a widespread practice in most violinists that we find today. Throughout his career he has performed numerous concerts with works from J.S. Bach to A. Schoenberg dispensing the use of continuous vibrato, using it as a timely resource at certain times of the musical discourse.

Contrary to the opinion of Roger Norrington are positions reputed by the critic and percussionist David Hurwitz. In his essay, Orchestral Vibrato, Historical Context, and the Evidence of the Printed Page[15], Hurwitz widely supports the use of vibrato (in all its variations depending on the epoch). For it provides examples from great performers and soloists throughout the history of the violin.

In the following excerpt we can clearly see the divergence from the views of Roger Norrington and other advocates of the position of the British director.

 […]One result of this lamentable trend has been the creation of HIPPLF[16] member Roger Norrington’s “Stuttgart sound.” His hypothesis, succinctly articulated in the notes to his recording of Mahler’s First Symphony, states categorically that, “Brahms, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Mahler, and Berg never heard an orchestra with vibrato; it simply wasn’t a part of their experience.” Needless to say, this assertion is purely rhetorical, designed to shock rather than to enlighten. Norrington is a fundamentalist. Accordingly, his position is a matter of blind faith, and not one of reason supported by actual evidence[17].

Then, Hurwith writes an essay focusing on five ideas showing his theory:

- to examine the evidences that Norrington is talking about in detail.

- to demonstrate that the use of string vibrato is understood to be inherent in a consistently employed expressive terminology centuries old.

- to explore the historical relationship of vocal music to purely instrumental performance.

- to emphasize the distinctions between solo and orchestral practice.

- to set the bar as high as possible in challenging those who seek to rewrite history in order to indulge their musical whims.

Currently, controversy on this issue is still alive, in turn creating waves in different ways of interpreting the music with no general consensus. Both forms seem to find its justification precisely in the diversity in the interpretation of the sources at our disposal.

However, something that both positions do seem to have in common is the concern for a different vibrato depending on the style and period, either more commonly used or lesser extent. Therefore, it must be taken into account by the interpreter, regardless of the position you have chosen to follow, regarding the use of vibrato.

- CHAPTER V -

Music of our days

Another major challenge that violinists of our day face is the interpretation of contemporary music. In this section, I have decided to focus on the music of the second half of the twentieth century and the music of the 21st century.

Why contemporary music? Because there we find that in many cases a lot of violinists make the "wrong" choices. And why is that? The violin is an instrument really linked to music from baroque period to romanticism music. It means that most of the methods and repertorie that we study and perform are focused in this musical periods and usually the acquaintance with contemporary music comes really late. Because the style of the music written in the last fifty years is so diverse, it is very easy to make choices that are arguable. especially the use of vibrato, tone coloring or rubato playing are dangerous areas regarding contemporary music.

Having lived with musicians who spent most of their life performing contemporary works, I've had the chance to work closely with them and analyze the way they approach this music. A good conversation can be the trigger for big questions.

I remember a day that I started to talk with a good friend of mine, a percussionist, on how to approach a score in which we find unknown elements. After observing several scores and performance of score, we were surprised at the number of cases in which some of the unknown elements were clearly explained in the score or in clarifications in Annexes. In a lot of cases they are ignored completely by the interpreters. A good example of this is the piece Three Miniatures by Krzysztof Penderecki (1933-)[18]. The score brings an explanation of the unusual elements we can find in it, but even in that case  most of the recordings we find some of the elements are not well performed, or there is misunderstanding of how it should be performed, if we are strict with what the composer wrote.

This already gives us a first answer: the first step that the violinist must follow is a detailed reading of the score. It may seem logical and not necessary to remember, but it has an explanation. In previous music styles, we are able to collect a lot of information with a fast reading.

However, we find other cases where the score is not clear, or the required effect is unknown to us. Of course, in many cases we still have the chance to talk it over with the composer himself. In orchestras and chamber music ensembles it is not surprising that composers are attending the premieres of their pieces, and they are always ready and pleased to give a friendly answer to the interpreter in every element of the score they composed.

However, there are moments when we will not have this option. In my opinion, we should try to prevent not to be strict and precise. Perhaps an element that we neglect could be too complicated or confusing but is one of the most important elements in the piece for the composer.

It is difficult to find a method or a unique way to find out the best way to perform this music in the correct way. Contemporary music is very diverse and new elements and techniques appear every day. That's why I decided to undertake interviews with some colleagues that can help shed some light on these issues. I decided to prepare an interview with three questions that can offer some help to the violinist to be more careful.

The first person I intereviewed was Joseph Puglia, who performs regularly as concertmaster of the Asko|Schoenberg Ensemble and is a promoter of contemporary music. I had the chance to have some masterclass with him and his way to do the things were an inspiration for me and for a lot of other students.

1.) Do you think violinists of our days are strict enough when they face a contemporary piece?

Do you mean strict enough with how they interpret the score and whether or not they are playing the right notes? I think it depends on the performer. Many performers are very strict, but sometimes (not so often) you meet someone who has the approach where they think "the audience won't know anyway". I guess I would say that in general, when people have respect for a piece of music and respect for a composer, yes, they are as strict with contemporary music as they are with old music. Whether we are ever "strict enough" is a difficult question - there is always more work that we can do to improve!

2.) What do you do when you face some strange element in a contemporary score?

If I find something that I don't understand, I ask anyone and everyone who might know what it means. If possible I try to contact the composer, or at least someone who has worked with the composer. If at the end of all of that I still don't know, I try to use my best judgment and try to think like a composer - if I had written that strange thing in a piece of music, why would I have written it that way, and not another way? (By the way, I also try to do the same thing with old music as well!)

3.) Can you offer some advice for a general way to practice a contemporary piece?

Sing! Again, this is true of all music, but the best way to learn a piece is to sing it! Conduct as well, while you are singing. You will learn the notes much more quickly that way and understand the music much better. I see a lot of people as well having trouble with difficult passages because they are not using the right fingering - try out as many fingerings as you can, practice a few of them for at least a day or two, and you will quickly learn which one is the best. For difficult rhythms, know how to subdivide the beat so that you can do it in your sleep. And use the metronome at least some of the time! (You can also even do that when you are singing!)

There are a few really interesting ideas on his words. First of all: sources. The principal sources we find in this music are the composers itself if they are alive and we can contact them. We have the chance to have the best source that we can dream, the owner of the idea.

Then there is a second idea I think we should emphasize. All that we talk about in this research needs something major: dedication and concern of the student. We spend hours working in the intonation, the bow technique, vibrato and all the other elements that make the music we play. This enthusiasm that we put into all of these elements should be the same when we search for the correct performance of the ideas written in the score by the composer. Everything should be thoughtful and researched.

In the past years, we found some violinist (and musicians in general) that are trying to develop methods that try to attempt to meet the new more common techniques, so they can be practiced in isolation (such as the textbooks developed during the Classical and Romantic period).

I have a great chance to talk with Diamanda Dramm, a violinist who is working in a method for contemporary techniques. I did a little interview to her to ask about their opinion and her point of view about the best way to approach to contemporary music.

1.) What do you think we still miss when we perform contemporary music?

I think when classical musicians play contemporary music, they often are able to do all the new techniques relatively quickly. Moving between them quickly, and even combining techniques while reading a complicated score with difficult rhythm is the problem. This is why we want to isolate these problems from each other. First of all to isolate the techniques from the repertoire. Then we isolate the techniques from each other.

2.) Which elements you try to isolate to work with in your method and studios?

Pizzicato, sul tasto, sul ponticello, glissando, microtones, tremolo, vertical bowing, harmonics. By spending some time with a technique, we can enjoy what it teaches us about our instrument, how it feels (for example glissando helps us with how to hold it), how it sounds (ponticello helps us understand and hear our overtones). So really, we can also revisit the basics of violin playing, but from a different perspective.

3. How do you think it will help to the violin students?

I hope these studies will be played and enjoyed by many violinists! I hope they are useful in strengthening and expanding our technique, and inspire us to explore our instruments in new ways.

Once more we found the same ideas in the undertone of her words. If we want to be complete musicians we need to approach a score with the same care we prepare our basic technique. What she is doing is interesting not only because of how she is isolating new techniques, but it shows that these elements should be taken into account at the same level as the traditional ones and it should be apart of our way to understand the study time or the performance in a concert. Nothing is less important, over all when these kind of details could be the key to the piece we are performing.

Another important point that I should mention is the knowledge we need to have to create a good comprehension of the piece we are performing. Even an older composer like Dmitri Shostakovich (1906-1975) we can find in his symphony no. 4 in C minor, Opus 43 (1936) and symphony no. 5 in D minor, Op. 4 (1937) where the politic situation is reflected in the score through the use of program music, or in his string quartet no. 8 in C minor, Op. 110 (1960) which one, according to the score, it is dedicated "to the victims of fascism and war". If we know these elements we will have a better chance in understanding the music we are performing. That is even more important in conceptual pieces we perform today. Sometimes these pieces are based on elements completely different to the traditional ones, like mathematical formulas or music styles like program music. It is in our hands to show the real nature behind the music we perform.

Conclusion

It would be good to go back again to the Neuhaus text. When he wrote about the four different styles in performance he wrote that only two of those different styles are convincing enough: the “living” style and, as a good addition, the “museum” style. The first one was a style where the inspired performer plays with respect and admiration for the composer at the same time that the performer adds new fresh ideas, and the second one was a style based “on the most accurate and reverent knowledge of how music was performed”, as Neuhaus wrote.

In my opinion, the combination of both ways is the perfect way to make a convincing performance and the correct way to approach to the music. Moreover, if we have enough knowledge coming from the sources and a good analysis of the piece, the ideas we will introduce will be fresh, as Neuhaus says, but at the same time those ideas will be full of meaning and it will show a deep knowledge of the music we are playing.

To summarize, I will divide the conclusions in two big statements:

1-. Play with accurate knowledge of the music we are performing. To get it we need to know the sources, other ways we will start to make the typical mistakes we are use to make or listen to. As I tried to show, there is ways to solve our doubts about how to perform a piece in every style if we research into the correct sources (first manuscripts and critical editions). This is something we should solve by ourselves, because in a few cases some of these mistakes are well accepted by violinists.

2-. Play being respectful with the source and with the composer ideas doesn’t have to clash with a performance where the violinist gives his interpretation of the music. The best way to make an interesting and fresh performance is having a rich and deeper knowledge about all the elements that we found in the score, about the composer and about the period or style where the piece was compose. The best ideas come from combining all the knowledge.