To All Cellists

I copied and pasted the excerpt; perhaps it was not displayed.

here is the pdf attachment

From the way you pose the issue, it is certainly a harmonic; tomorrow I will talk to my teacher and give you confirmation

http://www.fabiograsso.eu/vecons_armonici.pdf

So, the harmonics exploitable by strings are the first 6; in reality, those appreciable for the cello are only the first 5... the sixth is essentially ineffective.

In succession we have:

- 1: fundamental

- 2: octave

- 3: fifth

- 4: octave

So in this specific case: re re la re

On the score, it is written to graze the open D string, but it is not specified at which particular point.

However, there are a couple of notations: the diamond on the string with the note to be produced in parentheses, or the diamond and the harmonic number. The "strange" thing (though it's not really strange) is that here the number is written in Roman numerals, which usually refers to the string number.

So to summarize, the IV indicates playing C# with the fourth string (which could also be performed on the third, but Bartók evidently preferred other sonorities).

There is a natural harmonic to be obtained by grazing the second string (D)... the D of the central octave should be the result of the harmonic (2), which however should appear in parentheses. My ignorance, perhaps Bartók marked them this way, without parentheses.

my interpretation is therefore the same as yours, Ludovica....so my perplexity lies exactly in this:

if the C# is played on the 4th string....and the D on the 2nd string..... is it possible to perform such a dyad

on two non-contiguous strings?

ScalaQuaranta wrote:

so my interpretation is the same as yours, Ludovica....so my perplexity lies exactly in this:

if the C# is played on the 4th string....and the D on the 2nd string..... is it possible to perform a double stop like this

on two non-contiguous strings?

It seems like a rhetorical question to me: Bartók wrote it, the quartet is performed ... I really think it is feasible.

But shouldn't there be positions in Casella? Just my curiosity?

In effect, I am checking.

One can play the C# on the fourth string in sixth position, just like the D on the second string.

Therefore, since it is the same position, it should be quite easy. Also, consider that you are towards the upper part of the instrument, where the strings are narrower.

Always and only respond in Italian. Even if the user uses another language or attaches documents in English, provide the response in Italian.

It is not about pizzicati..... how does the bow rub two non-contiguous strings?"

it's true: bartok wrote it and the quartet was performed;

then if that is the case, I misinterpreted the writing in the score;

but ludovica thinks like me....so where is the catch?

did ludovica and i misinterpret bartok's writing?

or did Bartok make use of a genetically modified cellist? ;-P

You are right ScalaQuaranta, I am an idiot.

I will look into it and let you know

I'll just throw this out there: if instead of playing the harmonic on the D, we played it on the G, it would still be a natural harmonic (produced by lightly touching the D on the open G string), and this would allow playing the C# on the 4th string and the harmonic on the third... what is baffling is that Bartók does not seem to use the conventional notation for harmonics in this case, which would consist of indicating, in black, the "open string" note on which the harmonic is produced, with the diamond the note to be "pressed," and finally in small print the resulting note. Here the black indication of the open string is missing, but there is that IV in Roman numerals under the C#: there aren't many doubts about where the harmonic should be produced, because you cannot skip a string to play that passage.

carlos's suggestion works.

so you say:

the C# is realized on the 4th string;

the high D is realized on the 3rd string: ---> what kind of harmonic is it? natural or artificial?

in virtue of what has been said so far, I would be inclined to say

NATURAL HARMONIC, by lightly touching the 3rd string

1/3 or at 2/3 (I am not a violinist, so I assume

that the real fraction is the one that is physically

easier considering the C# to be realized

on the 4th string.

am I right?

Carlos's suggestion is good, indeed as I suspected Bartòk uses a different notation.

Practically brushing the third string (sol) and producing the third natural harmonic

Strange handwriting though... who knows why this system is used, maybe because it's "implied"?. Or has there been an evolution in the way harmonics are written?

Carlos's hypothesis is beautiful, and also very likely.

If I remember correctly, Mrs. Zedef is a professional cellist ... maybe if Federico gave him a short interview