Author Subject Tim Finholt Global user (5/4/00 3:16:44 pm) Reply Pitch
perception and vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Victor Sazer's post on Cello Chat indicates that the perceived pitch of a
vibrato'd note is the pitch at the top of the vibrato cycle. Gerhard Mantel
indicates that the perceived pitch is nearer the center of the vibrato cycle,
at the "statistical average" of the vibrato motion. Who's right?
Tim Finholt Global user (5/5/00 5:55:06 pm) Reply Mantel speaks
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- I asked Gerhard Mantel about his concept that the perceived pitch is sort of
the average of the total vibrato motion. The following is part of his reply.
The scales of truth seem to be weighing towards Mantel on this issue, unless
somebody can come up with some countering evidence.
"I found something in the internet:
www.klassik.com/de/magazi...ikel01.htm
which is an article about recorder vibrato. The author mentions pitch vibrato,
loudness vibrato and color vibrato. Our problem is the pitch vibrato. The
article is in German, but you will understand it because you will find a wave
diagram that describes the facts.
The last sentence above this diagram reads something like:
'Decisive for our ear is the middle value of the vibrations.'
Personally, I even go one step further than this diagram: The (mathematically)
integral areas above and below the middle value must be equal. That means, if
the vibrato wave is not symmetrical (not a sine wave), with short hits above
and long hits below that middle value, the middle value, or the perceived pitch
will move down until the balance between the upper and the lower integral areas
is equal again."
Edited by Tim Finholt at: 5/5/00 5:55:06 pm
Victor Sazer Local user (5/5/00 8:09:09 pm) Reply Vibrato??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Try this: Play a single note: 1. Without vibrato 2. Vibrate pulling
to the flat side and returning to the starting point a. Vary the width of
your vibrato making it wider and narrower 3. Without vibrato 4.
Vibrate moving (even slightly) above the starting point a. Vary the width
as above
Do you hear a difference in pitch between 2 and 4?
If you widen your vibrato by moving farther to the low side the note and
returning to the starting point, the pitch stays constant. It remains the same
as when you did not vibrate. This is because the pitch is controlled by the
length of string that is permitted to vibrate: longer length = lower pitch,
shorter length = higher pitch. The length of string that you allow to vibrate
is set by the upper edge of your finger. As you vibrate, momentarily moving
down from and back to the starting point, you ear and memory retain the sound
of the starting pitch.
If you move your vibrato, even the slightest bit above your starting point, you
will very likely find that you are playing sharp.
Many years ago, my violinist daughter taped a piece for a competition. It was
inadvertently played back at too low a speed. Although all of it was pitched
down in the cellar, and it was so slow that the vibrato motions sounded
something like eight notes, the opening theme of the Mendelssohn concerto
sounded clearly in tune at the top of her vibrato while the bottom of her
vibrato strokes varied considerably.
Steve Drake Global user (5/6/00 10:38:08 pm) Reply Re: Pitch perception and
vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sazer and Mantel may both be right. It may be a perceptional thing, one that
is different for different people. Personally, I hear the center of the vibrato
as being the pitch center, and hope most of my audience does, otherwise I'd be
playing sharp much of the time. Thankfully I get a lot of return gigs, so I
think the audience is percieving the middle of the vibrato as the pitch center.
However, I don't have a very wide vibrato.
Bob Local user (5/7/00 8:15:03 am) Reply Re: Pitch perception and vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Steve, I think you've found the nub of the problem (the center of the pitch?).
I was going to stay out of this, lest I be seen as simply a tiresome
Sazer-basher. But actually I first heard this vibrate-below-the-note idea from
no less an artist than Joseph Silverstein. Joe is not only a great violinist
(who could play perfectly in tune), he's a thoughtful, well-read scholar of the
instrument as well. So when I mentioned this idea to Bernard Greenhouse, who
simply snorted, I was still troubled. And I think there is other literature
propounding this theory as well.
I don't know from acoustical theory, sine waves, or what-all. What I DO know is
that (a) no one vibrates on every note, and (b) when you add vibrato to an
existing "white" note, the action is clearly a motion AROUND (above and below)
where the finger is placed. This means that, as a practical matter, vibrato
does include pitches slightly above where the finger is centered.
Thus, under the Silverstein/Sazer theory which posits that the "true" pitch is
the highest point of the vibrato wave, someone who plays in tune can
differentiate, in the placement of EACH finger, whether that note will include
vibrato (in which case it will land slightly below pitch to account for the
higher part of the wave) or won't (in which case it will land directly on
pitch). Since this is impossible, the theory fails, for me.
Victor Sazer Local user (5/8/00 3:25:19 pm) Reply Vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- I certainly agree with Bob when he states “…vibrato does include pitches
slightly above where the finger is centered.” However, is where the finger is
centered the same part of the finger that stops the string; the part that sets
the length of string that is permitted to vibrate? Suppose your finger was
several times as wide as it is, would its center be in the same place on the
fingerboard as a narrower finger, to produce the same note? If you assume that
the center of your finger is on the true note, would the pitch change as you
change the width of your vibrato?
There is no disagreement about the fact that the vibrato moves in both
directions from the balance center nor that the pitch changes in both
directions. I suggest however, that pulling the first stroke of the vibrato
downward toward the lower side of the note insures that whether you vibrate or
not, the pitch remains the same (with no adjustment needed) because your
vibrato always returns to the same starting point.
This in no way changes the tactile sensation of going equally in both
directions from the balance center nor the feeling of aiming for notes with the
center of your fingers.
If you move downward on the first stroke, the range of your vibrato goes from
the true note to some point below it. The distance below may vary as you widen
or narrow your vibrato for expressive reasons. As the span of your vibrato is
enlarged or reduced, your balance center tends to move to the center of the
span, whatever its amplitude to maintain an even vibrato. As long as the
uppermost point remains the same, the intonation will be stable. On the other
hand (no pun intended), if you start your vibrato with an upward stroke, the
upper part of the range begins from a sharpened note.
I believe it is helpful to notice in which direction your vibrato starts, to
see if it makes any difference and if it does, what the difference/s might be.
As I have tried to explain, I do not subscribe to the idea (seemingly
attributed to me) that you have to place your finger in a different place for
vibrated or non-vibrated notes. The exact opposite is the true.
Tim Finholt Global user (5/8/00 7:57:05 pm) Reply Clarification
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- I'm think I'm starting to understand what you are trying to say, but I want to
make sure. Based ONLY on this last post, it seems you may agree that, for a
note that is held for a significant amount of time (anything more than a
fraction of a second is my guess), the perceived tone is actually somewhere
between the upper and lower part of the vibrato cycle, probably near the middle
as Mantel suggests. Your main concern is that, if a note is started when one is
at the lower part of the vibrato cycle, for instance, the perceived tone will
start out flat.
Is this what you are trying to say? I don't think people strive to re-start
their vibrato with each note, and yet many players seem to play in tune. So I
wonder if this truly affects perceived intonation.
Edited by Tim Finholt at: 5/8/00 7:57:05 pm
Victor Sazer Local user (5/9/00 2:47:02 am) Reply More on Vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- I have been consistently trying to explain the same thoughts in all of my
posts on this subject. Evidently, my clarity has been wanting, but I will keep
trying.
1. When you place a finger on a string, you shorten the length of string
that you allow to vibrate. This establishes the pitch of the note.
2. The length of the vibrating string is set by the upper (toward the
bridge) edge of the finger.
3. If you then vibrate on this note, you will continue to hear the same
pitch if the first vibrato stroke moves downward and alternates going back to
its starting point. So, the vibrato moves from its starting pitch to, sometimes
varying points, below it, but never above it.
4. The pitch that you hear is not somewhere in between, but precisely,
the starting pitch set by the upper edge of the finger. The place where the
upper edge of your finger started is the top of the vibrato movement.
5. If the first stroke of your vibrato moves downward and returns to its
starting point, the pitch will remain constant, even if you widen or narrow
your vibrato. I believe that this not only helps assure accurate intonation but
also aids purity of sound.
6. If your vibrato movement goes above the starting point, you will tend
to play sharp.
7. I do not advocate restarting vibrato on every note, quite the
contrary. I suggest the advantage to continuing it by begining each note at the
top of its oscillation (where it is in tune) and vibrating downward as you
transfer it from one note to the next. This produces seamless connections and
easy tension-free motion.
8. Your ear and memory retain the sound of the upper part of the
alternating movement even though the pitch at the bottom of the vibrato may
vary.
9. You might try starting a note senza vibrato and then vibrating,
gradually increasing the width of your vibrato. If your first stroke is upward,
and you try to go an equal distance in both directions, see if the pitch stays
the same or begins to change.
10. Most string players habitually tend to start their vibrato downward
while others start upward. Many, probably never think about this at all, but
still tend to regularly start in one direction or the other.
11. In my experience, just providing awareness to students, that the
direction of the start of vibrato does make a difference, seems to improve
their playing.
Bob Local user (6/11/00 9:51:47 am) Reply Yet more on vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- My biggest fear is that people will snicker at this thread as simply the
effete nattering of four cello geeks with way too much time on their hands. My
next biggest fear is that members will write me off as simply a reflexive
Sazer-basher who has some unexplained vendetta going. But I’m an
equal-opportunity critic, as Mantel can attest. Quite possibly the silent
majority is going, "of course vibrato is both above and below the pitch; DUH!"
and moving on. However, as I've mentioned, this flat-only idea, harmful as it
is, has some traction out there; some of you may well run into prestigious
string players who espouse it. Hence, with thanks to Victor Sazer for stating
his side of the case succinctly, I offer a polite rebuttal:
Your clarity has not been wanting, in any respect. What has been
wanting is logical coherence.
"1. When you place a finger on a string, you shorten the length of string that
you allow to vibrate. This establishes the pitch of the note."
Indubitably
"2. The length of the vibrating string is set by the upper (toward the bridge)
edge of the finger."
Without question
"3. If you then vibrate on this note, you will continue to hear the same pitch
if the first vibrato stroke moves downward and alternates going back to its
starting point. So, the vibrato moves from its starting pitch to, sometimes
varying points, below it, but never above it."
Here's where you are mistaken. Vibrato, regardless of the direction of
the “first stroke,” moves the pitch both below and above the starting
point. As you yourself seem to understand ("[t]here is no disagreement
about the fact that the vibrato moves in both directions from the
balance center . . ."). Indeed it does. It goes up and it goes down.
Vibrato goes above the starting pitch and it goes below. It is this
reality your thesis cannot overcome. As I explained in my previous
post, it is particularly the comparison of vibrated vs. unvibrated
notes which makes the point most clearly. For a "white" note, the
finger remains in one spot 100% of the time. That spot is the perceived
and actual pitch. In the vibrato action, the finger transmits a wave
motion, never staying on any one spot. The assertion that the perceived
pitch is now at the very highest, tippy-top point of the vibrato wave,
a spot that is reached only a tiny percentage of the time, while the
ear discounts all the pitches it hears during the other 95% of the
vibrato cycle, is simply silly. The medial pitch, on the other hand,
will be crossed twice per wave, approached from both directions, and,
obviously, spend more time in the ear. This is why, when a well-trained
player intensifies the vibrato on a long note (thus raising the upper,
as well as lower, edge of the wave) the pitch doesn’t rise. So although
you may not “subscribe to” the conclusion that a finger must be placed
in a different spot depending if it's a vibrated or “white” note, that
nonetheless is the inevitable conclusion of your pitch perception
theory. It’s that pesky reality of the pitch going above the center,
starting point again. Since the vibrato motion does encompass higher
pitches, I must repeat: “someone who plays in tune would have to be
able to differentiate, in the placement of EACH finger, whether that
note will include vibrato (in which case it will land slightly below
pitch to account for the higher part of the wave) or won't (in which
case it will land directly on pitch). Since this is impossible, the
theory fails.” Lastly, this idea that the direction in which the vibrato
cycle begins has anything to do with anything is a true red herring.
First of all, I challenge you or anyone to find a prominent artist who
even thinks about this issue, let alone believes that one should strive
to start in one direction or the other. Second, the very act of trying
to strait-jacket a wave motion that should occur in a connected,
unforced way is itself tension-producing. As I found this evening when
I investigated, what the hand does naturally is to vibrate in the
direction it's going, i.e., an ascending fingering or an upward shift
will typically produce a vibrato that commences upward, and the
descending fingerings or shifts will produce one that begins downward.
These are the body's "natural impulses" you often harp on, yet a
deeply-flawed acoustical theory has caused you to ignore them. As I
said, when Bernard Greenhouse heard this theory, he simply snorted.
People should, of course, make their own investigations and draw their
own conclusions, as I've tried to do here. I respect your inquiring
mind and eloquence. And though I’m in Mantel’s corner against you on
this issue, I’m hardly his shill, as I think my “moving on” post
demonstrates. And, as I’ve suggested, the few who care about this
little tempest have likely already decided and moved on. But, for those
still with us, I feel it’s important to state the case as firmly as
possible. Teaching vibrato as you suggest would be stultifying.
Edited by Bob at: 6/11/00 9:51:47 am
justinkagan1 Global user (5/10/00 9:32:30 am) Reply Re: Yet more on vibrato
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- To any of you getting into this thread (more like a wisp): While Victor seems
to be less self-righteous than Bob, he also seems less right, and I believe at
this point Bob's logic is less refutable. Despite his tendency to editorialize
and satirize to buttress his arguments, the center of Bob's thought is
generally in tune whether he thinks from the high or low end of the logical
wave spectrum. I wonder if you gentlemen wouldn't mind weighing in the question
of recorded intonation accuracy v. live playing accuracy. I know the general
string playing accuracy is very high right now but I hear a lot of live playing
which sounds quite "dead". I see more static left hands than I hear in, let's
say, recordings from 30 years ago. The intonation and sound-quality
seamlessness which results from a constantly-moving left hand in a Heifetzian
technique has so much more life to me than one with white-notus interruptus.
The young crop of fiddle players and cellists at the Met who I hear a lot have
no clue as to how "dead" their sound is, stopping to not vibrate on snowy
evenings as they so often do. I will kick in with some thoughts on "balance and
placement" when I have a chance to sit down and write for more that 10 minutes.
In the meantime, have fun jousting. Bob, curious to know if certain litigators
illustrate better in tune than others and why.
Djerzy Global user (6/8/00 3:12:08 pm) Reply Re: Vibrato??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- And then this wrench gets thrown into the works:
Look at a common picket fence. Although the upper edge is a series of peaks and
valleys your perception of it's height will be determined by the highest
points. The mind tends to seek out boundaries, and in the case of repeating
patterns, considers the most salient points and "fills in the blanks" between
them.
Other contributing factors:
* A higher pitch has by nature a greater intensity.
* The point at which the finger stops and changes direction will have a
somewhat longer duration - both the highest and lowest pitches and NOT the
middle. The outer pitches have a longer DURATION(approximately 2x as long), and
the middle pitch has more FREQUENCY(played 2 times per revolution).
All factors considered, the highest point that your finger reaches in a regular
repetition will be that which the mind perceives as the actual pitch.
No matter which belief you subscribe to, one fact remains - vibrato is meant to
add a human quality to music. It can be used to express infinite shades of
emotion. From Mozart to Gypsy, we need to have available to us the whole range
of expression. To limit ourselves to one mode of vibrato in a "hammond-organ"
style would be to rob the music of it's human nature. I vote that it should be
left in the hands of the artist to determine what is appropriate to the musical
idea being expressed.
Respectfully offered for your consideration by Jerry Pence
Steve Drake Global user (6/8/00 9:31:32 pm) Reply Re: Vibrato??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- I thought we had already done this thread to death.
I highly disagree with you on all your points, except the second to last
paragraph.
Vibrato is like a picket fence? Come on, surely your ear isn't that
conscripted. This is an awful analogy.
A higher pitch has a greater intensity? No. Except in some abstract physical
models.
The next paragraph is only applicable to bad cellists, or perhaps one bad
cellist. I don't find this to be true in most of the cellists I like.
The next paragraph may be true for you, but it isn't for me, and I'd hate to
make generalizations about my colleaques about this without asking them.
As most of us have concluded, pitch center is a highly subjective thing. Most
people hear good cellists playing a pitch center, and vibrating up and down
from that center. Rostropovich and Ma would generally be percieved as playing
quite sharp if your argument was true, but most people don't hear them that
way.
Walter Lenel Global user (6/9/00 9:52:48 am) Reply to Steve
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Did you make a decision about auditioning in Richmond?
Djerzy Global user (6/10/00 2:22:23 am) Reply Re: Vibrato??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- I humbly offer this explanation in response to the doubt expressed concerning
the greater duration of pitch at the extremes of a vibrato cycle.
In a reciprocating motion between points A and B, (known as Simple Harmonic
Motion), the object in motion, prior to reversing direction, must first
decelerate and finally come to a stop. This causes an effect known as DWELL.
Dwell is the period of time that the object remains in a state of rest before
continuing in the opposite direction. After this it accelerates in the opposite
direction and the cycle continues. Depending on many factors, such as mass,
applied force, friction, total distance, velocity, amount of caffeine consumed,
etc., the amount of dwell will vary. This principal applies equally to both good
and bad 'cellists and one out of three violists.
To see a visual example of this, bow the C string on a 'cello and observe the
vibration. You can see that the image of the string is clearly more solid at the
outer edges of the vibration. The string is making a reciprocating motion just
as the arm does in vibrato, although presumably much faster! The more solid
image at the extremes is caused by the dwell factor.
For a more in-depth study of this subject I recommend the following resources:
LEARN PHYSICS TODAY - Online Physics Tutorial library.thinkquest.org/10796
FIZZICS FIZZLE library.thinkquest.org/16600/
I have invited Dr. James Chambers of the National Center for Physical Acoustics
to join our discussion on the subject of vibrato and perceived pitch. I hope
that you will welcome his input and direct your technical questions to him for
the enlightenment of all.
Respectfully yours,
Jerry Pence
Steve Drake Global user (6/10/00 10:44:09 am) Reply Re: Vibrato??
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Yes, I agree with you that statistically the pitch stays a bit longer at the
extremes of vibrato. Both on the low and high side. However, why do I (and
presumably others, including the worlds greatest soloists) still hear the
center of the vibrato as being the pitch center? For example, the first note of
Schelomo. It is customarily started with no vibrato, and then vibrato is added
gradually. I don't percieve the pitch as rising, and I don't detect players
subtly sliding the pitch center down to compensate for the vibrato.
Paul Tseng ICS Staff Administrator (6/15/00 11:58:22 am) Reply vibrato, snorting,
et al
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- There is no doubt that Greenhouse was one of the premier cellists of his time,
so his 'opinions' on matters such as vibrato warrant attention simply by virtue
of his own great playing.
But as it was pointed out, the pulling to the flat side of the pitch is not
such a preposterous theory for the likes of Silverstein and others including
Galamian (much of whose technique Rose adapted for the cello).
But this all talk..theory, (maybe even conjecture). Has anyone tried these
methods themselves? I did this morning and here are my findings (Disclaimer:
these are my own individual findings and opinions)
I recorded myself and listened afterwards: 1. I tried playing a note starting
the motion of the vibrato towards the "flat" side of the pitch.
2. I then played normally (for me at least) where the vibrato motion is a more
centered motion.
Conclusions:
1. When playing using method 1, I found that my arm was significantly more
relaxed as the range of motion was limited to the pitch to the flat side of the
pitch and back.
2. The pitch was not noticeably altered in either method. (I did not sound
sharp or begin to get sharp using method 2.)
3. Method 2 produces a wider, richer and rounder vibrato (which I prefer in
general) than method 1.
4. Method 1 sounds convincing and can be used where a lush vibrato is not
desired. It is a bit more focused and "refined" sounding.
Below is an excerpt from a book you must all be familiar with.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ INTONATION OF THE VIBRATO
It is important that the vibrato always goes to the flatted side of the pitch.
The ear catches fare more readily the highest pitch sounded, and a vibrato that
goes as much above the pitch as below makes the general intonation sound too
sharp. The finger should fall in tune on the string. The vibrato should
slightly lower the pitch by swinging first backward, and then should
re-establish the correct pitch by its forward swing. Whenever a distinct
wavering of the pitch occurs, the reason for it may be one of the following:
the vibrato is either too wide or too slow; the fingers are too weakly placed
on the strings; or, there is too much sharping of the pitch by the vibrato
motion itself.
From “Principles of Violin Playing & Teaching” by Ivan Galamian (Prentice-Hall
1962)
Pge 42.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Perhaps Rose adapted this ideology and has since spread the principle among his
many students who have become teachers or practioners of today.
However, Galamian's principles may not be completely applicable to the cello
because the cello has a MUCH longer string length. (Have you ever seen a
violinist try to vibrate on a cello? Have you ever tried to vibrate on a
violin?) What might work on the violin might not be enough for the cello. To
use the "centered" approach on the violin might sound ghastily "wobbly". Also,
each individual has fingers of different girth. That is a factor that might
push a person more towards one method or another.
My final answer: Method 1 (flatted vibrato) can work on the cello, but method 2
works just as well. Both produce different sounding results and it might just
be a matter of preference.
Paul Tseng, Cello Chat Administrator
Today's Quote My Website - New and Improved! The San Diego Cello Society Edited
by Paul Tseng ICS Staff at: 6/15/00 11:58:22 am
Roland Siemons Global user (6/25/00 6:34:42 am) Reply How to reply?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mr Finholt,
Can you provide me with the address of Mr Mantel?
Thanks for your help,
Roland Siemons
(
geocities.com/vienna/stage/9802) (
geocities.com/vienna/stage) (
geocities.com/vienna)