DOUBLE BASS INTONATION: A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO SOLO AND ENSEMBLE PLAYING BY JOHN MICHAEL PRIESTER Submitted to the faculty of the Jacobs School of Music in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Doctor of Music, Indiana University May 2015 Accepted by the faculty of the Jacobs School of Music Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Music. Doctoral Committee ________________________________________ Lawrence Hurst, Research Director _______________________________________ Bruce Bransby, Chairperson _______________________________________ Marianne C. Kielian-Gilbert _______________________________________ Stanley Ritchie 30 March 2015 ii Copyright ©2014 John Michael Priester iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To my committee, Prof. Bruce Bransby, Prof. Lawrence Hurst, Prof. Marianne Kielian- Gilbert, Prof. Stanley Ritch, and Prof. Kurt Muroki, my deepest thanks for your mentorship and patience. Even knowing what a long, hard road this paper was to be, you let me walk it. To Prof. Hurst and Prof. Bransby, in particular, thank you for the years of wisdom, which has made me the player and teacher I am today. To my parents, thank you for all of the years of support, even if seemed like they wouldn’t end. And to my wife, Briana, for every discovery shared, every frustration soothed, and every day I was allowed to cover the dining room table with research materials, thank you. iv DOUBLE BASS INTONATION: A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO SOLO AND ENSEMBLE PLAYING Abstract This study uses an interdisciplinary approach to analyze double bass intonation as it occurs in a solo (i.e., without playing with any additional instruments) and ensemble contexts, develops a systematic approach to double bass intonation (subsequently referred to as “the system”), and applies that system to double bass literature to theoretically test its applicability. While the examples used come mostly from the orchestral literature, the material presents passages often heard in an orchestral audition context in which the bass is played by itself. Intonation generally is examined according to acoustics, psychoacoustics, cognition, historical and modern performance practice, and pedagogy. The salient principle extracted is that acceptable intonation is generated from the satisfaction of several factors, including clear categorical assignment of an interval’s size in a tonal context, highly rated timbral characteristics of the sound produced, and tone placement conforming to emotional schematic expectations, and a general model of acceptable intonation is thereby proposed. With this background, the particular intonation difficulties of the double bass are analyzed, including acoustic roughness, psychoacoustic roughness, and part-specific intonation expectations. The resonance system of double bass intonation proposed is intended to minimize acoustic and psychoacoustic roughness while staying within the categorical bounds of intonation and maximizing conformity to schematic expectations. The system’s efficacy is theoretically tested against examples from the double bass literature from various time periods, keys, and modes. It is found to conform in most cases to intonation expectations, and where not, alternative readings and tone placements are suggested. A possible course of study to implement the system is then suggested, as are extensions and ideas for further related research. Keywords: Double Bass Intonation Tuning Temperament Acoustics Psychoacoustics Cognition Performance Practice Pedagogy v N.B. All words marked with a + are further defined in Appendix C: Glossary, p. 255 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………….iv Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………....v Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………vi Lists: Examples………………………………………………………………………..viii Figures………………………………………………………………………..…..ix Tables………………………………………………………………………….......x Appendices………………………………………………………………………..xi Chapter 1: Introduction……………..……………………………………………………..1 Chapter 2: What is this “acceptable intonation” thing anyway?………………………....11 The physical canvas…………………………………………………………..….11 Notions of pitch…………………………………………………………………..14 Comparison of pitches: where intonation begins………………………………...23 Categories in context: getting to the key…………………………………………29 Modeling categories: the general case…………………………………………...46 Some influences of instrument acoustics………………………………………..60 General conclusions……………………………………………………………...69 Chapter 3: How does this play out in practice?.................................................................71 Temperament…………………………………………………………………….71 Performance practice…………………………………………………………….79 Intonation pedagogy……….……………………………………………………..86 What we really do, really………………………………………………………...95 Chapter 4: Detailed Problems of Double Bass Intonation and Some Solutions………..105 Acoustic, psychoacoustic, and cognitive problems……………………………107 Being part of the solution……………………………………………………….115 Chapter 5: The System and Its Application……………...…………………………….121 An acoustic solution: the illusion of good intonation…………………………..121 Objectives of the system…....…………………………………………………..122 Developing the system: tuning……………...………………………………......123 Developing the system: setting unisons, octaves, and fifths……………...…….125 vii Developing the system: filling in the half-position tones with thirds and fifths.126 Developing the system: filling in first position with the switch hitters……..…128 Developing the system: notes of a higher position……………………...……...132 Evaluation and application: the numbers of the system..…………………...…134 Notes on the sketches…………………………………………………………...141 Evaluation and application: Mozart, Symphony No. 35…………………….….142 Evaluation and application: Mozart, Symphony No. 39…………………….….149 Evaluation and application: Beethoven, Symphony No. 5……………….…….156 Evaluation and application: Beethoven, Symphony No. 9……………….…….162 Evaluation and application: Schubert, Symphony No. 9………………….……167 Evaluation and application: Strauss, Don Juan………………………….……..172 Evaluation and application: Bartok, Concerto for Orchestra…………….…….179 Evaluation and application: Koussevitzky, Concerto Op. 3…………….……...187 Chapter 6: Conclusion and Ideals for Further Research…………………………..........191 Pedagogical implications: a possible course……………………….…………..191 Pedagogical implications: tools of the trade………………………..…………..198 Ideas for further research……………………………..………………………...201 The concluding remarks………………………………………………………...205 References………………………………………………………………………………207 viii LIST OF EXAMPLES Example 1: Sketch of Mozart, Symphony No. 35 in D Major (Haffner), K385, mvt. IV, mm. 1–38……………………………………………………....142 Example 2: Sketch of Mozart, Symphony No. 39, K543, mvt I, mm. 40–97…………..149 Example 3: Sketch of Beethoven, Symphony No. 5 in C Minor, Op. 67, mvt. III, mm. 1–97……………………………………………………..156 Example 4: Sketch of Beethoven, Symphony No. 9 in D Minor, Op. 125, mvt. IV, mm. 65–75………………………………………………......162 Example 5: Sketch of Schubert, Symphony No. 9 in C Major, D. 944 (the Great), mvt. III, rehearsal B–2 after C………………………...…...167 Example 6: Sketch of Strauss, Don Juan, op. 20, rehearsal F–21 after F………………172 Example 7: Sketch of Bartok, Concerto for Orchestra, Sz. 116, mvt. I, mm. 35–58…..179 Example 9: Sketch of Koussevitzky, Concerto Op. 3, mvt I, mm. 19–40……………...187 ix LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 1: The consonance ratings for (a) sine tones and (b) complex tones as measured by Plomp & Levelt (1965)……………..……….40 Fig. 2: The old/young woman illusion…………………………………………………...49 Fig. 3: The two faces/goblet illusion……………………………………………………..50 Fig. 4: Phon scale chart………………………………………………………………....110 x LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Exemplar table of frequency ratios projected by the system, expressed in cents…………………………….………135 xi LIST OF APPENDECIES Appendix A: Table of Ratios Predicted by the System Expressed in Cents……..…….233 Appendix B: Scores of Musical Examples……………………………………………..241 Mozart, Symphony No. 35 in D Major (Haffner), K385, mvt. IV, mm. 1–38 (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1880)...………………………………….241 Mozart, Symphony No. 39, K543, mvt. I, mm. 26–97 (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1880)……………………………………………………………244 Beethoven, Symphony No. 5 in C Minor, Op. 67, mvt. III, mm. 1–97 (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1862)………………………………………………248 Beethoven, Symphony No. 9 in D Minor, Op. 125 cello and double bass part, mvt. IV, mm. 65–75 (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1863)……………..252 Schubert, Symphony No. 9 in C Major, D. 944 (the Great), mvt. III, rehearsal B – 2 m. after C (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, c. 1850)……..253 Strauss, Don Juan, Op. 20, rehearsal F – 21 m. after F (New York: Dover 1979)…………………………………………………………….258 Bartok, Concerto for Orchestra, Sz. 116 double bass part, mvt. I, mm. 35–58 (London: Boosey & Hawkes 1946)………………………..264 Koussevitzky, Concerto Op. 3 piano score, mvt I, mm. 19–40 (Leipzig: Robert Forberg, c. 1910)………………………………………………..265 Appendix C: Glossary…………………………………………………………………..267 N.B. All words marked with a + are further defined in Appendix C: Glossary. xii 1 Chapter 1: Introduction “Intonation is the cross we all have to bear as string players.” -Anonymous audition committee member The search for “good” intonation is one that beguiles many a string player. It is shrouded in myth and legend, conflicted in artistry and physics. Many proceed through their education without a clear understanding of what it is they are measuring and the manner in which they are measuring it. Intonation forms part of the foundation of the musical art, being one