Performance on 3 25 Feb 2011 LSO/Harding

[Osborn]

Cellini might explain the importance of the bow. I recall an article (possibly obituary) about Heifetz, who was said to be reclusive and often irritable in retirement, that he was rather unwilling to give masterclasses but did give some time to visiting schools.

It was said that he would look at each child/student's violin without criticism but would confiscate or break any bows he didn't like (children in tears, mummies angry!) then play each violin using his own bow. And apparently, whatever he was playing, he could create some semblance of the unique Heifetz sound.

He would then give each child/student a brand new bow - he received a huge number of free samples, always of superb quality. He'd never get round to using them and sort of felt that he was giving the pupils the certainty that their violin could sound beautiful and had been given a bow made for (perhaps) the greatest violinist of the time.

Sorry about the rambly story (which is to the best of my recollection). Is the bow almost as important as the instrument Cellini and do some suit certain music better than others etc?

[Cellini]

Cellini might explain the importance of the bow. I recall an article (possibly obituary) about Heifetz, who was said to be reclusive and often irritable in retirement, that he was rather unwilling to give masterclasses but did give some time to visiting schools.

It was said that he would look at each child/student's violin without criticism but would confiscate or break any bows he didn't like (children in tears, mummies angry!) then play each violin using his own bow. And apparently, whatever he was playing, he could create some semblance of the unique Heifetz sound.

He would then give each child/student a brand new bow - he received a huge number of free samples, always of superb quality. He'd never get round to using them and sort of felt that he was giving the pupils the certainty that their violin could sound beautiful and had been given a bow made for (perhaps) the greatest violinist of the time.

Sorry about the rambly story (which is to the best of my recollection). Is the bow almost as important as the instrument Cellini and do some suit certain music better than others etc?

I've never heard that before about Heifetz - but it's an interesting story - a little out of character but could well be true.

There are differing opinions about bows, apparently Paganini was not bothered, and a friend who is a good player and a bit of a Paganini expert says he's not bothered too much about bows.

But most players put quite a lot of importance on the bow, which can cost as little as £500 and as much as £30,000 if its a certain French bow by Tourte or Pecarte.

Most high quality new bows (made using Permanbuco wood) are in the region of £1,500 to £6,000 but you can get a perfectly good new bow for £2,000 or just a bit more. Older antique bows go from £1,000 to anything, lets say £30,000 as in the above examples. It depends on age and also where from, French, English or German - mostly with older bows from about 50 years + and the most sought after would be French. I have an English bow from about 1930 which I paid £1,500 and it makes a big sound and do what I want it to do, richochet, spiccato, legato, staccato etc.

Bows are personal and a bow I like might not be liked by another player. Some bows do nice legato and have a good big sound but are difficult to control in spiccato say. When I was looking I tried about 30 or more bows - German Engilsh and others, and some from Italy and S America. One German and the Englsh bow I bought were short listed for home trial and the English bow won by a whisper. A famous Englsh bow was made by WE Hill in their workshops between about 1900 and 1970 (approx) and another famous English maker was James Tubbs whose bows fetch a lot and which so far I've never liked. (But I've only tried Tubbs viola bows so fiddle bows could be different).

James Ehnes in his DVD, playing all those famous instruments, says he matched bows with instruments for the best sound. So yes, most players think the bow is important.

Footnote: I also have a bow made out of Carbon Fibre which works OK - and it cost £350 - but they can go for over £1,000 as well. The one I have just doesn't have the big sound that the Permanbuco bow has. But some people like them.

I have heard and seen some players changing their bow in the middle of a piece, when a certain passage comes up, or for different movements, but this I feel is a bit extreme!! If in orchestra there is a lot of col legno (where you bang the bow stick in the string) people bring in their cheap rubbish bows and leave the good bows in the case. This saves marking the finish on the bow.

When David Oistrakh was in Paris in the 1950's/60's he would go to to the violin dealers and buy up all the good French bows, Tourtes and Pecartes, which could be had very cheaply then. In London I could buy a Hill bow for £20- £40 in that time, which are worth £3,500 - £9,000 now. Just about the same time, 1959/60 you could get a J B Guadanini violin for about £2,000 - now it would be £500,000 to a million. (It's called a poor man's Strad, but some people consider its as good as or even better than a Strad).

[Osborn]

Great stuff Cellini; many thanks. A friend of mine played for the BBCSO in Boulez's time (now teaches) and is always moaning about her bow(s). A bad carpenter always blames..!

Back to the Brahms, a recording by Isabelle Faust is released today which Andrew Clements reviewed favourably in the Grauniad:

"Faust plays down the Joachim connection in the concerto by opting to play not his own familiar cadenza but the one by Busoni, which is constantly underpinned by the timpani. Her performance is wonderfully proportioned, though, never grandiose nor unnecessarily rhetorical, with the Mahler Chamber Orchestra supplying perfectly scaled support. Those who like their Brahms bold and beefy may not care for this performance; those who prefer it expressively searching and introspective should love it, with the bonus of the delicate and deft account of the Sextet."

I know a bit about most of today's violinists but not her. I have an Amazon voucher to spend and am very tempted (1) because she's alive and I can look out for a chance to see her (2) becuase I far prefer Brahms performed with transparency, spring and suppleness (not like a massive granite Scottish castle looming oppressively out of a wet fog).

Worth buying? I don't think Ehnes (who I also rate very highly) has recorded it yet.