THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF MUSIC

THE INFLUENCE OF VIOLIN SCHOOLS ON PROMINENT

VIOLINISTS/TEACHERS IN THE UNITED STATES

By

Christian M. Baker

A treatise submitted to the College of Music

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Music

Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2005

ii

The members of the Committee approve the treatise of Christian M. Baker defended on October 11, 2005.

__________________________________

Eliot Chapo Professor Directing Treatise

__________________________________

Carolyn Bridger Outside Committee Member

__________________________________

Beth Newdome Committee Member

__________________________________

Melanie Punter Committee Member

The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members.

iii

Music resembles poetry; in each Are nameless graces, which no methods teach,

And which a master hand alone may reach.

Alexander Pope

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express appreciation to the violin teachers who were so kind to respond to my questions via written questionnaire and telephone interview. Their responses are the most essential component of this treatise. I would also like to thank my committee members for their time and attention to this project, including Lubomir Georgiev, who passed away before its completion, but who first recommended the topic to me. I am particularly indebted to my wife, Michelle, and to Dr. Carolyn Bridger, for their extensive help with the revisions.

I express appreciation to my parents, Gary and Cathy Baker, who have made tremendous sacrifices to ensure that their children have the opportunity to study great music. I thank my wifes parents, Jim and Nancy Bailey, who continually support and encourage. Finally, a special word of appreciation to my wife and our three little boysClyn, Russell, and Hyrumfor all their love and patience during this lengthy test of our endurance.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Respondents..............................................................................................................vi List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... vii Abstract ...............................................................................................................................viii

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................1

1. THE INFLUENCE OF VIOLIN SCHOOLS: INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES ..................4

2. GENERAL RESPONSES AND CONCLUSIONS.........................................................45

3. A REPORT OF THE LITERATURE ADDRESSING VIOLIN SCHOOLS AND PROMINENT INFLUENCES ON VIOLIN PEDAGOGY ................................................50

4. TABLES ..........................................................................................................................56

APPENDIX: Human Subjects Research Approval Letter ...................................................92 Informed Consent Form.................................................................................93

BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................................................................................94

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...............................................................................................98

vi

LIST OF RESPONDENTS

1. Andres Cardenes ...............................................................................................................4

2. Charles Castleman ...........................................................................................................10

3. Glenn Dicterow................................................................................................................14

4. Bayla Keyes .....................................................................................................................16

5. Mikhail Kopelman ...........................................................................................................23

6. Oleh Krysa .......................................................................................................................26

7. Violaine Melancon...........................................................................................................29

8. William Preucil ................................................................................................................32

9. David Updegraff ..............................................................................................................34

10. Zvi Zeitlin ......................................................................................................................37

vii

LIST OF TABLES

1. Abbreviations and Designations in the Tables.................................................................56

2. Life Spans of Selected Violinists.....................................................................................57

3. Selected Pupil-to-Teacher Relationships .........................................................................61

4. Selected Teacher-to-Pupil Relationships .........................................................................70

5. Selected Prominent Violinists/Teachers at Music Schools, Conservatories and Other Locations (Alphabetical by School)................................................................75

6. Selected Prominent Violinists/Teachers at Music Schools, Conservatories and Other Locations (Alphabetical by Violinist/Teacher).............................................. 78

7. Significant Treatises on Violin Playing (Chronological by Publication Date)................86

8. Significant Treatises on Violin Playing (Alphabetical by Author)..................................88

9. Primary Sources Consulted for the Tables.......................................................................90

viii

ABSTRACT

This treatise was written in an effort to increase awareness among violinists of the

role and importance of violin schools in present-day performance and pedagogy. Over time, the meaning and relevance of the term school (as it applies to violin playing and teaching) has become increasingly ambiguous and debatable. The purpose of this study is two-fold: 1) to determine the extent to which schools continue to affect prominent violin teachers/performers in the United States today, and 2) to give an account of available literature addressing the various schools of violin playing.

In order to enhance understanding of the current role that the various schools assume in violin pedagogy, opinions from current and highly respected teachers/performers were gathered in the form of telephone interviews and written responses. Their individual responses comprise Chapter One. Chapter Two summarizes their responses in more general terms. A report of relevant literature (Chapter Three) includes information which will allow readers to educate themselves about the different violin schools and prominent influences on violin pedagogy. A series of tables (Chapter Four) provides a useful reference to many of the more prominent teacher-student relationships, the relationships of those teachers to the schools where they were active,

and some of the most significant treatises on violin playing. It is apparent from the interviews that current perspectives and opinions pertaining to the influence of schools vary quite widely, even among renowned artists and teachers. However, one may develop a discriminating sense of the importance of various schools in the history of violin playing and teaching by studying the interviews and the sources relevant to this topic.

1

INTRODUCTION

Even while adherents to various schools teach their own versions of the correct approach to violin playing, each must consider how it is that conflicting schools are able to achieve equally impressive results, despite perceived faults inherent in other methods. The phenomenon is not new, as superb artists have emerged from many different schools (and from outside the schools) in the course of the past three centuries. Before the twentieth century, schools were traditionally affiliated with the location of influential teachers: for example, Giovanni Battista Viotti is recognized for his teaching in Paris and Joseph Bhm for his work in Vienna. But even as early as the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, prominent violinists often traveled extensively and taught in various locations. For instance, although Francesco Geminiani purportedly belongs to the Roman School, he taught for many years in Dublin and London. Antonio Lolli spent a significant amount of time in Germany, France, England, Scandinavia and Russia, not to mention his native Italy. Other international travelers of influence from this era include Gaetano Pugnani, Giovanni Battista Somis, Bartholomeo Campagnoli, Louis-Gabriel Guillemain, Giuseppi Tartini, Giuseppe Torelli and Pietro Locatelli, to name only a few. As violin playing continued to expand and become increasingly cosmopolitan, using location as a means of identifying a school steadily grew more problematic. Frederick Neumann commented on the situation:

[A] comparison of the principles of . . . national schools . . . proved impossible . . . because these national schools resist clear definition. What, for example should be called the German School? The method of Spohr? Or Joachim? Or Flesch? . . . The only thing they have in common is mutual disagreement. As a method the Russian school is a myth. . .1

Professor D.C. Dounis had this to say:

1 Frederick Neumann, Violin Left Hand Technique (Urbana, IL: American String Teachers

Association, 1969), 8-9.

2

I would like to explode the myth about the existence of different schools of bowing. There are no schools of bowing, such as French, Belgian, Franco-Belgian, German, Russian, etc. Bowing serves only in realizing and expressing the musical thought, and the mechanics through which that thought is projected is not a matter of nationality.2

Great pedagogues have always been held in high esteem, but perhaps the importance and influence of the national schools that they allegedly established has declined over time. In the twentieth century, distinguished performers and teachers were inclined to disassociate themselves from schools of the past, possibly because these traditional approaches were increasingly viewed as dogmatic. Consider the following statement by Leopold Auer: I have no methodunless the pursuance of natural lines of development, based on natural principles, be called a method.3 Jascha Heifetz said:

I believe people are a little over-zealous in observing certain rulesone position according to a certain method, a different position according to another. People ask me what method and style I use in bowing. I really havent any idea! I really never have been able to find out what the so-called Auer method is, even though I studied with him.4

When asked his opinion, Nathan Milstein replied:

To be frank with you, I doubt their importance. I have talked with other players on the subject, and I feel it is nonsense to make a philosophy of the various styles. We have a few great Belgian violinists, a number of Russian, French, etc., but to my mind it has just happened so. Nothing else.5

When asked whether his method was essentially Russian or French, Ivan Galamian answered, Partly Russian, partly French, and a good deal of my own.6 This disassociation from schools of the past conceivably led Carl Flesch to begin his Art of Violin-Playing with these words: The present work is not meant to be a School of Violin-Playing in the current meaning of the term.7

2 Samuel and Sada Applebaum, With the Artists (New York: John Markert & Co., 1955), 273.

3 As quoted in Neumann, Violin Left Hand Technique, 8.

4 Applebaum, With the Artists, 43.

5 Ibid., 79.

6 Ivan Galamian, Principles of Violin Playing & Teaching, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1985), 123. 7 Carl Flesch, The Art of Violin Playing, trans. Frederick H. Martens, vol. 1 (New York: Carl

Fischer, 1924-1930), 3.

3

In general, teachers today do not make a point to familiarize their students with different schools, past or present. One could reason that such should be the case, given that great talents continue to emerge regardless of the school to which each mightor might notadhere. But this situation has generated a degree of uncertainty as to the role and importance of schools in present-day violin pedagogy. Over time, the meaning and relevance of the term school has become ever more ambiguous and debatable. A familiarity with acclaimed treatises on violin playing, other relevant literature, relationships between prominent violinists/teachers, locations where these artists were active, and the opinions of current, highly respected violin teachers on this issue will help readers better understand the influence that schools now have on violin playing and teaching.

4

CHAPTER ONE

THE INFLUENCE OF VIOLIN SCHOOLS: INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES

ANDRES CARDENES Carnegie Mellon University (Pittsburgh, PA)

Telephone Interview January 8, 2005

Chris Baker: Who has most influenced your own violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person, if you wish. Andres Cardenes: Theres no question it was my teacher and mentor, Josef Gingold.

CB: To what extent do you view Gingolds influence as being associated with any particular school or schools of violin playing? AC: Well, theres no question hes a proponent and exponent of the Franco-Belgian School, which dates back to the era of Baillot and Vieuxtemps. [Vieuxtemps was] more or less his grandfather of music. Mr. Gingold studied with Ysae, who studied with Vieuxtemps, who studied with de Briot. And so that school was an offshoot of the French and actually Italian School, because Viotti was the one who basically had an influence over establishing almost all the schools, with the exception of the Italian School. He was nevertheless an heir of the Italian school, having studied with Pugnani. Viotti was the one who had the most influence over almost every other school in the entire world.

CB: To what extent do you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with any particular school of violin playing? AC: Definitely the Franco-Belgian School. I think my expertise is in that area, and the tradition that I play in is in that area, and the things I teach my students and feel very strongly about are in that area. I still teach in the same methods, in the same style, more or less in the same concept of that particular school, of course with some modification [because] of various other influences and, of course, my own experienceso I would say 70% of it is still very much mired in the Franco-Belgian School.

CB: In your experience with other professional violinists, do you generally perceive violin playing and teaching today as being associated with violin schools? AC: Its a little bit of a hard question because I think that in a global environment that were now living in, I think theres less territory in a certain way. I think that its harder

5

to discern specific schools or specific styles. I would say generally that theres still a pretty strong Galamian School because they were baby boomers and theyre still around, still playing quite a bit. Theres a weaker (I think) Belgian School; there are fewer proponents of that school, and theres a few Russian School and Soviet School people still around, but I think the French School, and the Czech School, and the German School have all kind of started to lose their identities because of the globalization. Im seeing now that theres more and more general violin playingmore to each persons individual tastes instead of falling under a specific tradition.

CB: Do you recall specific technical advice which Mr. Gingold regularly emphasized to many of his students? Please cite any examples you would like, especially if you feel they are hallmarks of the Franco-Belgian School. AC: Well, lets put it this way: I think that the emphasis in the Franco-Belgian School was not on the technique so much. It was actually more on the style, and I would say there was significant bow technique, not so much left hand, but significant bow technique. And that bow technique was the usage of the bow in such a way that the bow was extremely expressive, and the bow would be used in a manner to create more color, more palettes, moreI guess I would also say more variety in color and sound and texture, and that the vibrato would kind of help that along. We didnt spend an awful lot of time on the left hand except in the vibrato area, and in using extremely expressive fingerings, but not so much in the area of technical expertise, accuracy and perfection. That certainly was not the Franco-Belgian Schools emphasis; that was more the Soviet School and some of the schools that were offshoots of the Soviet Schoolthe Czech School, the Polish School. They were more interested in accuracy and dexterity than they were in expressivity.

CB: Do you recall specific exercises and/or repertoire which Mr. Gingold regularly assigned to his students? AC: Well, I dont know if I could say regularly because Mr. Gingold was a master of identifying peoples talents, and identifying their weaknesses and their strengths, and so he assigned repertoire or technical studies according to each individual. I couldnt say there was a blanket repertoire that he gave everybody, but he did often give the Chausson Poeme, the Spohr Concerto No. 8, the Ysae Sonatasthese were very much a big part of his teaching. And then surrounding that were many of the pieces that were associated somewhat on the fringes of the Belgian School: the Debussy Sonata, the Faur Sonata, the Ravel Tzigane, Impressionists, the Romantic French, and then of course it started to branch out farther. Mr. Gingold was an expert in all the technical studies, particularly involving the bow, which was also more or less an expert area of the French School with Lucien Capet. Capet, of course, was kind of the signature of the bowbefore him was Tartinibut Lucien Capet wrote volumes of books on bow technique, very much implemented in Galamians teaching of bow distribution.

CB: Do you think that Mr. Gingold implemented those same ideas? AC: I think he implemented a lot of those same ideas. So thats why I say it was a little bit on the fringe of what he taught. But the core repertoire was all stuff that was either

6

dedicated to Ysae or from the Franco-Belgian School, or repertoire that was conducive to the style in which the Franco-Belgian School was designed.

CB: Do you perceive significant differences between Mr. Gingolds approach and your own approach to violin playing and teaching? AC: Well, I think that would be a normal thing to say; yes, of course, there are some very significant differences. We are significantly different people with different temperaments and different backgrounds, different religious backgrounds and birth places: He was born in what is now Poland, and I was born in Cuba. Its pretty hard to be too much of a clone. I would say only that there are a lot of similarities in my approach and in my thinkingand I wouldnt [even] say similarities there are a lot of things that I strongly, strongly believe in that he taught me, that I continue to expound upon, and I continue to try to inspire my students to follow those parameters. On the other hand, its a more contemporary world, and the facts are different than they were fifty years ago or a hundred years ago, and so the repertoire I select now has a lot to do with the kids trying to get a job, or the kids trying to play specific concert recitals for requirements or competitions. In the old days you didnt think about that; usually you took an audition, you played a concerto and you got in based on thatfifty years ago. Now you have to play a lot of excerpts, and so theres a lot of history and a lot of analysis of symphonic repertoire thats included in my teaching. Mr. Gingold basically did do some of that, but he did it mainly with concertmaster solos. So, I would say, in essence I very much believe in the style and in the gravity and the seriousness of the Franco-Belgian School, but I have expanded it and modified it for the current time, and Ive added some of my own ideas. I think Mr. Gingold also was a unique humanitarian, unique personality, a man who had the gift of teaching in such [a way] that nobody else Ive ever known has had it. I dont have that same kind of personable approach that he does. Im more strict and Im more to the point, and Im much less patient than he was. He just had all the gifts of teaching, and so its hard to compare. But I would say that of course, regardless of comparison, the influence and the mentoring that took place are absolutelyits 90% of who I am.

CB: I watched a video of Mr. Gingolds teaching once (it was years ago), and Ive never forgotten the rapport that he had about him in his teaching. He really seems to have been an incredible man. AC: We adored him.

CB: Are there any additional aspects of any violin school which influence your own playing and teaching? AC: Well, lets say this: Any person who considers himself an artist would not rationalize and say, Well, Im a product of this. I feel like Im a product of many, many different influences, of many different schools, of many different teachers, and of many different instrumentalists. I also think of people like Janos Starker, Menahem Pressler, Gyorgy Sebok, and Nathan Milstein with whom I studied for two summers, and so I had a pretty good dose of the Russian Schoolthe Old Russian, not the Soviet, but the Russian School. All these others gave me tidbits of information, musical information, musical knowledge about specific works or techniques on their instruments, which was

7

extremely valuable. But I also learned from a few of the ones that I disliked: I also learned from many of those people just exactly how not to be, and exactly how not to teach, how not to play, how not to approach things, how not to treat people, and I think that those schools alsothose proponents of those schools as wellshowed (in my opinion) some serious deficiencies. The Soviet School, for instance, is a perfect example. Its a school of tremendous, tremendous accuracy and high-powered violin playing, but its also a school of tremendous dependency: dependency on your teacher, dependency on the system, dependency on huge amounts of dedicated hours of practice. Once that starts to waver, or you grow up, or your teacher dies, you find many of these players really not able to continue very well, because theyre too mired in one specific way of doing things, and that has hurt them in the long run. I cant generalize, of course, but I do know of a few that have done that, and some of them also dont grow as musicians because they havent been exposed to enough other things.

CB: Do you believe in the current existence of national schools, such as the German, Franco-Belgian, Russian, or even American? AC: Id say that they exist to a certain degree, but theyre watered down. And like Ive said, the boundaries are starting to disintegrate because of globalization and the fact that you can travel anywhere. Teachers travel all over the world now to give classes, and musicians travel abroad very often now to take lessons, and as long as that happensmy class, for instance: Out of my ten students, eight of them are foreigners. They come from Rumania and Bulgaria and from England, from Poland, Mexico, Chile; they come from all over the world. And so as a result of that its very difficult to say that those schools all now exist with their real specific focus because once you inject one Bulgarian with the Franco-Belgian virus that I teach, then he takes it back to Bulgaria, and he starts to tell other people how I did it, and of course that starts to disturb the gene pool of violin playing. And it has to; it has to disturb the gene pool because when the countries, areas, or territories were much more isolated, with very little influence from other places (particularly Eastern Europe), of course theyd been playing a certain way for many years, and now its not that way. They can get a video, they can get on the internet, they can watch something on television easily, so all of those influences have to change how you perceive yourself and how you perceive the world. And so eventually I think were going to get to a point where there wont necessarily be violin schools, but rather violin styles, where people will have more options to try different ways of playing based on what they feel is best for them, and possibly use various different influences from different teachers, through different methods, be it master classes, or private lessons, or video, or video-conferencing (which is what Pinchas Zukerman is doing), and, of course, going to concerts. With all those influences, one can start making their own identity rather than an identity thats related or connected somehow to a specific school.

CB: In your opinion, how important is it that violinists familiarize themselves with different schools of violin playing? AC: Well, I must say, if I have a complaint in the violin world today, its the tremendous amount of ignorance andI cant put it any other waythe incredible amount of ignorance there is about violin playing. Violin playingsomehow due to Suzuki, and due to just vast amounts of violinists and vast amounts of so-called professionals and so-

8

called teachers, and people who want to study and become professionalsthis is one profession where you can be called a professional if you made $15 over the weekend in a church. And so, because theres no way to screen or to maintain certain levels of professionalism like a bar exam, or to get your PhD you must pass written and oral examinations. In violin playing its so totally nebulous, all over the world, that anybody can be a professional, and because of that, I think, the fact is that weve lost touch with the tradition of playing violinthe discipline of playing violinwhich goes back five hundred years. And now the gene pool (as I like to say metaphorically) is just extremely mutated because people are just playing. They think its just like buying a used car: I think Ill be a violinist. And really, thats not the way violin playing ought to be. Violin playing should be a combination of being gifted and talented: having the gift of playing, and then the second thing is the discipline of playingto apply a discipline and a very well-schooled knowledge to your violin playing. And if you do that, and then you follow or you connect with a specific teacher, a specific school or a specific concept, then you can really start to be a violinist and musician, and have a career that I think is creditable. But weve really watered it down tremendously now, where, for instance, at one well-known school youve got 250 violin players studying violin. Im sure theyre all very good, but Im sure if you asked all of them to name five important violinists from a hundred years ago they probably couldnt do itor what countries theyre associated with, or Why was this piece written? For whom? And why? and they have no connection to that. They just play, and they play the notes, and, it would be the same thing if you read a book and you didnt have any cognizance of words. If you didnt know what any of the words meant, but you could still read it because you could phonetically say the wordsI think thats whats happening in violin playing. Everybody is speaking musically phonetically, but do they have a knowledge? Do they really know what theyre playing? Do they have a connection to it? Do they understand the discipline, and do they understand the commitment? Do they understand the traditions and the responsibilities of being a violinist? I think that has changed dramatically for the worse.

CB: Would you think that it would be more important for violinists to familiarize themselves with maybe a single school of violin playing, rather than getting familiar with different schools? AC: I think the minute you limit yourself in any way in music, and when it comes to knowledge, the minute you put a certain cap, I think thats already deadly. Im very familiar with virtually every school of violin playing that has ever existed in 500 years, starting with the monks in churches in the middle of nowhere in Italy. Those monks were the ones who taught Corelli. And so if you think about how totally isolated they were at that time, what an incredible invention it was, those instruments at that time back in the fourteenth centurythe twelfth century even, with violins that were not really violins, of coursebut how it evolved out of that, and how it grew and how it expanded into Europe and how it expanded all over the world after that. This is not Silicon Valley; its not like you just go out and buy computer chips. It takes time, and you really should familiarize yourselves with everything you can. As an example, I had a student who came in a couple years ago, a wonderful student of mine, very talented girl. She came in playing Tartinis Devils Trill, and she didnt know what to do with it, and she was doing the Kreisler

9

arrangement of it. I just told her very simply, Look, it cant be half this, half that; or it cant be one-third this, one-third that and one-third the other thing. I said, You have to make a commitment. Are you going to play it like Kreisler did? Play it like Kreisler, and just dont fool around with the senza vibrato things and the funky bowings. Just play it the way he wants you to play itin the Kreisler style. But if not, then go study something about Italian ornamentation, and come back and play it like they would have played it in the baroque time. And so she did; she did that. She came back, and then I said, Okay, now we have a concept. Now lets advance it.And so she started to modify the way she held the bow; she modified her fingerings, she modified her sound a little bit, she even wound up changing her strings for this piece. And then I thoughtwell, you see, if you didnt know that there was an Italian School, if you didnt know there was an Austrian School, if you didnt know how the arrangements worked and what the differences in the tonality were, and if you didnt know the differences in the bow strokes and the bow holds, and the manner in which to phrase, and the ornamentation, if you dont know all of that, you cant get a convincing performance. You cant have a committed performance of that, and thats why its important to know as much as you can possibly know, if you want to be an artist. If you want to be a violin player, thats another story, but if you want to be an artist, this is what it really requires.

CB: Would you like to recommend any sources which would be helpful in becoming better acquainted with yourself or with Mr. Gingold, for example, written interviews which may be difficult for others to find? AC: Well, there is a wonderful interview thats published by David Blum, and the name of the book is called Quintet. Its a series of five very in-depth, beautiful interviews that he did with five important musicians, and one of them was Mr. Gingold. The article with Mr. Gingold is called The Gold Coin, and its really a very beautiful article. Its a short biography of hima synopsis of his life. Its really wonderful. Of course, you have those videos of Mr. Gingold. I have quite a number of recordings, and soon Ill have a website. You could find out a lot about me from Carnegie Mellon University or Pittsburgh Symphony or from my management, which is American International Artists. And lets see, my conducting, my viola playingI mean, its all out there somewhere. I have two trios that I play in: You might know about the Diaz Trio, and I also play in the Carnegie Mellon Trio.

10

CHARLES CASTLEMAN Eastman School of Music (Rochester, NY)

Telephone Interview January 8, 2005

Chris Baker: Who has most influenced your own violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person, if you wish. Charles Castleman: My first teacher was Emmanuel Ondricek, whose left hand is a Sevcik productactually, both hands. He was really a Sevcik product, although he also studied with Ysae. And I studied with Ivan Galamian, who was mainly influenced by Capet, although possibly also somewhat by Mostras. I had a few lessons with David Oistrakh that had an enormous impact on my bow arm, and I had several lessons with Henryk Szeryng, who had a great deal of impact on my choice of fingerings and choice of bowings in performance.

CB: So all of those great teachers, you would say, have had the most influence, all together? CC: Yes, I would. Yes.

CB: You wouldnt favor one or two above the others? CC: No, because each one did something so different.

CB: To what extent do you view your mentors influences as being associated with any particular school or schools of violin playing? CC: Both Galamian and Oistrakh would be regarded as being from the Franco-Belgian School (bowing), and they were my bowing influences. I think that OndricekI think wed call it a Sevcik School of left-hand, particularly left-hand, but also right hand. Ive run into other Sevcik students who had the same right hand I did. Theres Michael Frischenschlager, who was the chair at Vienna Hochschule, who also was a Sevcik student, and I had a conversation with him, and he learned the same bow arm that I learned from Ondricek.

CB: Was Ondricek also a student of Sevcik, as well as his assistant? CC: Yes, he was. He was also the brother of Franz Ondricek, one of the famous violinists.

CB: But Franz didnt study with Ysae? CC: No, but I think Franz studied with Sevcik also. Jan Kubelik (a famous Sevcik student) and Emmanuel Ondricek worked very close together very frequently as examples of Sevciks playing and teaching.

CB: To what extent do you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with any particular school or schools of violin playing? CC: The Franco-Belgian bow grip is the grip that I teach.

CB: Franco-Belgian in the sense of how Flesch presents it in his Art of Violin Playing?

11

CC: Yes, I would think so; sure. And my left hand definitely is highly influenced by Sevciks concepts, although the fact that Im a performer has changed things. Like everyone else, Ive adapted it so that by now its almost not quite recognizable as part of [the Sevcik approach]. I think mostly by now its diverged, except for the Franco-Belgian bow grip and a particular conformation of the left hand in upper positions that I learned from Sevcik.

CB: So, would you say that you view your playing and teaching as being associated with a particular school, or not necessarily? CC: Not necessarily, except for what I just mentioned. I think that every student presents such individual problems. I mentioned Henryk Szeryng; he was an enormous influence on me in everything he ever taught me, and all the various lessons were things that would be associated with no school whatsoever, but were things he had learned from years of experience performinga good fingering or a good bowing in a particular situationwhich clearly was not part of his training. He had simply learned it himself, and had passed it on to me. And the main thing that Oistrakh gave to me had to do with the right wrist, because I had three teachers with very different points of view: the Sevcik point of view with the right wrist is that it should be stationary and basically immobile; Galamian (I would say unfortunately) doesnt seem to say anything about the right wrist, so he didnt do anything about what was going on, and Oistrakh made it loose because he was very much [inclined to] flexibility in the right wrist. So Im not sure, I guess that would be associated with the schools involved, but I dont know. Considering that Galamian and Oistrakh presented it so differently, and they both had the same school, Im not sure.

CB: In your experience with other professional violinists, do you generally perceive violin playing and teaching today as being associated with violin schools? CC: Right hand, yes; left hand, no. What the Franco-Belgian School presents is a bow grip and an approach that is intermediate between what you might call a German or French version, and a Russian version; and as such, it is advantageous for the maximum number of people as a starting point, and it is a very good teaching vehicle because youre giving them kind of the averagethe place to start. But I think teachers and students eventually develop their own version of it. I think its a good starting point even though Im not sure that all the people who would say they have Franco-Belgian bow arms look very similar.

CB: Do you recall specific technical advice which your mentors regularly emphasized to many of their students? Please cite any examples you would like, especially if you feel they are hallmarks of a particular school. CC: I learned my left hand from Ondricek, who died when I was 13 or 14 years old, and because I was a prodigy I was kind of built by then already. My later teachers didnt say anything about the left hand; they just left it alone, so I cant say much about the left hand because I dont even remember how I was taught. A lot of the current violin teachers studied with Galamian or Delay (Delay being the same school), and theres a lot of the grip, the bow changethe use of a lot of finger articulations are all with the Franco-Belgian School as practiced by Galamian and by Delay, and I think a lot of teachers are using that as a model.

12

CB: Do you recall specific exercises and/or repertoire which your mentors regularly assigned to their students? CC: I would think the basis for Galamians bow technique was coll.8 That was the basic tool. Coll was the way that you developed the strength and flexibility in your fingers to be able to manipulate the bow the way they wanted.

CB: Do you perceive significant differences between your mentors approaches and your own approach to violin playing and teaching? I know youve mentioned already that you consider yourself to be a combination of different styles, but if theres anything else you would like to mention along those lines CC: Not so much in technical terms. In terms of my own teaching, I think Im much more concerned with specific physical strengths, weaknesses, attributes, flexibility, etc., of my individual students, and adapting my teaching to thatfiguring out ways to loosen them up, figuring out ways to make them hold the bow perhaps in a way different from how someone else would with different characteristicsthis more so than Galamian did. I think he had a system, and although his system was the basis for my bow arm, I think (given all of that), I think that I dont hold to a system anywhere near as much as he did.

CB: So he was more uniform in his approach, maybe, than you are? CC: Yes.

CB: Are there any additional aspects of any violin school which influence your own playing and teaching which we havent talked about? CC: Well, there might be an interesting story with that. The so-called Heifetz bow arm (that was called the Russian bow arm) is one with a very pronated right hand, which gives one a lot of strength and not much flexibility, and for many years, that was the bow arm that was being taught because everybody admired Heifetz so much, [but it was taught] without a whole lot of success because it had so little flexibility. But if one looked at Heifetzs physique and the way he worked, clearly he was someone with extraordinary flexibility and not necessarily strong. He was kind ofa little frail, in a way, and so he had come up with this particular bow grip that gave him maximum strength, and with his phenomenal flexibility it worked just fine, but with someone with lesser flexibility it didnt work so well at all. I had a student several years ago who had studied with several teachers, very fine teachers. She was very small, not a very strong girl but very flexible, and she had studied with people from all the schools that youve ever heard of, and none of it really helped her. She was having a lot of trouble with tendonitis and things of that nature, and I decided to teach her the Heifetz bow armwhich of course Ive never played from, but [from] my understanding of itand it had wonderful results, because in fact it had exactly the effect that I had hoped. In other words [it] gave her the strength that she needed in her own, wonderful flexibility. So I found that this clearly is not a bow grip I would teach generally, but I found it really valuable in this one case.

8 See Galamian, Principles, 73-74.

13

CB: Thats interesting. Knowing how to adapt to the students is not always easy, so its great to have a sense for that. Would you say that the Heifetz bow arm is maybe synonymous with the Russian School? CC: Well, thats what they call the Russian School, but Ive avoided that because the Russians like Oistrakh and Kogan had Franco-Belgian bow arms, not like Heifetzs at all, and Milsteins is not Heifetzs either; you know, Elmans wasnt Heifetzs, so thats what they call the Russian bow arm, but I think it was just Heifetzs.

CB: Do you believe in the current existence of national schools, such as the German, Franco-Belgian, Russian, or even American? CC: Only in terms of the bow grip; I mean you cant see someone play or hear someone play and know where they came from at this point. Outside of bow grips, Im not so sure that necessarily holds. Joseph Silverstein, another excellent teacher, still teaches the Old French School, which is [in contrast to] Heifetzs index finger, which (as I mentioned) contacts the bow very high up on the index finger, and the Franco-Belgian, which contacts the index finger mid-finger. Silversteins (what I would call French School) contacts it very near the first joint, not the second joint, creating enormous flexibility, not as much strength, but in a different way.

CB: Ive never heard that somebody nowadays is teaching thatwell, Ive heard it called the German grip, what you called the Old French. Maybe its the same thing. CC: He teaches it with enormous success. He very frequently used to come and give master classes at my summer program; and what I found was [even] with his very different bow arm, we were looking for exactly the same result. I think what you have more than anything else is this: A teacher has a concept of the ideal product that comes from his students in terms of the sound that comes out, in terms of the flexibility, in terms of the strength, and we found that even though our bow arms are entirely different, the concept was so much the same that it worked very well to have students go back and forth.

CB: In your opinion, how important is it that violinists familiarize themselves with different schools of violin playing? CC: I think its important to know that there isnt a right way of playing. I think if you dont realize that there are several schools of violin playing youll think that what your teacher taught you perhaps is right, and anything that you hear about [other approaches] is wrong, because your teacher is unlikely to be showing you schools that arent his own (Im an exception). And if you know that there are these different schools, and they have different advantagesfor example, that there was a bow arm that isnt right for you, which contributed to Heifetz being the great artist that he wasyou then understand enough and you know enough that youre willing to adapt to what you are taught [in order] to help yourself more, and to help your students more. But I think as an exercise of just simply knowing what they wereknowing whats different among them is importantIm not sure you have to be able to understand all of them as they function.

14

GLENN DICTEROW Juilliard; Manhattan School of Music

Telephone Interview January 8, 2005

Chris Baker: Who has most influenced your own violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person, if you wish. Glenn Dicterow: Certainly my father was one of the biggest influences; he was a great musician. He was principal second of the Los Angeles Philharmonic (Harold was his name), and he began teaching both my brother and myself. Soon after, I began studying with other people, including Manuel Compinsky, Naoum Blinder, Erno Neufeld; then, of course were the performers that I studied with, Heifetz and Henryk Szeryng; and then Galamian at Juilliard.

CB: To what extent do you view your mentors influences as being associated with any particular school or schools of violin playing? GD: I think all of them are associated with different types of schools, but mostly I believe its thenot the Sovietbut the pre-Soviet Russian School that influenced me mostly (the one that went back before Oistrakh): Leopold Auer, Milstein, Heifetz. The most special influence musically would be Fritz Kreisler.

CB: So do you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with the Auer School, combined with Kreislers musicality? GD: Yes.

CB: In your experience with other professional violinists, do you generally perceive violin playing and teaching today as being associated with violin schools? GD: Well, I dont know what school you would call that, because a lot of people are influenced obviously by the Galamian/Delay connection; many of them are soloists out there. Then you have Vengerovs School which isI dont remember the name of his teacher, I think its Bron.

CB: Yes, Bron. GD: But Im not sure, mostly I would say today, most of them have come from the Galamian/Delay School. I suppose you could call that Franco-Belgian.

CB: Yes, Galamian is sort of his own school, in a sense, maybe a combination of the Belgian and the Russian. GD: Yes, I would say so.

CB: And his ownmostly his own, probably. Do you recall specific technical advice which your mentors regularly emphasized to many of his students? Please cite any examples you would like, especially if you feel they are hallmarks of a particular school. GD: I would say the right arm of the Auer School. Theres a lot more color involved rather than, say, in the Galamian School. That [Galamian] to me was just, you know, big

15

sound production: a lot of weight with not a lot of color, though Ill have to say the older school [Auer] would be more mental, as far as the bow arm is concerned.

CB: You studied with Heifetz (who was the Auer School), and Blinder who was a second generation Auer student, and then Galamian. But Heifetz was more of an influence as far as the bow arm was concerned? GD: Heifetz, Milstein, Kreisler were much more of an influence as far as the color that they were able to produce, and their sound.

CB: Do you recall specific exercises and/or repertoire which your mentors regularly assigned to their students? GD: Galamian certainly assigned to his students the tudes of Gavinis and Dont, and scales, of course. Heifetz was a fanatic of scales, Paganini caprices.

CB: Oh, and the Paganini caprices also? GD: Oh yeah. Not that he performed too many of them, but

CB: But he would assign them a lot? GD: Yes, he would.

CB: Do you perceive significant differences between your mentors approach and your own approach to violin playing and teaching? GD: Well, I have many mentors, so yes, I would say theres an approach, definitely, that, all mixed together, comes out perhaps as a makeup of all of them.

CB: And so youve combined the different things that youve learned from all of them? GD: Yes. Mainly the bow arm is the key to individuality and color.

CB: Do you believe in the current existence of national schools, such as the German, Franco-Belgian, Russian, or even American? GD: I think theyre getting more and more co-mingled. I believe that there is definitely a difference in the German style and the American style, I would say, but I think in America you have quite a mix because you have so many nationalities. I think that the American influence is very strong, certainly in the Asian culture. Musically speaking, they tend to gravitate toward the American School.

CB: American School meaning the Galamian? GD: Mainly, I would say, but we also have the other teachers that certainly were important, [for instance, at] CurtisZimbalist in the olden days, a slightly different approach: more musically inclined, at least virtuosically. Thats why I say its very continental, very international.

CB: In your opinion, how important is it that violinists familiarize themselves with different schools of violin playing? GD: Very important.

16

BAYLA KEYES Boston University

Telephone Interview April 14, 2004

Chris Baker: Who has most influenced your own violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person, if you wish. Bayla Keyes: There are several big influences. Ill start with Paul Kling, who was my teacher at the University of Louisville, Kentucky. He was concertmaster of the Louisville Orchestra at the time, then he moved to Canada and he taught in Victoria, Canada. As a young boy, he was a prisoner at Teresenstadt [concentration camp near Prague], so he was exposed to some of the greatest musical influences in Europe, many of whom were killed in that camp, but he survived. He was and is an incredible musician, a wonderful violinist, and it was just amazing luck to have him as a teacher. He basically kicked me out of the University of Louisville and made me go audition for Ivan Galamian.

I got into Mr. Galamians studio at Curtis, and he was an amazing technicianreally taught me about how to play the violin, although he didnt combine it with the kind of musical information that Paul Kling had given me.

I think the biggest musical influence on me during my time at Curtis was Felix Galimir. He really became a mentor to me.

There was a woman at Curtis named Karen Tuttle who was an amazing influence. She has a whole physical system of teaching; she calls it coordination. That was a fantastic piece of luck for me to be able to study with her, sort of on the side, but I also studied with her a great deal in the year immediately after my graduation from Curtis. Karen Tuttle is basically the goddess of the viola world. She taught most of the major violists in this country, including Jeffery Irvine, Dean Hansel, Kim Kashkashian, Sally Clark, Michelle LaCourse, Karen Richards, Karen Dreyfus,just on and on.

CB: Did you actually study violin with her? BK: Yes. She taught this coordination system which was basically a method of hooking the bow to the breathing, and so you learned a way to breathe so that you were constantly relaxing as you breathed out. It was a marvelous system for releasing tension. She worked in a large way with the body, so it almost didnt matter what instrument she was teaching. She was basically teaching the relationship of the body to the music and the body to the instrument, so that you would be comfortable. This was a very different thing than what I had learned from the other teachers, who were concentrating either totally on the music or totally on the violin itself, like Mr. Galamian. Karen Tuttle ended up teaching at Curtis, Juilliard, Aspenshes just been the big name. It was fun to be the token violinist [laughs].

Long after I had been out of school, I developed some tendonitis in my hands. I wasnt living in Boston yet; I was in the Muir quartet but we were living in Connecticut and we were on the road touring about 250 days a year, playing something like 120 concerts a yearvery rigorous. I developed tendonitis carrying the luggage and everything like that, and I heard about this wonderful teacher in Boston named George Neikrug. I took about a dozen lessons with him, and that really changed my life because he had studied with D.C. Dounis. George Neikrug is actually a cellist, but (like Karen

17

Tuttle) he teaches all instruments. He kind of specializes in tendonitis and knows all these little ways to show how to do things; he just opened my eyes.

I feel like Ive had these great influences in my life, and I feel extremely blessed. I cant say that Im just one persons student. I feel like I got such important things from all these people Ive mentioned.

CB: Did you also study with Shumsky? BK: I did. I studied with Shumsky for two years at Yale. Well, he was phenomenal, but I think his technique was so different from what I had learned from Mr. Kling and Mr. Galamian that itit kind of confused me. It wasnt congruent with everything else that I had learned. For example, Galamian teaches to be slightly pronated on the bow, and Mr. Shumsky was teaching me to be very square on the bow.

CB: Meaning, with a flatter wrist? BK: Right, exactly. I didnt understand enough to integrate it with what I already knew, and I think that was part of why I hurt myself, because I was not good at integrating different systems.

CB: So by the time you studied with Shumsky, your technique was probably pretty much established anyway, as far as what you had learned from Galamian and these others? BK: Certainly the Galamian stuff, but then later on when I hurt myself and I learned the Dounis stuff, that was a huge help.

CB: That was after Shumsky though, right? BK: Yes, and I would say that I went through interesting stages because after I studied with George Neikrug (which was in my early 30s; I had this series of lessons with him), I spent the next ten years or so integrating the Dounis concepts into what I was already doing with the Galamian training. Theyre very different, so it took me quite a while to sort that out in my own playing. Then when I left the Muir Quartet in 1995 and began teaching full time at Boston University, playing with my piano trio (Triple Helix) and playing a few concertos around town, I found I had to go back and draw on the Galamian training that I had before, because although the Dounis stuff works better in the string quartet, the Galamian stuff works better for the concertos (which he taught fabulously; he specialized in the concertos). Interestingly enough, it also works better for the piano trio because with the Galamian concept of sound theres a lot more brilliance and clarity. Are you familiar with all the coll and martel stuff?

CB: Yes, which he points out in his Principles of Violin Playing and Teaching. BK: Yes, and that makes a very articulate playing with a lot of consonants, and basically a large, ringing sound with a free use of bow. It works really well in a concert hall, but since theres articulation it also works well next to a piano because the piano has an attack, whereas the Dounis stuffwell, I tell my kids that the Dounis stuff is the push- pull, which means that your hand responds to the bow (kind of a melting response which makes a really different sound). With the Galamian you do an active finger motion at the start of a stroke, and of course I use them both; it depends on what you want in any given situation.

18

CB: So you find the Dounis to be more helpful particularly in quartets? BK: Yes. Any time you want more of a blendy sound, or a more covered sound. Galamian said three things to me all the time: closer to the bridge, more bow, and make every note beautiful. With the Dounis, you are working with releases. The Karen Tuttle stuff that I learned is quite congruent with the Dounis, because Karen Tuttle works with the releases in the large muscle groups, and the Dounis stuff that George Neikrug showed me works with the releases in the small muscle groups of the knuckles, the fingers, the wrist (in both hands actually), so I began to understand these principles of release, and what I call softness or melting. Galamian is more strength-based, so you have a lot of power and a lot of muscle. Sometimes thats exactly what you want, but sometimes you want relaxing, and a sound which reflects a suppleness in the muscles. Its hard for me to explain without showing you.

CB: On a scale from 1 to 5, to what extent do you view your mentors influences as being associated with a particular school or schools of violin playing: 1 being closely associated, 3 being somewhat associated, and 5, not associated? BK: 3, somewhat associated. Paul Kling certainly came from the European line which was influenced by Carl Flesch and Sevcikthat whole stream. But Galamian was a student of Capet, so theres that whole stream. Karen Tuttle studied with Dounis, but she was also William Primroses assistant as a student at Curtis, and she came up with her method while observing William Primrose. She went to all of his lessons and watched him play, and she came up with these physical principles. She really founded her own school.

CB: Many people refer to the Galamian School now, toohe being also his own school. BK: I think thats right, and its not exactly Russian, but its certainly closely related to Russian, in my opinion.

CB: More so than Franco-Belgian? BK: Yesoh, yes.

CB: Do you believe Galamian meant to establish his own school? BK: He took a lot of Capets ideas and he went further with them. He had very original ideas for developing technique and very good methods for achieving results with a large number of students. I think thats why he had such great success as a teacher-trainer in this country. Thats what all great teachers do: They take what theyre given and then they go further and do something original with them. You can always trace your heritage, but I meanits got to be just like composers, right? You know, Bartk studied the music of Mozart and Haydn and Beethoven and Brahms, but his music doesnt sound like them. Paul Kling had the Franco-Belgian influence in Teresenstadt, but he was also a huge fan of David Oistrakh and followed him all over the place, so he was heavily influenced by the Russian School as well. So, there again, the greatness of his teaching came from his taking concepts from both schools. I also felt that way about Galamian and about Karen Tuttle, too, so I think all these teachers, while coming somewhat out of a tradition, went on to be very much not just a parrot of a tradition.

19

CB: Again using the 1 to 5 scale, to what extent do you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with a particular school or schools of violin playing: 1 being closely associated, 3 being somewhat associated, and 5, not associated? BK: Well, I guess Id have to put myself at about a 3 because I definitely take material from all of them. I definitely quote them and use it, but Im definitely teaching in a way that none of them taught because Im using materials from other schools. Im not a single-school person; Im a combo.

CB: Again choosing from 1 to 5, in your experience with other professional violinists, to what extent do you generally perceive violin playing and teaching today as being associated with violin schools? BK: Between 1 and 2. I see people teaching in a verykind of pigeon-holed way. I certainly see, even on the college level, that the teachers send students to other teachers from the same school. So, in a certain way its disadvantageous to the kids because theyll go straight through and have only [for instance] Galamian-trained teachers. Even the same can be said for the Karen Tuttle School because she has so many students all over the country in string quartets and at colleges teaching and in all the orchestras. You cant go anywhere withoutI mean, its just hugeher influence. And all of them network and send each other their students, so its pretty hard to be a violist in this country and not come into that school, because there are so many of them. My complaint is that these teachers dont explore enough in other traditions. If the teacher just takes what theyve been taught, and they dont go further, sometimes the teaching can get very sterile.

CB: Do you recall specific technical advice which your mentors regularly emphasized to many of their students? Please cite any examples you would like, especially if they are hallmarks of a particular school. You have mentioned a lot already; anything else? BK: There is a great difference from teacher to teacher in how much the musical principles are taught, and thats another thing that has me greatly concerned. I think there has been a tendency to divorce the violin teaching from the music itself and leave the musical part of the instruction to the chamber music teachers or something like that, which I think does a vast disservice to the concerto and solo repertoire. I think its one of the reasons why its so hard to tell the soloists apart. In Arnold Steinhardts book Indivisible by Four, he mentions how in the old days when he was growing up, none of the big famous soloists sounded like each other. Heifetz was completelyyou know, you could distinguish his sound, vibrato; Elman was his own; Kreisler was his own. They didnt sound like each other. And Arnold made the complaint, with which I somewhat agree, which is that you turn on the radio [today] and you hear these soloists and they all sound wonderful and have incredibly high virtuosic style, but theres a kind of sameness of standards. And this is not just in the violin world, this is going on throughout music. Eric Rusk, a fantastic horn player, says that theres a kind of internationalization of standards in horn playing. There used to be different schools of horn playing, different sounds in different parts of the world, and now you cant tell where a horn player was trained because theyre all sounding the same. In one way it means that theres a much higher technical standard all over the world, but in another way, it takes out the different flavors. It makes kind of a uniformity, which is somewhat

20

distressing. I think that the kids are encouraged to come up to this very high technical level without being given the tools for finding out how to play the music in a way that makes what they have to say very special and very individual and unique, and frankly, its much easier to teach the technique than it is to teach the stuff that Im talking about. But the teachers that I mentioned to youPaul Kling and Felix Galimir, and to some extent Karen Tuttlewere constantly teaching about the musical principles, and for me, thats the reason to be in music: to make whats in the music come alive. All this technical stuff, as fascinating and wonderful as it is, and as helpful as it is, its just a means to an end, and a lot of times you can get the end by emphasizing the musical principles. A lot of the teaching that I received was kind of teaching from a viewpoint. Karen Tuttle did teach musical principles, but most of what she gave me was the physical coordination. Likewise, George Neikrug gave me tremendous technical and physical help. We didnt talk a whole lot about the musical things that were going on because he was basically fixing my tendonitis problem. Galamian, likewiseonce I asked him about a musical phrasing and he said, I am a doctor of the violin. If you have a problem, I fix it. The musical stuff is up to you. He just came right out and said that. So, if you had the musical talent and the curiosity, then you could take what he gave you and apply it to the music, but he was not interested in that. I cant teach that way. I have to teach the way Paul Kling taught me, which was always from the standpoint of what youre trying to do what youre trying to express in the music. You start with the score; start with the musical idea because you cant even begin to make your technical decisions unless you know what it is youre going for. What character do you want? That determines the sound that you want; that determines the bow hold youre going to use, and the amount of bow that you will use. It all springs from the musical impulse.

CB: Thats in contrast to the way most of your teachers taught, except for Paul Kling? BK: I would not say most of my teachers, but certainly Galamian, and a lot of the violin teaching that I am seeing, based on the people who come and audition for Tanglewood and for Boston University, where you get this wonderful cleanliness and you get this strong sound with a steady bow speed right next to the bridge, and you dont get colors and musical ideas. See, Galamian had this belief that you teach the technique when theyre young and then later on, much later on, after theyve learned all the concertos and everything and theyre all completely fabulous violinists, then you teach them musical stuff; then they can easily develop that. I think that if you start out teaching them the technique, very often something that needs to be encouraged and nurtured at an early age just will not really develop fully.

When youre trying to teach all these different things, its very difficult to get all of these concepts. Thats one of the reasons I give [students] a lesson a week, and undergraduates also get an extra lesson a week with my assistants. Then, they all come to studio class for an hour and a half each week, and I give them handouts: I have to give them a lot of information so that they can get the whole system. My kids are kind of snowed under withI mean if I could, Id like to do the Russian thing, where they just come to lessons the whole day. Yuri Mazurkevich told me that when David Oistrakh was not touring, when he was teaching, all the students went to all the lessons. It was an immersion into the system. Theres a lot to be said for that kind of thing, rather than just one hour a week. I cant teach them what they need to know in one hour a week.

21

[With students] I tend to use tudes that I enjoyed playing and listening to. Theyre just some of the Dont and Kreutzer tudes that I enjoy the sound of, so its something fun to practice. You can give pleasure to yourself while youre working on a specific problem. The advantage with the tudes is that there are usually far fewer problems than you might have in even a first movement of a concerto, where you have many different problems in a row. With an tude, you can basically concentrate on one or two aspects and fix those things inside of the tude. And I must say that I use scales much more than I used to. I use scales, arpeggios, and double stops because the problems that show up in the pieces always show up in the scales as well. When you have them in the scales, you can fix them without the additional complications of the musical ideas, and then when you go back into the pieces, your technical foundation is good. So I teach far more technique than, for example, Paul Kling taught me.

CB: Generally more than your other teachers, would you say? BK: Well, Galamian was a total scale fanatic, so I dont believe I do as much as he did, but none of my teachers taught scales and technique the way that I do except for Galamian. Generally speaking, scales and this kind of technical work is uniform with the bigger teachersyou know, like the Vamoss and David Cerone and the Juilliard Prep School.

CB: Do you perceive significant differences between your mentors approach and your own approach to violin playing and teaching? BK: Yes, I guess so, mainly because of the fact that Im trying to do all of the things [laughs], which is why Im at a university instead of a conservatory, I suppose. Certainly I start from the musical characters, which is not like Galamian. But I do incorporate a great deal of the technical, specific things which I think can really enhanceI remember I was playing the Chaconne for Felix Galimir (I studied with him after I got out of Curtis and moved to New York City) and I was playing one of the arpeggiated sections. The notes in the middle of the chord were not speaking, so I asked him what to do, and he had no idea. He didnt know, and he simply said, I dont know; youll just have to figure that out yourself. And, you know, if youre very talented, and just naturally physically gifted, you can figure these things out yourself, but if you happen to have a teacher who knows exactly what to tell you, it saves you hours! And so I do a certain amount of that kind of technical teaching. I show them a specific muscle group associated with a specific technical task, like string crossings or shifting. I try to get them to understand the way the muscle groups work in the most natural way possible. This also goes along with Karen Tuttles teaching because I try to make them very aware of what their bodies are doing, so that they wont tense up inappropriately. Basically, I tell them that their bodies have to be free to vibrate so that the music can go through them, so that they can feel the musical impulses through their bodies and then coming out through the violin. So I get sort of mystical by that point.

I feel like I will do whatever it takes to get somebody to sound good, and if what works is for me to tell them to think about their fantasies, thats what Ill ask them to do. If what works is for me to tell them to move their thumb on the bow and hold it in a different way, thats what Ill tell them to do. If what I have to do is scare them to death so theyll practice, then thats what Ill do. Actually, Galamian said a wonderful thing in

22

one of his books: he said that the teachers job is to study the student and figure out the key to the student. I do take that advice to heart, and I dont just mean technically. What youre trying to do is bring the best out of the student, and there are so many ways into someones heart, just like there are so many ways into the music.

CB: Do you believe in the current existence of national schools, such as the German, Franco-Belgian, Russian, or even American? BK: Of all of those, I think the one that really has an identity still is the Russian. The others, I would say, have become extremely blended, and I think the American School is de facto a blend. It would be pretty hard to say distinguishing hallmarks of an American School in my mind, but the Russian is very clear.

CB: In your mind, Galamian follows the Russian very closely, at least as far as the bow arm is concerned? BK: Its not identical, but I think its pretty close. Its certainly far closer to Russian than it is to Franco-Belgian. I associate Galamian with the Russian bow hold because he basically married it to the Franco-Belgian hold.

CB: Back to the 1 to 5 scale; in your opinion, how important is it that violinists familiarize themselves with different schools of violin playing? BK: 1, very important, which goes back to the conversation earlier about how people unfortunately tend to be taught one method all the way through and they dont get exposed to others. Well, it can take a long time, and you have to get around, so I dont think you can expect a 20-year-old to be able to do this.

CB: Would you like to recommend any sources which would be helpful in becoming better acquainted with yourself or with your mentors, for example written interviews which may be difficult for others to find? BK: Michelle LaCourse is a viola professor at Boston University who has written articles about Karen Tuttle. She was also a former student of hers, and was her assistant for many years at Peabody.

CB: Im aware of Dounis The Daily Dozen and The Absolute Independence of the Fingers; are there other publications by Dounis that you would recommend? BK: Actually, The Artists Technique of Violin Playing, Op. 12, is the one I use the most; its published. Id also recommend a small yellow booklet that talks about useful principles and has musical examples: New Aids to the Technical Development of the Violinist, Op. 27. I should also mention Simon Fischer's Basics, which has great information about both Dounis and Galamian, also Dorothy Delay. It has lots of good pictures. Theres also the recent Eric Rosenbluth edition of Carl Fleschs Art of Violin Playing.

23

MIKHAIL KOPELMAN Eastman School of Music (Rochester, NY)

Telephone Interview March 31, 2004

Chris Baker: Who has most influenced your violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person, if you wish. Mikhail Kopelman: Maybe Ill talk first about my influences, not as a teacher, but as a performer. When I was a student at Moscow Conservatory there were many great musicians. If talking about violinists, of course Oistrakh was, lets say, the god. But I would say that I listened to all the recordings of, like, Heifetz, Elman, Kogan, and I was influenced by these people too. So I was influenced by the old generation of great violinists. I was fortunate to listen live to Oistrakh for many, many years, and Kogan. Talking about teachingwell, its hard to say because I didnt learn, really, how to teach violinI just learned during my many years of study at Moscow Conservatory and before Moscow Conservatory. Then mainly I learned a lot when I started to play in string quartets. Of course, my teachersMaya Glezarova and Yuri Yankelevichthey taught me, so I learned a lot from them, and then I learned a lot from different musicians, just [by] myself.

CB: Would you say there were one or two people who had the most influence on you, or would you say it was really a combination of all these artists that you were hearing, rather than just your teachers? MK: Mainly its a combination of the artists I was hearing. Also I learned a lot when I joined the Borodin quartetfrom the old members of the Borodin quartet. But its not violin playingits mainly making music, you know.

CB: So would you say there are probably no one or two people who have influenced you the most? MK: Thats right.

CB: On a scale from 1 to 5, to what extent do you view Glezarovas and Yankelevichs influences as being associated with a particular school or schools of violin playing: 1 being closely associated, 3 being somewhat associated, and 5, not associated? MK: I think without doubt its associated with the Russian School for sure, number 1, because Yankelevich, he was reallyit was real Russian School. His teacher was Nalbandyan, who was a pupil of Auer. I think he was an assistant of Auer, many years ago.

CB: Again using the 1 to 5 scale, to what extent do you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with a particular school or schools of violin playing? MK: Lets say 2, because I was also influenced in my early years before Moscow Conservatory, when I studied in Uzhgorod (the small city where I was born), and the teacher with whom I was studying was Efim Flomen, a pupil of Enesco. He had studied at Bucharest Conservatory. But mostly I was influenced by Yankelevichby Russian Schoolbecause I studied there since I was thirteen years old.

24

CB: Again using the 1 to 5 scale, in your experience with other professional violinists, to what extent do you generally perceive violin playing and teaching today as being associated with violin schools: 1 being closely associated, 5, not associated? MK: Well, we can put 2, maybe.

CB: Do you recall specific exercises and/or repertoire which your mentors regularly assigned to their students? MK: Every day I was playing scales, arpeggios, double stops, and every day I played some Bach. It was really a very important thing to do. So I spent at least one hour every day to practice scales and different kinds of exercises. It was like, you know, its like a prayer. Still Im doing this until now. I try, if I have a little time, I always play a little Bach or exercises, which is very important, I think.

CB: Do you recall specific technical advice which your mentors regularly emphasized to many of their students? Please cite any examples you would like, especially if they are hallmarks of a particular school. MK: I remember nothing specific because, wellspecific it was in some points when, for example, I came to Moscow they started to change some things like my vibrato, so I spent much time to learn how to vibrate, but it was just a short period, so I couldnt call thisyou knowit was not regular. Nothing special, I think.

CB: Im sure it depended on the individual students, too. MK: Thats true.

CB: But nothing sticks out in your mind as being something routinely emphasized? MK: No.

CB: Do you perceive significant differences between your mentors approach and your own approach to violin playing and teaching? MK: I think there are some differences, yes, because when I started, my teacher always gave advice for all students to use, lets say, the same fingerings, bowings, you know. Everybody played so it was, lets say, just one specific edition.

CB: Are you talking specifically about Yankelevichs students? MK: Yes.

CB: So he would prescribe specific fingerings and bowings. MK: Yes, which is a normal thing, but it was very difficult to change anything if you had some of your own ideas, because it waswell, it was a sort of system. I am more flexible, I would say, with my students. I think that many things depend on physiology. Everybody has a different physiology, so some fingerings for some people are just not good. But I believe that fingering is alsowhen we put fingerings and bowingsits also not only [affecting the] technical aspect, but the musical aspect too, for sure. So, its quite a complex thing. And also, I think what I really learned during my many years playing

25

with string quartetsits a more detailed approach, lets say, for colors; so I know how to use different kinds of colors because I learned a lot playing string quartets.

CB: Would you say that this was something you werent really taught, but that you sort of acquired yourself? Is this a difference in your approach to violin playing? MK: Yes, its just a more musical approach now. Ive learned a lot of great music since I was studying as a student, so I think my musical approach now is completely different. My understanding of the music, and understanding of the sound production and quality, and different styles, you knowits different. So with my own experience, I can maybe teach my students technically how to make different colors.

CB: Using technique to teach those different colors? MK: Yes.

CB: Do you find that to be a difference between your own approach and Yankelevichs approach, for instance? MK: I believesomething is different, yes. What I got from Yankelevichit was a basis. The school which I got, its like a basic thing. Then youlets say, you build the house.

CB: So the details you acquired more on your own, maybe? MK: Yes, and you learn all your life.

CB: Are there any additional aspects of any violin school which influence your own playing and teachinganything that we havent talked about that you would want to mention? MK: As I mentioned, I listened to all the recordings like Kreisler, Elman, Zimbalist, Heifetz, and wellthese people: Kreisler was a different school, and, lets say, Thibaud (French School) or Grumiaux (Belgian School). So I learned a lot from these great musicians, just listening to how they playyou can learn a lot if you listen. So I would say I was influenced by the old masters, too, just through the recordings. And also in the Russian School I was always told about making a great soundbeautiful sound like a voice; and I was listening to the old Italian singers, which I think also helped a lot to understand the nature of the sound.

CB: Do you believe in the current existence of national schools, such as the German, Franco-Belgian, Russian, or even American? MK: Yes, I believe they still exist, but these days I think its not so pure like it was before, not so clean. Its a different world now. Everything is mixed. Many nationalities live in different countries, so I would say that it is sort of a mixture now.

CB: Back to the 1 to 5 scale. In your opinion, how important is it that violinists familiarize themselves with different schools of violin playing: 1 being very important, and 5, not important? MK: Well, I would say that its important, I think. Its very important, so I would say 1.

26

OLEH KRYSA Eastman School of Music (Rochester, NY)

Telephone Interview March 24, 2004

Chris Baker: Who has most influenced your own violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person, if you wish. Oleh Krysa: Of course my great teacher David Oistrakhbut of course I was absorbing different ideas from different players...Jascha Heifetz, Kreisler, Nathan Milstein, many Russian playersbut I think maybe because my nature is closer to the nature of David Oistrakh, I think the most valuable time for me was with him. Of course, great pianists and great singers as well, and cellists. One time I was very involved in opera. I liked opera, you know. I was sitting at many, many show[s] of opera because my first teacher was concertmaster in the opera theater, so I was very interested. But later on I switched to symphony music, solo music for violin, and chamber music.

CB: Was [Konstantin] Mikhailov your teacher who played in the opera? OK: Mikhailov, yes. He was a student of Korguyeff, and Korguyeff was [an] assistant to Auer, so I had a very good teacher from when I was six.

CB: You started with him when you were six years old? OK: Yes.

CB: Would you say that Oistrakh was your greatest influence? OK: Of course, because I am always saying that he was not only a teacher of violin, he was our godfather. He taught us how to live, how to manage, how to not only be a good violinist, but also a good man and good colleague; and he was incredible.

CB: To what extent do you view Oistrakhs influence as being associated with a particular school or schools of violin playing? OK: Of course, hes very Russian School. He presents a very, very valuableexample of Russian School: that singing technique, perfection, excellent style, etc. So I think he belongs to Russian School, of course.

CB: Most people associate Auer with the Russian School too, because of his work in St. Petersburg. Oistrakh was somewhere else [Moscow]. Do you maybe consider there to be two different Russian Schoolsone with the Oistrakh School, one with the Auer School? OK: Well, yes, of course, theyre a little bit different. But it was very personal, his teaching and suggestions, but still very Russian School.

CB: To what extent do you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with a particular school of violin playing? OK: Well, you know, its an endless process because we are trying to get perfection and beauty, and I think Oistrakh got it. His art I am always comparing to the art of Mozart or Raphael in painting: beauty and perfection. My goal also is to keep these traditions and

27

somehow transfer them to my students. I am trying to do [this]sometimes successfully, sometimes notbut [laughs] its a life.

CB: Obviously you do it very successfully, or I wouldnt be interviewing you [we laugh]. But as far as your goal, would it be to pass on that same School? OK: Yes. Of course, I am not Oistrakh. I am Krysa, so I cannot do the same thing, but still, traditionsyes.

CB: So, as far as the extent that you view your own playing and teaching as being associated with the Russian School, would you say closely associated? OK: Yes.

CB: Do you recall specific technical advice which Oistrakh regularly emphasized to many of his students? OK: Yesmostly the beauty of the sound, mostly without pressure. Just bow speed and a lot of air in sound and in the bow. There are very different approaches sometimes from other schools and from other teachers, but I am always following that advice.

CB: Do you recall specific exercises and/or repertoire which Oistrakh regularly assigned to his students? OK: Well, he was trying to balance, of course, regarding to every person, which is very different. But of course very standard classical repertoire with adjustments to different personalities, and balance of modern, romantic, and classical music. Modern music was always part of my repertoire because he always said, Here, we are living in twentieth centuryyou have to know that music and perform that.

CB: Any other exercises or repertoireif you noticed that there were certain things that he always used with every one of his students, or was it pretty individual? OK: Its very individual. Every student has different repertoire in different order. I started, for example, from Goldmark Concerto, and I switched to Mozart, and I go to Bach, and Wieniawski, and Szymanowskiwhatever.

CB: Do you perceive significant differences between Oistrakhs approach and your own approach to violin playing and teaching? OK: Probably not. Of course, sometimes there are slight differences, but I think I am very strongly following Oistrakh.

CB: Are there any additional aspects of any violin school which influence your own playing and teaching that we havent talked about yet? OK: Well, as I said, I was trying to absorb different approaches from French School, from American School, from different countries, so Im trying to mix. But still, I think I am a very strong representative of Russian School. Mostly I taught in Moscow, so I had many great colleagues in Moscow Conservatory and Kiev Conservatory. But also I am learning a lot from my colleagues here in United States: for example from my colleague, Professor Zvi Zeitlin, who is, you know, a living legend; from my friend Charles Castleman, who I know very well for a long time; Mr. Kopelman, who is the first

28

violinist in the Borodin Quartet and Tokyo Quartethes a great chamber music playerso I am always trying to get as much as I can from them. So, I can say that, of course, I have an influence from my colleagues. But again, I am mixing. I think its very important to keep your individuality very strong.

CB: In your experience with your colleagues and other professional violinists, to what extent do you generally perceive violin playing and teaching today as being associated with violin schools of the past? Do you think closely associated, or somewhat associated? OK: Closely associated.

CB: Do you believe in the current existence of national schools, such as the German, Franco-Belgian, Russian, or even American? OK: Yes, but its not that separate like it used to bebecause of communications and travelersso its much wider and deeper.

CB: In your opinion, how important is it that violinists familiarize themselves with different schools of violin playing? OK: Very important.

CB: Would you like to recommend any sources which would be helpful in becoming better acquainted with yourself? OK: Other sources about myself?

CB: Yes. OK: Well, you know the [Applebaum] series The Way They Play? Its volume 14, so you can read something there.

29

VIOLAINE MELANCON Peabody Institute of Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, MD)

Written Response Postmarked April 12, 2004

TREATISE QUESTIONNAIRE *If you would like additional writing space, please use the back side or a separate sheet.

The purpose of the questionnaire is to determine the extent to which schools of violin playing continue to affect prominent violin teachers/performers in the U.S. today.

[V. Melancons answers are typed in bold]

1) Who has most influenced your own violin playing and teaching? You may mention more than one person if you wish, and answer the following for each.

Claude Letourneau and Isadore Tinkleman

2) To what extent do you view your mentors influence as being associated with a particular school or schools of violin playing?