Italian - German Mandolin Technique

[Jairo Ramos]

I'm studying the italian methods, Calace, Munier, Branzoli. I read in this forum about a german school of classical mandolin, but I can't understand which are the differences between Italian classical mandolin technique and the german classical technique.

Maybe someone here can explain this...

Thanks!

[DavidKOS]

I'm not the biggest expert - but it seems the Germans use a lot less tremolo, softer picks, flatwound strings, and have a different, almost more guitar-like concept of mandolin tone.

I'm not a German stylist.

[crisscross]

I'm not the biggest expert either, but in addition to what David said: German stylists often use a little larger bowlback with a little wider fingerboard that makes chordal playing easier.
The pick most used is the Wolle pick.
You can see a typical German mandolin (a Seiffert model made by Alfred Woll) and a Wolle pick used by Caterina Lichtenberg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N70qOyuUB8I
Generally speaking, the sound seems a little darker then the sound from Naples.

A nice entry into German style mandolin might be the e-book "Reflections" by Barbara Pommerenke Steel available as a download at Astute music.
https://www.astute-music.com/store/p...nke-Steel.html
Here's the chord study "Little River"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY4_lW0yiXw

Another composer, who has written easy to intermediate pieces in the German style is Marlo Strauss.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASsmtEhUYAI

On a higher level, what seems to be a piece in German style:

"La flor inocente" composed by José A. Zambrano and played by Jeannette Mozos del Campo on a mandolin by Uli Albert.
Lots of chords and no tremolo at all.

[margora]

Although it is true that the majority of German classical mandolinists use Seiffert-style instruments that have "a little wider fretboard", with flatwound strings, and the Wolle pick, these physical artifacts have little or nothing to do with modern German classical mandollin technique. My personal technique draws on modern German, and I play the same way whether or not I am using a Wolle pick or Thomastik strings, and whether or not I am playing my Sieffert, my Calace, my modern American Cohen, or for that matter, an F-5. The same is true of Caterina Lichtenberg. It is incorrect to say that the Germans use "less" tremolo.

To begin, the various methods mentioned by the OP -- Calace, Munier, Branzoli, and so forth -- date from the late 19th and early 20th century. The Neapolitan mandolin, with its GDAE tuning, was invented ca. 1750 and its predecessor, the mandolini (tuned mostly in 4ths) from the 17th century. The Neapolitan baroque instrument became extremely popular in the 1760s, primarily in Paris, and a number of tutors were written -- Denis, Gervasio, Leone, etc. Of these, only Fouchetti covers both the Neapolitan and early instruments. Some of the methods sold well and were in wide circulation -- the Leone, so much so, that it was translated into English (a copy is in the British Library).

The mandolin subsequently went into serious decline in the early 19th century. When it was revived in the late 19th century, the baroque tutors had been completely forgotten and they play no role in the ca. 1900 methods, which are influenced overwhelmingly by the violin, particularly in the left hand orientation on the fingerboard, left hand fingering (so-called diatonic fingering, or two frets per left hand finger), and various arpeggio patterns. The mandolin, however, is not a plucked violin, and the heavy influence of the violin has been to the detriment of the instrument, in my opinion and that of many others. Unless I had a specific reason to do so -- for example, a student who wished to study ca. 1900 performance practice on the mandolin -- I would not use these methods for a student today.

As the urban legend goes, the baroque methods were "rediscovered" by Konrad Wolki, who wrote about them in the appendix of his method, which was re-published in English (in a translation by Keith Harris) by Norman Levine's company, Plucked String Inc. Various pieces of the baroque tutors were subsequently codified by Marga Wilden-Husgen and became the initial basis for modern German technique. This included an attempt to revive the instruments themselves, although the German version of the baroque mandolino -- or what is erroneously referred to as a "soprano lute" -- has almost nothing to do with an authentic copy.

In the Wilden-Husgen method (her Mandolinen Schule) and especially her book of studies (Technische Studien fur Mandolinen) extensive use is made of the baroque tutors as source material. This includes, for example, the various preludes in the Denis method, and Leone's "magazin" which gave his arpeggio patterns. Along with the source material, the right hand was codified -- for example, in the extensive use of single-string upstroke (sometimes called "2-2-1" for a DDU pattern across strings, in which the U is a single-string upstroke). Also (very) important is the orientation of the plectrum towards the strings, i.e. a "slanted" orientation (used in the downstroke) and also "tilted" (the plectrum strikes the string on its left side).

Wilden-Husgen also selected a small collection of exercise materials from Calace, etc. and, on the American side, Odell (which also happens to be popular in Japan), These are intended to build skills to play what the Germans call "tremolo-staccato" such as the Calace preludes.

Modern German technique differs significantly also in posture -- use of the footstool, under the left leg or frequently, with both feet on it, use of a lap cloth to stabilize the instrument -- and left hand orientation. The left hand does not support the neck in any manner and the left hand position on the fretboard is very similar to the modern classical guitar. Again, this relates back to the 18th century methods, Leone in particular.

Germans began to be trained in these methods, first by Wilden-Husgen and subsequently her students, ca. 1980. The earliest students include Lichtenberg and Gertrud Weyhofen (Troester, when she was married to Michael), both very well known and influential, but also many others. The methods have been very successful in producing a steady stream of very high level professional players, the majority of which received their education in the music conservatory at Wuppertal. Sometime ago Lichtenberg was appointed to take over from Wilden-Husgen, who is retired but still active as an educator and performer.

The various Wilden-Husgen books are in German. The closest in English are two books by Gertrud Weyhofen (Technique on Eight Strings, Volumes 1 and 2), which were companions to a two volume DVD that Weyhofen made for Norman Levine in the 1990s. These are OOP, but copies can be found on Ebay. Weyhofen is arguably the best exponent of modern German technique. The DVDS also contain outstanding performances of various mandolin-guitar pieces with her-then spouse, Michael Troester. These performances are vastly superior to anything else at the time (still true today, IMHO).

German technique has continued to evolve. One very important strand is the work of Keith Harris, in his book The Mandolin Game, and also in his ongoing series of articles published in the quarterly CMSA Mandolin Journal (and also in the FAME newsletter). Harris goes far beyond previous work in considering posture, right hand stroking, plectrum orientation and left hand fingering. In particular, modern German left hand fingering is basically violin ("first finger position", "second finger position" and so on), but Harris has rethought this extensively. I am personally very influenced by his ideas. The German insistence on violin fingering is odd, because the evidence is clear that the baroque mandolino was played by lutenists, who used the same left hand fingering regardless of the size of the instrument, or its tuning.

In addition to Harris's work, there are differences in second-(and third) generation Germans, many of whom are Lichtenberg students. Although obviously German, Lichtenberg's technique has some differences from, say, Weyhofen -- the right hand uses more arm movement, and the left hand is also different. This can be seen also in Lichtenberg's two recent DVDs for Homespun, but one must keep in mind that these are produced primarily for an American audience. Lichtenberg also has a stronger interest in the Italian methods -- see, for example, her collection of intermediate etudes, or the English-language version of the Calace method that she and Mike Marshall published). The same is true of Steffen Trekel, who has recently edited various Munier works for his wife's (Maren Trekel) publishing company.

Lastly, it is very important to recognize that modern Italian classical mandolin differs significantly from the early 20th century methods. Modern Italian begins with Annedo, who taught Ugo Orlandi, who then taught many others, including Aonzo. Modern Italian's have a casual approach to posture (compared with modern German) -- the legs are crossed over, the neck is fairly flat (unlike German, in which the headstock is angled up towards the player's shoulder, again following 18th century practice) and the left hand generally supports the neck. Left hand orientation is violin-like, and right hand plucking uses a lot of "free" stroke. The right hand has a "flat" wrist, which is braced on the strings behind the bridge. I have a lot of friends into modern Italian and I enjoy their playing (such as Carlo) but as a technical approach to the mandolin, I do not find any of this compelling.

There is also an emerging school of modern Italian players investigating historically informed performance practice (HIP, for short). This is a very good thing, because the German approach to 18th century mandolin is anachronistic (especially, the mandolino). Some of the best work, IMHO, is being done by Mauro Squillante and Davide Rebuffo, both of whom are professionally trained as lutenists, and are outstanding mandolinists and musicologists. Squillante and Rebuffo operate a mandolin academy out of Naples, which offers periodic workshops in historical performance practice on the mandolin.

[Jim Garber]

Big thanks to Bob Margo for detailed explanation and history.

[JeffD]

There is an exciting history there. I was introduced to some of the details a couple of weeks ago. It is very interesting.

I think I would be right in saying that Caterina Lichtenberg would be an example of a more orthodox German style of playing. Correct me if I am wrong.

My question is, do the two different "schools" apply more appropriately to different music. For example, if one were well versed in both would one use the more German technique for Bach and the more Italian technique for Vivaldi?

[Jim Garber]

My question is, do the two different "schools" apply more appropriately to different music. For example, if one were well versed in both would one use the more German technique for Bach and the more Italian technique for Vivaldi?

Nah! I would say it is more of an aesthetic choice in technique, equipment and musical approach.

[margora]

"I think I would be right in saying that Caterina Lichtenberg would be an example of a more orthodox German style of playing. Correct me if I am wrong."

There is only one, more or less, orthodox German. There is always individual variation and things change over time. As I mentioned, Caterina uses more arm movement in her right hand than Gertrud -- as she explains in her video, probably because she learned this as a child. In the past decade or so many Russians have made their way to Wuppertal, and generally come having extensive experience on the domra. Domra tremolo, for example, is almost entirely arm and can sound very aggressive on a mandolin. Once they go through Wuppertal these players tend to shed some of the domra approach, but not entirely.

"My question is, do the two different "schools" apply more appropriately to different music. For example, if one were well versed in both would one use the more German technique for Bach and the more Italian technique for Vivaldi?"

If one is following a HIP (historically informed performance) approach, the only way to play Vivaldi "appropriately" is to use a baroque mandolino (5-course) played with the fingers, and not a plectrum. From such a perspective it would be incorrect to play Vivaldi on a modern mandolin, using whichever approach. If by "Bach" you mean the solo violin or cello music, there is no literally "appropriate" way to do this on a Neapolitan mandolin, because it did not exist when the music was written. The solo violin music circulated in Paris ca. 1760-80 in violin circles, but there is no evidence any of it reached any of the Parisian mandolinists at the time. One can, however, approach the music with a HIP attitude in mind -- that is, imagine how Leone would play the music, if he knew about it.

[Jairo Ramos]

Well, I simply thought that the german style was a boring one, and the Italian Style an amusing one!

This forum is marvelous, fellow members with deep knowledge take time to explain clearly and extensively.

I think that answers like the one of Robert Margo must to be a sticky in this Classical forum. In this forum and in google I didn't find a more complete answer.

Thank you all!

[crisscross]

I have another question concerning the German mandolin technique:
There is a distinction between "gerade Plektrumstellung" and "geneigte Plektrumstellung"
The signs are I for "Gerade Plektrumstellung" and / for "geneigte Plektrumstellung".
You can see that on page 8 of the sample of Gertrud Troesters techique book.
http://www.edition49.de/pdf/vf/VF_13_Probepartitur.pdf
"gerade" means something like perpendicular or at an angle of 90 degees, and "geneigt" means something like slanted or angled 45 degrees.
Is this distinction typical for German mandolin technique?
I'd adjust the pick slant rather by feeling than consciously...

[Jairo Ramos]

I also noted what Mr. margo says about the plectrum:

"Also (very) important is the orientation of the plectrum towards the strings, i.e. a "slanted" orientation (used in the downstroke) and also "tilted" (the plectrum strikes the string on its left side)."

I always play with a slanted pick orientation, and do the tremolo with the plectrum in horizontal position, sometimes slanted it at the finish or the beginning to change the expression. I do too a soft tremolo, without a deep stroke, I rub the strings...

Interesting to hear what the experts have to say about your question, Crisscross!

[margora]

""gerade" means something like perpendicular or at an angle of 90 degees, and "geneigt" means something like slanted or angled 45 degrees.
Is this distinction typical for German mandolin technique?"

Yes, it is essential. The slanted pick is how one plays a standard down stroke, either a single note or the first two notes of a glide stroke (e.g. DDU). The pick is also slanted when playing the upstroke, which causes only a single string to be plucked. The perpendicular pick is used for alternating stroking -- and, therefore, tremolo. For arpeggio patterns, either can be used, it varies with the context. As I recall, Gertrud does not discuss the "tilt" of the plectrum in her books, although it is apparent in her instructional video. The plectrum is tilted so that the right side (for a right handed player, looking downward at the hand) is upwards slightly, and the plectrum contacts the string on the left side. This is explained in detail in Keith Harris' book, The Mandolin Game.

[SA-R]

For me as a mandolinist and musicologist some of the texts I see above don't just answer a question. Instead they create history and are a sign of mechanisms of canonization. On that topic a lot of books have been written, I highly recommend Lydia Goehr's 'The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works'. If you keep mentioning the same names and the same stories over and over again they will eventually become the truth, despite the actual complexity of the subject.

The story of an Italian (or Welsh) and a German school of mandolin playing actually goes back to at least the mid 1930s when a new German movement that was largely influenced by Nazi ideas was campaigning for a new style of playing and of composing to great a national identity. Two people that were involved big time, leading this campaign, were Hermann Ambrosius and Konrad Wölki. For me it is therefore very sad, that such big credit is given to two people that were closely intertwined with the German Nazi history. If you are interested in reading more about that I highly recommend to read my own article that appeared in Phoibos 2013/2 [URL="https://www.academia.edu/15685588/Kanonbildung_Musikgeschichtsschreibung_und_Klangäs thetik_fernab_des_mainstream_oder_von_der_Befreiun g_der_Mandoline.."[/URL].

What happened with this way of thinking after the second world war has not been researched properly so far. Instead certain names like Wölki, Behrend, Wilden-Hüsgen etc. keep popping up and are seen as one line of developing 'the' German tradition. That is only one side of many (hi)stories pushing a certain tradition. But what about all the people that are being more and more forgotten because nobody writes about their activities? And I'm not just thinking of Takashi Ochi or Detlef Tewes.

Here in Germany we don't talk about 'the' German or Italian school. That seems to be a conversation that appears in the English speaking world. For me it is a historical creation that does not give credit to the very colorful world around the mandolin. In fact the word 'school' has yet to be defined. Things and traditions are in fact a little more complicated with several ways of playing the instrument, different sound concepts and performance practices. There are so many people out here in Central Europe that play and teach the mandolin, creating very different scenes.

What really brings the mandolin further in my opinion is not discussing technical details or repeating the opinions of whoever is loud enough to be heard in other countries or online. For me it is more important to look outside the box, to include various sound concepts and to be part of the professional music world. I find it very important not to listen to the same people again and again but instead to watch the world carefully and maybe do research on topics of interest. Personally, as a mandolinist I learned various ways of playing through different teachers. My playing really developed further when I learned a different way of perceiving sound and when I started working with excellent musicians that do not play the mandolin.

[Beanzy]

I think it is imoprtant to realise that the methods being talked about are thoroughly modern approaches using modern sensibilities to approach what for most of us is a modern version of an instrument with a long development period.
A very large part of that modern approach involves historical interpretation in order to give results that please the modern ear. This last sentence was just as relevant back when Calace was writing his methods with a very Modernist approach to our instrument. His works can be read as a grand opus that sought to elevate the instument to acceptability in the world of art music. As with earlier times he was not afraid to change the instruments and repertoire to better fit the desired outcomes (his pursuit of the liuto cantabile etc)

However it is important to continue to recognise that real developments are often made by people who don't necessarily share your artistic or political views, but their contributions still stand if they are valid in themselves. Subsequent developments in Germany should be looked at on their merits, and those seem great to me. I am not a great fan of the lute/guitar approaches which hold sway in the Wuppertal bubble, but I do appreciate the great strength it has in promoting musical excellence. I wouldn't see its dominant influence in our small musical corner as a flaw, but rather as evidence of a lack of similar organisational coordination in alternative approaches. My basic attitude would be for those of us who prefer alternative approaches the onus would be on us to step up to the block. Thankfully there are current advances that show hopeful signs of a bit more organisation and outward looking coordination from other areas & approaches.
If any of this gives the impression of some great divide then hopefully a trip to any symposium will reveal the reality that the many approaches often sit side by side in playing for performance and pleasure. In our trio we have three different approaches, none of which would be considered orthodox by any of the schools, so it's a series of stylistic preferences which people gravitate to depending on their logic and aesthetic sense.

As with any artistic pursuit taken to a high level there will be those who get satisfaction from certainty and 'doing things the right way' luckily there is still enough living variety for it to be obvious that there is a stylistic smorgasbord from which we can select the morsels that best suit our palette and leave the rest to those who prefer them.

[crisscross]

Here in Germany we don't talk about 'the' German or Italian school.

It's true, that the first time I heard about this distinction was on the Cafe.
Nonetheless, it seems obvious to me.

When I play a piece in the Ranieri method, the mandolin is treated more like a violin.
Melodies in tremolo accompanied by a second mandolin. For me, that's the Italian way.

When I play a little piece by Marlo Strauss or Barbara Pommerenke-Steel, the mandolin is treated more like a classsical guitar.
One mandolin playing a whole arrangment, tremolo only as a special effect. Rather German.

As a beginner of classiacal mandolin styles, I don't have an overview over stylistic nuances, but these two approaches are clearly different.
Even to me as a German, the distinction makes sense.

[Acquavella]

It's true, that the first time I heard about this distinction was on the Cafe.
Nonetheless, it seems obvious to me.

When I play a piece in the Ranieri method, the mandolin is treated more like a violin.
Melodies in tremolo accompanied by a second mandolin. For me, that's the Italian way.

When I play a little piece by Marlo Strauss or Barbara Pommerenke-Steel, the mandolin is treated more like a classsical guitar.
One mandolin playing a whole arrangment, tremolo only as a special effect. Rather German.

As a beginner of classiacal mandolin styles, I don't have an overview over stylistic nuances, but these two approaches are clearly different.
Even to me as a German, the distinction makes sense.

I think it is important to point out that you are referring to technical materials. If one looks at Leone, Denis, Gervasio or Munier and Calace methods you will find the same exercises that Marlo Strauss and Barbara Pommerenke-Steel compose. The two you mention are beginning student materials. There are other modern European materials which focus on tremolo or left hand technique. Marlo Strauss is a guitar teacher at a Musikschule for children. So, of course, the majority of his compositions are focusing on the raw basics of tone production. As a German, you must be aware that there are many different styles of instruments and playing techniques depending on what region you are from. I have seen several German zupforchester that are more Italian than actual Italian orchestras. It's all taste and the guru of that particular area.

I believe that SA-R is bringing two points to light. One - When someone references or states the "German-school", you are in fact only talking about the Wuppertal school of thought. This is actually just one of several voices here in Germany. Yes, they have done great work in the past but they do not define an entire nation of very good players with extremely different views. Wuppertal is a university of music in NRW which has produced extremely good players in the past and makes the most "noise" in promoting themselves. This is one of several places to get a BMus in the mandolin and the only place to achieve a Masters in Germany. Which brings up SA-R's second point: the canonization of music.

In the English speaking world the same names are constantly referenced to the point that one will start to believe that these people are responsible for saving the mandolin or for "changing the way we see the mandolin". However, now having lived in Germany since 2014, I see that as total B.S. The reality is that Ambrosius, Ritter and Wolki played a role in the Nazi music organizations (Reichsmusikkammer). Wolki contributed to how people could be manipulated through music to advance his own career; plain and simple. Ambrosius was actually a card holding member of the NSDAP and Musikleiter fuer das Gau Mitte. Ritter reported Jewish zupforchesters in order to confiscate their instruments and create new non-Jewish orchestras. The evidence is there for everyone to see. These are not men that should be mentioned as a savior of the modern mandolin. Someone above said that one should be judged on their merits, not by their political views. Well, as a member of the Ger Mandolin Orchestra, I am appalled at that comment. I'm sorry to say that belonging to a political party that killed millions of Jews, gays and disabled people is not a "political view".

We also keep hearing the same modern names over and over because either they have YouTube videos, advertising in the Mandolin Journal or they are screaming the loudest. SA-R is stating that it is important to not follow the noise but to do your own research. For instance, Detlef Tewes and Juan Carlos Munoz have arguably done more for the mandolin than many of the names that keep popping up. I believe that is one of the points that SA-R is trying to bring to light. Canonization can blur reality because all you get to hear are the same names over and over. When in reality, you are not seeing or hearing from the ones that are accomplishing the most......because they are working all the time. One needs to watch out that one doesn't just take one man's knowledge or opinion as the way it is or the reality. Someone can read as many books as possible but in the end you are still just reading someone else's opinion.

I suggest that the English speaking world change it's way of describing the "German-school". It would be more appropriate to say the "Wuppertal" school. From what I've seen, the mandolin in Germany is wide and varied in opinion and technique; and the majority is not from Wuppertal.

And for the record..... I have been guilty of all the above. Moving to Germany has opened my eyes and given me a wider perspective than what I was taught from my teacher or created in my mind.

[Beanzy]

Chris I mean their techniques and advancements (schools) are not invalidated by the idocy of the person developing them and they should not be disguarded along with the persons reputation. It is similar to the difficulties in many areas of art where people need to find how to incorporate the results of history into the way out of the past. Minstrel songs , "The Merchant Of Venice" etc are perennial examples of this. So too it would be illogical to try to cease the pursuit of valid techniques just because they may have been produced or codified by loathsome individuals, this is how we use jet engines and rockets despite their past and even ongoing potential as tools for wrong. It is the people who use them for ill, not the tools. It is the individuals who are to be taken to account for this, yes you wouldn't be holding them up for adulation but neither should we be trying to pretend they didn't have a place in that history.
Definitely awkward to have in the history of european mandolin, but their influence is a matter of fact, however awkward dealing with that may be now.

My own reasons for rejecting these techniques are because I don't view the mandolin as a lute or guitar, rather as something that came from the family and over a century past developed its own form and logic & I see little value in trying to regress it back to something it no longer is.

[Acquavella]

Chris I mean their techniques and advancements (schools) are not invalidated by the idocy of the person developing them and they should not be disguarded along with the persons reputation. It is similar to the difficulties in many areas of art where people need to find how to incorporate the results of history into the way out of the past. Minstrel songs , "The Merchant Of Venice" etc are perennial examples of this. So too it would be illogical to try to cease the pursuit of valid techniques just because they may have been produced or codified by loathsome individuals, this is how we use jet engines and rockets despite their past and even ongoing potential as tools for wrong. It is the people who use them for ill, not the tools. It is the individuals who are to be taken to account for this, yes you wouldn't be holding them up for adulation but neither should we be trying to pretend they didn't have a place in that history.
Definitely awkward to have in the history of european mandolin, but their influence is a matter of fact, however awkward dealing with that may be now.

My own reasons for rejecting these techniques are because I don't view the mandolin as a lute or guitar, rather as something that came from the family and over a century past developed its own form and logic & I see little value in trying to regress it back to something it no longer is.

Beanzy - I hear ya, man. However, that is exactly the point that a lot of people aren't seeing clearly. Wolki and Ambrosius did create these "new" techniques in order to manipulate the people. This was the goal, the secret, the technique.....however we want to define it. Their introduction of a new technique was to get people to not play the "foreigners" way. The Reichsmusikkammer's job was part of the propaganda machine that helped blur the lines.

It's good that you mention "The Merchant of Venice". The good thing is that there have been many, many conversations / studies / journals on this subject. The musicological world is well informed and discussing openly. However, in the mandolin world, everyone is willing to turn a blind eye; no discussion is happening and continue to treat these men as influential or as saviors. Of course, history has built them up to be heroes at a time when the mandolin had none or we were searching for something new (historically, way behind all other arts). The problem is that the music is the propaganda; the devise used to manipulate. I understand that one's merit can not be erased and shouldn't be down played. However, Hitler brought to Germany: Thriving Economy, Removing Unemployment and zero inflation, Breaking Free of International Financiers, Strong Family Values, Workers Welfare Programs, Elimination of Crime (that's an oxymoron), Organized Farming, MUSIC PROMOTION, Volkswagen, the Autobahn, Artist funding and pension scheme, advancements in GEMA.....and the list goes on. If we just look at Hitler's (or the NS party's) achievements and judge them only on their merits......Hitler appears to be one of the greatest leaders of all time, who loved his country and led his people brilliantly to a higher standard of living. HOWEVER........ the truth is absolutely insane and therefore the world label's Hitler a madman, not a savior. This is an extreme example but this is the world in which Wolki, Ambrosius and Ritter were a part of. Should an orchestra continue to program their music? That is the question.

This is the canonization of music. The world is being force-fed the same names (including modern names) but it is typical marketing. They are given too much credit or raised on too high a pedestal. The story is much broader than that. We say the "German" mandolin, however there are many types of mandolins in Germany. The "Seiffert" style of instrument was developed by one luthier and one teacher, who was searching for one particular sound. That's two people, out of an entire nation, who wanted to change the sound. That was also a much later development coming from Wuppertal. Very early Seiffert instruments are much different than from his later instruments. It should also be mentioned that a lot of the "German" or Wuppertal school of playing is based on Leone's teaching; a highly strung Italian living in France.

The point that SA-R was making is that we can't just make blanket statements, assume history or continue to pimp a certain group of people. The reality is much larger. One of the last things my teacher said to me before she passed away was that I should study with as many people as possible and take something from them all; disregard the rest. Best advice she ever gave me. The question isn't this school or that school. The question is, do you have the tools necessary to play the instrument to the level you desire? Plain and simple. Everything else is just propaganda to help draw in more students or help certain teachers find their place in life. Something Leone was good at as well.

[Beanzy]

The question isn't this school or that school. The question is, do you have the tools necessary to play the instrument to the level you desire? Plain and simple. Everything else is just propaganda to help draw in more students or help certain teachers find their place in life. Something Leone was good at as well.

Totally agree, and glad it is being discussed. It can be difficult to get the influences in proportion as there are few if any coordinated counter examples benefitting from such well organised state supported institutions. It must be very frustrating to see that support and organisation so heavily coopted to serve one particular approach, especially given the history. However do alternative approaches have sufficient coordination to assert their right to a place at the institutional table? Or do we need to remake the whole thing in several different areas, at a time of austerity in funding decisions evrywhere?
Could you ever make another Wuppertal situation nowadays, when the train of rising productivity, incomes and tax revenues appears to have left the station?.

I see signs of hope in examples such as the new centre in Naples and private initiatives such as Venice, we even have some good ad-hoc ones becoming more regularised here, but they are no match for state funded institutions in terms of promotion and with awarding of diplomas and degrees. Where that goes so goes the funding. I imagine if we hadn't lost your wonderful, inspirational teacher what we might have here in the UK. We do ok, but I think it was just about to get going so much further. A bitter loss there for sure.

[DavidKOS]

Thanks for the interesting discussion.

As for the mandolin-as-fretted violin versus mandolin-as-lute/guitar, I sort of prefer the Italian vew....

but it's easier for me to think of the violin as a fretless bowed mandolin

Seriously, I can see using both styles/approaches in classical mandolin study.

[Jim Garber]

Wow. This thread certainly turned a fascinating corner for me.

[JeffD]

One practical question - in a high level mandolin ensemble, say a small chamber ensemble or quartet, should the musicians all be playing within the same tradition? Do styles conflict in ensemble playing? Could someone fluent in one tradition perhaps not be appropriate in an ensemble playing another?

[Jim Garber]

One practical question - in a high level mandolin ensemble, say a small chamber ensemble or quartet, should the musicians all be playing within the same tradition? Do styles conflict in ensemble playing? Could someone fluent in one tradition perhaps not be appropriate in an ensemble playing another?

Interesting question and I am certainly no expert on that matter but common sense (at least some form of sense that I maintain) would say that any ensemble, even playing the most modern music, would still have a similar and integrative style. Unless, of course, the intent is to add the element of rank chaos to the music.

[JeffD]

that any ensemble, even playing the most modern music, would still have a similar and integrative style.

If that is the case, and if one wants to maximize one's opportunities to play classical music with others, one should work on getting proficient in a number of the traditions, and not focus on just one, I would think.

Like so many things, everything I don't know ends up biting me in the tailpiece.

[Beanzy]

Possibly a whole other thread there JefD; You'd probably get many different opinions on that one.
I certainly hold a few conflicting ones at any given time.
In our trio we're not terribly high level, but we take it seriously enough. Our approach is to choose the pieces then talk a lot, bashing ideas around & decide how we want to treat the parts. We may want to purposely colour one of the mandolins differently to the other to enable it to be revealed easier, so a different mandolin type may help there. Or it could be that it's a piece where one part needs to blend seamlessly with the next, (maybe to get the musical wit in a piece there needs to be scope for confusion) so it's sometimes better to all use the Calace instruments that we have. Then there's often the choice of whether it's better to play the 2nd part as mandola from tenor clef, or even the cello part on the 8ve mandolin if it fits & gives a better tone. As we all know often plectrum & string choices can have a huge effect, so their coordination could be vital.
I love the diligence in pursuing uniformity many orchestras bring to their presentation, they just look and sound so "right". The uniform approach can be very liberating, as you have preset those instrument decisions, focussing on purely musical choices from the start.
But my inner contrary side wants to be able to wander off the set path and wonder what it would sound like if x, y or z were tried. That can be unsettling if you're someone who needs to be assured that things are being done the 'correct' way.
Personally I prefer to not limit myself in advance, even though it can be a lot more work and waste time in abortive experiments, it can also deliver interesting insights.