How it’s made - Part 2: Models and Mould
The topic of the model is a tricky one, and one we think a lot at. But in the end we decided, by now, to stick to the Hoffmann inspired model, and I tell you why.
It’s often said that the Violoncello da Spalla it’s not a standardized instrument, but actually I feel that this a bit of a defense posture. The more you study the surviving old instruments, it becomes very clear what a Violoncello da Spalla is and what it is not.
Are we making spallas or what?
Speaking of Violoncello da Spalla model is a slippery path because there are also four strings versions and even Sigiswald Kuijken, pioneer of the Violoncello da Spalla revival, is usually playing on a 19th century children cello, with a proper set up, but with four strings. Recently I have seen this huge tenor viola by Galeazzi which works perfectly as a cello da spalla. So one could be tempted to get everything in: children cellos, violoncello piccolo, tenor violas, viola pomposa, five strings cellos… however we think it’s better being more clear and decide for one model, because it’s not totally fair saying that the Violoncello da Spalla is not a standardized instrument. We think it was, because instruments in museums actually seem to follow a standard. They have differences coming from makers and regions, but they are recognizable after a standard: they are small enough to be played horizontally with ease by a violinist or a violist, their ribs are around 8 cm and they have five strings. Museums’ instruments are all hugely worn up from use: they were used really a lot and this for us is a guaranteee that the Violoncello da Spalla was an instrument in common use and not an experiment by an eclectic maker.
Trying to be clear and concise, this is why we chose to stick to the Hoffmann-inspired model:
Violoncello da Spalla is not an organological definition; it doesn’t precisely define an instrument. Da spalla is a playing position that was always used (e.g., medieval big villas or fiddles), and it is determined just by the size of an instrument: the longer the instrument, the more it will go from the left arm/shoulder/torso to the right and over it. Violoncello was not a precise instrument ⚠️ but the role of the bass of the violin family and it literally means “small violone”: violino is for trebles, viola for the middle parts, Violone for the basses. A violoncello is a small Violone that still players the bass part but can also play melodies.
J. S. Bach: even if the spallists are playing all the cello repertoire, the first music everyone will play on a spalla is Bach’s suites, and even if one may think “no, I’m not interested in playing the sixth suite”, sooner or later, they will. And for that, they will need a fifth string. We know that Bach had this small five strings Hoffmann at home. Maybe, I would like to say probably, they also created it together. They wanted a cello small enough that a violinist could play it (because they didn’t have good cellists in Leipzig), and they added a fifth string on the bottom ⚠️ (more later on this). So, when I have doubts, my inner answer to the question: “are we making Violoncello da Spalla or what?” is: I am making Bach’s instrument: not a tenor viola, but a small five-strings violoncello.
Four strings: when I make a five string instrument, the client can get it settled with four strings if they like, just taking off a peg and having more grooves in the nut and bridge, as Sigiswald Kuijken did for a long time. The contrary is harder, so if I don’t get a precise order for a four string instrument, I will continue to make five strings. On a personal note, also because I love playing that first string: it’s comfortable and it has a wonderful free and open sound compared to the second string’s high positions.
The setup of a five strings instrument is more tricky than a four strings one, because it is not symmetrical. So, I prefer making a good five strings one and be sure it works well with five, thank making a four strings and not being sure of what happens is the customer will want to add a string later.
When we have four strings, how will we tune them? Baroque cellists had two instruments: a big one tuned CGDA for the continuo, and a small one tuned GDAE for the obbligato and solo. Which will we choose? The solo repertoire for GDAE is wide and super interesting, and not the same interesting when played on a CGDA-tuning short-scale. But if you play a continuo with a GDAE tuning you’ll feel like you are doing it with a viola, you will have to octavize a lot, you will miss basses. Because the Violoncello da Spalla was the instrument that in the continuo group had the role of obbligato and embellished parts, the tuning GDAE would be more historically correct (the fifth string came later and often it is not used at all), but why depriving you of the possibility of playing a good continuo bass? So, I am definitely for the fifth strings version, I love having both the continuo and the solo cello in one instrument, and I think this is what makes the Violoncello da Spalla so special.
I love having both the continuo and the solo cello in one instrument, and I think this is what makes the Violoncello da Spalla so special.
Ah, so it’s a pomposa?
This is the question that often I get asked when I start explaining what is a Violoncello da Spalla. I am tempted to answer “yes” to make it short and simple, thinking that probaboy I am speaking with someone who knows what is a pomposa, but…
What is a viola pomposa first of all?
In good museums, curators catalogued the Hoffmann kind of da spallas as pomposas.
I paste and copy from one of my newsletters: “From Johann Adam Hiller “Lebensbeschreibungen berühmter Musikgelehrten und Tonkünstler, neuerer Zeit. Erster Theil, Leipzig 1784” (Biographies of famous music scholars and musicians of modern times. First part, Leipzig 1784): During the carnival of 1738, [Franz] Benda traveled to Dresden at the invitation of the concertmaster [Johann Georg] Pisendel, who maintained a friendly correspondence with him [...]. One day [Silvius Leopold] Weiss invited Messrs. Benda and Pisendel to lunch and secretly had Benda's violin case brought over. In the afternoon, he was asked to play a solo on the violin, which Pisendel accompanied with the Viola pomposa*)*) This instrument is tuned like a cello but has one more string on top. It is slightly larger than a viola and is attached with a strap so that it can be held in front of the chest and on the arm. The former violin maker in Leipzig Hofmann made a few of them, based on Joh. Seb. Bachs.”
These are the two reasons I would like to say yes. Hiller is clearly referring to what we call Violoncello da Spalla today.
But, unfortunately, I have more reasons to say no…
Look at the music published for viola pomposa, and it’s two sonatas, one by Telemann written in 1728 and one by Lidarti in 1760. Apart from the fact that they are only two and are “not so interesting”, they are written in violin clef and use a four-string instrument tuned GDAE. ❗️ so, probably something tuned one octave below the violin; otherwise, why not just publish them for violin, which had a wider audience? Their viola pomposa probably was a big tenor viola tuned GDAE, what later was called octave geige.
You speak with luthiers, even experts, and they tell you that the pomposa is a viola, low ribs, tuned in the viola octave, with an e on top. The violin e. Now: 1. The violin gut e would break at the length of a viola; 2. If it was at the same octave of a violin, which sense did it have to publish those two sonatas for pomposa?
So, what is a viola pomposa is probably a more unclear and confused topic than a Violoncello da Spalla.
So my answer to the question: “ah, so it’s Bach’s viola pomposa?” is:
No, it’s a violoncello. A violoncello with five strings, small enough to be played horizontally by someone with a violin or viola technique. (And yes, Bach owned it)
No, it’s a violoncello. A violoncello with five strings, small enough to be played horizontally by someone with a violin or viola technique. (And yes, Bach owned it)