[NOTE: This may walk the line between GQ and Cafe Society, but as I’m looking for a factual answer to my question I’ve posted it here; however, if any mods think that it would be better off in CS, I certainly wouldn’t object to it being moved.]
I know that the first violin gets his/her own acknowledgement as concertmaster before the conductor arrives, but I can’t seem to find any information on the history of this: why is the first violin the concertmaster? Why not the first cello? Or first flute? Does it have to do with where the first violin sits? What does the concertmaster do, anyway?
I’ve tried several different Google – and SD – searches, and the best I’ve been able to come up with is this Chicago Symphony Orchestra site explaining the “first chair” concept:
Are there any orchestra-philes out there who would be so kind as to help me fight my ignorance, please?
It’s basically a status-symbol. Everyone in a major orchestra is fantastic, but the best ones, like you said, are “first chair”. So, let’s say you’re in the Second Violin section. And they want to promote you. If you’re lucky enough to get a choice, they’ll let you decide if you want to be, for example, the “first chair” of the Second Violins, or maybe just a “regular” player in the First Violins.
If you decide to join the First Violins, then maybe someday (and we’re talking years here) you’ll be “promoted” to first chair of First Violins, i.e. Concertmaster (or Concertmistress).
The “special responsibilities” include giving the nod to the oboist to play the concert pitch note (an “A”) before the piece so the orchestra can tune. They also serve as the conductor’s right hand man (or woman) during rehearsals, and should something go wrong during the performance it is up to them to keep it under control. Think of it as a “best man” position at a wedding!
As to why it’s the violin specifically chosen to be up for this position, my WAG would involve the importance of the violin in an orchestra, as well as the position (i.e. just off to the left of the conductor), but someone else may have to add to that.
I think that’s exactly right, although I’d say the positioning is BECAUSE of the importance of the chair. The strings are really the workhorse of the orchestra, playing most of the time and generally having the melodic material a lot more than the winds. And since the melody is generally (not always, but most of the time) on the top, the higher-pitched instruments have more status in that regard. So, being the highest-pitched member of the string family, the violin is arguably the most important voice in the orchestra.
It’s certainly not just a status symbol. The concertmaster (known as ‘leader’ in the UK and I believe elsewhere) has a huge role to play. He’s not just the conductor’s right-hand man, but also the main point of communication between the orchestra and the conductor. He will often have a decision in the appointment of new players, particularly new principals, not just in the string section. It’s true that many of these roles could potentially be fulfilled by other players. But the role of the leader does all stem from the orchestral core originating as a string ensemble, of which the primary violin is the assumed leader, partly due to early string quartets presenting the first violin as a quasi-soloist.
(In any decent orchestra, the leader isn’t appointed by simple promotion from the rank-and-file violins. It should, and mostly is, a special appointment by the full audition/trial procedure. Of course, members of the orchestra are able to contend for the position, but should never be given preferential treatment solely for this reason.)
(And yes, I know I said ‘he’ throughout. Obviously I mean ‘he/she’.)
Absolutely agreed, GorillaMan. I didn’t mean to imply that it was “just a status symbol”. It’s just hard at the level of, say, the New York Philharmonic, to differentiate between who’s better. And sometimes it helps to be a “name” violinist, I suppose.
Appointing ‘name’ violinists can be a disaster. The best violinist won’t necessarily be the best leader. I’ve seen good violinists incapable of leading, and not-so-good violinists excel at it. Naturally, the perfect combination is good-at-both, but then you’ve got to hope they don’t have a solo career on the cards.
(Granted, I was second chair in a minor orchestra, but nonetheless…)
The lead violinist position was often used for visual cues, as in synchronizing bow strokes and so forth. While the conductor theoretically has control of the piece’s tempo, it is physically possible for a piece to be conducted faster (not overall, but with respect to a particular beat within a bar) than a string player can move to reset the bow position (in the case of consecutive downbows, etc.) In that event, all eyes are to the first violinist for synchronicity.
During the eighteenth century, a composer/pianist like Mozart would have conducted his piano concertos while siutting at the keyboard and playing. During the nineteenth century, the responsibility got transferred to a conductor (who may also have beenm the composer). I’m not sure if Beethoven conducted his piano concertos while playing the piano, though he did conduct his symphonies.
I don’t know how it was in your orchestra but in major ones, one of the lead violinist’s major tasks is deciding bow strokes. Notice that everyone bows the same way; that’s because the scores were edited by the first violinist. If players were left to themselves you’d end up with near-chaos as far as bowing is concerned. Obviously, deciding strokes is something only a string player can do.
Great googly moogly…the info I was looking for, on the site that I cited. :smack:
Thanks much to everyone who replied. You’d think that by now I’d cease to be amazed at the depth and breadth of the knowledge here, but no. There’s a reason I’m a Dope Fiend ™.
Another custom appears to be for the last chair violinist to surrender his instrument should tragedy befall the concertmaster’s.
I played percussion in a pit orchestra in college and a piece of something slid off the stage into the pit and landed on the concertmaster, somehow messing up his violin. Once he determined his instrument was unplayable the last chair immediately passed his instrument up to the concertmaster who sniffed at it but deemed it worthy enough to get through rehearsal.
Interesting, mack…I wonder if that would have happened during a performance, as well?
(I will not mess with the concertmaster’s violin the next time I go to the orchestra…I will not mess with the concertmaster’s violin the next time I go to the orchestra…I will not mess with the concertmaster’s violin the next time I go to the orchestra…)
If the leader’s instrument has a problem mid-performance, they’ll take the deputy’s one, who will take the one from the player behind them, and so on. The broken instrument will get passed to the back at the same time, and the last player will either disappear offstage to sort out the problem if possible, or sit out the rest of the piece.
GM:If the leader’s instrument has a problem mid-performance, they’ll take the deputy’s one, who will take the one from the player behind them, and so on. The broken instrument will get passed to the back at the same time
I am seized with a desperate craving to fire an air pistol or something at the bridge of the first violin during a concert just so that I could see this marvelous swapperoo being carried out.
Of course, when I think of the chances that I’d accidentally hit a player instead of an instrument, and the likelihood that I’d get caught, and the probable legal punishment for popping off air pistols into a performing orchestra, and the probable expense of replacing a first violinist’s instrument even if I did manage to hit it, my craving becomes a lot less desperate.
Would definitely be something to see, though. Has such an occurrence ever been captured on film, to anyone’s knowledge? What would you pro musicians estimate as the likelihood of such a thing occurring at any given concert? If the odds are good enough I may have to start buying season tickets again.
Likewise, it is the concertmasters responsibility to pass his violin to the soloist if the soloist has a problem. I once saw Itzhak Perlman break a string while performing. Contrary to the urban legend, he turned to the concertmaster, asked for his violin, took it and continued playing. I don’t recall if the concertmaster sat out, or got a violin from someone else, but Perlman’s violin was restrung and returned to him after the end of the movement.
Just another reason why the first violinist is the second-in-command: there are more violinists than anything else in the orchestra, in fact, I think more violinists than all non-strings combined. So naturally the leader of the violins is already a major leader, and they can take on leadership of the rest fairly easily.
And, in fact, as R-Chuck has pointed out, the soloist sometimes has to grab the closest fiddle at hand. I’ve also seen that happen - at a CSO performance - and I think that it’s likely that the concertmaster will have a finer instrument to hand over than, say, the last chair player. The concertmaster is the one called upon to play virtually all of the solo violin parts in the orchestral literature, and has to be a superb musician and also have an instrument to match. (Of course, when you get to the major leagues of orchestras, no one in those bands are really of inferior quality, as has been mentioned, but it’s just another reason that the concertmaster is so valuable.) As for bowing, just a point of clarification - the concertmaster determines the bowings for the violins, but not for the other string instruments. If it’s not written in the score, the first chair player of that section will make that call, unless a conductor has a particular preference.
