Shanti Nachtergaele
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
From divisions to divisi: improvisation, orchestration
and the practice of double bass reduction
Anciennement la plupart des contrebassistes avaient
l’habitude, en jouant leur partie à l’orchestre, de sim-
plifier à leur guise les dessins qu’ils trouvaient trop
difficiles, et d’en abandonner l’exécution intégrale aux
violoncelles. Cette pratique vicieuse n’est plus tolérée
aujourd’hui. Lorsqu’un trait placé dans la région infé-
rieure du quatuor ne peut être textuellement rendu
par les contrebasses, le compositeur indique lui-même
dans sa partition la manière dont le passage doit être
simplifié.1
Formerly, the majority of contrabassists were in the habit,
while playing their part in the orchestra, of simplifying as
they pleased passages that they found too difficult, and
of leaving their execution in full to the violoncellos. This
vicious practice is no longer tolerated today. When a pas-
sage that is set in the lowest part cannot be performed as
written on the contrabass, the composer himself indicates
in his score how the passage should be simplified.
W riting in 1885, director of the Brussels
Conservatory François-Auguste Gevaert
described the by then obsolete practice of bass-line
reduction in his Nouveau traité d’instrumentation.
That double bassists in the mainstream performance
community today no longer practise ad libitum
reduction—the technique of extracting a simplified
double bass line from a given bass part—comes as
no great surprise. Twenty-first century orchestral
practices value technical aptitude and fidelity to
the written score, the former of which diminishes
the motives for reduction and the latter of which
implicitly prohibits the practice. Many double bass-
ists working within historically informed perfor-
mance are only slightly better acquainted with the
technique due to a lack of extensive research on the
subject. Previous discussions of double bass reduc-
tion, also referred to as simplification, have provided
Early Music, Vol. xlvi, No. 3 © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1093/em/cay049, available online at https://academic.oup.com/em
Advance Access publication September 21, 2018
only a general description of the practice or focused
on its use in a specific geographical and temporal
context.2 This article will trace the history of the
practice and compare various procedures for bass-
line reduction outlined in historical treatises and
method books.
16′ doubling and the need for extemporaneous
reduction
The practice of double bass reduction was closely
connected to the development of bowed bass
instruments, the changing profile of the orchestral
bass section, and the evolution of improvisational
and notational conventions. Issues of terminol-
ogy complicate the organological history of the
double bass, particularly in the case of the term
‘violone’, which as discussed in previous issues of
this journal, denoted a variety of early bowed bass
instruments of both the viol and violin families.3
The taxonomy and function of early bowed basses
remain matters of contention aggravated by equiv-
ocal historical evidence and a rivalry between
modern cellists and double bassists to claim ances-
tral precedence.
For much of the 17th century, the Italian violone
and its German variant Violon primarily referred
to 8′ non-transposing instruments. The terms also
applied to 16′ instruments that sounded the bass
line an octave lower than written, but these often
received more specific designations of size (grosso,
grande, große, etc.) or sounding range (contrabasso,
octaf/octav).4 With the advent of overspun strings
in Bologna in the 1660s, increased string density
allowed shorter, thinner strings to produce lower
483
pitches, leading to the rise of a smaller and more
agile bass instrument in the late 17th century: the
violoncello, or ‘small violone’.5 In the 18th century
the meaning of ‘violone’ shifted to designate larger
instruments: either 16′ contrabasses or, for the first
part of the century, intermediate-range instruments

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019

such as that now dubbed the ‘G violone’ (a large viol
tuned G′–C–F–A–d–g, which typically does not
transpose at the octave).6
The violoncello became the standard 8′ bowed
bass, first in Italy and eventually throughout Europe.
Larger basses were also fitted with overspun strings,
which allowed for greater clarity in the lower reg-
ister. This development probably contributed to the
increased use of the violone and contrabass as 16′
transposing instruments throughout the late 17th
and early 18th centuries, relegating them to the role
of doubling instruments.7 By the 1730s, the stand-
ard pairing of cellos and contrabasses in orchestras
had become the norm, but contrabasses remained
unstandardized across Europe.8 The four-string con-
trabass tuned in fourths (E′–A′–D–G, the standard
modern double bass tuning) was common in 18th-
century Germany, Italy and France; this remained
the dominant tuning in 19th-century Germany. In
1 Frontispiece from  Charles-Amand Durier’s Méthode
Vienna and the surrounding area, a virtuoso school
complète de contre-basse, illustrating French three-string
of double bass playing developed in the second
tuning (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Département
half of the 18th century. The ‘Viennese’ contrabass,
de la Musique, vm8 f-3, ark:/12148/bpt6k1162387n)
tuned F′–A′–D–F!–A and characteristically fitted
with frets, generated a distinct style evident in its
repertory of concertos and concertante parts, and more independent. It first became increasingly
remained in use with waning popularity until the common to notate isolated passages with differ-
1840s.9 Outside Austria and Germany, three-string ing cello and contrabass lines together in shared
contrabasses were popular from the late 18th to mid- parts. The two lines could appear on a single staff,
19th centuries, tuned in 5ths (G′–D–A) in France often distinguished by opposite stem directions, or
(illus.1), and in 4ths (A′–D–G) in Italy, England and split between two, necessary especially when the
Spain.10 lines differed substantially. Divisi sections became
Throughout the 18th and early 19th centuries, longer and more frequent as theories of orchestra-
it was standard practice for an ensemble’s cellists tion developed and composers assigned the two
and contrabassists to read from the same parts, instruments separate functions, and eventually
a holdover from Baroque basso continuo prac- completely separate parts.
tice. Large works, opera in particular, were more During the era of shared parts, a number of
likely to prompt separate parts; however, com- conventions developed regarding the execution of
pletely dividing the cello and contrabass parts in parts not tailored specifically to the double bass.
orchestral works only became the norm around Contrabassists remained silent in certain passages
the middle of the 19th century. This notational or movements, and transposed notes that fell below
emancipation occurred neither abruptly nor uni- their range an octave higher. Another convention
formly, but in general parts became progressively involved the ad libitum simplification or reduction

484  Early Music  August 2018

of passages that were especially fast or difficult to
execute. Such a technique was already known to
German organists adapting rapid passagework to
be playable on the pedals with a 16′ registration, as
is demonstrated in Friedrich Erhardt Niedt’s trea-
tise of 1717.11 In orchestral music, a German émigré
to London, Johann Christoph Pepusch, explained
the need for such reductions in his A Treatise
on Harmony (1731). Complaining about ‘Quick-
running Variation in the lower Notes of the Bass’,
he wrote:
This Error is however daily run into, by giving divided
Basses to be play’d on the Violone or Double Bass, which
makes a horrid rumbling, whereas if the Violoncello’s,
and other such Bass-Instruments only, did play those
Divided Basses, and the Violone or Double Bass play’d
a Fundamental Bass under them, made up of what the
Italians call Note Sostenute, a much finer and more agree-
able Harmony would ensue, for Every Note would be clear
and distinct in every part of the Composition.12 (emphases
original)
Pepusch’s treatise is, however, not a performance
manual, but a theoretical discussion of harmony.
While he did not write that double bassists should
determine the ‘fundamental bass’ themselves—he
more likely intended composers to take on this
responsibility—his statement indicates that bass-line
reduction shares close ties with divisions or dimi-
nutions, as the two techniques represent reciprocal
processes. Pepusch presented the double bass part
as one that lacks embellishment, supporting dimi-
nutions in the 8′ bass line. This relationship is con-
sistent with that often observable in obbligato and
continuo bass parts of sonatas, and the concertino
and ripieno bass parts of concerti grossi. Notated
contrabass reductions appear in a number of 18th-
century manuscript scores and parts, particularly
in the genre of opera.13 Laurence Dreyfus has drawn
attention to the simplified nature of violone parts in
several of Bach’s works as evidence that they were
intended for 16′ instruments transposing at the
octave, although his primary justification lies in the
notated range of these parts compared to separate 8′
bass parts; furthermore, he also argues that despite
resembling a reduction of the harpsichord part, the
violone part in an early version of Brandenburg
Concerto no.5 (bwv 1050a) was not intended for a
contrabass instrument, but for 8′ violone.14 Referring
to simplified violone parts appearing in a number
of Leipzig cantatas, he suggests that ‘although these
parts constitute exceptions to the rule of undiffer-
entiated violone parts, one suspects that, given the
time and inclination, Bach might have reduced
more violone parts accordingly’.15 It is also possible
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
that violone players were capable of producing these
reductions themselves from undifferentiated parts if
Bach lacked either sufficient time or inclination. In
summary, these early examples of divided bass lines
are of interest not only for the insights they provide
into the evolution of orchestration, but also for their
potential correlation with methods of extemporane-
ous bass-line reduction.
Quantz and Corrette on 18th-century double
bass playing
Johann Joachim Quantz’s celebrated Versuch einer
Anweisung die Flöte traversiere zu spielen (1752)
was the first treatise to explicitly discuss reduction
as a performance practice for double bassists, that
is, to instruct them to play something different from
their notated part. Quantz introduced the main
issues related to double bass playing and bass-line
reduction:
it remains incontestable that, even if the [contraviolonist]
has no need of great delicacy of taste, he must understand
harmony, and must be no poor musician … In playing this
instrument a special distinctness (which, unfortunately,
few possess) is required.16
If in a bass part passage-work appears which, because of
its great rapidity, the [violonist] is unable to execute dis-
tinctly, he may play only the first, third, or last note of each
figure, whether they are semiquavers or demisemiquavers.
In each case he must determine which notes are the prin-
cipal notes in the bass melody … Except in passage-work
of this sort, however, which some find too difficult to play
rapidly, the [violonist] must omit nothing. If he were to
play only the first of four quavers that appear to be the
same note, passing over three, as some do at times, espe-
cially if they have to accompany a piece that they did not
compose themselves, I do not know how he could avoid
an accusation of laziness or malice.17
In addition to the brief instructions outlined above,
Quantz included a number of examples demonstrat-
ing the proper execution of commonly occurring
bass-line figurations (illus.2). Many of Quantz’s con-
cerns became recurring themes in later writing on
double bass reduction—the problem of indistinct
Early Music  August 2018  485

2  Johann Joachim Quantz’s suggested reductions for fast passagework (Versuch einer Anweisung die Flöte traversiere zu
spielen (Berlin, 1752), tab.23)
articulation in the low register, the importance of
knowledge of harmony, and the technical abilities of
contrabassists.
In France, Michel Corrette expressed similar ideas
in his Méthodes pour apprendre à jouer de la contre-
basse à 3, à 4, et à 5 cordes, de la quinte ou alto et
de la viole d’Orphée [1773]. Like Quantz, Corrette
described when and how contrabassists should
reduce passages, namely that ‘when there are batter-
ies, the contrabass should only play the lower notes’
(‘Quand il-y-a des batterirs [sic] la contre basse ne
doit faire que les notes d’en bas’) and ‘in roulades
only the first note of each beat’ (‘aux Roulades que
la 1re note de chaque tems’).18 He then clarified that
contrabassists should, however, ‘play all of the notes
in slow tempos such as Adagio, Andante, etc.’ (‘mais
on joue toutes les notes dans des mouvemt lent [sic]
come Adagio, Andante &c.’).19 Corrette also touched
on the Rameauian concept of the basse fondamen-
tale, explaining that for the sake of variety contra-
bassists should determine the principal notes of the
continuo line rather than look for the root of any
inverted chords, since the fundamental bass would
only produce ‘a monotonous harmony’ (‘une har-
monie monotone’).20 Corrette also specified that in
concertos, contrabassists should read from the fig-
ured continuo part, ‘since the principal notes of the
harmony are figured for the harpsichord[.] It is pre-
cisely these notes that should be played’ (‘comme les
principales notes de l’harmonie sont chiffrées pour
le Clavecin[.] C’est justement ces notes la quelle
doit jouer’).21 He followed with the reminder that
486  Early Music  August 2018
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
contrabassists should play all notes in slow tempos,
as well as notes in the tonic and dominant harmo-
nies, which often remained unfigured.22 Corrette
included numerous examples of simplified bass lines
in his method, a selection of which appear in illus-
tration 3.
Nineteenth-century trends and the eventual
decline of ‘the simplifiers’
This is what the simplifiers do. When a note is repeated
eight times in a bar as eight quavers, they just play four
crotchets. If there are four crotchets written, they play two
minims. And if there is a semibreve or a single note to
hold for a whole bar they begin the note and then drop
the bow after one beat as if their strength had suddenly
deserted them. If you expect an energetic scale rising an
octave, don’t count on it, since it will almost always be
transformed into four notes chosen at will by the player
from the eight notes of the scale. Did you write a tremolo?
Since this is a bit tiring on the right arm the simplifying
bassist will offer you a few clumsy notes, and you’ll be
lucky if he doesn’t reduce it to a simple held note, turning
feverish agitation into dull placidity. God preserve us from
thieves and simplifiers!23
Simplifiers are almost always poor in spirit, and since, as
the Gospel tells us, theirs is the kingdom of heaven, I often
think they ought to get there as quickly as possible.24
Out of laziness … or for fear of not being able to manage
difficult passages, a good many [contrabass] players take
the liberty of simplifying their parts. The simplifier-school,
much respected forty years ago, should be dead and buried.25
One can only speculate whether Hector Berlioz’s dis-
approval, expressed above, of those contrabassists he
 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019

3  Examples of simplified double bass parts from Michel Corrette, Méthodes pour apprendre à jouer de la contre-basse…
(Paris, [1773]), p.12
Early Music  August 2018  487
called ‘the simplifiers’ stemmed entirely from artistic
objections or perhaps more from his desire to exert
complete control over orchestral players, whom he
deemed ‘machines bearing intelligence but subordi-
nate to the action of an immense keyboard played
on by the conductor following the directions of the
composer’.26 The above statements represent some of
his most vehement criticisms of the practice, rais-
ing the question of how attitudes towards reduction
changed between the late 18th and mid 19th cen-
turies. Although the topic of reduction remained
prevalent in writings on the double bass throughout
the first half of the 19th century, discussions of the
practice turned increasingly critical.
Corrette’s method [1773] includes a clue as to why
extemporaneous reduction may have caused problems:
if there were numerous contrabassists in an ensemble,
as was increasingly common in the late 18th and 19th
centuries, they might disagree on how to simplify a
given bass line. In such cases, he advised composers
to provide contrabassists with a separate simplified
part.27 Corrette’s conception of reduction as either a
notated or an improvised procedure, depending on
the size of the ensemble, suggests that the growth of
orchestras was linked to the decline in the practice of
reduction as a performance practice and the concur-
rent rise of separately notated contrabass parts.
The German composer and theorist Gottfried
Weber expressed concerns about possible disagree-
ment within the double bass section in more detail
than Corrette. Writing for Leipzig’s Allgemeine musi-
kalische Zeitung in 1807 and again in 1816, Weber
illustrated the potential for discord in a simplified bass
line when one contrabassist chose to play the principal
notes of the harmony, while another performed non-
harmonic tones falling on the main metrical divisions
of the bar (illus.4). Weber did not, however, oppose
extemporaneous reduction outright, reasoning:
[es ist] denn wirklich ein ganz vernünftiger und guter
Nothbehelf, dass viele Violonisten die für sie zu geschwin-
den Figuren aus dem Stegreif zu vereinfachen, z.B.  aus
Sechszehntheil-Passagen, Achtel-Passagen zu bilden
suchen, und auf diese Art, statt die Passage, wie sie geschrie-
ben steht, undeutlich zu geben, lieber auszugsweise
nur die Hauptnoten derselben heraussuchen, und
dann diese deutlich und gut geben, die Ausführung
der Sechszehntheile aber dem beweglichern Violoncell
überlassen.28
488  Early Music  August 2018
4 Gottfried Weber’s cautionary example of discordant
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
reductions, in which one double bassist might choose
to play harmonic tones A and B′  on the fourth and
eighth quavers, while another played G! and C! to align
with the cellos’ semiquavers (Allgemeine musikalis-
che Zeitung, xviii/41 (9 October 1816), col.696; Munich,
Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 4 Mus.th. 1800–18, col.696,
urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10527966-5)
It is really a very sensible and good remedy for many
violonists to simplify these fast figures ad libitum, for
instance forming quaver passages from semiquaver
passages, and in this manner, instead of playing indis-
tinctly the passage as it is written, rather seek out only
the principal notes, and play them clearly and well, and
leave the execution of the semiquavers to the more agile
violoncello.
Weber encouraged composers to write a separate
contrabass line below the cello line in their shared
part, and charged music directors with this task
if the composer failed to do so.29 He still allowed
contrabassists to choose to play the full bass line
along with the cellos and, more surprisingly, sug-
gested, ‘in contrast, the weaker among the violoncel-
lists can play the reduced contrabass part, and thus
they would be much more useful than when they
ruin a passage that they do not understand how to
simplify’ (‘Im Gegentheile würden die schwächern
unter den Violoncellisten allenfalls die erleichterte
Contrabassstimme spielen, und daduch [sic] immer
viel mehr nützen können, als wenn sie die Passage,
welche sie nicht zu vereinfachen verstehen—verder-
ben’).30 Unlike Quantz and Corrette, Weber believed
that a knowledge of harmony was something ‘that
one cannot demand of practical instrumentalists’
(‘welche man von dem praktischen Instrumentisten
doch nicht fordern darf ’).31 His view probably stems
from the shift towards specialized performance
training in the 19th century, as compared to the
broader music education of the 18th century, which
emphasized composition and theoretical knowl-
edge in addition to technical fluency on multiple
instruments.
 Double bass method books and orchestration
treatises provide further documentation of the prac-
tice and eventual decline of double bass reduction.
Methods by Jacques-Claude-Adolphe Miné (Paris,
[1827]), Franz Joseph Fröhlich (Würzburg, 1829),
Charles-Amande Durier (Paris, [1836]), Luigi Felice
Rossi and Giorgio Anglois (Turin, 1846), and a
Professor Hartman (Paris, [1854]), as well as August
Müller’s articles on double bass playing written for
the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik (Leipzig, 1849), all
recommended simplifying impracticable passages.32
All but Rossi and Anglois’s method included notated
examples of suggested reductions, a selection of
which are reproduced in illustrations 5 and 6.
The fundamentals of bass-line reduction vary lit-
tle between sources—in fast or difficult passages,
double bassists should play only the principal notes,
that is, those which are most essential to the har-
mony. Some descriptions also offer insights into
shifting attitudes to double bass playing, reduction
and performance in general. On the topic of req-
uisite theoretical knowledge, Miné echoed Quantz
and Corrette in advocating the value of a knowledge
of harmony; however, he also allowed that without
such knowledge, ‘the ear and experience do the rest,
for there are very good contrabassists who are not
harmonists’ (‘l’oreille et l’habitude font la reste; car
il y a de très bons Contre-bassistes qui ne sont pas
harmonistes’).33 Fröhlich was less confident in con-
trabassists’ ability to simplify passages at sight, and
advised, ‘Any contrabassist who is not in a position to
find on first glance the correct representation of any
passage must make an effort to carefully study every
figure, even every single note. If he cannot do so,
the music director must do it’ (‘jener Kontrabassist,
welcher nicht im Stande ist, prima vista die richtige
5  Examples from Franz Joseph Fröhlich, Systematischer Unterricht, ii/2 (Würzburg, 1829), tab.107 (Munich, Bayerische
Staatsbibliothek, 4 Mus.th. 510 d-2,2, tab.107, urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10527193-2)
Darstellungsweise jeder Stelle zu finden, sich die
Mühe geben muß, jede Figur, ja jeden einzelnen Ton
sorgfältig einzustudiren. Kann er es nicht, so muß
es der Musikdirektor thun’).34 He referred readers
to a handful of examples among his supplementary
tables in which he indicated the ‘principal notes’
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
(‘Hauptnoten’) of the bass line to be played by con-
trabassists (illus.5).35
In the 19th century, writings on double bass
reduction increasingly turned their attention to
composers. While Quantz had admonished double
bassists against over-simplifying pieces ‘that they
did not compose themselves’, he did not offer com-
posers any advice on how to prevent such offenses.36
Corrette, and later Weber and Fröhlich, presented
notated reductions as a solution to potential prob-
lems with improvised reduction, but did not frame
these as independently composed parts. François-
Louis Perne, a contrabassist at the Paris Opéra from
1799 to 1816 and later the Inspector General of the
Paris Conservatoire, defended ‘the simplifiers’, argu-
ing that they understood their instrument better
than the composers whose works they simplified:
Ces contrebassistes harmonistes et même compositeurs
connaissent mieux l’effet de leur instrument que beaucoup
d’auteurs et compositeurs d’opéras, et cela par l’habitude
et le talent qu’ils ont de juger de l’effet total de l’orchestre
dont ils font partie; ils savent que, si dans un mouvement
assez vif ils faisaient toutes les notes qui font partie d’un
même accord, cette multitude de notes graves ne formerait
qu’un bruit sourd et un effet peu distinct dans l’ensemble.37
These contrabassists, who are harmonists and even
composers, know the effect of their instrument better
than many opera composers; and with the experience
and talent they have of judging the total effect of the
orchestra in which they take part, they know that if, in a
very fast tempo, they played all the notes that belong to
Early Music  August 2018  489
 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
6  Excerpts from Beethoven’s Symphonies nos.2  (A) and 3  (B) with Durier’s suggested reductions (Méthode complète
de contre-basse, Paris, [1836], p.50; Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Département de la Musique, vm8 f-3, ark:/12148/
bpt6k1162387n)

the same chord, this multitude of low notes would only
produce a dull sound and an indistinct effect within the
ensemble.
Another Parisian double bassist, Charles-Amand
Durier, offered reduction as a means to serve more
effectively the composer’s intent, writing, ‘we must
seek to preserve the principal intentions of the
composer, and be content to just support the vio-
loncello by playing the main note of the chord’
(‘on doit chercher à conserver les principales
intentions de l’auteur, et se contenter de seconder
seulement le Violoncelle en jouant la principale note
de l’accord’).38 Durier illustrated this concept by
simplifying excerpts from a number of Beethoven’s
symphonies, including those shown in illustration 6.
Writings on orchestration provide an add-
itional perspective on how double bass reduction
was transformed from a performance practice
into a compositional convention. Although tech-
niques of instrumentation existed in the 18th cen-
tury, the development of orchestration as a distinct
sub-discipline of composition was a 19th-century

490  Early Music  August 2018

phenomenon.39 In the early 1810s, William Crotch
and Alexandre-Étienne Choron endorsed impro-
vised reduction in conjunction with separately
notated double bass parts in some passages. In his
brief comments on instrumental composition,
Crotch advised:
In general … a separate part is not composed for the dou-
ble bass, but the performer looks out of the violoncello
book, playing the  same notes an octave lower, or omit-
ting such notes as he thinks proper … but separate lines
and an occasional difference in the passages are rather
recommended.40
In France, Choron expanded Louis-Joseph
Francoeur’s Diapason general de tous les instru-
ments à vent (1772), complementing Francoeur’s
original discussion of wind instruments with chap-
ters on strings, percussion and voice.41 In this new
edition, published as Traité général des voix et des
instruments d’orchestre in 1813, Choron’s observa-
tions about the contrabass part resemble those of
Crotch:
La partie de contre Basse est la même que celle du
Violoncelle, sauf les notes trop rapides que l’on supprime.
Les compositeurs ne se donnent pas la peine de faire eux
mêmes cette réduction; ils la laissent faire aux contrebass-
istes, qui en ont l’habitude. On n’ecrit séparément la partie
de contrebasse, que lorsquelle renferme quelque intention
ou dessin particulier.42
The contrabass part is the same as that of the violoncello,
except for notes that are too fast, which are removed.
Composers do not go through the trouble to make this
reduction themselves; they leave it to the contrabassists,
who are accustomed to doing so. They only write a sepa-
rate contrabass part when it includes a special intention
or line.
Anton Reicha, however, encouraged compos-
ers to take it upon themselves to produce a suitable
reduction for the double basses. His Cours de com-
position musicale (c.1818), an official textbook at the
Paris Conservatoire, where Reicha taught counter-
point and fugue, reads:
Les joueurs de contre-basse ont, il est vrai, l’habitude de
simplifier les parties de Violoncelles et de ne prendre que
les notes réelles des accords; mais simplifier une partie en
détachant au juste les notes qu’il convient de retrancher,
et n’exécuter les autres qu’avec leur valeur nécessaire
exige du temps, de la méditation et des connaissances
en harmonie; le joueur de Contrebasse qui souvent n’est
pas harmoniste et qui, en poursuivant la mesure, n’a pas
même le tems de réflechir, doit fréquemment se tromper.
C’est donc aux auteurs qu’il appartient de faire ce travail,
et nous leur conseillons, pour leur propre intérêt, de ne
jamais le négliger.43
Contrabass players, it is true, are used to simplifying the
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
violoncello part and playing only the notes that are actu-
ally in the chords. But to simplify a part by removing
exactly the notes which are to be eliminated, and to play
the others with just their necessary value requires time,
contemplation, and knowledge of harmony. The contra-
bass player, who is often not a harmonist and who follows
the beat, without enough time to think, will frequently
make mistakes. It is therefore up to composers to do this
work, and for their own benefit, we advise them never to
neglect it.
Distaste for improvised reduction grew through-
out the following decades. Reicha’s colleague at the
Conservatoire, François-Joseph Fétis, alluded to the
practice while comparing French and English dou-
ble bassists in a letter published in The Harmonicon
in 1829. Fétis complained that in contrast with dou-
ble bassists in London, who play with ‘a precision,
a minuteness, a delicacy, and a power, to which in
Paris we are strangers’, some French double bass-
ists ‘give themselves less trouble, and are content
with executing the leading notes of the passages of
the score before them. Not so the double basses of
the Philharmonic Concert: these artists allow every
thing to be heard’.44 Principal among these London
double bassists would have been the famed Italian
expatriate Domenico Dragonetti, whom the Paris
Conservatoire’s board of directors had consulted
before establishing its double bass class in 1827.45 That
year, Fétis had advocated adopting the ‘Dragonetti’
bow in France in La Revue musicale.46 Reading ulte-
rior motives in his comparison of French and English
double bassists then suggests a link between different
models of bows and the practice of bass-line reduc-
tion, and attests to the deteriorating status of ‘the
simplifiers’ in France, which culminated in an impas-
sioned campaign against extemporaneous reduction
by one of Reicha’s students—Hector Berlioz.
Examples of simplified orchestral excerpts, par-
ticularly from Beethoven’s symphonies, appeared
in double bass methods until c.1850.47 As the per-
formance practice declined, the topic of reducing
double bass lines persisted in the context of orches-
tration.48 Instructions for writing simplified double
Early Music  August 2018  491
bass lines based on a more ornate cello part resem-
ble those for extemporaneous reduction; however,
orchestration treatises directed these instructions
at composers, often without mentioning the tech-
nique’s roots in improvised practice. In the mid to
late 19th century, composers increasingly wrote ded-
icated double bass parts, and double bass reduction
eventually became a purely notated phenomenon.
Methods of reduction
In addition to describing the practice of reduction,
many authors provided examples of simplified bass
lines. These examples often consisted of hypothetical
bass lines rather than excerpts from existing reper-
tory. Some—Quantz, Fröhlich and Hartman—sim-
plified a selection of commonly occurring patterns,
while others—Corrette and Miné—included longer
passages, which demonstrate logical harmonic
progressions and motivic figurations despite not
originating in existing works. Miné followed these
examples with a number of unmodified excerpts
from symphonies by Haydn and Mozart. He offered
no explanation as to whether students should sim-
plify these excerpts or play every note, presumably
leaving the decision to the discretion of the pupil
or his teacher. Durier and Müller applied reduction
to examples drawn from Beethoven’s symphonies.
Weber alone illustrated both a generic example and
one from an existing work, Mozart’s Requiem.49
Representing a timespan of just over a century—
Quantz published his Versuch in 1752, and Hartman’s
Ex.1 Rhythmic reductions of repeated notes: (a) Quantz, Versuch, tab.23; (b) Fröhlich, Systematischer Unterricht, ii/2,
tab.107; (c) Corrette, Méthodes, p.11; and (d) Miné, Méthode de contre-basse, pp.16–17
492  Early Music  August 2018
method is thought to date from 1854—as well as
different national traditions, these sources present
varying approaches to extemporaneous bass-line
reduction. Even so, identifiable patterns are manifest
in the rhythmic and pitch profiles of simplified dou-
ble bass parts, as well as in how they serve the com-
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
posite bass line performed by the entire bass group.
Comparing these methods thus involves classifying
reductions according to their function, rhythmic
structure and pitch alignment.
(a) Rhythmic, melodic and harmonic functions
Reductions influence the rhythmic inflection of
a bass line by emphasizing its principal notes, but
can also reinforce a passage’s harmonic or melodic
outline. Purely rhythmic reductions apply primar-
ily to passages consisting of repeated notes. By elid-
ing repetitions of the same pitch and replacing them
with longer note values (or rests) (ex.1), rhythmic
reductions allow for more distinct articulation and
a clearer marking of metrical structure. Rhythmic
reduction may be combined with harmonic or
melodic reduction—the omission of pitches that
embellish a bass line’s underlying harmonic progres-
sion or melodic design. The content of the original
bass line and the nature of its composed ornamenta-
tion may call for the harmonic and melodic reduc-
tion of passages. Reductions serving a harmonic
function simplify chordal figurations and the
unfolding or filling in of vertical harmonies (ex.2).
Melodic reductions simplify the ornamentation of
horizontally (i.e. melodically) coherent bass lines
(ex.3). A single passage might call for any combina-
tion of rhythmic, harmonic and melodic reductions.
(b) Even versus uneven rhythmic profiles
The most straightforward reductions involve a
line. Evenly proportioned simplifications, featuring
2:1, 3:1 or 4:1 reduction of the notes in the origi-
nal bass line, represent an intuitive solution to the
potentially indistinct execution of rapidly repeated
notes. Uneven rhythmic patterns generally consist
of a long note followed by one or more short notes

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019

purely rhythmic simplification of repeated notes
appearing either in extended passages or as isolated
repetitions. Quantz, Corrette and Miné all sug-
gested reducing passages of repeated notes to slower
rhythms (ex.1), but varied in their degree of sim-
plification and preferred rhythm for the simplified
leading to the next beat, and most often use dotted
or lilting triplet figures; the reverse, short–long pat-
terns, are rare. Quantz prescribed uneven rhythms
more often than other authors, and suggested a dot-
ted rhythm for four-note repetitions. Conversely,
Fröhlich was unique among theorists in including

Ex.2  Reductions serving a primarily harmonic function. Transcribed from: (a) Quantz, Versuch, tab.23; (b) Fröhlich,
Systematischer Unterricht, ii/2, tab.107; (c) Beethoven, Symphony no.3, mvt.iv, in Durier, Méthode complète de contre-
basse, pp.50–51; (d) Beethoven, Symphony no.6, mvt.iv, in Müller, ‘Ueber den Contrabaß’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik,
xxx/13, p.65; (e) Hartman, Méthode de contre-basse, p.9

Ex.3  Reductions serving a primarily melodic function. Transcribed from: (a) Quantz, Versuch, tab.23; (b) Mozart, Requiem,
Kyrie, in Weber, ‘Ueber Instrumentalbässe’, Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, xviii/41, col.696; (c) Corrette, Méthodes, p.12

Early Music  August 2018  493

an example that simplified a dotted rhythm to an
even subdivision of the beat (ex.1b).
In his 1836–7 series of articles ‘Companion to the
orchestra; or hints on instrumentation’, the English
composer and pianist Cipriani Potter (a pupil of
Crotch) described how even and uneven rhythms
affect the character of a simplified bass line:
The introduction of the dotted notes, also, gives a decided
character, and adds great force and energy to the composi-
tion … When the basses are made to move always with the
beats of a composition; that is, with the equal divisions of
the bar, the effect is apt to be monotonous.50
Quantz’s examples demonstrate this relationship
between uneven rhythms and musical momen-
tum. Quantz favoured uneven rhythms when the
last note of a figure leads to the next beat by step or
by dominant leap of a 4th or 5th, promoting both
rhythmic and harmonic impetus in the contrabass
line (see exx.2a, 3a and 4). Uneven reductions thus
tend to mark each beat rather than grouping beats
hierarchically. This type of reduction seems espe-
cially appropriate for the florid dotted figures often
featured in the opening of French overtures (ex.4a).
Ex.4  Examples of uneven-rhythm reductions: Quantz, Versuch, tab.23
Ex.5  Even-rhythm reductions outlining arpeggiated and stepwise motion across consecutive beats: Quantz, Versuch, tab.23
494  Early Music  August 2018
Even rhythms, by virtue of their uniformity, allow
for larger groupings of beats across the bar, sug-
gesting a possible motive for Quantz’s use of even-
rhythm reductions to outline underlying scalar or
arpeggiated lines in the original bass (ex.5).
Other sources follow this pattern of even and une-
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
ven rhythms as well, often utilizing uneven-rhythm
reductions to highlight linear motion in the bass
line or to propel harmonic progressions. Corrette
and Miné avoided the dotted-quaver–semiquaver
rhythms that Quantz used so often, but employed
dotted-crotchet–quaver rhythms to the same
effect (ex.6). Corrette and Weber generally simpli-
fied semiquaver figures to even quaver or crotchet
rhythms (ex.7; see also ex.3b). Corrette, Miné and
Hartman also tended to reduce triplet figures
evenly by a 3:1 proportion (exx.2e and 8), whereas
Quantz suggested a lilting crotchet–quaver rhythm
(ex.4b). Quantz, Corrette and Fröhlich all simpli-
fied descending sequences of escape (échappé) notes
from semiquavers to quavers, observable in example
5c and illustration 5.51
Of the authors discussed above, Miné most fre-
quently elided repetitions. In four pages of examples,
Ex.6  Dotted-rhythm reductions from (a) Corrette, Méthodes, p.12; and (b) Miné, Méthode de contre-basse, p.15.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019

Ex.7  Simplifications of semiquaver passages from (a) Corrette, Méthodes, p.14; and (b) Weber, ‘Ueber Instrumentalbässe’,
col.695

Ex.8  Reduction patterns for triplet figures from (a) Corrette, Méthodes, pp.16–17; and (b) Miné, Méthode de contre-basse,
pp.14, 17.

he left only a single occurrence of repeated notes
intact in the contrabass line. These notes appear in
the second of two bars with identical violoncello
parts (ex.9a, bars 5–6). Miné may have merely pro-
vided an alternative to the simplification shown in the
previous bar, or perhaps he intentionally increased
rhythmic activity to lead to the phrase’s concluding
imperfect cadence. While Miné offered no expla-
nation, additional examples support this musical
justification. Unaltered triplets precede significant
harmonic changes that occur earlier in the example,
indicating a preference for more active rhythms at
structurally important moments. Elsewhere Miné
alternated between more and less active rhythms in
consecutive bars, emphasizing the hierarchy of more
active strong and less active weak bars, and contrib-
uting to a sense of two-bar hypermeter (ex.9b).
(c) Pitch synchronisation and dissonance
When an active bass line is simplified, the notes
articulated by the contrabass may relate to those
in the original bass line either synchronously or
asynchronously. In synchronous reductions all
notes in the simplified line articulate simultaneously
with those in the original bass line, whereas asyn-
chronous reductions feature notes that articulate
either before or after the corresponding notes in the
original line. Conceptually, synchronous reductions
lengthen the principal notes of the original bass
line or replace its non-essential notes with rests.
Since the remaining notes must align with those in
the original bass part, the patterns and figurations
in the original line influence the reduction’s rhyth-
mic design. This correlation probably accounts for
the tendency of synchronous examples to regularly
feature uneven rhythms, while asynchronous exam-
ples more often employ evenly subdivided rhythmic
patterns.
With few exceptions, German authors favoured
synchronous reductions in their examples. These
examples appear on a single staff with the origi-
nal and simplified lines indicated by stem direc-
tion, rather than on two separate staves (compare
Quantz in illus.2 or Fröhlich in illus.5 with

Early Music  August 2018  495

Ex.9  Reductions exhibiting rhythmic variation from Miné, Méthode de contre-basse, pp.14–15: (a) increased rhythmic
activity highlights the harmonic progression, (b) varying rhythmic patterns underline hypermetric hierarchy
Corrette in illus.3 or Durier in illus.6). It remains
unclear whether the authors opted for this
method of notation precisely because their reduc-
tions allowed it, or whether a desire for more
space-efficient notation influenced their theo-
ries of simplification. By contrast, asynchronous
reductions are more common in French sources,
possibly resulting from a desire for even-rhythm
simplifications of bass lines whose principal notes
occur on weak subdivisions of the beat (that is, fig-
ures featuring accented ornamental notes). When
Alberti bass and arpeggiated patterns occur in the
bass line, Corrette simplified the figurations to a
repetition of the chordal bass, leaving the rest of
the harmony to the 8′ instruments (exx.10a and
10b). This contrasts with Quantz’s preference
for dotted-rhythm reductions of Alberti figures.
Corrette also used asynchronous simplification
for figurations embellishing the interval of the
3rd, assigning the root of the chord to the con-
trabass while the 8′ bass plays the 3rd. As with his
simplifications of triadic examples, these reduc-
tions are consonant with the original bass line at
the point of articulation (ex.10c).
496  Early Music  August 2018
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
In figurations not based on 3rds or arpeggios,
asynchronous reductions introduce the potential for
accented dissonances between the 8′ bass line and
simplified contrabass line. For practical reasons, a
reduction is only considered dissonant if the origi-
nal and simplified lines concurrently articulate a
dissonant interval; dissonances that emerge when
the original bass line moves to non-harmonic tones
over a held note in the simplified line need not be
considered. Dissonant reductions are not common.
Hartman included one example in which the ‘bad’
beats of his contrabass reduction are dissonant with
the cello line (ex.11a). Fröhlich included two exam-
ples whose rhythms are ambiguously notated on a
single staff (see illus.5), but suggest dissonant asyn-
chronous reductions (ex.11b). A  short–long ‘scotch
snap’ rhythm does not suit his second example,
and the interpretation of even quavers with fleeting
dissonance is thus more plausible than a synchro-
nously aligned uneven rhythm. Also noteworthy,
in addition to suggesting reductions with weak-
beat dissonances, Durier simplified a passage from
Beethoven’s Third Symphony such that dissonances
occur on several strong beats (ex.12).
Ex.10  Consonant asynchronous reductions from Corrette, Méthodes for (a) arpeggios (p.12); (b) Alberti bass patterns
(p.15); and (c) embellished 3rds (p.14)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019

Ex.11  Dissonant asynchronous reductions from (a) Hartman, Méthode de contre-basse, p.9; and (b) Fröhlich, Systematischer
Unterricht, tab.19 (* indicates articulated dissonances between bass line and reduction)

Ex.12  Dissonant asynchronous reductions for Beethoven’s double bass parts from Durier’s Méthode complète de contre-
basse: (a) excerpt from Beethoven, Symphony no.3, mvt.iv, bars 449–52, featuring several dissonant articulations on strong
beats (pp.50–51); (b) excerpt from Beethoven, Symphony no.4, mvt.iv, bars 21–3 and 319–20, featuring metrically weak dis-
sonant articulations (pp.51–2) (* indicates articulated dissonances between bass line and reduction)

Differing approaches to a common technique
In the 18th and 19th centuries, contrabassists reg-
ularly departed from the written score in perfor-
mance by either transposing or removing notes
from problematic passages. National tuning con-
ventions in this period probably influenced their
approach to bass-line modification. Early Italian
methods focus on transposing passages that fall
out of range, which was especially important
given the Italian contrabass’s more limited lower
compass.52 The three-string Italian set-up, lacking
the heavy lowest string that presented the great-
est impediment to clarity for so many others,
also appears to have reduced the need for reduc-
tion, as relatively few Italian sources mention the
practice. German sources referring to the now

Early Music  August 2018  497

standard E′–A′–D–G tuning usually feature active
and often uneven rhythm patterns. French meth-
ods for three-string tuning by 5ths (see illus.1,
above) tend to exhibit more frequent reductions
and a greater degree of simplification, possibly
due to the wider interval between open strings.
While few examples from different methods sim-
plify identical bass lines, Durier’s and Müller’s
reductions for an excerpt from Beethoven’s Fifth
Symphony (ex.13) illustrate these tendencies.
Durier simplified most of the excerpt to crotchets,
whereas Müller included more of the original bass
line’s quavers, keeping the rhythm of the reduced
part closer to that of the original in the bars with
slurs. Other organological features such as differ-
ences in bow design or the use of frets may also
have influenced techniques of reduction, though
specific correlations cannot be determined from
the available documentation.
The appropriate method of simplification for
a passage varies according to the original bass
line’s content. Regardless of their approach to
reduction, the sources examined share a common
goal of extracting a logical and musically satisfy-
ing contrabass line from the 8′ bass part. Double
bassists wishing to incorporate the technique
Ex.13  Two reductions for Beethoven, Symphony no.5, mvt.iv, bars 80–90. Transcribed from Durier, Méthode complète de
contre-basse, p.53; and Müller, ‘Ueber den Contrabaß’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, xxx/5, p.31
498  Early Music  August 2018
into historically informed performances today
can also draw from less explicit sources on the
practice. Before separately notated double bass
parts became the norm, occasional examples of
notated reductions appeared in scores and parts
dating from the late 17th century onward, espe-
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
cially in opera and larger works. These simpli-
fied parts, assigned to the double bass, bassoon
or contrabassoon, presumably reflect the types of
reductions contrabassists would have performed
ad libitum. Keyboardists also simplified certain
passages when playing basso continuo,  and key-
board treatises provide justifications similar to
those for double bass.53 Additionally, as Heather
Miller Lardin observes, the practice of  contra-
bassists doubling the principal notes of the bass
line resembles keyboard players reinforcing cer-
tain notes an octave lower.54
The evidence discussed above suggests the
widespread, though not necessarily uniform
or universal, practice of double bass reduction
in 18th- and 19th-century orchestral playing.
Historical contrabassists who practised reduction
probably used the technique in isolated passages
akin to the brief divisi sections notated sporadi-
cally in scores, and reduction would have been
particularly useful for fast passages exhibiting
patterns that resemble diminutions. Performers
today may vary their use of reduction according
to the ensemble, repertory and venue of each per-
formance. Informed double bassists will also, no
doubt, draw on personal taste and experience in
utilizing reduction to fulfil their role as the rhyth-
mic and harmonic foundation of the ensemble, or
as Fröhlich so aptly put it, ‘the soul of all music’
(‘die Seele der ganzen Musik’).55

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019

Shanti Nachtergaele is a Vanier Scholar and PhD student in musicology at McGill University. She
studied historical double bass and violone with Margaret Urquhart and Rob Nairn, and remains
active as a performer. Her research focuses on the history of the double bass and its techniques and
performance practices. shanti.nachtergaele@mail.mcgill.ca

This article is based on portions of
my MA thesis, ‘Extemporaneous bass
line reduction in historical double
bass playing’ (The Pennsylvania
State University, 2017), and material
was presented at the 2016 European
Double Bass Congress, 2017 McGill
Music Graduate Symposium, and
2017 International Society of Bassists
Convention. I wish to thank Mark
Ferraguto, Eric McKee and Tom
Beghin for their input on the project
in its various stages, and the Penn
State Institute for the Arts and
Humanities for the support provided
by a Graduate Student Summer
Residency in 2016.
1  François-Auguste Gevaert, Nouveau
traité d’instrumentation (Paris, 1885),
pp.66–7.
2  See, for example, M. Cyr, ‘Basses
and basse continue in the orchestra
of the Paris Opéra 1700–1764’, Early
Music, x/2 (1982), pp.155–70, at
pp.167–8; P. Brun, A new history of the
double bass (Villeneuve d’Ascq, 2000),
pp.69–80; H. Miller Lardin, ‘Michel
Corrette’s Méthodes pour apprendre
à jouer de la contre-basse à 3. à 4. et
à 5. cordes, de la quinte ou alto et de
la viole d’Órphée: a new translation
with commentary’ (DMA diss.,
Cornell University, 2006), pp.35–70;
and M. Pinca, ‘August Müller’s
contributions to the Neue Zeitschrift
für Musik (1848–1849): evidence of
approaches to orchestral double bass
playing in the mid-19th century’, Ad
Parnassum: A Journal of Eighteenth-
and Nineteenth-Century Instrumental
Music, xii/23 (2014), pp.15–59, at
pp.47–57.
3  F. Baines, ‘What exactly is a
violone? A note towards a solution’,
Early Music, v/2 (1977), pp.173–6;
E. Segerman, ‘Mysteries of the early
double bass’, Early Music, xxvii/4
(1999), pp.660–61; S. Kuijken, ‘A Bach
odyssey’, Early Music, xxxviii/2 (2010),
pp.263–72.
4  S. Bonta, ‘Terminology for the bass
violin in 17th-century Italy’, Journal
of the American Musical Instrument
Society, iv (1979), pp.5–42; T. Borgir,
The performance of the basso continuo
in Italian Baroque music (Ann Arbor,
1987), pp.72–4; and D. F. Chapman,
‘The sixteen-foot violone in concerted
music of the 17th and 18th centuries:
issues of terminology and function’,
Eighteenth-Century Music, xii/1 (2015),
pp.33–67.
5  Bonta, ‘Terminology’, pp.5–6.
6  Chapman, ‘The sixteen-foot violone’,
p.35.
7  See Borgir, The performance of
the basso continuo, pp.78–80; and
Chapman, ‘The sixteen-foot violone’,
pp.33–67.
8  J. Spitzer and N. Zaslaw, The birth of
the orchestra: history of an institution,
1650–1815 (Oxford, 2004), p.23.
9  The lowest string could also be
tuned variably to D′ or E′. J. Focht,
Der Wiener Kontrabass: Spieltechnik
und Aufführungspraxis, Musik und
Instrumente (Tutzing, 1999), pp.35–6.
10  These tuning trends are outlined in
Brun, A new history of the double bass,
pp.99–127.
11  Friedrich Erhardt Niedt,
Musicalischer Handleitung: Dritter
und letzter Theil (Hamburg, 1717), p.43.
12  Johann Christoph Pepusch, A
treatise on harmony (London, 1731),
pp.46–7. The treatise was published
anonymously but it has subsequently
been attributed to Pepusch.
13  See M. Cyr, ‘Basses and basse
continue’, pp.155–70; M. D.
Greenberg, “Perfecting the storm:
the rise of the double bass in France,
1701–1815’, The Online Journal of
Bass Research, i (2003), §§4.4–4.6;
and D. Glüxam, Instrumentarium
und Instrumentalstil in der Wiener
Hofoper zwischen 1705 und 1740
(Tutzing, 2006), pp.382–418.
14  L. Dreyfus, Bach’s continuo group:
players and practices in his vocal works
(Cambridge, MA, 1987), pp.142–66.
15 Dreyfus, Bach’s continuo group,
p.165.
16  Johann Joachim Quantz, On
playing the flute, trans. E. R. Reilly
(New York, 1966), p.247. Edited
by the author to reflect historical
terminology, particularly Quantz’s
interchangeable use of the terms
‘contraviolonist’ and ‘violonist’; see
J. J. Quantz, Versuch einer Anweisung
die Flöte traversiere zu spielen
(Berlin, 1752), p.218.
17  Quantz, trans. Reilly, On playing
the flute, pp.249–50; Edited as above
(n.16), see Quantz, Versuch, p.221.
18  Michel Corrette, Méthodes pour
apprendre à jouer de la contre-basse à
3, à 4, et à 5 cordes, de la quinte ou alto
et de la viole d’Orphée (Paris, [1773]),
p.10.
19 Corrette, Méthodes, p.10.
20 Corrette, Méthodes, p.10.
21 Corrette, Méthodes, p.14.

Early Music  August 2018  499

22 Corrette, Méthodes, p.14.
23  Hector Berlioz, ‘De
l’instrumentation de Robert le Diable’,
Gazette musicale de Paris, ii/28 (12
July 1835), pp.229–32, at p.229, trans.
H. Macdonald, Berlioz’s orchestration
treatise: a translation and commentary
(Cambridge, 2002), pp.58–9.
24  Berlioz, ‘De l’instrumentation
de Robert le Diable’, p.231, trans.
Macdonald, Berlioz’s orchestration
treatise, p.59.
25  Hector Berlioz, Grand traité
d’instrumentation et d’orchestration
modernes (Paris, 2/1855), p.311, trans.
Macdonald, Berlioz’s orchestration
treatise, p.361.
26 Berlioz, Grand traité, p.293, trans.
Macdonald, Berlioz’s orchestration
treatise, p.319.
27 Corrette, Méthodes, p.10.
28  Gottfried Weber, ‘Ueber
Instrumentalbässe bey vollstimmigen
Tonstücken’, Allgemeine musikalische
Zeitung, xviii/41 (9 October 1816),
cols.693–702, at col.695.
29  Gottfried Weber, ‘Praktische
Bemerkungen’, Allgemeine
musikalische Zeitung, ix/52 (23
September 1807), cols.821–4, at
cols.822–3.
30  Weber, ‘Praktische Bemerkungen’,
col.823.
31  Weber, ‘Praktische Bemerkungen’,
col.822.
32  Jacques-Claude-Adolphe Miné,
Méthode de contre-basse (Paris,
[1827]); Franz Joseph Fröhlich,
‘Kontrabaß-Schule’, in Systematischer
Unterricht, ii: In den vorzüglichsten
Orchester-Instrumenten (Würzburg,
1829); Charles-Amand Durier,
Méthode complète de contre-basse
(Paris, [1836]); Luigi Felice Rossi
and Giorgio Anglois, Metodo per
il contrabbasso d’orchestra (Turin,
1846); Hartman, Méthode de contre-
basse à 3 et à 4 cordes (Paris, [1854]);
August Müller, ‘Ueber den Contrabaß
500  Early Music  August 2018
und dessen Behandlung, nebst einem
Hinblick auf die Symphonieen von
Beethoven. (Dritter Artikel und
Schluß)’, Neue Zeitschrift für Musik,
xxx/2, 3, 5, 13, 15, 21 (January–March
1849), pp.9–11, 15–18, 28–32, 65–7, 82–3,
109–13.
33 Miné, Méthode de contre-basse, p.3.
34  Fröhlich, ‘Kontrabaß-Schule’, p.472.
35  Fröhlich, ‘Kontrabaß-Schule’, p.472.
36  Quantz, trans. Reilly, On playing
the flute, p.250.
37  François-Louis Perne, ‘Note sur
la contrebasse’, La Revue musicale, ii
(1828), pp.495–7, at p.496.
38 Durier, Méthode complète de
contre-basse, p.1.
39  Spitzer and Zaslaw, The birth of the
orchestra, pp.501–6.
40  William Crotch, Elements of
musical composition; comprehending
the rules of thorough bass and the
theory of tuning (London, 1812), p.113.
41  Spitzer and Zaslaw, The birth of the
orchestra, p.504.
42  Louis-Joseph Francoeur and
Alexandre-Étienne Choron, Traité
général des voix et des instruments
d’orchestre (Paris, 1813), p.84.
43  Anton Reicha, Cours de
composition musicale; ou traité
complet et raisonné d’harmonie
pratique (Paris, c.1818), p.253.
44  The term ‘leading notes’ is a poor
translation of ‘notes principales’ in
Fétis’s native French. He published
his observations in both languages.
François-Joseph Fétis, ‘State of music
in London (second letter)’, The
Harmonicon, new series, vii (1829),
cols.214–17, at col.216; and ‘Deuxième
lettre. Société philharmonique. Londres,
1er mai 1829’, Curiosités historiques de
la musique (Paris, 1830), pp.181–95, at
p.192.
45  M. D. Greenberg, ‘The double bass
class at the Paris Conservatory, 1826–
1832’, Journal of the American Musical
Instrument Society, xxvi (2000),
pp.83–140, at pp.89–94.
46  François-Joseph Fétis, ‘Sur la
contrebasse et sur son archet’, La
Revue musicale, i (1827), pp.468–72, at
pp.469–71.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/em/article-abstract/46/3/483/5104864 by Universidad de La Rioja user on 17 December 2019
47  See Durier, Méthode complète
de contre-basse; Müller, ‘Ueber den
Contrabaß’; and Hartman, Méthode de
contre-basse à 3 et à 4 cordes.
48  For a more extensive survey of
discussions appearing in orchestration
treatises, see S. Nachtergaele
‘Extemporaneous bass line reduction
in historical double bass playing’
(MA thesis, The Pennsylvania State
University, 2017), pp.31–42.
49  Weber, ‘Ueber Instrumentalbässe’,
cols.695–6.
50  Cipriani Potter, ‘Companion to the
orchestra; or hints on instrumentation:
no.iv: violoncello and contra-basso’,
The Musical World, v/61 (12 May 1837),
pp.129–33, at p.132.
51  For Corrette’s example of this
pattern, see the last two systems on p.11
of his Méthodes.
52  Bonifazio Asioli, Elementi per il
contrabbasso, con una nuova maniera
di digitare (Milan: [1823]), pp.17–26; and
Luigi Felice Rossi and Giorgio Anglois,
Metodo per il contrabbasso d’orchestra,
trans. and ed. Luca Marzetti (Albese
con Cassano, 2017), pp.43–6.
53  Analogous keyboard continuo
practices are addressed in
R. Donington, The interpretation
of early music (New York, r/1992),
pp.313–15, 364; and F. T. Arnold,
The art of accompaniment from a
thorough-bass: as practiced in the
XVIIth and XVIIIth centuries, 2 vols.
(London, 1931), i, pp.94, 196, 294,
329–30, 381–2.
54  Miller Lardin, ‘Michel Corrette’s
Méthodes’, pp.39–58.
55 Fröhlich, Vollständige theoretisch-
pracktische Musikschule (Bonn, 1811),
iv, p.92.