The Viola Section
The violas are misunderstood, we are the black sheep of the orchestra.
********************************
The first violins and cellos carries the top and bottom melodys, they are the most recognizable, therefore composers always write all the important melodies for them.
The second violins supports the top melody, so without them the melody would sound empty.
The double bass... well they carry the bass note, without that the chord structure completely falls apart.
Then the viola section... well we get whatever that's left over of the harmonies. The composer seems to leave the viola part until the very end, then writes it according to whatever note and rhthym it takes to fill up the harmony. Without us... the piece of music will sound just fine.
If you check out an orchestra or quartet music and look at each part, you will realize that the viola part is always the most boring and the one without any kind of melody whatsoever.
**************************************************
The instrument "viola" itself is misunderstood. The violin is light and small, therefore easy to carry on the shoulder. The cello's weight is left not on the shoulders but on the ground while cellists play, therefore making it still relatively easy to play.
The viola, on the other hand, is just a pain in the... back. It's big and heavy, and us violists still have to carry them on our shoulders, which ultimately screws up our back by the time we reach mid-age. The viola basically includes the disadvantages of both instruments, we are the "worst" of both worlds.
The violin is able to create a beautiful, high pitched, melodious and smooth sound, while the cello is able to create a more masculine and deep sound, full of thickness and richness.
The viola, on the other hand, is just too hard to creat a decent sound. It is not able to reach the high notes of the violin, neither is it able to reach the low notes of the cello. It is the most quiet of the strings because it has to be big enough to play lower notes then the violin, but small enough to carry on the shoulders. IT IS NOT ABLE TO BE FULLY BEAUTIFUL LIKE THE VIOLINS, NEITHER CAN IT BE FULLY HANDSOME LIKE THE CELLOS. IT IS JUST BADLY ENOUGH TO BE IN BETWEEN.
For a stereo system, people usually crank the treble (violins) up or crank the bass (cellos) up. Nobody EVER touches the mid. If you listen seperately to the UBC orchestra, you will realize that viola section is always the most out of tune and average sounding instrument, because we have to carry a large piece of rock on our shoulders.
*************************************************************************
Now don't get me wrong, if played correctly, the viola can still sound absolutely amazing. It is just the music world has already perceived this notion of "violas are crap" that we barely ever get a chance to show the world our "beautiful+handsome/ 2= understated, unique, and sophisticated" sound.
********************************
The first violins and cellos carries the top and bottom melodys, they are the most recognizable, therefore composers always write all the important melodies for them.
The second violins supports the top melody, so without them the melody would sound empty.
The double bass... well they carry the bass note, without that the chord structure completely falls apart.
Then the viola section... well we get whatever that's left over of the harmonies. The composer seems to leave the viola part until the very end, then writes it according to whatever note and rhthym it takes to fill up the harmony. Without us... the piece of music will sound just fine.
If you check out an orchestra or quartet music and look at each part, you will realize that the viola part is always the most boring and the one without any kind of melody whatsoever.
**************************************************
The instrument "viola" itself is misunderstood. The violin is light and small, therefore easy to carry on the shoulder. The cello's weight is left not on the shoulders but on the ground while cellists play, therefore making it still relatively easy to play.
The viola, on the other hand, is just a pain in the... back. It's big and heavy, and us violists still have to carry them on our shoulders, which ultimately screws up our back by the time we reach mid-age. The viola basically includes the disadvantages of both instruments, we are the "worst" of both worlds.
The violin is able to create a beautiful, high pitched, melodious and smooth sound, while the cello is able to create a more masculine and deep sound, full of thickness and richness.
The viola, on the other hand, is just too hard to creat a decent sound. It is not able to reach the high notes of the violin, neither is it able to reach the low notes of the cello. It is the most quiet of the strings because it has to be big enough to play lower notes then the violin, but small enough to carry on the shoulders. IT IS NOT ABLE TO BE FULLY BEAUTIFUL LIKE THE VIOLINS, NEITHER CAN IT BE FULLY HANDSOME LIKE THE CELLOS. IT IS JUST BADLY ENOUGH TO BE IN BETWEEN.
For a stereo system, people usually crank the treble (violins) up or crank the bass (cellos) up. Nobody EVER touches the mid. If you listen seperately to the UBC orchestra, you will realize that viola section is always the most out of tune and average sounding instrument, because we have to carry a large piece of rock on our shoulders.
*************************************************************************
Now don't get me wrong, if played correctly, the viola can still sound absolutely amazing. It is just the music world has already perceived this notion of "violas are crap" that we barely ever get a chance to show the world our "beautiful+handsome/ 2= understated, unique, and sophisticated" sound.