Double Bass Pizz vs. Arco Intonation

[Zach Gaston]

I found a few comments, but no dedicated thread about this. Based on those comments, I'm glad to know it isn't a me thing or a problem.

How do y'all deal with the difference in arco and pizz intonation? Seems like I need to start practicing them separately (whoops), but I play a lot of improvised music, and I switch back and forth somewhat willy nilly. I tend to use one more than the other depending on the gig (pizz more often than not), but I almost never play exclusively one or the other. Is it just a case of tuning to the main one, then avoiding open strings with the other?

 

[A Bass And Its Boy]

I find that my arco intonation suffers not because of tuning but because it’s kinda like patting your head and rubbing your stomach at the same time—the vertical motion of my vibrato is thrown off by the horizontal motion of the bowing hand happening simultaneously.

 

[jj.833]

I practise almost exclusively arco last few years. My intonation both arco and pizz levels up constantly. The more I delve into intonation issues, the more I understand that there's no strict intonation for any given tone. The finger placement of, say, F# is different when I play in, say, G major, or F# major. The pitch of F# is different in piano and in forte. The observed pitch differs when playing fast tones or long ones. The placement of F# is different when accompanying piano or cellos. The idea behind it is that you simply need to rely on your ears, and often the result is a compromise anyway.
The way to learn it is practise, practise, practise.

 

[Lionel Albert]

I found a few comments, but no dedicated thread about this. Based on those comments, I'm glad to know it isn't a me thing or a problem.

How do y'all deal with the difference in arco and pizz intonation? Seems like I need to start practicing them separately (whoops), but I play a lot of improvised music, and I switch back and forth somewhat willy nilly. I tend to use one more than the other depending on the gig (pizz more often than not), but I almost never play exclusively one or the other. Is it just a case of tuning to the main one, then avoiding open strings with the other?

Arco intonation is easier than pizz intonation but it's more accurate, you know where the fingers are supposed to be.
On pizz (jazz technique only), it's more difficult, the ear tends to feel it sharper, it depends of the dynamics and of course the quality of the strings.
Sometimes it's said that Ron Carter is out of tune but if you put a tuner in front of his solo recordings, he is more in tune than a lot of double bassists.
I think he might be aware about this phenomenon, you know, a plucked string that sounds sharper than dies in tune (long sustain).
So yes, there is a difference, it's not so surprising if classical and jazz pizzicati techniques are so different.
The attack changes all the parameters.
Maybe I'm wrong but I'm not far from the truth.

 

[Jason Sypher]

I’m not entirely clear why pizz intonation and arco intonation would be different. In tune is in tune. But being in tune is almost always a moving target. So many variables exist that it’s clearly impossible to always be in tune. I continually refer back to slow arco practice: scales, arpeggios, long tones etc. Same old story. But what I’ve noticed in the past few years is a new sensitivity to intonation I never experienced before. I remember slowing down an Edgar Meyer video a few years ago and watching him correct his intonation by ever so slightly rolling his finger forward towards the nail or back, fine tuning on the fly. It was a revelation. Almost imperceptible, especially to the naked eye, he was micro adjusting all the time. This is the truth of intonation. It’s always moving.

 

[Zach Gaston]

I'm not entirely clear why pizz intonation and arco intonation would be different. In tune is in tune. But being in tune is almost always a moving target. So many variables exist that it's clearly impossible to always be in tune. I continually refer back to slow arco practice: scales, arpeggios, long tones etc. Same old story. But what I've noticed in the past few years is a new sensitivity to intonation I never experienced before. I remember slowing down an Edgar Meyer video a few years ago and watching him correct his intonation by ever so slightly rolling his finger forward towards the nail or back, fine tuning on the fly. It was a revelation. Almost imperceptible, especially to the naked eye, he was micro adjusting all the time. This is the truth of intonation. It's always moving.

What I mean is that it I tune a string pizz and then check it arco, the tuner says it's off. The two techniques create slightly different notes. Of course I'm practicing intonation as more than a fixed thing, but the techniques are fundamentally different. I'm wondering if anyone has strategies for dealing with using both on a gig.

 

[AGCurry]

What I mean is that it I tune a string pizz and then check it arco, the tuner says it's off. The two techniques create slightly different notes. Of course I'm practicing intonation as more than a fixed thing, but the techniques are fundamentally different. I'm wondering if anyone has strategies for dealing with using both on a gig.

I think it depends on how far the string is deflected during attack and decay, both pizz and arco. I find it helps to use minimum force when tuning. I may have a poor ear, but if the string is in tune at that point, it's close enough for pizz AND arco... especially considering that most of my notes are stopped notes, where it's up to me to adjust.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

What I mean is that it I tune a string pizz and then check it arco, the tuner says it's off. The two techniques create slightly different notes. Of course I'm practicing intonation as more than a fixed thing, but the techniques are fundamentally different. I'm wondering if anyone has strategies for dealing with using both on a gig.

I think it depends on how far the string is deflected during attack and decay, both pizz and arco. I find it helps to use minimum force when tuning. I may have a poor ear, but if the string is in tune at that point, it's close enough for pizz AND arco... especially considering that most of my notes are stopped notes, where it's up to me to adjust.

I agree with both of these statements. To me, arco and pizz are two different animals regarding intonation because the intonation envelope is defined by string excursion. With pizz, the maximum excursion is at the beginning, but with arco, it's variable depending on bow placement, speed, and pressure. A pizzicato note cannot crescendo, but an arco note can.

...what I've noticed in the past few years is a new sensitivity to intonation I never experienced before. I remember slowing down an Edgar Meyer video a few years ago and watching him correct his intonation by ever so slightly rolling his finger forward towards the nail or back, fine tuning on the fly. It was a revelation. Almost imperceptible, especially to the naked eye, he was micro adjusting all the time. This is the truth of intonation. It's always moving.

I totally agree. The greatest players are not infallible. It's not that they never miss, it's just that they adjust quickly and seamlessly so that most people don't even notice. When your technique gets you close enough, the distance to adjust can be covered - as you say - by a simple rolling of the finger, as in vibrato. I think the highest level players have all just built in this constant micro adjusting as a subconscious part of their technique.

 

[sean_on_bass]

i don't perceive an intonation or tuning problem between arco and pizz, personally. no problem, hence no solution.

 

[Jason Sypher]

I know what you mean. Bow weight, speed, placement can all change your final note. I’ve definitely adjusted over the years (ha I accidentally typed “tears”). I think I’m most accurate when I play without much weight at all with the bow, a direction I’ve been going in for some time. I can get a bowed open string to register differently on the strobe tuner than the same note plucked. It’s a real thing. But equally I pluck much lighter than in the past. Dramatic molestation (!) of a strings excursion seems to introduce problems in general. Most of the time NOBODY notices all this babysitting but I notice in quiet passages and in the recording studio.

 

[fdeck]

Granted, I'm no pro or teacher, but I've noticed subtle differences. Sure, I trust that my fingers belong in the same place for pizz and arco, but getting there accurately seems different. For instance, an etude that's an intonation buster for me when playing arco suddenly becomes easier when I switch to pizz. And I've been playing both pizz and arco for a long time.

I can think of a couple of possibilities. First, my son -- a fine cellist -- suggested that the upper harmonics are important for perceiving intonation, and bowing produces more of those. So our ears may be more forgiving when we play pizz.

A second thing is that we pick up on all sorts of subtle audible clues and cheats, such as sliding between notes, hearing the start of a note before it's fully developed, and so forth. Perhaps a benefit of arco practice for us jazzers is that we're deprived of our usual signposts, so we have to develop more solid intonation based on correct technique.

 

[Jason Sypher]

Granted, I'm no pro or teacher, but I've noticed subtle differences. Sure, I trust that my fingers belong in the same place for pizz and arco, but getting there accurately seems different. For instance, an etude that's an intonation buster for me when playing arco suddenly becomes easier when I switch to pizz. And I've been playing both pizz and arco for a long time.

I can think of a couple of possibilities. First, my son -- a fine cellist -- suggested that the upper harmonics are important for perceiving intonation, and bowing produces more of those. So our ears may be more forgiving when we play pizz.

A second thing is that we pick up on all sorts of subtle audible clues and cheats, such as sliding between notes, hearing the start of a note before it's fully developed, and so forth. Perhaps a benefit of arco practice for us jazzers is that we're deprived of our usual signposts, so we have to develop more solid intonation based on correct technique.

Agreed. The bowed note is full of frequencies a plucked note would not contain, particularly revealing mids and highs. That and the fact that the pizz note begins to decay quickly while the bowed note remains constant, even gaining attention as the ear focuses and adjusts to the pitch. Like a single word spoken and a single note sung. Single words go by quickly while a sung note grabs our attention and we get engaged with the intonation. Logically it would seem that the point of contact with the fingerboard would remain the same, right, as the string length is determining the frequency of the note regardless of what makes the string vibrate, bow or fingers. I really think of bowing as singing, the bowstoke correlating to the breath of a singer. That's what makes it so incredible. With a bow you really are singing, for better and for worse, every nuance is heard. If a singers breath wavers, you hear it, and that can produce inconsistencies in pitch among all the other variables.

I was watching a Karen Carpenter doc last night. They talked about her incredible singing and mentioned that she sang very quietly, that you wouldn't be able to hear her if she was rehearsing in a car for example, but that "the microphone loved Karens voice". It got me thinking. Recently I have been recording in the studio with a very hot mic and a very light approach and really liked the sound I am getting. It may be that a very light touch allows for a more fuller development of harmonic content and expression. So, in the same way that pizz can negate a certain amount of frequencies that one gets with the bow, a heavy bowing style can also negate a certain amount of frequencies. Allowing a bass full expression really changes the sonic possibilities. Intonation will be one of those aspects highlighted when we play with a lighter touch. I immediately got up from my documentary and recorded a bunch of samples with different mic settings and distances. A light touch with very hot signal is truly the most engaging sound to me. Very much like Karen Carpenters close-mic’ed singing. There is an intimacy there that is almost embarrasingly personal. But when it works, when it's good, you simply can't turn your ears away from the sound. Karen did make micro mistakes, the tiniest cracks but I’m sure they left them in because they were so excruciatingly human.

 

[garrett2]

So, in the same way that pizz can negate a certain amount of frequencies that one gets with the bow, a heavy bowing style can also negate a certain amount of frequencies. Allowing a bass full expression really changes the sonic possibilities. Intonation will be one of those aspects highlighted when we play with a lighter touch. I immediately got up from my documentary and recorded a bunch of samples with different mic settings and distances. A light touch with very hot signal is truly the most engaging sound to me. Very much like Karen Carpenters clost miked singing. There is an intimacy there that is almost embarrasingly personal. But when it worlks, when it's good, you simply can't turn your ears away from the sound.

I've been working a lot on the magical threshold point where you get just the slightest bit of resistance in your bowstroke - i.e. not gliding over but the tiniest grip. Bozo Paradzik suggested a swipe of Pop's and on then a swipe of Pirastro Gold violin rosin. So far it's ideal for this kind of stroke.

 

[Jason Sypher]

I've been working a lot on the magical threshold point where you get just the slightest bit of resistance in your bowstroke - i.e. not gliding over but the tiniest grip. Bozo Paradzik suggested a swipe of Pop's and on then a swipe of Pirastro Gold violin rosin. So far it's ideal for this kind of stroke.

I’ve never made peace with Pops. It’s just too much grip for me. I’ve settled on Carllson’s over the years, used sparingly. But I fully understand what you mean. The string is always engaged, never left skittering on its own, always in control but never bullied, always resonant and moving air no matter how quiet.

 

[Don Hergert]

String excursion is especially noticeable while tuning. If you pizz a hard stroke on a string while using an electronic tuner you can watch the tuned note change. Modern tone strings with long decay make this easier to observe, but I even see this with the old-school short decay strings that I use; they make this slightly less track-able with the tuner, but I can still watch it. On the extreme side of excursion you'll see higher pitches then as the string relaxes the pitch swing diminishes. It is also observable with other stringed instruments. On bowed instruments the bow drives excursion even more than pizz, often raising the note register a number of cents more on the tuner.

With either pizz or arco, you can estimate pressure extremes and tune to whatever your "normal" stroke is. With my fast decay strings I've found a very light and long pizz stroke -- almost like bowing with the texture of a finger -- diminishes excursion the most so tuning is more quickly accurate, but if I'm tuning among other instruments I may find that such a light stroke is hard to hear or even get to register on the tuner. I'll almost never try to tune with the bow because it drives excursion so much more than pizz, and most of my playing in public is with pizz. I suppose if I played arco all the time I'd be likely to tune more exclusively that way.

I use the same kind of electronic tuner on all of my instruments, so I'm very used to how it registers during excursion and can watch for visual signs that the string is settled and in tune. When I'm tuning by ear or intonating while playing I'll tweak as necessary; especially among other instruments, my ears are not as seensitive as an electronic tuner so I'll keep an open mind to do frequnent touch-ups.

 

[garrett2]

I've never made peace with Pops. It's just too much grip for me. I've settled on Carllson's over the years, used sparingly. But I fully understand what you mean. The string is always engaged, never left skittering on its own, always in control but never bullied, always resonant and moving air no matter how quiet.

That's how I feel about Pops. Also the rosin sound swamps the instrument and string which I hate. But violin rosin on top works wonders defeating the grip a bit. YMMV!

 

[turf3]

I was watching a Karen Carpenter doc last night. They talked about her incredible singing and mentioned that she sang very quietly, that you wouldn't be able to hear her if she was rehearsing in a car for example, but that "the microphone loved Karens voice". It got me thinking. Recently I have been recording in the studio with a very hot mic and a very light approach and really liked the sound I am getting. It may be that a very light touch allows for a more fuller development of harmonic content and expression. So, in the same way that pizz can negate a certain amount of frequencies that one gets with the bow, a heavy bowing style can also negate a certain amount of frequencies. Allowing a bass full expression really changes the sonic possibilities. Intonation will be one of those aspects highlighted when we play with a lighter touch. I immediately got up from my documentary and recorded a bunch of samples with different mic settings and distances. A light touch with very hot signal is truly the most engaging sound to me. Very much like Karen Carpenters close-mic'ed singing. There is an intimacy there that is almost embarrasingly personal. But when it works, when it's good, you simply can't turn your ears away from the sound. Karen did make micro mistakes, the tiniest cracks but I'm sure they left them in because they were so excruciatingly human.

The first really famous singer to leave behind the Ethel Merman/John McCormack bel canto/project to the back of the auditorium approach was Bing Crosby. His eventual approach, the one that made him famous, depended on the availability of high quality microphones, so he could get right up on the mike, sing softly, and get a very different effect than the traditional singer who would stand back from the thing and let 'er rip.

Think Chet Baker vs. Louis Armstrong.

So by the time Karen Carpenter came along, there were a couple generations of performers, producers, recording engineers, etc., with experience in that style of singing.

 

[Jason Sypher]

The first really famous singer to leave behind the Ethel Merman/John McCormack bel canto/project to the back of the auditorium approach was Bing Crosby. His eventual approach, the one that made him famous, depended on the availability of high quality microphones, so he could get right up on the mike, sing softly, and get a very different effect than the traditional singer who would stand back from the thing and let 'er rip.

Think Chet Baker vs. Louis Armstrong.

So by the time Karen Carpenter came along, there were a couple generations of performers, producers, recording engineers, etc., with experience in that style of singing.

Oh sure. I definitely wasn’t saying she was the first. I’m more interested in experimenting with close mic’ing the upright, particularly when bowing.

 

[garrett2]

Think Chet Baker vs. Louis Armstrong.

Louis was a master of the quiet conversational style of singing, as with all other styles of singing. In my view he was the greatest art singer of the 20th century. You can hear his influence in using art to overcome the restrictions of his "instrument" in Billie Holiday and so many others. His rhythmic skill as a singer are unmatched. I will keep my opinions about Chet Baker to myself (I know that wasn't your point!)

 

[turf3]

Louis was a master of the quiet conversational style of singing, as with all other styles of singing. In my view he was the greatest art singer of the 20th century. You can hear his influence in using art to overcome the restrictions of his "instrument" in Billie Holiday and so many others. His rhythmic skill as a singer are unmatched. I will keep my opinions about Chet Baker to myself (I know that wasn't your point!)

Actually I was referring to their trumpet style - didn't even think about comparing them as singers!
Should have selected different examples.