I'm in a debate with someone who claims that at some point, the double bass and contrabass were different instruments, apparently during the Baroque era, and I disagreed. Am I correct or am I just making a fool of myself?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
Welcome to TalkBass! Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Double Bass Was There Ever A Time Where The Double Bass And Contrabass Were Different Instruments?
- Thread starter JohnnyWantsBass
- Start date
-
- Tags
- contrabass double bass names
In all seriousness, typically, "contrabass" is a more general term to describe any bass register instrument that sounds an octave lower than written or the standard bass range of that particular instrument. "Double bass" is the stringed instrument with which we are all familiar, and a specific instrument within the larger "contrabass" family.
In general usage, though, unless followed by another word, i.e , "clarinet," "contrabass" used by itself is pretty synonymous with "double bass."
'Contrabass' and 'double bass' mean exactly the same thing, and that is "pitched an octave below," referring to bass-clef notation. 'Contrabass' is derived directly from Italian, the 18th-century language of music. So the words denote the pitch, not the instrument.
As I understand it, in the original form of the violin family the cello was considered the "bass instrument"; but as we all know the cello doesn't really go all that low.
The very term "double bass" comes from it being lower than the "bass" (cello) of the violin family.
Now at the time when the violin family were becoming distinct from the viol family, there were also bass viols (fretted, generally more than four strings) - which if my understanding's correct are also around the size of a cello. And because the "double bass" as we know it borrowed a number of construction techniques from the viols (flat backs, for example), sometimes what we call DB has been called "bass viol".
The truth is that the register designations of musical instruments are kind of sloppily applied. So for example you have the saxophones from sopranino to contrabass where each successive size is a fourth or fifth away from the ones above and below, so baritone sax is in Eb, bass sax a fourth below in Bb, and contrabass a fifth below that again in Eb, but the clarinets go "Eb" (not designated), soprano a fourth below, alto a fifth down, then no baritone position at all, then bass clarinet, then "contra-alto" a fourth (?) down then contrabass. In violins we have "soprano" (the violin), "alto" (viola), then "cello" which is supposedly bass, with no tenor or baritone position, then "Double Bass/Contrabass" something like an octave and a sixth down from that. Now in vocal ranges, we have contralto which isn't an octave below alto as in the clarinets, but rather a bit lower than standard soprano and more or less overlapping the "alto" women's vocal range, and "countertenor" is a men's range above the tenor, where the designation seems like it ought to mean an octave below. In flutes the bass flute is an octave lower than the soprano flute; in saxophones the bass sax is two octaves lower than the soprano sax. There are no tenor or baritone flutes.
So there's really no consistent logic except that generallly bass is lower than soprano.
With that out of the way, many different instruments of the general violin/viol type have been made as "basses" - for example there are "church basses" which are in between a DB and a cello; the Mexican tololoche appears to be something sim'lar; so yes, it's highly likely that you can find two distinct historical instruments one called in common language "contrabass" and one called "double bass" that are noticeably different. That said, in today's orchestral language, "double bass" and "contrabass" are used more or less interchangeably for the biggest standard member of the violin family, bowed, unfretted, and in its standard configuration strung with four strings in fourths thus EADG.
The very term "double bass" comes from it being lower than the "bass" (cello) of the violin family.
Now at the time when the violin family were becoming distinct from the viol family, there were also bass viols (fretted, generally more than four strings) - which if my understanding's correct are also around the size of a cello. And because the "double bass" as we know it borrowed a number of construction techniques from the viols (flat backs, for example), sometimes what we call DB has been called "bass viol".
The truth is that the register designations of musical instruments are kind of sloppily applied. So for example you have the saxophones from sopranino to contrabass where each successive size is a fourth or fifth away from the ones above and below, so baritone sax is in Eb, bass sax a fourth below in Bb, and contrabass a fifth below that again in Eb, but the clarinets go "Eb" (not designated), soprano a fourth below, alto a fifth down, then no baritone position at all, then bass clarinet, then "contra-alto" a fourth (?) down then contrabass. In violins we have "soprano" (the violin), "alto" (viola), then "cello" which is supposedly bass, with no tenor or baritone position, then "Double Bass/Contrabass" something like an octave and a sixth down from that. Now in vocal ranges, we have contralto which isn't an octave below alto as in the clarinets, but rather a bit lower than standard soprano and more or less overlapping the "alto" women's vocal range, and "countertenor" is a men's range above the tenor, where the designation seems like it ought to mean an octave below. In flutes the bass flute is an octave lower than the soprano flute; in saxophones the bass sax is two octaves lower than the soprano sax. There are no tenor or baritone flutes.
So there's really no consistent logic except that generallly bass is lower than soprano.
With that out of the way, many different instruments of the general violin/viol type have been made as "basses" - for example there are "church basses" which are in between a DB and a cello; the Mexican tololoche appears to be something sim'lar; so yes, it's highly likely that you can find two distinct historical instruments one called in common language "contrabass" and one called "double bass" that are noticeably different. That said, in today's orchestral language, "double bass" and "contrabass" are used more or less interchangeably for the biggest standard member of the violin family, bowed, unfretted, and in its standard configuration strung with four strings in fourths thus EADG.
I suspect historically "bass" has been applied to "the lowest pitch member of this instrument family we can figure out how to build at this point in time" so the bass flute is a lot higher pitch than the bass violin; and the cello was "bass" until it was dethroned by what we now call "double bass".
The case of the flute is a bit instructive; originally there was "the flute", more or less pitched in C with its lowest note the middle C of piano/harpsichord. The lowest flute that could be built and played in those days was a fourth below the standard, pitched in G; because in the days before the invention of modern keywork you had to be able to cover the holes with your fingers, and the spread of the human hand limited how low a flute could be pitched. That flute in G was universally called "bass flute" simply because there wasn't anything below it.
With the development of modern keywork, on the other hand, first a flute was developed an octave below the standard one, and it is now called "bass flute", while the flute in G that WAS called "bass" is now called "alto" flute. And with the bass flute being an octave below the standard one, now there are contrabass flutes in several different pitches and they have all kinds of designations as "contrabass", "contra-alto", Contra in C, Contra in G, etc. - and the only way to know for sure what the thing is, is to get additional clarification.
The case of the flute is a bit instructive; originally there was "the flute", more or less pitched in C with its lowest note the middle C of piano/harpsichord. The lowest flute that could be built and played in those days was a fourth below the standard, pitched in G; because in the days before the invention of modern keywork you had to be able to cover the holes with your fingers, and the spread of the human hand limited how low a flute could be pitched. That flute in G was universally called "bass flute" simply because there wasn't anything below it.
With the development of modern keywork, on the other hand, first a flute was developed an octave below the standard one, and it is now called "bass flute", while the flute in G that WAS called "bass" is now called "alto" flute. And with the bass flute being an octave below the standard one, now there are contrabass flutes in several different pitches and they have all kinds of designations as "contrabass", "contra-alto", Contra in C, Contra in G, etc. - and the only way to know for sure what the thing is, is to get additional clarification.
Four different answers, all essentially correct but different and slightly conflicting. Clearer now?
Sort of like Microsoft support....
Sort of like Microsoft support....
The term 'Double Bass' actually derives from the historic situation where the basses would play the same part as the 'cello, that is to say the bass 'doubled' the 'cello. It is still common to see parts for 'older' music with 'VC/CB' at the top.
I've read that but do you have a real source other than "people have said"? It seems to be an application of a modern term (doubling) to an orchestration practice of a particular period.
Whereas it seems more likely to me that "double bass" is simply a translation of "contrabass" where "contrabass" in this case means "contrabass violin" i.e., below the cello at a time when the cello was still considered the bass voice of the violins.
I'll point out that low brass are named this way, as BBb tuba or EEb tuba is commony called "double Bb tuba" to distinguish it from the euphonium which is an octave above it and is taxonomically a Bb tuba. So this usage is more or less consistent with "double bass" as a sort of translation of "contrabass" and with reference to the previous role of the cello as the bass of the violin family. And again, the bass viol (when correctly termed, meaning the fretted instruments tuned (mostly) in fourths) is roughly in the pitch range of the cello, so the cello was early on taking the "bass" role.
Last edited:
It is mentioned in Eric Taylor's "The AB Guide to Music Theory, Part II", published by associated board of the Royal Schools of Music, ISBN 978-1-85472-447-2. There is specific mention of basses playing the same music as the celli and not having separate stave until post 18th century. But I have also heard a number of my daughter's university lecturers saying the same thing - she is 3rd year Double Bass BMus at the Royal Academy of Music so we are talking about world-class teachers, not your average Joe!
Edit - to be fair, whilst I've heard it a lot, I don't recall reading anything that offered a definitve "... the double-bass, so-called because it historically only ever doubled the cello part...", so maybe it is more hearsay and inference than actual fact.
Last edited:
So to me the question would be first of all, when did the term in English become "double bass"? If it wasn't called that till 100 years after the basses started getting their own parts, that would tend to indicate it's more of a (slightly mis) translated "contrabass" than a description of its function on those occasions when it does play the cello part an octave down.
And as to the "argument to authority", if I have a question about phrasing, or spiccato, or the differences between Mozart, Haydn, and Beethoven in how they wrote for bass, I'd defer to the double bass professors at the Royal Academy of Music; but on questions of organology and the evolution of terms used to refer to a particular instrument through the generations, they may be just as likely to take something "sumgai" wrote somewhere and repeat it, as anyone else. Unless someone says they've researched the actual usage of the term over time and can point to examples, I'm still dubious of the attribution. If we're going to pull out competing professors I'd rather hear from a professor of linguistics.
I would also point out that only in English (as far as I know) is the term "double bass" even used. As far as I know all the other European languages use a form of "contrabass" except for Gaelic, Maltese and Welsh, all of which we can expect got it from English. Yet the tendency to write bass parts doubling cello surely was present all over Europe?
Well, it's telling that the French for Double Bass is Contrebasse, the German is Kontrabass and the Italian is Contrabasso. Excuse my spelling, but that seems to indicate it's all the same instrument.
Referenced in Wikipedia:
- "A Brief History of the Double Bass, Lawrence Hurst, Professor of Double Bass, School of Music, Indiana University". 27 October 2009. Archived from the original on 27 October 2009. Retrieved 21 July 2012.
- ^ Maitland, José Alexander; Wodehouse, Adèle H. (1879). A Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1480-1880). p. 458.
Here is a bass-playing angel playing from an abbey church near my place in France. The frescoes there go back to the 14th and 15th centuries. I was really surprised because I was not aware of double basses or bass viols being that ancient.
To my eyes, it looks more like a double bass than a bass viol: it has 4 strings (viols frequently had 5 or 6 strings), no frets (unlike viols), it has f-holes (viols usually have c-holes) and violin corners. But, as far as I know, neither double basses nor viols were ever really standardized, so...
Remembering my architecture lessons, this painting would likely be a few centuries newer than 15th century. In 15th century the mainstream was still gothic, while this anatomically precise angel in dynamic posture seems to me at least renaissance styled. But it really is interesting and you might even be up to a discovery...
Interesting note in there about the 'frets' - this is a replica of an early 3-string bass in the museum at the Royal Academy, complete with moveable gut 'frets':
On Vienesse Violone, there were few frets made from gut strings. The frets were adjustable to fit the needs of pre-tempered tunings (often placed not straight as we are used nowadays). The basic reason for the frets was to maximize the output volume by using sympathetic vibrations. The player pressed guitar-like chord shapes, but played only 1 or 2 strings (though 3 were also possible using the proper bow type).
More in Korneel Le Compte book (MetaHodos lower on the page), which is a fascinating reading. And listening too!
More in Korneel Le Compte book (MetaHodos lower on the page), which is a fascinating reading. And listening too!
I don't want to start a dick-dance over authorities, but I've heard enough highly educated and learned folks say the same thing independently of each other that I would reluctant to dismiss out of hand. As with many such topics, the truth is buried in the mists of antiquity - at this point in time we are all just archaeologists!!
What's that instrument you play?
Bass: -- Oh, like Paul McCartney! -- No, like Ray Brown. -- Who?
String Bass: Oh, to distinguish it from a tuba! Right.
Acoustic Bass: Oh, that big acoustic guitar with four strings on MTV Unplugged! No.
Upright Bass: Oh, to distinguish it from the horizontal bass! Sort of.
Double Bass: It's twice as bass as a cello! Yes.
Contrabass: Contrabass what, though? Good question.
Bass Viol: So, it's some kind of historical instrument? Not really.
Bass: -- Oh, like Paul McCartney! -- No, like Ray Brown. -- Who?
String Bass: Oh, to distinguish it from a tuba! Right.
Acoustic Bass: Oh, that big acoustic guitar with four strings on MTV Unplugged! No.
Upright Bass: Oh, to distinguish it from the horizontal bass! Sort of.
Double Bass: It's twice as bass as a cello! Yes.
Contrabass: Contrabass what, though? Good question.
Bass Viol: So, it's some kind of historical instrument? Not really.
I personally prefer either the term double bass or contrabass, at least in the context of classical music where I put my energy.
- String bass doesn't agree with me æsthetically.
- Upright bass seems like a modern term to distinguish us from the electric bass. I don't like it because I was here first. Get off my lawn! For this reason, I prefer to call the electric bass the "transverse bass" (taking a cue from flutes, being end-blown or transverse).
- Bass viol might have been true once, but it's not a pure viol anymore, as construction techniques have converged with violin family instruments
- Bass violin might be more true now than before, but it ignores the origin
I play jazz on bass mostly, but also some "legit," (as opposed to "classical," which is a narrow musical era that doesn't cover much of orchestral, ensemble, and soli works)...and heartily agree with the "we were here first" attitude...
..although I don't mind "string bass." For the reasons you stated, I'm not fond of "upright bass." The electric guys are the outliers...One of the best ad libs I ever heard was from John Byner (great comedian and actor). One of his bits used to be doing a dance with a broom. At one venue where he was performing for many nights in the row, he got into sort of "playing to the band" once in a while with a bunch of inside jokes/asides and things got kind of loose. One of the stage hands would always bring out the broom to John to dance with. One night he decided to play a prank on John and brought out a vacuum cleaner instead. Without missing a beat, John said...
"No way, man. I don't play Fender broom."