Have you ever noticed how some violinists are described on CD covers etc as being of the

Franco-Belgian or
Russian or
German or even of the
Sevcik

school/traditions? Two points here.

First, does it matter? If he sounds good, he sounds good! So, why does it matter what "school" he came from? Does a violinist from a particular school sounds a particular way? Leopold Auer (Heifetz's teacher) when interviewed, opined that he did not think people can distinguish his students as being his, from their sound.

Secondly, what do these confusing terms mean, anyway?

Our daughter's teacher was taught by an RCM professor who was in turn taught by 3 from the F-B, Russian Jewish and Hungarian" traditions. These serve no practical purpose, surely?

Any thoughts?

It doesn't matter if all you want to do is listen to the playing, but if you are a student trying to learn from the different recordings it can be useful to know. There is a difference between being able to distinguish a particular teacher's pupils from their sound and being able to identify which school of playing they are from.


There are different bow holds associated with the terms German, Franco-Belgian and Russian. The oldest is the German, then comes the Franco-Belgian, and the newest is the Russian bow hold. The different bow holds affect the position of the forearm. This affects the tone that can be produced from the violin (or viola). It seems to me that the older the bow hold the more effort is required to produce a good tone. Also the Russian bow hold seems to me to be more stable (I changed from a Franco-Belgian hold to a Russian bow hold about a year ago). I find it easier to control the bow now.

The 'Russian Jewish' and 'Hungarian' traditions refer to particular styles of playing and music (I think), which is a bit different.

Much like the different "schools" of ballet, yes, there is a difference in the way students are taught. Even the actual technique varies slightly. With ballet there is simply the French school and the Russian school. When it comes to instruments of the violin family, there are many more schools of teaching and thought.

As to whether it matters? Well, no, not really. As you say, if a player is good then they are good, the school of playing they were taught by is irrelevant, but there will be stylistic differences in the way the music is approached. What one player of the French school considers the correct approach or technique, a student of the Russian school might have been taught something slightly differently.

Over the years I've had lessons from a wide range of teachers. Some have been strict advocates of playing through the Carl Flesch Scale System until your fingers bleed and you suffer tendonitis, with their opinion being no pain no gain, while others are more free in their thought and will recognise that every string player is both mentally and physically different, and requires a non-regimented approach. I prefer the latter!

Thank you, AmandaL and Purple Viola.

It's good to know as VN and I are about to hear Joshua Bell play live at the Barbican quite soon. Bell is always going on about the Franco-Belgian sound in his ear and about his wonderfully flexible Franco-Belgian teacher, Gingold, who was very "free" with him and let him develop as an individual, much like what AmandaL likes. Well, I'm a concert-goer so I'm expecting from this chap is a VERY nice sound!

AmandaL and Purple Viola,

It's also interesting that you both say that there IS a difference and so, it matters if you are a learner. That makes me wonder for a moment which school my daughter's teacher belongs. He is "ultimately" taught by a teacher who also taught Gyorgy Pauk in the main. Getting more curious now (or is it just being nosy?) - Hmmm, what school does Pauk belong to?

Tess

I'll try and find out. No promises on a definitive answer, but I'll have a dig round and see what information I can find.

JBs sound for me can be a bit gushing, but from a pure general listener/concert-goers point of view there is not really anything about his playing you could criticise.

Thanks, AmandaL.