“In order to accompany well a recitative, a complete knowledge of harmony and of the violoncello is necessary; one must be intimate with figured basses, and know how to execute them readily. He who can do this has reached the summit of art; for it presupposes a great deal of necessary information, and still more the power of judging how to turn it to account.
“If the bass player is not certain of the resolutions of discords, if he is unable positively to indicate to the singer when he is to make a complete or a broken cadence, if in his concords he does not know how to avoid forbidden fifths and octaves—he is in danger of confusing the singer, and in any case he will produce a most disagreeable effect.
“As in good compositions, a recitative always follows a well-defined progression and adapts itself to the character of the part, to the situation portrayed, and to the voice of the singer: in the accompaniment—1. The strength of the tone must be regulated according to the effect to be produced, for the accompaniment must sustain and embellish the singing and not spoil and drown it. 2. The chord must not be repeated, except when the harmony changes. 3. The accompaniment must be quite simple, without flourishes or runs. Good accompanying always has in view the best rendering of the subject, and when the player allows himself to fill up certain gaps with a short interlude, this must only consist of the notes of the chord. 4. The chord must be played without Arpeggio, ordinarily in the following manner”—[48]
Baudiot in his violoncello tutor, which appeared later than the above, makes the following remark concerning the accompaniment of recitative: “It sometimes happens that the actors linger on the scene without reciting (speaking), be it that they have forgotten the text of what they have to recite, or that for some other reason they are silent. At times their appearance on the boards is delayed. In such cases, the accompanist (i.e., the cellist) can perform short preludes and embellishments at his pleasure. But he must be modest about it, and employ his ornaments at the right moment, and always with taste.”[49]
To the art of violoncello making the same applies as to the violin. The productions of the Italian makers surpass those of all other nations. Amongst them, those manufactured by Nicholas Amati, Stradivari, and Gius. Guarneri del Gesù are most to be preferred and justly so.[50]
Stradivari and Amati made their cellos of two different sizes; the larger one was formerly called “il Basso,” while the smaller was distinguished as the Violoncello proper. The latter is the more preferable as being more manageable; in these days it is used as a valuable model.
As to the violoncello bow, which had the following form in the first half of the eighteenth century,[51] its progress went hand in hand with that of the violin bow. The improvements which were successively made on the latter were effected on the former. The greatest perfection reached by the bow was the work of a Frenchman, François Tourte. To this day he has never been excelled in this department. (See Appendix [A].)
The fabrication, however, of good violin and cello bows has latterly become very general; and especially in Markneukirchen the manufacture of bows as well as instruments has received a great impulse.[52]