Gut vs. Steel Cello Strings: The Sequel
The feeling and response of gut cello strings vs steel strings is a tricky thing to describe because there are so many kinds of gut and steel strings. Cellists (myself included) will drone on debating the merits of particular string brands and flavors with a different “winner” each time, depending on the hall, the cello, the bow, the repertoire, and the player. A dark cello needs bright strings, one with a slow response needs “fast” strings, a very reverberant hall may benefit from more focused sounding strings, etc. But still, choices need to be made! Because cello strings are expensive and require some acclimation of technique and sometimes instrument adjustment, most cellists tend to pick a favorite setup and stick with it in most playing situations.
So, here I go with an attempt to apply generalities which may be helpful, I hope, to an extent?
During my first flush of seriously using gut strings, I fell in love with Gamut “round-wound” gut C and G strings. “Round-wound” is the standard winding used on Gamut brand strings: It has the textured feel of the round wire winding, as opposed to “flat-wound” metal tape winding. I used, interchangeably, medium-plus or heavy gauge strings on “Bruiser” (my 2018 cello by Lawrence Wilke -- so named because Larry’s trademark antiquing makes Bruiser’s seamless one-piece back look like he has been through a barroom brawl!) The textured surface of “round-wound” strings grabs the bow beautifully and work best when tracking with a very straight bow, parallel to the bridge. I found that delicately touching a round-wound string with the bow can elicit a lovely line and varied colors without sounding muffled – the strings are much more sensitive than the Spirocore or Larsen brand tungsten C and G strings I have used for most of my career. But with this “tracking” comes a problem: The bow technique is very different from standard flat-wound tungsten/steel strings, or Pirastro “Olive” and “Eudoxa” gut strings (which are also flat-wound.) To change color on flat-wound strings, it’s easy and desirable to angle the bow while playing to make it move closer to or farther from the bridge for a more concentrated or “flautando” color. With round-wounds, the grooves on the string surface grab the bow and make it much harder to maneuver in the same way. It can be done easily in soft dynamics, so something like the opening of the Brahms e minor Sonata can sound great. But the intro to the Brahms Double Concerto? Much harder! The more weight you apply to the string, the more the string grabs the bow and tries to keep it at the same point relative to the bridge. So, in the Brahms Double, leaning in AND moving the bow closer to the bridge is trickier than with more modern “flat-wound” strings. My conclusion is that round-wounds will be my first choice for light continuo playing, but for modern solo playing aren’t as practical as flat-wounds. Interestingly, many “historically informed” players I have spoken with use (standard) Olive flat-wounds on the C and G, which are really 20th century strings! The technology used to make flat-wound strings didn’t appear until much later than the original round-wound string winding methods.
Pirastro gut strings have been around a VERY long time, and are arguably the most famous and widely-used gut strings, so after the Gamuts, I tried Pirastro Olive and Pirastro Eudoxa lineups. I found that medium gauges in both sets sounded the best on my cello with the exception of the Eudoxa A string, which sounded best in heavy gauge. Like most cellists, including Stephen Isserlis, Gary Hoffman, and many others, I prefer the Olive C to the Eudoxa C for clarity and power. After the initial shock of the slippery feel of the Olive C, which I had never gotten past in previous trials over the years, I realized that it is necessary to apply a little rosin to a new Olive C at the bow contact point. After that, the string almost immediately sounds “broken in,” but still needs a day of hard playing to stretch to pitch stability. For consistency, I use the Olive G, even though I like the Eudoxa G just as much. The Eudoxa G is just a slightly different flavor – perhaps less complex than the Olive? The Eudoxa medium D, by contrast, is such a fantastic string that I strongly prefer it to the Olive D. Despite the mismatch with the Olive set, I use it instead of the Olive D, which is also an excellent string. I find that the Olive medium A offers more power and a greater dynamic range on my cello than the slightly thinner Eudoxa heavy gauge used by Stephen Isserlis.
A note about unwound gut A and D strings: While I really liked several of the unwound gut A string choices, I couldn’t find a single unwound D string that worked well on my cello. I know they have been used historically with great success, but am completely bewildered by them! Granted, I didn’t try very many brands, so will continue the search for a good unwound D… My theory is that, at modern pitch, unwound gut D strings need to be too thick to offer the response we expect from modern strings.
Unwound A strings, on the other hand, sounded quite good on my cello. Compared to wound gut, which feels and sounds to me like a middle choice between steel and unwound, unwound A strings are the even more sensitive to overtones and subtle bow pressure changes. Sheep’s gut sounds the most sensitive, and is considered my most to be the preferred material for strings. Cow’s gut feels to me to be a little stiffer, and less sensitive to high overtones – this makes it a little less likely to squeak if you are using a less than optimum gauge, but it also sounds less vibrant and detailed. Like so many things, this subtlety of touch is a blessing and a curse. Under my fingers, unwound gut strings sometimes have so much resonance that it seems like they are trying to pull my fingertip into a harmonic node – great if that’s exactly where you want to put the pitch, but difficult if you want the pitch to be a little sharper or flatter! This phenomenon is particularly noticeable in the high registers at loud dynamics, especially when playing double stops with full concerto volume. For this reason, as with round-wound gut C and G strings, I plan to use unwound gut A and D strings primarily in “historically informed” continuo or chamber music settings.
Comparing wound gut Olive A and D strings to Larsen Il Canone “warm and broad” steel A and D strings becomes a very subtle exercise, indeed, which is why I made this video.
It has been interesting to see how cellists’ opinions have been split between which string set in the video sounds “better.” Personally, I slightly prefer the character of the sound and organic feel of the gut, but the way the aluminum winding wears off on my fingers and turns them black is off-putting, and as my wife more scientifically puts it: “Gross!!” You can see the discussion on the Facebook International Cello forum by clicking here.
For concerto playing or orchestra auditions, I will probably recommend the consistency of steel A and D strings to my students. Steel tends to respond faster than gut to very light flautando playing, or very firm pressure with a slow bow (as in the beginning of “Schelomo.”) And steel strings certainly hold their pitch better, which orchestral stand partners will appreciate! But for those who have the luxury of a climate-controlled performance spaces and patience to experiment, playing on gut is well worth the effort!
