“Col” or “W/“ indication

[DBird90]

Is “col” or “w/“ instrument still used to indicate the player is harmonizing or playing the same rhythm with others? While some engravers may argue whether it should or shouldn’t be done, a retired Hollywood session keyboardist told me it’s only shorthand for the copyist and not used in the above way. Is that really true? I read on MET it was debated whether to use in scores and parts for the players.

[hautbois baryton]

I don't use any shortcuts where a player has to jump to another staff. As instructions for the copyist (or shorthand for the composer) it's fine, but it should never make it into a player's part.

[JJP]

I’ve never seen it used in a part, but in handwritten scores, “col” is common when one instrument is in unison with another. It’s a shorthand to save time when writing. Copy/paste in computers removes the need for the indication.

I’ve also seen “col 8va” or “col 8vb” for instruments in octaves. Example: “Col flute 8vb”.

Edit: I should add that most of my experience is in Hollywood.

[DBird90]

Thank you. Gould must be mistaken about that, or it’s just her opinion.

[MichelRE]

the only time I've found "col" to be justified is where a soloist or vocalist is accompanied by an obligato instrument and the passage is "free".
in the sense that the vocalist will sing their part, and the instrument who is "col" will do their damnedest to follow them tightly.

Otherwise, there's no point in writing it if it's just a regular passage that will be conducted anyway.

[JJP]

Thank you. Gould must be mistaken about that, or it’s just her opinion.

I would have to look at that part of Gould’s book before dismissing it. She could be referring to a different usage of the term.

[DBird90]

Thank you. Gould must be mistaken about that, or it’s just her opinion.

I would have to look at that part of Gould’s book before dismissing it. She could be referring to a different usage of the term.

Right. She says if an instrument is playing in rhythmic or harmonic unison to use the term (in complex rhythms at least), but apparently no one ever does.

[JJP]

Right. She says if an instrument is playing in rhythmic or harmonic unison to use the term (in complex rhythms at least), but apparently no one ever does.

The way she is referencing, I do see on parts and scores to alert a performer that they need to phrase, articulate, and tune with someone else. You will sometimes see that indication above the staff, especially if they need to follow a soloist, there is no conductor, or the orchestrator/copyist simply thinks it will be helpful to the performer. So in that sense, it is used — frequently as “w/clarinet” or “(with clarinet)”. “Col” I see less frequently in non-classical writing.

The usage to which I was referring is common in handwritten scores. Rather than writing out the whole line, someone will simply write “col 1st alto sax” followed by a thick or wavy line for the duration of the section that is unison with the 1st alto sax. That way they don’t have to spend the time writing all the notes.

[David Ward]

This is perhaps rather different, but maybe sufficiently related to be worth adding here.

General directions such as col canto (with singing), colla voce (with the voice [whether instrumental or singing]) and colla parte (with the part) are fairly normal in both score and parts. In a conducted score, they give warning to watch the conductor, or to pay close attention to a singer or to a concerto soloist, to whom these directions could suggest playing a passage with more than usual freedom. They might perhaps be thought of as coming in the approximate category of tempo modifications.