B-flat and A clarinets: redundant?

ByBret Pimentel

I wrote this a few years back for a graduate school course. The professor, not a wind player, raised the question of why I limited the discussion to clarinets in B-flat and A, and ignored, for example, the C clarinet. The reason for this, which may not be obvious to a non-clarinetist, is that the B-flat and A instruments use the same mouthpieces, reeds, and sometimes even barrels. Since other sizes of clarinet require their own mouthpieces and reeds, there is a clearer separation between these instruments.

Photo, Ollie Crafoord

Alert concertgoers will be aware that the orchestral clarinetist is often seen on stage with not one, but two clarinets, which appear to be nearly identical. These are clarinets in the keys of B-flat and A, and, in truth, they very nearly are the same—identical in keywork and playing approach. The difference is one of an inch or so in length, giving the A clarinet a range that is deeper by one semitone.

It seems a redundancy to have two instruments so close in range. The ubiquity of the B-flat and A clarinets is a vestige of the clarinet’s early days, when its simpler keywork made it poorly suited to playing in more than a handful of keys; early clarinetists owned several instruments of different transpositions so that they could play in whatever key was required. But the modern instrument has a more involved mechanism that allows much more chromatic agility. The problem that remains is that the clarinet has accumulated two hundred and fifty years of repertoire, some of which calls for the instrument in B-flat, some of which calls for the instrument in A, and even some that calls for a little of each.

The question, then, is this: for a given piece of music, did the composer simply choose a specific clarinet in an attempt to make life easier for the clarinetist? If so, it may no longer be necessary to use two clarinets to do the job of one, with the modern instrument’s more sophisticated keywork giving it more chromatic freedom. The clarinetist might pick his or her preferred instrument for the situation, regardless of which is specified by the composer. (Jack Brymer is willing to leave the decision up to an even lower-level employee: “There is a fairly strong school of thought which suggests it [the use of both A and B-flat clarinets] is an archaic hang-over and that the composer should simply write the score out in concert pitch and leave it to the copyist to sort the matter out.”)

The other possibility is that composers selected either B-flat or A clarinets to exploit a difference, real or perceived, in tone quality. Colin Lawson points out that composers as orchestrationally astute as Francis Poulenc and Richard Strauss have scored for B-flat and A clarinets to be used simultaneously, with the clear intention of contrasting the instruments’ timbres. Brymer, however, contends that “one can prove scientifically that the sounds of the B flat and A clarinets are identical,” and attributes any perceived timbral difference to preconceived notions.

The clarinetist who chooses to use only one clarinet to play parts written for either instrument must, of course, become skilled at transposing. Another issue is the very slight difference in range: the A clarinet’s low E (concert D-flat) is unobtainable on the ordinary B-flat clarinet. Some musicians have used a B-flat clarinet built to reach the extra low note, but Lawson quotes the conductor Sir Henry Wood as calling this practice a “great mistake.” Sniffs Sir Henry, “I always missed the particular quality of the A instrument.”

The debate over the B-flat and A clarinets is built essentially on differences of opinion. The only clear conclusion that can be drawn at this point is that clarinetists for generations to come will walk onto the stage with a clarinet in each hand.

Sources

Brymer, Jack. Clarinet. Yehudi Menuhim Music Guides, ed. Yehudi Menuhin. New York: Schirmer, 1976.

Lawson, Colin. “Introduction: Clarinets in B-flat and A.” In The Cambridge Companion to the Clarinet, ed. Colin Lawson. Cambridge Companions to Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Similar Posts

  • Oboe reedmaking resources

    ByBret Pimentel
    One of mine.
    One of mine.

    There’s no way around it—if you’re going to be a serious oboist, you have to learn to make your own reeds. Even fine handmade reeds purchased from an excellent reedmaker can’t compete with reeds made to your own personal specifications, suited to your highly individual combination of embouchure, instrument, playing style, and performance situation. A reed is in a constant state of change, from initial scraping until eventual retirement, and needs the daily ministrations of a skilled reedmaker to keep it playing at its best.

    Woodwind doublers who take up the oboe as a secondary instrument will need to learn at least basic reed adjustment techniques in order to have reeds they can count on in professional situations. But if you’re going to learn the mysteries of fine-tuning “finished” reeds, you’re most of the way toward learning the whole process—consider at least learning to tie blanks from cane that you purchase already gouged and shaped. Starting from tube cane gives you even more control over the finished product, but requires the use of gouging and shaping equipment ($1200+, all told).

    There’s no real substitute for learning reedmaking at the feet of a skilled oboe teacher, but here are some of my hand-picked favorite guides and tutorials online. These can serve as a good introduction for a beginner, and more experienced reedmakers may like to cull a few new ideas from the wide variety of opinions and approaches represented here. Read More “Oboe reedmaking resources”

  • The problem with “ethnic” woodwinds

    ByBret Pimentel

    I mentioned in a recent post that I am trying to get away from using the term “ethnic” woodwinds, one that I have used frequently in the past as a catch-all for the instruments I play that aren’t modern Western flutes, oboes, clarinets, bassoons, or saxophones. The term was problematic from the beginning, since, for example, I was using it to include instruments like recorders, which fall squarely under the umbrella of Western music traditions, but are arguably period or historical instruments.

    Additionally, I find that the term “ethnic” increasingly grates on my ear as too ethnocentric and limited a view, and incompatible with my real attitudes concerning music from cultures and traditions other than my native ones. For example, it’s clearly not politically correct to lump non-white people or non-Americans together under the label “ethnic,” so it doesn’t seem to make sense for me to use similarly divisive and condescending language to refer to musical traditions, either.

    photo, Vernon Hyde
    photo, Vernon Hyde

    I currently favor the term “major modern woodwinds” as an acceptable (though flawed) shorthand for all the Western orchestral woodwinds plus saxophones. But there isn’t a really accurate and culturally-sensitive way to lump together the woodwinds that don’t fall into that category. I frequently need to express verbally or in writing what instruments I play. If I am speaking to someone musically savvy, I can say that I play “woodwinds” and they will assume that I play most or all of the major modern woodwinds. They are unlikely to just assume, though, that I can also play recorders and dizi and Lakota flutes and a bunch of others, and that might be information that I want them to have.

    Recently I expressed this concern on social media, and got a few interesting suggestions. “World” woodwinds came up, and is what I have adopted for now on this website, though I think ultimately it has some of the same issues as “ethnic:” aren’t my clarinets “world” instruments (and, for that matter, don’t they have ethnicity, too)? Someone else suggested “woodwinds of various cultural origins,” which I think is pretty good but too wordy to be practical. Someone else suggested that I simply list the instruments individually rather than trying to affix a single label; I think this idea has clear merit in terms of cultural sensitivity, but it does fail the practicality test.

    It’s tempting to consider something clever like Pedro Eustache’s term “multidirectional flute soloist,” but, though charming, it doesn’t communicate the concept with any clarity. I have also experimented with materials-based terminology as in “wooden and bamboo flutes,” but this isn’t inclusive enough and ultimately has the same problem as the word “woodwinds” itself—wood construction isn’t what makes a woodwind a woodwind.

    So for now it’s “world” woodwinds, or perhaps “woodwinds of various cultural origins” when that kind of wordiness is practicable. I welcome additional suggestions in the comments section.

  • Woodwind teaching resources for school band directors (and others)

    ByBret Pimentel

    If you are teaching a woodwind methods course, you might be interested in my book.

    Photo, Nick Findley

    Students in my woodwind methods classes are usually music education majors, planning careers as school band directors. In my class, they get their one-semester crash course in playing and teaching the flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon, and saxophone. Clearly there’s a lot of information that they will need but which will be easily forgotten—I can’t give a trumpet player three weeks to learn to play the clarinet, and then expect her to remember many fingerings once the playing test is done, the clarinet is returned, and I’ve given her a bassoon contend with.

    So I have them prepare a woodwind notebook over the course of the semester, with lecture notes, class handouts, fingering charts, and other things that will hopefully be valuable resources to them in their teaching careers.

    One of the things I ask them to include in the notebook is some resources that they have discovered independently. The idea here is to have them find things that they think they will need, and to become acquainted with some good sources for woodwind information along the way. I tell them that information found on the web will only count if I think it’s reliable, and I encourage them to send me links for advance approval.

    Usually my classes figure out that I can’t very well reject anything they print from my website, so I usually see a lot of my own stuff appearing in their notebooks. I don’t object to this as long as they choose well, but sometimes they don’t. Last semester’s submissions included my review of the AKAI EWI 4000s, which, of course, is not part of our curriculum, and even some of my links pages, which become considerably less useful on paper, since you can’t click through to the good stuff.

    So I figured I might as well share my own selection of posts from this blog that I would encourage future band directors, or other woodwind players or educators, to put in their notebooks: Read More “Woodwind teaching resources for school band directors (and others)”

  • Music practice and technical debt

    ByBret Pimentel

    In software development there’s a concept referred to as “technical debt.” The debt is created when software code is written in a less-than-optimal way. The computer program works, but has some bugs or inefficiencies that will need to be fixed or improved later. Like other kinds of debt, it can be a useful way to get something done now, but will cost more (time, effort, dollars) in the long run.

    The metaphor works well for practicing music, too. Suppose I am working on a passage where a certain alternate fingering would be the most efficient choice. But I don’t use that fingering very often and I’m not completely comfortable with it, so I fall back on a more familiar solution. That gets me playing the passage now with some degree of success, but it also solidifies my attachment to the familiar fingering. Or perhaps my articulation is a little too heavy and thumpy, and I cover that up by adding some slurs in crucial places. That makes the passage work, but means that if I ever want to play it right I’ll have to improve my tongue movement and unlearn the slurs.

    In a perfect world I would always tackle the issue head-on: invest whatever is necessary to habituate the alternate fingering or clean up my articulation technique. In reality sometimes a looming performance means plastering over the problem and promising myself I’ll fix it later, at a greater price.

    I have found it useful to keep a running list of things I want to improve in my playing, including technical debts that need to be paid off. Incorporating relevant exercises, a few at a time, into my warmups helps me make small daily payments, so that hopefully the next time I need those techniques I own them free and clear.

  • Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 1: demographics

    ByBret Pimentel

    First things first: thank you thank you thank you to all who participated in the survey, and especially those who Tweeted, Facebooked, and otherwise spread the word. I was bowled over by the number and diversity of woodwind doublers who responded: top professionals, rank amateurs, and everyone in between, for a grand total of 187 responses. Wow! It has been fascinating to see your answers and read your comments. Over the next few weeks, I’ll be revealing what I’ve learned in installments. If you’re not already subscribed in some way, you can grab the RSS feed, sign up for updates by email, or follow me on Twitter. And you can see all related posts in one place, tagged as .

    And now, with no further ado, I give you:

    Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 1: Demographic background

    Gender

    Although a number of talented and versatile ladies responded, as a group we are mostly of the male persuasion.

    Read More “Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 1: demographics”

  • Concept-based woodwind methods

    ByBret Pimentel

    If you are teaching a woodwind methods course, you might be interested in my book.

    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, at no cost to you.

    Most college students studying instrumental music education have to take a woodwind “methods” course, a sort of crash course in teaching the woodwind instruments. I have taught woodwind methods classes for about the past ten years.

    A typical approach is to divide the semester into instrument-based units: x weeks studying the flute, x weeks studying the oboe, etc. I’ve taught woodwind methods that way, and it’s tough to get through all the material. How can you realistically cover the pedagogy of five instrument families in one semester? (Some schools offer this scant improvement: two semesters.)

    photo, Kerr Photography

    One big reason that woodwind methods teachers get stuck in the one-instrument-at-a-time paradigm is that existing textbooks, syllabi, etc. treat the woodwinds as being hopelessly different from each other. While the woodwinds are more diverse than the brasses or bowed strings (though perhaps not the percussion), the techniques of playing them are not as unrelated as many seem to believe.

    A symptom of this misunderstanding is the woodwind-methods-by-committee approach, in which a textbook has chapters written by five different authors, or in which a course is taught by a rotating cast of woodwind professors. This invariably leads to holes in the curriculum, confusion over vocabulary, and contradictory ideas.

    I have much, much better success when I focus on the basic concepts underlying good woodwind playing. My course addresses audible aspects of how woodwinds sound (tone, response, intonation, volume/dynamics, fluency), and connects them to elements of playing technique (posture/position, breathing and breath support, voicing, embouchure, tuning, articulation, finger movement, and selection from among alternate fingerings). When my students are conversant in those concepts, it’s almost trivial to apply them to a diverse group of instruments: “the clarinet uses a very high voicing, but the flute uses a very low voicing.”

    That’s still a lot to cover in a semester, but I actually find that I can get through the material efficiently enough to leave some days open for review, Q&A, or special/requested topics. And, more importantly, my students absorb widely-applicable concepts rather than trying to memorize seemingly unrelated factoids about seemingly unrelated instruments.

    This is a valuable approach for woodwind doublers, too, who have to parse out the differences in the instruments but also the differences in culture and tradition that have developed around those instruments and their pedagogy. Understanding the underlying concepts helps to make sense of the sometimes very different approaches to the same problems.

    Warning: commercial-ish plug

    I’ve hinted on the blog a few times about my upcoming book, based on materials I have developed for my woodwind methods courses. It clearly and concisely covers the most crucial concepts in woodwind playing. Since I usually teach a mixed-instrument class I pair it with a band method (such as Essential Elements or Accent on Achievement) for hands-on playing activities, but it would work just as well paired with an individual method (such as the Rubank series) if you have the luxury of a full class set of each instrument.

    I’m hoping to get the book launched before 2017 slips away. If you like, you can join a mailing list to be notified if when it becomes available. Update: the book is now available!

3 Comments

  1. I would argue that the interval of a perfect 12th between the chalumeau and clarion registers of the clarinet is unique in modern orchestral woodwind instruments, and that the necessary keywork associated with this larger interval makes the technical demands of the instrument far greater than the other woodwind instruments.

    Reply

  2. I don’t own an A clarinet, but have often wished that I did, simply to improve the key signatures when playing with an orchestra. Call me lazy, but when playing a piece in concert A, I’d rather be in no sharps no flats than in five sharps.

    Reply

  3. The same thing could be said about E-flat and D clarinets, but, at least west of the Rhine, has been resolved in favor of the E-flat. Bass clarinets in A are likewise rare [is that why B-flat bass clarinets now usually have a low E-flat key?]. Schoenberg wrote for contrabass clarinet in A, but I imagine those parts are nearly always transposed on a B-flat contra. [Try to find an A contra!].

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments that take a negative or confrontational tone are subject to email and name verification before being approved. In other words: no anonymous trolls allowed—take responsibility for your words.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.