Bassoon as a double

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

I’d like to say up front that I really love the bassoon. I do.

The bassoon was the last of the major woodwinds that I added to my arsenal. Looking at it from a strictly pragmatic standpoint, I think that was the right choice for me, and would be for most doublers. Let’s face it: when it comes down to time and money, for woodwind doublers, the bassoon demands a lot of both and doesn’t always return a lot of either.

Bassoons are tremendously expensive. A really playable intermediate-level instrument, used, might cost $5000. Compare this to maybe $500 for a clarinet of similar quality. And the bassoons played by top professionals might run more than $30,000. Sure, a serious violin can cost several times that amount, but then again you can double on a high-quality flute, oboe, clarinet, and a saxophone or two all for less than the cost of a true professional bassoon.

The bassoon presents some unique challenges to the woodwind player. Its keywork is labyrinthine, its tone and pitch are highly flexible, it uses bass and tenor clefs (all the other woodwinds use treble only), and it uses fussy and delicate double reeds (though not so fussy and delicate as oboe reeds). None of these challenges is insurmountable, but they are significant.

And the gig situation for bassoon doublers is relatively bleak. Single reeds and flute are the bread and butter of most doublers, and a good oboe/EH specialist with decent single reeds can be in high demand, too. For the bassoonist, the best bet is to become a low reeds specialist, with excellent bassoon, bass clarinet, and baritone saxophone skills. Note that these again are all seriously expensive instruments. And if you do a lot of your playing at smaller venues, like I do, then the low reed book is usually the first thing to get cut when the budget or orchestra pit are too small to accommodate a full woodwind section.

Are there reasons to play the bassoon as a woodwind doubler? Absolutely. It’s a deeply rewarding instrument to play (if not so much in the monetary sense); it has a rich repertoire, a huge sonic range, and a noble history. And if you are committed enough to learn to play it really well, you may find that you are in demand after all, perhaps not so much for doubling gigs but simply as a serious bassoonist. There are a lot of really fine flutists and saxophonists out there, and bassoonists of equivalent skill are a relatively rare breed.

I’d like to offer a few words of advice to (1) woodwind doublers who are considering picking up the bassoon, and to (2) fine bassoonists who are thinking about getting into woodwind doubling.

  1. For woodwind doublers
    • Don’t scrimp too much, but don’t take out a second mortgage either (yet). You don’t need a pre-war Heckel like the players in a top orchestra. At least not at this point. But you do need an instrument that plays in tune and with consistent tone without undue effort. The 200-series instruments by Fox are excellent, and may be all the bassoon you will ever need. They cost maybe twice as much new as a pro-level clarinet or saxophone.
    • Get some lessons. Even if it’s just a few. The bassoon is a different animal than the other woodwinds. There are some secrets you will need to learn before you will sound like the real thing. Fingering the bassoon is more art than science.
    • Get a good reed source. If you took the previous tip seriously, then you’re already set. The best way to get reeds (other than learning, painstakingly, to make your own) is to buy them face-to-face from a real live bassoonist. By “best,” I mean you will get reeds that are adjusted for your climate, embouchure, and instrument, and probably cheaper than ordering from a reedmaker on the Internet. Mass-produced reeds from your neighborhood music store are a waste of money for someone who already has an ear for pitch and tone.
    • Don’t skip the basics. The big Weissenborn book is a good place to start. Really practice all the “easy” stuff at the beginning. Then maybe jump over to Oubradous for some serious scale and arpeggio work, and then come back to the Weissenborn book to play the Milde studies. The bassoon’s technique is just too complicated and nuanced to jump into gigs with a fingering chart and a hopeful expression.
  2. For bassoonists
    • Your quickest and easiest way to improve your employability through doubling is as a bassoon specialist with strong bass clarinet and baritone saxophone. I would suggest buying a high-quality student model clarinet and alto saxophone and taking a serious approach to learning them (lessons, practice time, etc.) while you save your pennies for a nice baritone saxophone and bass clarinet. A good intermediate-level baritone saxophone like the Yamaha 50-series will serve you well. If you’re going to be serious about low reeds, spring for a low A instrument. There are also decent intermediate bass clarinets to be had, but no good tried-and-true intermediate models with range to low C, so you may need to bite the bullet and get a really professional-level bass clarinet.
    • If you are independently wealthy and enjoy heavy lifting, consider ultimately expanding to bass saxophone and the contrabass clarinets, and tie up every low reeds gig for miles around. Or if your budget and trunk space are a little tighter, you can keep working on clarinet and higher saxophones, and eventually add flute and piccolo.
    • Become a jazz lover. In woodwind doubling situations, you will need to be prepared to play at least a semi-convincing Broadway-jazz style on single reeds. Most bassoonists don’t have real background in that stuff; do some serious listening or maybe take a few lessons with a local saxophonist to pick up some of the nuances of articulation and inflection.

Good luck!

Similar Posts

  • |

    Why scales?

    I recently asked one of my (woodwind) students why she thinks I make her practice scales. She didn’t have a ready answer, and I realized maybe I hadn’t been clear about the value of scales. Here are some reasons to practice scales (and arpeggios, and other methodical technical materials):

    photo, Aprilyn Podd
    • To develop good finger movement. Scales provide a systematic way to work each finger, and to work them together in just about every combination.
    • To build familiarity with the instrument. A rigorous scale routine makes you use every key and every fingering on the instrument.
    • To get comfortable playing in every key.
    • To explore the instrument’s range. Full-range scales are a good way to make yourself play in the highest and lowest registers of the instrument every day.
    • To provide a canvas for working on other techniques. Ever notice how woodwind instruments articulate a little differently on different notes? How different notes respond differently to vibrato? How some notes tend to be flat or sharp? Learn your scales well, and then use them as a way to take those techniques through every note on the instrument.
    • To train for musical situations. Most music is made up of bits and pieces of scales and arpeggios. Getting those patterns into muscle “memory” frees up mental bandwidth for sight-reading, ensemble, expression, and more.
    • To develop your ears. Internalize major, minor, diminished, whole tone, chromatic, and other modalities.
    • To satisfy requirements. If you are a music student at just about any level, scales are probably part of your lessons, exams, and auditions for the foreseeable future.
    • To have a familiar, habitual technical workout that you can improve upon for the rest of your life, without need for an étude book.

    Practice scales every day!

  • The problem with “ethnic” woodwinds

    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.

  • Homemade EWI stand

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

    There are a few stands commercially available for the Akai EWI, and lots of folks have made their own or repurposed other items. I wanted one that was inexpensive and compatible with the Hercules stands I mostly use these days, and decided to try the DIY route. I came up with something workable but not perfect, so I’m sharing my finished project in case anyone is inspired to improve upon my design (please share!).

    I built mine mostly from 3″ (~7.5cm) plumbing pipe and fittings. (I’m including some product links in case they are helpful, but mostly I was able to buy these things locally for much cheaper.)

    I bought a 2′ (~.6m) length of pipe, but only ended up needing half of it.
    Cut mostly with a hacksaw, and refined a little with some files and sandpaper. Good enough.
    3″ end cap, with a hole drilled to fit the bolt. The bolt is 3/8-16 (imperial), which fits the peg sockets in my Hercules stands.
    Disk cut from EPS foam (“styrofoam”) and hot-glued into place. This is where the end of the EWI will rest. (The pipe piece is shown here inserted into the 22.5° elbow.) I picked foam because it is lightweight and easy to cut to shape.
    Bolt secured with 5-minute epoxy.
    This nut will help lock the stand in place on the Hercules base, sort of.
    I didn’t bother gluing the parts together, since they fit pretty tightly anyway and I’m considering this a prototype. Some paint
    …and some craft foam, secured with spray adhesive.
    Works ok.

    It’s more stable than it looks, even on this small Hercules base, because its center of gravity is so low. The end cap and elbow are heavier PVC while the taller part is made of lighter foam core pipe. As always, don’t leave instruments on stands any farther than you can sprint to catch them falling over.

    Things I like about the stand:

    • It was cheap and not hard to make. The worst of it was cutting and shaping the foam core pipe, and someone with cooler tools than I have could probably make quick and accurate work of it.
    • Does work with the Hercules stands I already have. If you can figure out what bolt thread to use, you could easily adapt this to other commercial stand bases.
    • The instrument just rests in the stand, no clips or straps to unhook. Plus the whole upper key “stack” is exposed 360°, so the EWI is easy to grab even during a quick instrument switch.
    • No interference with any of the power/line/MIDI jacks.

    Things that I don’t especially like:

    • On the 3-peg Hercules base shown, the stand has to be oriented as shown to stand up properly, which puts the EWI a little bit in the way of using other pegs on the stand. It works better on one of the larger Hercules stands, like the saxophone or bass clarinet stands.
    • Since the stand isn’t symmetrical like a typical flute/clarinet peg (because it leans 22.5°), it doesn’t always work to just screw it all the way into the base—it may end up leaning in an inconvenient or unstable direction. The nut helps lock it in place when it’s leaning the right way, but it’s fussy and not as secure as I would like (the stand tends to rotate a little if I bump it wrong).
    • It’s pretty chunky. I made a previous attempt to build this from 2″ pipe, which would work okay except that the EWI’s side keys protrude too much. (I did consider sticking with the 2″ pipe and making little cutaways for the keys, which could still be a possibility.)
    • The plastic-specific spray paint I used didn’t turn out well. I had trouble getting an attractive finish, and the paint tends to scratch off without too much effort. I’m not sure if the paint just isn’t well suited to these specific plastics, or if maybe it’s because I applied it in the extreme humidity of a Mississippi summer.

    Anyway, this is a usable though imperfect design, and may be a jumping-off point for future versions by me or you.

  • Changing octaves on the flute: a survey of published opinions

    On the flute, there are several notes that have identical fingerings: each note from bottom-line E through third-space C-sharp has exactly the same fingering as the note an octave higher. Obviously, some factor other than fingerings must account for the octaves, but flutists as a group seem to be unclear on what it is.

    I got curious and dug through some pedagogical sources to see what flutists have published about it. I have compiled my findings into a chart:

    To achieve the upper octaves on the flute

    I have started from the baseline of the lowest octave’s tone production methods, and framed the authors’ ideas in terms of what has to be done to move into higher octaves. And I’ve grouped the answers together as best I can, hopefully with reasonable accuracy as to the authors’ intended meanings. For example, “move jaw” and “move jaw forward” obviously overlap, but I separated them to try to maintain the authors’ original levels of specificity. And “jaw” and “chin” may really be the same thing for most flute-playing purposes, but I’ve separated in them in a case where the author seemed to see them as distinct.

    Some of the authors address the issue specifically and in detail, while others just mention something in passing, so the chart does not necessarily represent their complete and definitive views. I have provided a bibliography with page numbers so you can read the authors’ words in context, and I highly recommend doing this if you’re interested in the topic. I’ve color-coded things so you can see at a glance which ideas are most popular, though I don’t think this is an issue to be settled by popular vote.

    There are some surprising outliers. Most authors who mentioned the size of the aperture indicated that it should get smaller in the upper octaves, but a couple insisted that it should not change. Several authors indicated that the distance from the aperture to the blowing edge decreases for upper registers, but one said it actually increases. There’s significant disagreement on whether blowing harder is part of achieving the higher octaves.

    I think some of the differences of opinion shown in the chart may be due to flutists actually doing the same things but describing them differently. It’s also possible that the techniques listed can be combined in different ways to create different tone production “recipes” that produce similar results.

    I’m interested in continuing to expand this in the future. If you can point me toward a published source, then send it along (I’m not really interested in anecdotes or private opinions), or let me know if you think I have misread or misinterpreted someone’s views (especially if you’re the author!). Read More “Changing octaves on the flute: a survey of published opinions”

  • Woodwind doubling and the “main” instrument

    I identify very much as a woodwind player: as far as I’m concerned, if it’s a woodwind, it’s part of what I do. But when I introduce myself to someone that way, I am frequently asked, “But which one is your main instrument?”

    I am hesitant to give a straightforward response to this. To identify a “main” instrument feels like an admission of failure. I work hard to play all of my instruments at a high enough level to be qualified for whatever gig you were thinking of hiring me for—if I pick just one, are you going to write me off as a possibility for the others?

    photo, Neil Moralee
    photo, Neil Moralee

    Do I genuinely play all of my instruments at the very same ability level? Of course not. It would take some strange kind of balancing act to keep them perfectly equal all the time. I do have a woodwind that I played for a decade before getting serious about any of the others, the one I earned a bachelor’s degree in performance with (my graduate degrees are “multiple woodwinds” degrees). To some extent, that one still is my comfort zone, though that gap is very slowly closing.

    Not all woodwind doublers feel the same way about it, nor should they, necessarily. There are lots of ways to be successful and fulfilled as a woodwind player. But my own goal is to play them all well enough that I could convincingly claim any of them as a “main” instrument. My favorite compliment is when, after hearing me play several instruments, someone still asks which is my main one. Sometimes I receive that compliment, and sometimes I don’t.

  • Masato Honda plays recorder

    I’ve been practicing the Telemann recorder suite this summer, and I had been meaning to write a recorder-related post. I thought I might mention this video of Masato Honda, a Japanese woodwind doubler and fusion/smooth jazz artist, but Gandalfe at The Bis Key Chronicles beat me to the punch today with this post featuring another video, of Mr. Honda’s really nice saxophone playing. Read More “Masato Honda plays recorder”

One Comment

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.