Crossing the break (or not) on saxophone

Much has been made of “the break” on clarinet—the point at which the chalumeau register and throat tones cross over to the clarion register—but all modern woodwind instruments have at least one break in their “standard” ranges. The saxophone has exactly one (ignoring the altissimo range), between the second C-sharp and the second D.

From an acoustical perspective, that point is the division between the fundamental pitches and the first overtone. When playing a lower-register note, the air column’s vibration is at its simplest. The pitch is determined by the effective length of the saxophone, which depends on which toneholes the player opens or closes. In the upper register, the air column is manipulated into vibrating twice as fast (by changing the airstream and/or opening a register vent), and a sound an octave higher is produced.

This means that there is, technically, some overlap between the registers shown above, which really are based on one specific set of “standard” fingerings. The fingerings for low B-flat, B, C, and C-sharp can be used to produce sounds in the second overtone, and the fingerings for high D through F-sharp can likewise produce sounds at the fundamental. In theory, this should mean an overlap of over a fifth:

If you’ve experimented with those fingerings, you know that they don’t work quite as expected in practice. The low B-flat fingering with the octave key added, for example doesn’t sound great, and neither does the high F-sharp fingering with no octave key. But with some experimentation, a few usable alternative fingerings can be found within this range.

Here are a couple of examples from the saxophone movement of Sy Brandon’s Divertissement for multiple woodwinds and piano.

example 1

In example 1, the excerpted passage stays entirely in the lower register, with the exception of one note, D. The D is a “long-tube” note, meaning that most of the toneholes are closed and the effective length of the tube is long. It is immediately surrounded by the notes C-sharp and B, which are short-tube notes. The short-tube notes tend to be free-blowing, clear, and flexible, while the long-tube D tends to be more resistant and stuffy, especially if you are adding the low B key (and you should) to compensate for the D’s built-in sharpness. Here’s what it sounds like:

The D doesn’t sound the same as the notes around it. It’s duller and more muted. I can make the standard fingering work if necessary (good breath support and voicing are key), but I think the better part of valor is discretion, and it makes sense to me to avoid crossing the break here if possible. After a little experimenting, I picked an alternate fingering that keeps me in the fundamental register, and works reasonably well technically:

The tone produced with this fingering is a much better match for the surrounding notes, and contributes to a smoother line.

Your ears should of course be your guide, but I did find this visual comparison revealing. The D stands out significantly in the first waveform, and virtually disappears into the C-sharp in the second.

using standard D fingering
using alternate D fingering

In a second example from later in the movement, there is an occurrence of the opposite problem:

Here, there is only one note, C-sharp, that, using standard fingerings, belongs to the fundamental register. This free-blowing short-tube note is likely to blare out a little:

This alternate fingering works quite well, and, though it does not technically put the C-sharp in the upper register (despite the octave key), it does bring the C-sharp in line with the surrounding D’s tone-wise. Note that some saxophonists are initially put off by what they perceive as an airiness or fuzziness about this fingering; I find that effect to be significantly less perceptible from a few feet away, and less jarring than the blare of the “open” C-sharp. Eugene Rousseau considers this fingering essential enough that he includes it in his beginning saxophone method.

Here’s how it sounds:

In the recording, I am using the low B key for pitch correction on the D, and I hold it down through the C-sharp without detrimental effect.

I have a small handful of these alternate fingerings that I use on a fairly regular basis. I think that they are somewhat instrument-specific, though, and are best discovered through trial and error on your own horn. If you like, you can use the Fingering diagram builder to create charts of your favorites.

Similar Posts

  • What is voicing?

    I’d like to address the term “voicing,” which I think is often misunderstood. Here’s my best definition:

    Voicing refers to the relative size of the oral cavity, which can change depending on the position of the back of the tongue.

    There are a number of other terms that are used to describe this same concept in woodwind playing. I don’t take issue with any of these terms individually, and I think that as a teacher it’s useful to have a variety of possible ways to explain this concept. (These terms can become problematic, however, when they are used in opposition to each other: “Open up, and blow cooler air.”)

    Here are some examples of ways of describing voicing. I consider the terms in the left column all to be descriptions of the same thing, and those on the right to be likewise equivalent to each other. Read More “What is voicing?”

  • Naming the low E-flat (contrabass? contra-alto?) clarinet

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

    Every so often I hear from people about what I call the E-flat contrabass clarinet (or “contrabass clarinet in E-flat”), such as in my woodwind doubling in musicals list or in my woodwind methods book. Some prefer the term “contra-alto” or even “contralto,” but I find “contrabass” to be the most accurate and useful description of the instrument.

    (One disadvantage of this terminology is always having to specify the key to differentiate it from the larger contrabass in B-flat.)

    First, let’s dispense with “contralto,” which describes a low female voice, typically in an opera setting. That misses the mark by a wide margin for an instrument whose range dips considerably lower than the lowest male voices.

    The use of “contra-alto” (with or without hyphen) seems to be based on the questionable idea that the prefix “contra-” means “an octave below.” My best guess is that this is a back-formation from the names of some other instruments, such as the contrabassoon (which happens to be pitched an octave lower than the bassoon). In any case, following this logic leads to the term “contra-alto” clarinet because it is pitched an octave below the alto clarinet (an instrument whose waning popularity makes it a questionable choice for a frame of reference). This logic then produces “contrabass” for the B-flat instrument, as it is pitched an octave below the bass clarinet.

    Various music dictionaries that I have at hand agree that the prefix “contra-” means “lower than,” but do not specify an octave lower, and most use contralto voice as an example. (If you have a counterexample from a published, music-oriented reference, I am interested to hear about it.) Based on this, “contra-alto” seems inapt—a contra-alto/contralto instrument should be just lower than the alto, and higher than tenor or bass.

    Problematically, of the three major current manufacturers, Buffet-Crampon and Leblanc list “contra alto” clarinets on their websites, and Selmer uses “contralto.”

    Here are some published usages of various names, listed from oldest to newest. Send me others if you know of any. It does seem to me that “contra-alto” becomes more common in the last quarter of the twentieth century, a trend that I consider undesirable (cf. “flautist”).

    Reference Nomenclature used Notes
    Waln, George E. “The Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. 2: 43. Article originally published 1955. E♭ contrabass
    Ayres, Thomas A. “Arranging for the Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1957. E♭ contrabass
    Cailliet, Lucien. “Cailliet Discusses the Contras.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1961. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
    Hullfish, William R., and Jack Allen. “Examining a Versatile Instrument.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1963. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Weerts, Richard K. “The Clarinet Choir of Yesterday and Today.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1963. E♭ contra-alto clarinet Weerts uses “contra-alto” in this letter, but “contrabass” in subsequent articles listed here.
    Abramson, Armand R. “A Better Use of the Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1964. Contrabass clarinet The author does not specifically name the E-flat instrument, but refers to the “contrabass members of the clarinet family” (in the plural).
    Weerts, Richard K. “Clarinet Choir Music.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1964. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Weerts, Richard K. “The Contrabass Clarinet in the Modern Symphonic Band.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1964. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Rohner, Traugott. “The Bass and Contra-bass Clairnets are Misnamed.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1957. “So-called contrabass in E♭” The author makes a case that the instrument would be better called an E♭ bass clarinet (and the bass clarinet would be better called a baritone clarinet).
    Lawrence, Morris Jr. “The E♭ Contrabass Clarinet.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1966. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Small, Terrence. “The Contra-Clarinets.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1968. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Weerts, Richard K. “The Clarinet Choir as a Functional Ensemble.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1969. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Rendall, F. Geoffrey. The Clarinet: Some Notes Upon Its History and Construction. 3d ed. Edited by Philip Bate. Instruments of the Orchestra. London: E. Benn, 1971. Contrabasset-horn in E flat The author clarifies that this does refer to the instrument in question here.
    Harmon, John M. “The Contra Clarinets: New Possibilities.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1978. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
    Heim, Norman. “The Clarinet Choir Phenomenon.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1979. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
    Donald E. McCathren. “Teaching and Playing the ‘Other Clarinets.'” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1983. E♭ contrabass clarinet
    Heim, Norman. “The Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1985. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
    Baines, Anthony. Woodwind Instruments and Their History. New York: Dover, 1991. Contrabass in E♭
    Baines, Anthony. “Contrabass clarinet.” In The Oxford Companion to Musical Instruments. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. E♭ contrabass
    Jones, Brian D. “The E♭ Contra-alto Clarinet: Misunderstood and Overlooked.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1998. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
    Pino, David. The Clarinet and Clarinet Playing. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 1998. E♭ contrabass The author allows that it is “sometimes called the ‘contra-alto’ clarinet.”
    Page, Janet K., K. A. Gourlay, Roger Blench, and Nicholas Shackleton. “Clarinet.” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Edited by Stanley Sadie and J. Tyrrell. London: Macmillan, 2001. Contrabass clarinet, E♭
    Sadie, Stanley, and J. Tyrrell, eds. “Contrabass clarinet.” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: Macmillan, 2001. Contrabass clarinet in E♭
    Randel, Don Michael, ed. “Clarinet.” The Harvard Dictionary of Music. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press: An Imprint of Harvard University Press, 2003. Contra alto clarinet in E♭
    Payne, Tim. “The Contrabass Clarinets.” In The Versatile Clarinet, edited by Roger Heaton. New York: Routledge, 2006. E♭ contrabass
  • The amazing shrinking woodwind section: increasing demands on woodwind doublers

    There is a long tradition of using small orchestras in musical theater as a money- and space-saving consideration. Presumably, if budgets and orchestra pit square footages were unlimited, full symphonic orchestras would be used for theater like they are for movies, with an 8-12(+)-piece orchestral woodwind section, plus perhaps a 5-piece saxophone section. But let’s go back a few decades and examine the compromises. Here are a couple of examples:

    Flower Drum Song

    (from original 1958 orchestration)

    1. Piccolo, flute, alto flute
    2. Piccolo, flute
    3. Oboe, English horn
    4. Clarinet, alto saxophone
    5. Clarinet, alto saxophone
    6. Bass clarinet, tenor saxophone

    You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown

    (from original 1966 orchestration)

    1. Piccolo, flute
    2. Flute
    3. Clarinet
    4. Clarinet
    5. Bass clarinet, tenor saxophone

    The Flower Drum Song orchestration uses a 6-piece woodwind section. The bassoons, sadly, are the first thing to go. The principal flutist has to double on both piccolo and alto flute, an uncommon compromise in the orchestral repertoire, where the doubling is often relegated to an auxiliary flute part to allow the principal to be at his or her soloistic best on a single instrument. (The second flutist also doubles piccolo, which is a bit more common.) Similarly, the oboist pulls double-duty as soloist on both oboe and English horn. The full clarinet section is expected to double not on auxiliary clarinets, but on saxophones.

    You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown is not quite as demanding on individual woodwind players; the first flute part does include piccolo (again, this is not typical symphonic-orchestral thinking), and the bass clarinetist doubles on saxophone. The double reed section is eliminated completely.

    photo, NK Eide

    Now let’s look at how these shows’ orchestrations have been revised in more recent revivals:

    Flower Drum Song

    (from 2002 revival orchestration)

    1. Piccolo, flute, alto flute, dizi in C, D, E-flat, F, and B, bamboo flutes in E, F, and G
    2. Flute, clarinet, soprano saxophone, alto saxophone
    3. Flute, oboe, English horn, clarinet, soprano saxophone, tenor saxophone
    4. Clarinet, bass clarinet, bassoon, tenor saxophone

    You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown

    (from 1999 revival orchestration)

    1. Piccolo, flute, clarinet, soprano saxophone, alto saxophone, soprano recorder, kazoo

    44 years later, Flower Drum Song’s woodwind section has shrunken from six musicians to four, but the number of instruments has boomed from 13 to 25. The first flutist is expected to play some “world” woodwinds in addition to an array of orchestral flutes, and the other three woodwind players each cover instruments from three or four woodwind families, with multiple members from at least one of those families.

    You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown’s revival after 33 years drops the woodwind section from five musicians down to one. The lone woodwind player covers seven instruments from (arguably) five families: two flutes, a clarinet, two saxophones, a recorder, and a kazoo (which, despite being vaguely woodwind-like in form, is not one). As the only player of each of these instruments, this musician should expect to be prepared to sound like a convincing soloist on each.

    Based on these examples and others, two trends seem to be emerging in theater orchestrations:

    1. Fewer woodwind players.
    2. More colorful orchestrations. In the case of both of these shows, the new orchestrations are not simply a slimming-down of a too-expensive woodwind section—new sounds are being introduced. In some cases these might be meant to rebalance the orchestra due to cuts in other sections, but it also seems that recent orchestrations involve creative choices tending toward a broader aural palette.

    Both of these mean greater demands upon woodwind players. 21st-century woodwind players need to be able to play a greater number of instruments, from a pool no longer limited to the orchestral woodwinds and saxophones, at a soloist level on each instrument. The common 20th-century clarinet/saxophone or flute/clarinet/saxophone doubler may find him- or herself less employable than in previous years, and less able to hide in the section on a weaker double. Double reeds are a must, and so are auxiliary instruments (piccolo, larger flutes, English horn, clarinets and saxophones of any size) and world or historical woodwinds.

    As the number of woodwind chairs shrinks and the standards of musicianship and versatility rise, the specialist and the jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none will both be out of a job, and the rare jack-of-all-trades-master-of-each will become an increasingly hot property.

  • Principles for teaching woodwind methods

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

    I teach a woodwind methods course at my university. This class (sometimes known as “woodwind techniques” or “class woodwinds”) is for music education majors. It’s a kind of crash course in the woodwind instruments (flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon, and saxophone) in preparation for careers in school band directing. Here are some things I try to keep in mind when teaching it.

    • It’s a pedagogy course, not a performance course. Since my background is in performance, not music education, it’s tempting to veer off into the finer points of playing. But while hands-on experience with the instruments is crucial, the real goal here is that they are able to effectively teach beginning and intermediate students, which is a (somewhat) separate skill. Give your students lots of chances to practice their teaching.
    • Keep it concept-based. While some time needs to be spent on the quirks of each instrument, it’s more efficient to teach underlying principles like breath support, voicing, embouchure, and finger movement, which vary from woodwind to woodwind less than many educators think. Help your students make connections between how the instruments are played, rather than walling the concepts off into a flute unit, an oboe unit, etc.
    • Keep it mission-critical. Mine is a one-semester course; some schools offer the luxury of spreading the woodwinds over several semesters. But even a semester for each instrument wouldn’t be nearly enough. Be disciplined about sticking to the most central, useful concepts. Knowing the early history and development of the oboe isn’t a bad thing, but it’s not critical to this course. Ditto for show-and-tell with the alto flute or sopranino saxophone, discussion of circular breathing and double-lip clarinet embouchure, and reedmaking. Be ruthless about cutting what are probably your favorite lectures—the more advanced, obscure ones.
    • Expect your students to forget everything. They can probably learn just enough clarinet fingerings to get through the test, but they will almost certainly forget them as soon as you hand them a bassoon. Gear your woodwind methods course activities toward broader skills like the ability to read a fingering chart, rather than short-term memorization of specifics.

    Give your students their best chance at becoming successful woodwind teachers!

  • Q&A: Reeds

    Here are some of the questions readers sent me in celebration of this blog’s 10-year anniversary. I have edited, combined, and otherwise adapted some of them but hopefully there are answers here for those of you who were kind enough to inquire.

    How do you (or how do you help a student) select the appropriate hardness of reed?

    This is a careful balancing act and involves tradeoffs. In general a too-soft reed causes pitch instability (tending toward flatness), good piano response but limited forte range, improved low-register response but weak upper register, and a thin and/or bright tone. A too-hard reed usually has poor piano response, a more resistant low register, and a stuffy or labored tone.

    I find that many reed players use reeds that are too stiff, perhaps due to the strange but pervasive idea of “moving up” in reed strength as a rite of passage or indicator of skill.

    Also: with clarinet and saxophone, reed strength is (a) inconsistent between brands and (b) tied very closely to the characteristics of the mouthpiece, so it’s not especially useful to make broad recommendations (“beginners should start on a 2½…”). It’s entirely likely that two clarinetists playing different mouthpieces might need dramatically different reed strengths.

    How can I obtain better than mass produced double reeds for my beginning oboe and bassoon students? Do you have any tips on how to learn to improve already made reeds, store bought or otherwise?

    Absolutely double reed players should, if at all possible, work with private teachers for this very reason. The ideal scenario is for a private teacher to make and continually adjust reeds for beginning double reed players. An alternative might be to connect with nearby symphony players, professors or graduate students, military musicians, or other nearby double reeders who might be willing to sell reeds (face-to-face, so adjustments can be made) or do occasional reed classes or adjustment sessions.

    Improving/adjusting reeds involves some specialized skills, one of which is playing the instrument at a high level. Reed adjustment is an iterative process of making a small change and then testing, small change and test, small change and test. If you can’t play the instrument well, then reed adjustment is shooting in the dark.

    One possible exception is that minor changes to bassoon reed wires are basically reversible, so there may be some room to experiment with that. I won’t get specific here as wire adjustments have been dealt with in detail by many previous authors, but careful, small adjustments can potentially improve response in various registers, pitch, and tone.


    Thanks for your questions, and good luck with your reeds!

    More 10-year anniversary Q&A

  • Commonly-fudged woodwind fingerings

    Beginning woodwind players, including doublers, sometimes cheat a bit on fingerings, using fingerings that are almost right. If you’re doing this, it’s likely that you have notes with poor tone, intonation, and/or response. If you think you are getting away with it, you’re probably mistaken, and you may be cementing bad habits that are going to become even more apparent as aspects of your tone production improve.

    Flute

    The most common culprits at a beginning or intermediate level are the right-hand pinky and the left-hand first finger.

    • The pinky should stay down for virtually every standard fingering, with the exceptions being anything below the low D, anything above the high (4th-ledger-line) A, and the D in the staff. This is not only crucial to the pitch and tone of many notes (you’ll hear it as your embouchure improves!), but also helps to stabilize the instrument.
    • The left-hand first finger must lift for second-octave D and E-flat. You can probably make the notes respond without doing so, but you’ll sound better and struggle less if you do it right.

    Make your own diagrams with the Fingering Diagram Builder

    Oboe

    It’s tempting to be a bit lazy with the various octave mechanisms: the half-hole, the first (thumb) octave key, and the second (side) octave key. Practice slowly and carefully:

    Read More “Commonly-fudged woodwind fingerings”

2 Comments

  1. The long C# fingering is also useful in both examples. I don’t use it that often, but I’m willing to bet that if you were to use it in the first case, the wavelength would probably be wider on the leading tone, than on the tonic. Since we want to stress the lower note while ascending from one half-step to the next, it would make sense musically.

    The most troubling aspect of the long C# fingering for most French school players is the fact that is plays too sharp on many modern instruments. Using LSK1 as your octave vent instead of the octave key fixes this pitch problem.

  2. This was very helpful, as I have found little help on the Web in terms of crossing the Split on Saxophone, and I am self-learning. Thank you very much for offering it out

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.