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

  • 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.

  • Quick tutorial: Telemann Canonic Sonata on EWI, Ć  la Jeff Kashiwa

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

    I recently posted a video of Jeff Kashiwa demonstrating the Akai EWI4000s wind controller. As part of his demonstration, he plays a movement from one of the Telemann Canonic Sonatas (well, sort of an arrangement of one).

    The Canonic Sonatas are duo sonatas, with both musicians playing from the same part. (You canĀ download free sheet music of the Canonic Sonatas from the IMSLP.)Ā The first player begins, and the second player echoes, one measure behind. If you have ever sung “Row, Row, Row Your Boat” as a round, then you already understand how this works.

    Jeff Kashiwa plays the Allegro movement from the first Canonic Sonata all by himself, playing the first part on the EWI and using a delay effect to create the second (echo) part. Ā Here’s the video again—it should start playing about a minute and a half in, and the Telemann goes until about 2:40.

    After the 2:40 mark, Mr. Kashiwa uses more sophisticated looping techniques, using some kind of external device. But you can perform the Telemann duet without any extra hardware, using only the EWI4000s’s onboard synthesizer. Read More “Quick tutorial: Telemann Canonic Sonata on EWI, Ć  la Jeff Kashiwa”

  • Do woodwind instruments have similar fingerings?

    I get lots of emails and search traffic from people trying to find the answer to questions about woodwinds and “similar” fingerings: Do they use the same or similar fingerings? Which instruments are the most similar? Can I use fingerings from _____ instrument on _____ instrument?

    I’ve addressed before why these questions might be coming from misconceptions about woodwind doubling, and why the answers might not be as useful as one might think. But beyond that, some of those questions are difficult to answer in a straightforward way.

    Do any of the major modern Western woodwind instrument families use identical fingerings (such as saxophones using the same fingerings as oboes, or clarinets using the same fingerings as bassoons)? No.

    Do instruments within those families use identical fingerings? Kind of. For example, the members of the concert flute family (piccolo, flute, alto and bass flutes, and others), use fingerings that are at least very similar. But some use slightly-varied fingerings to improve pitch, tone, or response of certain notes: for example, piccolo players often use a modified fingering for the third-octave A-flat, which they wouldn’t use on a lower-pitched flute. And the keys that appear on flutes aren’t set in stone—some might have a special C-sharp trill key, or a low B key, that other flutes lack. And clever flute makers can add anything else they dream up that customers will pay for.

    Do any of the woodwind families have similar enough fingerings that you can play them without significant additional effort to learn how? No, not if you want to play them well.

    But really, which ones are the most similar? It’s not as simple as counting up the number of “matching” fingerings between two instruments. You could argue that the written note D below the treble clef staff is “similar” for flute, oboe, and saxophone. D uses the three middle fingers of each hand on each of these instruments. But the flute also requires pressing a left-hand thumb key, while the others don’t. And the oboe has more than one key for the right ring finger, and I suppose it’s up to you whether the correct one for this note feels the “same” to you as the other two instruments. On clarinet, this written note uses a very different fingering, but the note written an octave higher has similarities to the flute/oboe/saxophone note. And the bassoon doesn’t have a D fingered in a closely similar way, but its low G uses a similar fingering that falls into roughly analogous scale fingering patterns.

    (While brainstorming this post, I briefly considered trying to create some kind of chart showing which fingerings were the “same” or “similar” across the woodwind families. I quickly abandoned the idea because the necessary exceptions, explanations, and context would have complicated it beyond any usefulness.)

    Like asking if two languages are similar, asking if two instruments’ fingerings are similar begs an answer that is incomplete, misleading, and ultimately not useful. If your intention is to apply that answer to playing or teaching woodwind instruments, your success will depend on instead approaching each instrument on its own terms.

  • Tonguing and language sounds

    Be wary of pedagogical approaches to woodwind articulation that depend on analogies to speech sounds.

    The most common, at least in the English-speaking world, is the idea that tonguing is like saying “too” or “doo.”Ā And certainly there are significant mechanical similarities, especially with “too.” “Doo” doesn’t work as well because it is a voiced consonant, produced essentially the same way as “too” but with vibration of the vocal cords, an undesirable effect for woodwind playing (except for some extended techniques).

    Some teachers recommend something like “too” for crisper articulations and “doo” for gentler ones.Ā If you compare carefully your whispered (unvoiced) “t” and “d” sounds, you may find that they are not, in fact, completely identical. My “t” gives a bit more explosive sound, because I release the entire tongue, and my “d” is softer because I tend to release only the tip of the tongue, keeping the back in contact with my molars. But this difference doesn’t apply to good woodwind playing technique, in which the back of the tongue must be kept independent from the tip in order to manipulate voicing.

    “Loo” is another one that gets mentionedĀ sometimes for gentler articulations. This one also doesn’t work well if taken literally because (1) the “l” sound is voiced and (2) it leaks air around the sides of the tongue. (You can approximate an unvoiced version by whispering “lll…,” but that sound isn’t typically used in English.)Ā A woodwind book I read recently recommends some additional oddities like “droo” or “thoo.”Ā “Droo”Ā doesn’t work well because it has a sequence of two consonant tongue positions, one of which is voiced. “Thoo” (presumably the unvoiced version) leaks air near the tip of the tongue.

    Another point worth making isĀ that consonant sounds in English aren’t necessarily the same as consonants in other languages, so even if we select some workableĀ English consonant sounds, it’s not a given that those are the ideal choices.Ā (Plenty of study has already been done on this topic.)

    And that’s just the consonants. Assuming they are used as a shorthand for describing articulations, with an understanding that they do not precisely represent articulation technique, vowel sounds can still cause confusion. ConsiderĀ the “oo” in “too.” Vowel sounds are loosely analogous to woodwind voicings, so it is best to match the vowels to the instrument. Is “oo” the right voicing to evoke?

    For low-voiced instruments, an “oh”- or “ah”-like vowel sound is a better match. (“Oh”Ā is still problematic because English speakers pronounce it as a diphthong, two vowel sounds in sequence—this will causeĀ unstable pitch and tone when applied to a woodwind instrument. To avoid this, we must borrow an “o” sound from another language.) For the clarinet, “ee” is the closest match. For saxophones, the vowel sound needs to be somewhere in between, perhaps near the schwa (ə) sound like the “a” in “about.”

    Language sounds can be used only as a very limited analogy for woodwind articulation technique—use them with care.

  • Reader email: doubling opportunities

    woodwinds
    Photo, fantail media

    A reader emailed me to ask this question (edited):

    I was wondering if you could give me some information on what kind of opportunities being a doubler has opened up for you. I am beginning to consider options for graduate school and am looking into multiple woodwinds degrees. Thanks!

    I do consider myself to be at the beginning of a hopefully long career, but doubling has already given me some opportunities that I surely wouldn’t have had otherwise.

    Doubling isn’t a career that typically leads to fame outside the music business, but within the industry many of the best and best-known doublers are working in Broadway pit orchestras, in the Los Angeles recording studios, or on the road with touring jazz or pop acts.

    I haven’t had any of those jobs, nor do I anticipate pursuing any of them at this point. But here are a few things doubling has done for me:

    Doubling gigs. These are gigs where I am actually hired to perform on multiple instruments. Most reasonably large cities in the US seem to have at least a few community or school musical theater productions with large enough budgets to pay a professional or semi-pro orchestra, and woodwind doublers are generally in demand (bonus points for double reed players or “low reeds” players). Doubling gigs can also include being hired as a local to play behind a touring show or artist who is passing through town, or being a sort of utility woodwind player for local orchestras, churches, and so forth. Often for me these have been sort of write-your-own-job-description situations, where I’m hired to play one instrument, and later re-hired because I’m able and willing to cover some other parts, too. Read More “Reader email: doubling opportunities”

  • What kind of ligature should I get?

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

    I’m on record as believing that clarinet and saxophone ligatures make little if any actual difference in how you sound. You’re welcome to disagree, but you might want to watch Michael Lowenstern’s video about it first.

    So, assuming the ligature has little direct influence on sound, what is the best kind to buy?

    Consider the humble fabric-type ligature:

    Fabric-type clarinet and saxophone ligatures

    They can be made of fabric or various other flexible materials. Fake-leather materials are popular.

    Here are their advantages over most other ligatures:

    • Generally inexpensive, although there are pricier versions available if paying more makes you feel better
    • Relatively easy to fit to even unusual mouthpieces and reeds, since they are flexible
    • Durable: I still have and use one I bought in high school
    • Not easily damaged: can be dropped, stepped on, or otherwise battered with little if any ill effect
    • Won’t dig into or otherwise damage reeds or mouthpieces
    • More expensive than an actual shoelace, but quicker and easier to install
    • Ambidextrous: many of the popular inexpensive ones can be switched for left- or right-handed screw tightening
    • Usually just one screw to tighten, so 50% less tightening/loosening time than the many other kinds of ligatures that have two screws
    • Available: no waiting lists or custom-building, easily purchaseable from just about any brick-and-mortar or online band-instrument retailer

    I have a number of fancy and expensive ligatures that various teachers required I buy over the years of my education, including some plated in actual gold. They don’t outperform my fabric-type ones in any meaningful way. You may still see them in my performance videos, etc., as I am still trying to get my money’s worth out of them. When they break or wear out, I’ll replace them cheaply and easily with good reliable fabric ones.

    Get a good, reliable, no-nonsense ligature to hold your reed in place, and happy practicing!

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.