crop man getting dollars from wallet

Do I really need…

ByBret Pimentel

For woodwind doublers and lots of other musicians, the shopping list can go on and on. Do I need a clarinet in A? In E-flat? Do I need an alto flute? A contrabassoon? A bass saxophone?

Clearly there’s no one-size-fits all answer, but here are some things to consider.

  • Are you doing, or aspiring to, the kind of gigs where not having access to the right instrument is a dealbreaker? Or the kind where nobody minds too much if you cover that bassoon part on something else? (The answers to these may depend on a lot of factors like the musical genre, the hiring contractor, the location, and the availability of other musicians in the area.)

  • Are you happier being the person who is equipped for every situation? Or are you happier being the person who gets by with the necessities? (It’s okay to be either, or some of each.)

  • Do you expect, in purely financial terms, a return on investment for your new instrument? Do you see a clear path to pay for the instrument, its upkeep and accessories, and then some, by getting gigs you wouldn’t otherwise get? (It’s also okay if you have non-financial motivations.)

  • Are you pondering another purchase because of opportunities you’ve had to turn down? Or are you betting on future opportunities? Or just fascinated by another shiny object? (Any of those can be acceptable reasons if they fit with your financial resources and goals.)

  • If the purchase is part of a strategy to get more opportunities, what is the market like? For a particularly expensive instrument like a contrabassoon, it might be worthwhile if there is an unmet or under-met need for it in your area. (But if other contrabassoonists nearby have already locked down all the gigs, your expensive toy might end up collecting dust.)

It’s hard to predict which instrument purchases will help you meet employment or income goals. Ultimately, it’s up to you to weigh the tangible and intangible factors and decide whether investing in something new is the right choice. Good luck!

Similar Posts

  • More on the science/fiction of woodwind materials

    ByBret Pimentel
    Photo, ~Bob~West~

    There’s an interesting woodwind-related post by blogger “MarkCC” at Good Math, Bad Math, entitled “My Newest Flute, made of… Plastic?!”

    MarkCC recently acquired a new flute of the type used in Irish traditional music, the kind that are most often made of wood. But MarkCC’s is made of polymer, and it sounds like MarkCC has wrestled a little with the issue of whether a plastic flute can really measure up to a wooden one.

    But… Plastic?

    I’ve seen several acoustic studies that claim that the material the instrument is made of isn’t that important. In a wooden flute, the physics show that the head joint is the only part of the flute that really has a significant influence on its sound. But the head joint of a wooden flute is actually lined with metal. So the wood isn’t really having too much influence on the sound.

    As it turns out, MarkCC is something of a doubler, and also plays the clarinet.

    Most people (including me) play on mouthpieces made of hard rubber or plastic – so the primary sound-producing piece of the instrument is plastic. The barrel of a wooden clarinet is (obviously) wood, so according to the physics/acoustics, that’s the only piece of wood that actually has any measurable acoustic effect. And the physics of this isn’t sloppy stuff put together by an instrument company trying to sell their plastic clarinets: to the limits of my ability to understand it, it’s good, solid stuff.

    And yet, I’ve played a whole lot of clarinets, and by god, there’s nothing like a grenadilla wood clarinet. Even the best clarinet makers, even when I put my wooden barrel on a polymer body, it doesn’t sound the same. Of course, that’s subjective, and we humans are notorious for hearing what we want to hear in a subjective situation. And, by god, I’m a math geek. I’ve seen the math, and it’s correct.

    One of the most-linked articles on my blog makes the same point about our expectations about materials coloring our playing experience. It’s worth pointing out, too, that a different barrel made from the same material will also affect the instrument’s sound.

    I do think it’s a grey area to refer to a mouthpiece or barrel (or flute headjoint) as “sound-producing.” The instrument’s parts don’t produce any audible musical sound (unless you hit them with drumsticks)—it’s the column of air contained within them that vibrates in a musically useful way.

    But MarkCC goes on, I believe, to hit the nail on the head: Read More “More on the science/fiction of woodwind materials”

  • Voicing: stable vs. flexible

    ByBret Pimentel

    I have discussed here previously the importance of proper voicing for woodwind instruments. In a nutshell, voicing is the configuration of the oral cavity, manipulated by moving the back of the tongue.

    There seems to be some debate about voicing: is it something static, or something that changes from note to note? I find that the answer is, sort of, both.

    photo, stonelucifer
    photo, stonelucifer

    For beginning woodwind players, tone, intonation, and response (virtually every aspect of tone production) can be improved by habituating a single, stable, “correct” voicing. When this is accomplished, an ideal woodwind instrument, which of course does not exist, would play perfectly in tune, with perfectly consistent tone from note to note, and with perfectly even and reliable response.

    An instrument that is merely good will do these things well, but imperfectly. A more advanced musician can use small and temporary voicing adjustments to improve individual notes by altering their pitch, tone, or responsiveness. Doing this requires a “stable” voicing as a stepping-off point, fine control of the mechanics of voicing, and an ear trained to hear notes that are out of tune, uncharacteristic in tone, or problematic response-wise.

    So, in general, when working with beginning students or others with significant tone production issues, the goal is to work toward a stable voicing that stays the same from note to note, but with more advanced students the goal is to learn to adjust the voicing ever so slightly to improve each note as needed.

  • Keeping your fingers “close”

    ByBret Pimentel

    There’s a common idea with woodwind players and teachers that it’s important to keep your fingers close to the keys. Keeping the fingers within a certain reasonable distance does have benefits:

    • It’s easier to keep track of where the keys are and not “miss,” especially for beginners
    • Allowing the fingers to rise too far can introduce tension into the hands

    But I think finger-closeness is a concept that gets over-taught and over-stressed. It seems to be motivated by a desire for finger speed (or some euphemism like “fluidity”).

    Assuming the fingers are within a reasonable range, I think working toward extreme closeness probably doesn’t offer much if any speed increase, but does make tension more likely. It’s a micro-optimization only worth thinking about when you’ve solved every other problem with your technique, and even then your results may differ on whether it’s productive (or even counterproductive). Definitely don’t stress out your beginning students over it.

    Try this if you like: bring a finger down onto a key from, say, 1-2mm above the key (about the thickness of a couple of credit or ID cards). Then try from ten times that distance, 1-2 cm (the width of a fingernail or two). What do you notice about speed? How about tension?

    Keep the fingers close enough to stay in position and not bend backward, but don’t worry too much about dialing in extreme closeness.

  • Purposeful fingering choices

    ByBret Pimentel

    I have gotten into the habit of grilling my students about their fingering choices: “Can you tell me which fingering you used for the last note in that phrase, and why you chose it?” Often they take this (and often correctly so) as an indication that I disapprove of their choices: “Oh, I guess I should have used the other fingering.” But I would like them to actually answer the question that I asked—why did they use the fingerings that they did?

    Usually the answer is either that he or she has a “usual” fingering for that note and didn’t bother to consider any others, or that he or she finds the alternative fingering to be physically awkward or hard to remember. As you might guess, I do not find these reasons satisfactory. Professional-level command of an instrument requires a thorough knowledge of fingering options, a thoughtful, purposeful approach to choosing from among them, and conscientious practice to habituate them.

    photo, Gala Medina
    photo, Gala Medina

    Ideally, there should never be a situation where a woodwind player falls back on a “usual” fingering for a note; each possible option should be considered and weighed each and every time. (Training and experience can automate this to some extent within common patterns of notes, such as scalar or arpeggiated passages.)

    In some situations a student knows that a different fingering is the “right” one but shies away from it because they can’t remember it or have difficulty executing it. (One example is the left E-flat fingering for beginning oboists; reaching for the left-hand key can move the ring finger enough that it fails to cover its hole.) These situations are resolved simply through careful repetition until they become a part of (so-called) “muscle memory.” There are a number of method/exercise/etude books that provide material for practice of unfamiliar fingerings (the Klosé clarinet method and the “Universal” saxophone method are some time-honored examples.)

    An amateur tries to get the job done with a few low-quality tools. A professional keeps his or her toolbox fully stocked with sharp, high-quality tools and knows just which ones to use to get the job done right the first time.

  • Tonguing and language sounds

    ByBret Pimentel

    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.” 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. 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 mentioned 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.) A woodwind book I read recently recommends some additional oddities like “droo” or “thoo.” “Droo” 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 is that consonant sounds in English aren’t necessarily the same as consonants in other languages, so even if we select some workable English consonant sounds, it’s not a given that those are the ideal choices. (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. Consider 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” is still problematic because English speakers pronounce it as a diphthong, two vowel sounds in sequence—this will cause 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.

  • |

    Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 5: challenges

    ByBret Pimentel

    Back for more, I see? Thanks to all who are still reading results from the Great Woodwind Doubler Census of 2011. At this point we are getting into some more of the questions with free-form answers, and I think your responses are really interesting.

    Q: What is your greatest challenge as a woodwind doubler?

    I categorized the answers as best I could, with many of your responses falling into multiple categories. Here are some of the most common issues raised:

    By far, the most common issue reported was finding the time to practice multiple instruments—I’ll reveal that this was my own answer, as well.

    Flute-specific problems were also frequently mentioned, with oboe, clarinet, and bassoon appearing lower on the list (the saxophone got only a mention or two). I do think that the flute as a double has some particular challenges, but, as we know, it’s also one of the most common doubles. It would be interesting to assemble a group of doublers who play all five major woodwinds at a somewhat equal level, and take a poll to see which instrument they think is the biggest challenge.
    Read More “Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 5: challenges”

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.