Dubious pedagogy alert: woodwind vibrato

I think there is a lot of garbage in the way woodwind vibrato—specifically flute and double reed vibrato—is taught.

Flutists, oboists, and bassoonists use the same basic physiological mechanism to produce vibrato. I often read or hear debates over what, exactly, this mechanism is, with some arguing fervently that it is the “diaphragm,” and others insisting that it is the “throat.”

It’s worth pointing out here that a major issue in wind-instrument pedagogy is the fact that so many of the important techniques happen somewhere inside the body where they cannot be easily observed. (Violinists don’t seem to have much disagreement about what part of the body to use for vibrato.)

My belief is that neither the “diaphragm” nor the “throat” can be correctly identified as the organ of vibrato.

I use quotation marks for “diaphragm” and “throat” because both are incorrectly identified to begin with. The “diaphragm” supposedly used in “diaphragm vibrato” must surely actually be the abdominal muscles, external to the thoracic cavity. I covered this ground already in a post on breath support:

The diaphragm is, of course, the star of the show when it comes to inhalation—it is the contraction of this muscle that stretches the lungs, allowing air to rush in. But the diaphragm only flexes in that one direction. Exhalation (in normal breathing) is the result of that muscle relaxing. Of course, for wind playing, the simple relaxation of a muscle can’t provide the kind of air control that we need. Thus, the abdominal (and perhaps intercostal) muscles are also engaged to control exhalation.

And “throat” is simply too vague a location—like saying the embouchure is formed with the “head.”

Flutist Nina Perlove effectively demonstrates in one of her fine videos why “diaphragm” (abdominal) vibrato doesn’t work: it causes a pulsation in the breath support, disrupting phrasing and destabilizing pitch. (I like most of what she has to say in the vibrato video, though I do, of course, disagree with her conclusion that vibrato comes from the throat.) The abdominal muscles cannot produce vibrato because they must maintain constant pressure for good tone production, and the actual diaphragm is incapable of producing a vibrato because it can’t actively participate in exhalation.

Much has been made of the role of the mysterious “throat” in producing vibrato, though the proponents of this theory never seem able to narrow it down to a more specific structure.

Many woodwind players, myself included, have been taught that vibrato is learned first as pulses of the “diaphragm,” which over time migrate from the abdomen into an undisclosed muscle in the throat area. I continue to use this method in my own teaching; I believe it to be effective though ultimately misleading. I have also heard and read that the vibrato comes from some sort of collaboration between throat and diaphragm; I have been unable to find even a reasonably convincing explanation of how such a thing might work.

I believe that the true source of vibrato is the intercostal muscles, the muscles between the ribs. This is by no means a new theory; for example, Edwin Putnik, author of The Art of Flute Playing, embraces the idea of intercostal vibrato, acknowledging that it is often misidentified as “diaphragm” vibrato.

Putnik does also describe a “throat” vibrato in the vague terms characteristic of those who espouse that theory, but finds it inferior to the intercostal vibrato. (The Art of Oboe Playing by Sprenkle and Ledet and The Art of Bassoon Playing by Spencer similarly acknowledge the existence of a “throat” vibrato, but ultimately advocate a diaphragmatic/abdominal vibrato.)

I suspect that most (if not all) fine flute, oboe, and bassoon players do actually produce vibrato in the same way; the disagreement here is not a matter of preferring one muscle movement over another, but simply identifying which muscle it really is. Various studies of questionable scientific merit (carried out mostly by well-meaning music graduate students) have shown by X-ray and other means that various bony and/or cartilaginous structures in the throat do in fact move in a manner corresponding to the vibrato being produced. This seems generally to be taken as evidence that the throat is responsible for vibrato, presumably in the same way that rear-view mirrors are responsible for propelling your car forward (I mean, of course, that the movements observed in the throat are corollary, rather than causative). Even without the aid of medical technology, I can see (in the mirror) and feel movement in my throat, as well as throughout my torso, but none of this tells me from whence the pulsations originate.

Oboist Howard Niblock makes an interesting point in a 1989 Instrumentalist article:

Of course many people have approached the subject directly. Such approaches have usually focused on where the vibrato is produced. Most often this has been the abdominal area or diaphragm, as it is often mistakenly identified, though the throat is also often recommended as the proper location of the vibrato. The anatomical approaches are often quite interesting, but often they are also counterproductive. In the first place, concentrating on making a particular part of the body do a particular thing often produces additional tension in that part of the body… In the second place, the actual sound of the vibrato is secondary in these approaches…

While I do agree that an “anatomical approach” can contribute to tension and distract from music-making, I also believe that it is important for serious musicians and educators to understand the physical realities of vibrato, for the sake of consistent and useful pedagogy.

[See also a paper on saxophone vibrato I wrote a few years back.]

Similar Posts

  • Switching between clarinets: tone production

    Switching between any two instruments, even two closely-related ones, is a challenging prospect. You must practice for many hours to do it well. But often people switching between clarinets (such as between B-flat clarinet and bass clarinet) are making larger changes than necessary.

    The fundamental concepts in clarinet tone production are breath support, voicing, and embouchure. These should remain basically the same whether you are playing the largest or smallest members of the clarinet family.

    Breath support should, in all cases, be powerful and constant. Voicing, even on low clarinets, should be high (think “cold air”). You may find the lower clarinets are somewhat more forgiving of lower voicings, and even that some pleasing effects can be achieved. But a consistently high voicing across the clarinet family pays off in intonation, evenness of tone, and ease of response.

    Embouchures must adapt, but really only to accommodate different sizes of mouthpiece. In general, the larger the instrument and mouthpiece, the more mouthpiece you will take into your mouth. However, this amount can vary even between two B-flat clarinet mouthpieces. To find the correct position for each of your mouthpieces, insert a piece of paper between the mouthpiece and reed. Where the paper stops is approximately the place where your lip should contact the reed.

    Beware advice suggesting that larger clarinets use a “looser” embouchure. Embouchures for all clarinets should be airtight, but not tight.

    The angle of the embouchure is also important. Clarinet mouthpieces of any size are best played at a relatively steep angle (compared to, say, a saxophone or oboe), around 30 degrees from vertical. Some larger clarinets, depending on their neck curves, seem to lend themselves to a more-horizontal angle. But bringing the bottom end of the clarinet closer to you helps to achieve a more optimal position.

    Fingerings are mostly the same for members of the clarinet family, but there are some exceptions and adaptions. Advancing players should consult a good fingering chart (such as Stefanie Gardner’s bass clarinet chart) for differences. (Or even better, get a private teacher.) Note in Dr. Gardner’s chart some differences from B-flat clarinet: the use of the left hand index finger vent for C-sharp6 through G6, and the special fingerings for the extra keywork for notes below E3, if available on your instrument.

    Happy practicing!

  • Saxophone hand position

    I often see poor hand position among developing saxophonists. It’s not as much of a problem for oboists, clarinetists, or bassoonists, since those instruments’ finger holes demand a higher degree of finger-placement precision in order to close them properly; an open-holed flute also requires a little more care. But the saxophone’s toneholes are all covered by pads affixed to relatively large keys, so even with a casual approach to hand position getting the holes covered isn’t a serious problem.

    But there are a number of advantages to more careful hand positioning, and on a well-designed instrument it’s also really easy: just put the tips of the three middle fingers of each hand on the corresponding key touchpieces. (Not the tippy-tips, like a violinist, with the fingers perpendicular to the key surface, but the fleshy pad or “pulp” of the finger, just to the palm side of the tippy-tip.)

    Let’s look at the left hand first. I have superimposed (poorly) the key touches over my fingers to show their locations.

    Good hand position
    Good hand position
    Poor hand position
    Poor hand position

    Here are the problems that the poor hand position causes:

    • In order to fully depress the keys, the fingers may lock straight or even collapse backwards a bit. This makes the fingers’ motion more complicated and tense, and less efficient.
    • The fingers may contact the keys farther down the finger pad, perhaps even at or below the first knuckle crease. This decreases control over the keys. And/or…
    • The pads of the fingers contact the keys somewhere beyond the key touchpieces, giving the fingers less leverage and requiring more effort to depress the keys.
    • The pinky finger is shifted to a position where it is more difficult to reach the low C-sharp key, and where more effort is required to fully depress it.
    • Although not pictured here, the thumb should also be situated to that its pad contacts the octave key in a strong position with good leverage.

    Now the right hand.

    Good hand position
    Good hand position
    Poor hand position
    Poor hand position

    If poor right hand position is used:

    • As with the left hand, the fingers lose their neutral curve and become unnecessarily straightened.
    • As with the left hand, the contact points between the fingers and keys are less than optimal.
    • The pinky finger is shifted into a position where either the finger must be contorted to contact the E-flat key properly, or a less-optimal part of the finger contacts the key.
    • The ring finger must bend uncomfortably to reach the side F-sharp key, or that key must be pressed by stiffening the finger and contacting the key near the base of the finger, which is imprecise and awkward.
    • Sometimes poor right-hand position results from allowing the crook of the thumb and index finger to sit in the thumb hook. In these cases, good hand position will require repositioning the thumb so that the thumb’s distal joint is in the thumb hook.

    Some of my students, when asked to shift their hand position, have initially objected, insisting that their poor hand position is required due to their individual anatomy or the configuration of their individual saxophones. I have yet to see this prove true. I suppose I can’t eliminate the possibility that very rare situations exist that might call for a slight adjustment to the finger-pads-on-the-touchpieces positioning, but I haven’t encountered a significant case of this yet. Even with my larger-than-average hands (you may be able to spot my custom extra-high green palm key touchpieces in the photos), putting my fingertips on the touchpieces immediately creates an open, relaxed, and efficient hand position, with fast finger movement and a light touch on the keys. If your saxophone has badly-positioned touchpieces, you might consider visiting a good repair technician to have them relocated (or consider it a warning sign of a poorly-made instrument that should be replaced).

    Good hand position is a prerequisite to smooth, effortless saxophone technique. Check yours carefully, and set yourself up for success.

  • |

    Not good

    I like to use a Socratic-ish method in my private lessons, and ask my students questions. It means that I have this conversation several times per day:

    [Student plays.]

    Me: How did that sound to you?

    Student: Not good.

    Me: What didn’t you like about it?

    Student: It didn’t sound good.

    Me: What aspect of it didn’t sound good to you? The tone? the pitch? the phrasing? the articulation?

    Student: Um, I guess the articulation?

    Me: What didn’t you like about the articulation?

    Student: It wasn’t good?

    It’s an ongoing battle to get my students to listen more deeply than that. Was the articulation “not good” because it started with air noise instead of tone? Because it was accompanied by an unwanted percussive sound? Was the articulation technique perfect but you failed to follow the composer’s markings? Or was it something else?

    Photo, David Bailey
    Photo, David Bailey

    Often the “not good” is a combination of factors, but if my students can identify even one of them, then they can immediately start working in a focused way to improve it. If it’s just “not good,” then they tend to just play it again from the beginning without any clear approach to making it sound better, and repeat until frustrated.

    Part of my job is to help them identify and verbalize the desirable and undesirable phenomena in their playing, and to teach them the techniques for manipulating the variables involved (breath support, voicing, embouchure, finger technique, and tongue technique, to name the most obvious ones). But it’s up to them to take that information and run with it. For my students to become independently-functional musicians, they need to learn to listen critically to themselves and troubleshoot.

    For yourself and for your students, don’t be satisfied with bland value judgments (it sounded “good” or “bad”). Be factual and descriptive about what you hear, and tackle problems in a methodical way. Practice smart!

  • Connecting observations to techniques

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

    In my woodwind methods class, I try to create lots of opportunities for students (future instrumental music educators) to practice observing woodwind playing and giving feedback. For the feedback to be useful, it needs to connect an observation to a technique. Here are some examples of what not to do:

    Observation without technique

    “Your tone sounds good.”

    “Your intonation is problematic.”

    “There are response issues.”

    First, it’s important that an educator can articulate their observations with clarity and detail. What is “good” about the student’s tone? (Are you saying that it is characteristic? That it is consistent from note to note?) What is problematic about their intonation? (Is it flat overall? sharp overall? Is it unstable over the course of a phrase? over the course of a single note?) What “issues” are there with response? (Notes responding late? Notes responding with extraneous noise?)

    But once the problem or success is clearly identified, it still isn’t of much use unless it comes with a recommendation.

    “Your tone is very consistent. Nice work using steady breath support.”

    “Your pitch is scooping upward into each note—be sure to articulate with just the tip of the tongue so your voicing remains stable.”

    “Let’s see if a softer reed will allow your notes to respond more quickly and clearly.”

    Technique without observation

    “Try relaxing your embouchure.”

    “Use more breath support.”

    “Keep your fingers close to the keys.”

    Barking orders without explanation might produce some short-term results, but when students know what result you’re trying to produce they can be proactive.

    “Remember, you can get that bigger, clearer sound if you relax your embouchure.”

    “Use more breath support so those high notes will be up to pitch.”

    “You’re having trouble covering the toneholes because your fingers are starting from too far away. Keep them closer so they can find the holes more easily.”

    When my students learn to give feedback that connects their specific, precise observations with clearly-taught techniques, they are preparing for fruitful lessons and rehearsals with their own future students.

  • |

    Need a panflute? Woodwind doubling gear woes

    Toothpaste For Dinner

    A handy “panflute flowchart” from toothpastefordinner.com. Read More “Need a panflute? Woodwind doubling gear woes”

  • The magical properties of air

    Often, when I discuss with my students issues in their playing technique, I follow up by asking them, “How can you solve this problem?” They learn quickly that “breath support” (or a rough synonym like “more air”) is generally a safe answer.

    And with good reason. Breath support is absolutely key to tone production—it is crucial to reliable response, consistent tone quality, and stable intonation. If I can get a student to improve their breath support, I can generally count on each of those things improving immediately and noticeably.

    But I think there are other things that are improved, perhaps indirectly, with air:

    • Finger and tongue movement. I am lumping these together because I have a theory that air helps them in the same couple of ways. The first is that focusing on breathing—a movement so natural that we literally do it for our whole lives and barely think about it—diverts attention away from the finger and tongue movements that woodwind players get so stressed and tense about. This lets the autopilot (or Gallwey’s “Self 2”) take over and execute in a relaxed, natural way. The second way air helps here is that good breath support requires good breathing, and good breathing gets more oxygen to the finger and tongue muscles.
    • Expression. Expressive playing often involves things like dynamic contrasts, vibrato, and nuances of tone color (to name only a few). Each of those things functions better when well-supported: dynamic range expands, and vibrato is smoother and more controlled (again a result of better-oxygenated muscles?). Tone color, I think, actually gets less flexible, in the sense that it becomes more consistent note-to-note despite quirks of the instrument; this means that tone color changes may be applied in a more deliberate way.
    • Confidence and relaxation. Deep breaths are a common and effective insecticide for pre-recital butterflies. The breathing should remain centered and Zen even after the music starts.
    Pictured: air. Photo, Matt Peoples
    Pictured: air. Photo, Matt Peoples

3 Comments

  1. Your comment about introducing vibrato through use of the “diaphragm” reminds me of the teaching technique, “Lies for Undergraduates”, right along with the debate among theorists about whether there really is a cadential 6-4 chord, or whether it is a double suspension, and so forth.

  2. This is very well written and I agree 99% with what you say. My one disagreement is that I believe it is possible to produce vibrato in the throat, in the same way as one can make an intermittent vocalisation ( try the sound e e e with a short sharp e as in men ) with the larynx I think because it is possible without exhaling, unlike the syllable aah aah aah , unless it is a very high pinched sound. This e e e is how I believe the nannygoat style of vibrato is made, especially I think on double reeds, as it is so easy to constrict the throat here. Flute players are more likely to have a relaxed throat I feel because of the volume of air moving, and so tend to use the intercostals in exactly the way you describe. I teach vibrato to my oboe pupils by showing them how to start the sound without any tongue at all , and a huh huh sound ( also useful for good tonguing strangely) that is made of separate syllables. Then the next step is to join them up into the single tone, but very slow and gradually increase the speed and decrease the depth until the desired result is achieved, Many talented players will do this completely instinctively, even from the very first lesson. It is very much the same as a singer must do, I think, although I am not a confident exponent, but the pressure of air behind it must be greater for oboists at least, to overcome the resistance of the reed. The type of reed is of course a factor in this , Ledet is very useful on this topic.

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.