From WindWorks Design: Wind controller in a pit orchestra

ByBret Pimentel
Photo, mabel.sound

“Gertjan” at the WindWorks Design blog posted some interesting comments about using a wind controller in a local production of Seussical the Musical. Gertjan (I wasn’t able to positively identify him from the WindWorks website, but maybe he will find his way here and let us know who he is) played saxophones in the show as well, and used the wind controller to cover a number of wind and non-wind instrument parts.

Although it gives me a little indigestion to see a wind controller substituting for woodwinds that might otherwise have been played by a doubler, I do think there is application for wind controllers in orchestra pits. Keyboard-driven synthesizers are ubiquitous in recent shows (or are sometimes used to replace other instruments, especially a string section), and, in some cases, a wind synth might be even better suited to certain kinds of synthesizer parts. Gertjan mentions some synthy sounds like “vocal doo,” “scary voices,” and “ghostly shimmering breathy sound,” all of which strike me as likely to be very effective with a wind synthesizer’s breath control. Some others, like “harp” and “tinkle bell” seem like they might be more intuitively assigned to a keyboard.

In the comments section one of my previous articles, I said this:

EWI seems like such an individualized thing—what with all the options for sounds, effects, etc.—that in most typical doubling situations it would take a fairly EWI-savvy orchestrator/musical director to use it effectively, beyond just using it to cover acoustic instrument lines (what a waste!). I think most would have to work directly with the performer to compose for the available sounds (or create new ones).

This certainly seems to have been the approach that Gertjan and his musical director took:

What followed was an intense e-mail conversation between the musical director and myself about the possibilities, what sounds I would normally use, etc. It ended with him visiting me at my house where we talked about it in great detail, with me demonstrating the various options and abilities.

It’s worth taking a look at both of Gertjan’s posts about his experience. Part 1 deals with the collaborative process between wind controller player and musical director, and Part 2 discusses some technical tips and other practicalities of using a wind controller in the pit.

Similar Posts

  • Q&A: Voicing

    ByBret Pimentel

    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.

    What are your thought on voicings on the various extensions of the big five? I find I get optimal results on flute with low voicing, but on piccolo I use something more similar to high register alto sax.

    I tend to be generally consistent within instrument families: low voicing for flute, so also low voicing for piccolo, alto flute, etc. High voicing for clarinet, so also high voicing for bass clarinet. Saxophones are a little different because they require a “middle” voicing, and I do think it’s worthwhile to target each member of the saxophone family precisely. The easiest way to do that is with mouthpiece pitch: a baritone mouthpiece should sound a concert D (a ninth above middle C on the piano), a tenor mouthpiece sounds a G, alto an A, and soprano a C.

    I recently purchased a pennywhistle and I’m really enjoying it so far. I was wondering if there’s any specific kind of voicing associated with that kind of instrument. It feels easy to play the lower octave, but going up higher than the fourth or fifth in the second octave is really difficult without absolutely blasting.

    For fipple flutes like recorders and pennywhistles (also known as tinwhistles or “Irish” whistles), I recommend a very low voicing, the same as for concert flute or double reeds. Recorders have a thumb hole that serves (sometimes) as a register vent, which tames the upper registers somewhat. Pennywhistles don’t have that—the only way to get to the upper register is to overblow. With some practice and finesse the registers can be balanced somewhat, but with fipple flutes don’t expect nearly the level of dynamic control that you have on a concert flute or modern reed instrument. Bear in mind, too, that fipple flutes generally take much less air than a band/orchestra woodwind.

    Some nice handmade pennywhistles are designed to improve the register imbalance issue. (Narrower-bore whistles in particular tend toward a sweeter, softer upper register, but a weaker lower register.) But many professional whistle players prefer the more “authentic” sound of inexpensive whistles, and might try out quite a few to find one that plays well enough.

    Thanks for your questions! Voicing is a little-understood, little-taught aspect of woodwind playing.

    More 10-year anniversary Q&A

  • “More air”

    ByBret Pimentel

    When I use the term “breath support,” students and colleagues often echo back something like “oh, right, more air.” But is breath support the same thing as “more air?”

    Measuring quantities of air isn’t completely straightforward—when we say “more air,” we might rightfully wonder whether that means a greater volume filled with air, or a greater number of air molecules, or whether we’re really thinking of something like airflow or air velocity.

    For my purposes in teaching, I find a few different measures to be relevant:

    First, you must set up breath support with a good inhalation, and I think it’s generally helpful to inhale a large volume of air into the lungs.

    Then, you must pressurize the air by engaging the torso muscles, constricting the space in which the air is contained. (The diaphragm’s relaxation alone does create pressure, but not enough for good woodwind playing.)

    The increased pressure makes the air escape your embouchure at a higher velocity. You can adjust the size of your embouchure, allowing more or less air to pass through, which is the basic mechanism woodwind players use to change (sound) volume (or “dynamics”).

    I’m most directly concerned with air pressure when I talk about breath support, and in some ways in which that does translate to “more” air. But since “more” can be measured in multiple ways, I like to use a more exact term like “breath support.” That also has the concreteness of referring to something that the player actively does, rather than focusing the imagery on air, which is invisible.

    Be precise in your pedagogical vocabulary, and consistent in your breath support.

  • Transcription: Stan Getz, tenor saxophone on Huey Lewis and the News “Small World (Part Two)”

    ByBret Pimentel

    Get the transcription (PDF)

    Huey Lewis tells the story in Kansas City Magazine (strong language edited):

    Well, my dad was a jazzer and Zoot Sims died. And when Zoot Sims died, they had a benefit in San Francisco at Kimball’s or somewhere. …

    So I take him and sit down … and then I get a tap on my shoulder. I turn around, and it’s Getz. It’s really amazing … he’s wearing his horn and taps me on the shoulder, and my dad turns around and Phil Elwood turns around. And my old man goes, “Holy s***!”

    Getz says, “Why don’t you let me play on some of your s***? I can play that s*** too.” And I said, “Oh, why, yes sir, I’m sure you can.” And then he took a card and he wrote on it: “Stan Getz. Have sax, will travel.”

    He played beautifully, and on the way home, my old man says, “If you don’t take him up on that offer, I will never, ever forgive you!”

    Get the transcription (PDF)

  • Understanding response and stability

    ByBret Pimentel

    A few years ago I drove a friend’s car. The accelerator was much more sensitive than I was used to, and it caused a jerky ride: every time I touched the gas, the car lurched forward. It was a different experience driving a moving van full of heavy furniture. No matter how much I leaned into the accelerator, the speedometer crept upward with painful slowness.

    The car I’m used to driving is somewhere in between—it’s acceleration isn’t quite as zippy as my friend’s car’s, and not as sluggish as the truck’s. With woodwind instruments it’s important to have a similar balance.

    Response is how readily the system (you + the equipment) produces tone. A very responsive setup/technique will make a sound with the faintest whisper of air.

    Stability is, in a way, the opposite of response. Rather than responding to the slightest puff of air, a more stable setup has some “cushion”—you lean into it a little more to produce a tone.

    A very responsive setup takes less physical effort to make a sound, but the sound can be harder to control. The pitch and tone are more flexible, which can be a good or bad thing depending on your preference and playing situation.

    A more stable setup takes more effort to produce tone, but it tends to have more steady pitch and tone. Again, this is a tradeoff.

    For most players and situations, some kind of middle ground is the right choice: enough response to articulate notes at pianissimo, but enough stability that you don’t have to devote all your attention to keeping things in tune.

    Assuming your tone production is a well-oiled machine (breath support, voicing, and embouchure all working well), your equipment choices and condition play an important role. That means matching reed/mouthpiece/headjoint to your instrument, and keeping pads and tenons in good non-leaking condition. For example, a saxophone that blows very freely (or, in other words, is very responsive) may need a little resistance in the reed and mouthpiece (to provide stability). A flute that has a lot of resistance built in may need a freer-blowing headjoint (for ready response).

    Develop your basic tone-production technique and make smart, reasonable equipment choices to find the response and stability you require.

  • Mario Rivera (1939-2007): Latin saxophone and flute

    ByBret Pimentel

    I recently got a copy of the 1984 Tito Puente disc El Rey. I’m sorry to say I wasn’t familiar with the names of any of the other musicians on the album—everyone sounds absolutely incredible—but I was blown away by the flute and tenor playing of Mario Rivera.

    A quick Google search later and I can see that the late Mr. Rivera ranks among the heavies of Latin Jazz, and I have been missing out on his playing before now. Pick up a copy of El Rey and check out his virtuosic charanga-style flute playing (on Puente’s Oye Como Va, for example—that’s right, Tito Puente wrote it, not Carlos Santana) and some really tasty tenor sounds, too (check out the Latin cover of Giant Steps).

    Or, surf on over to YouTube for some videos from a Bern Jazz Festival appearance. Hear some breathtaking baritone  playing, some really nice flute duets (not to mention piccolos, timbales, and scat) with Dave Valentin, and, if that’s not enough, Rivera on vibes and even trumpet(!). Read More “Mario Rivera (1939-2007): Latin saxophone and flute”

  • The amazing shrinking woodwind section: increasing demands on woodwind doublers

    ByBret Pimentel

    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.

7 Comments

  2. Oh God, this is stupid. Ok, so his two-bit theater company can’t afford a whole orchestra. So, like most theater companies, they have to boil it down to essentials. Since this guy doesn’t play another other than saxophone and EWI, he does the piccolo/clarinet/oboe sounds on it. Yuck.

    I play orchestra pits a lot. In fact, just got done with a production that boiled down Cinderella to 8 people from the 20 in the original score. No one used EWI. There was one keyboard player doing the strings. I can’t imagine how bad doing piccolo parts on EWI would sound. I mean……ugh. And the Yamaha MU100R is over 10 years old. So…….double ugh.

    I could see maybe…….maybe using a EWI with something like a good Kontkat library patch…..or maybe……not.

    I think the company would have done better to just have a keyboard player do it. I’ve done Seussical…..it sounds great with real instruments.

    Reply

  3. Thanks, Doron and Eric, for your comments.

    I have no doubt that everyone involved—Gertjan, the musical director, everyone—would agree that having a fully-staffed orchestra would be ideal. But budgets are tight and good doublers are sometimes hard to find.

    I tend to think that if you have to resort to synthesizers to replace orchestral instruments, a clarinet on wind controller is better than a clarinet on a keyboard, since you get at least some crescendo/decrescendo control, and hopefully some smooth slurs. And nobody is out of a job in this situation—you still need a real live musician to play the EWI.

    An argument could be made that even using woodwind doublers is an unacceptable substitute for a full orchestral woodwind section plus a saxophone section.

    Reply

  4. I have to agree with Brett! I’ve played keyboards for years in many different settings and would rather have someone playing parts on an EWI to fill in for missing wind players than on a keyboard! Unless of course you are using a breath controller with the keyboard. I think everyone would agree that it would be great to have a real player on a real instrument but who lives in THAT world?

    Reply

  5. Yes, I did find my way here. ;-)

    Thanks for your insights, Bret, and others for their comments. I’ll try to address some of them. First of all, our “two-bit company” can’t afford a full-scale orchestra, unfortunately (none of the players are paid!). The doublings that the Seussical orchestral score calls for are rare to find, and not cheap if and when you do find a professional that fits the bill, so we have to make do. Given the circumstances, I think we do a great job. And no, I’m not replacing any ‘live’ musicians (at least, I think I still have a pulse…), just “filling the gaps”, as it were.

    Some of the sounds I did (like harp) could have been done by keyboard, but at these points both keyboard players were busy playing other sounds. As for e.g. piccolo: the PLG-VL, that uses physical modeling, does a great job. Even both flute players in the orchestra were convinced. “This guy” plays other instruments as well (including duduk, hah!), but either they weren’t in the score or the positions were already filled. I’m guessing ericdano didn’t read my whole post, or he would have known that yes, we did it with real instruments. :-P (Curious to hear whether he thinks a keyboard is a real instrument, and whether a wind controller would be less so and why…)

    As for my hardware synth: I find my trusty ol’ MU100R is still a worthy competitor, especially the PLG-AN (virtual analog) and PLG-VL (physical modeling) cards. And in terms of reliability it sure beats a laptop with a software synth/library. Most laptops wouldn’t last three years, let alone a decade…

    Cheers all,
    Gertjan

    Reply

    1. Thanks, Gertjan, for stopping by and for the clarifications. Using electronics in music is a hot-button issue and probably will always be.

      It would be cool to see some future shows (if there are any currently, I’m not aware of them) that use both traditional woodwinds and wind controllers, each for their own strengths.

      Reply

  6. My how things have changed in the 12 years since these posts… I’m playing lots of musicals with my EWI, which I love, and NO ONE is complaining (or usually knows the difference)! Of course, the sounds are so incredible now that it really does make a difference. Check out the AKAI 4000s playing 21 different sounds or combinations with a professional pit for “9 to 5”.

    Reply

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.