Instrument stands for doublers: mini-reviews and a wish list

Recently I have been getting a bit of pit work from a nearby community theater. They like to do month-long runs of their shows, which means that the musical director often hires two or more people for each seat in the orchestra, so that they can trade off playing the show according to their availability. One little perk of this method is that often the woodwind player who does the first show leaves his or her instrument stands in the pit for the other doubler(s) to use, so I’ve gotten to try out a variety of stands lately in a real-life situation.

I have, of course, a number of stands of my own, most of which do a basically satisfactory job, but none of which I’m overwhelmingly enamored with.

My main workhorse stand is by Belmonte, and looks something like this. Mine is a few years old and it looks like there may have been a few minor design changes. It holds an alto and a tenor saxophone (or two altos or two tenors—the bell rests adjust to alto or tenor positions), plus a flute and clarinet (or two flutes, or two clarinets).

I like it because:

  • It’s relatively cheap.
  • It folds up, sort of, and you can take all the instrument pegs out for even more compact storage/transport.
  • It’s fairly stable.
  • When my old one wore out, I called the company and they sent me a new one with no hassle. I didn’t even have to ship them the old one.

I hate it because:

  • It’s not tremendously sturdy; the hinges tend to get a little loose after a while.
  • It has the typical “combo flute/clarinet peg” problems. My clarinet sometimes gets wedged onto the base of the peg, and in some cases I grab the upper joints of the clarinet, leaving the lower joint and bell still on the stand. Plus, the upright is too narrow to hold my flute without wobbling. There isn’t any chance of it falling over or anything, but I’d like it to fit the bore of my flute more closely.
  • It won’t fold up right with both saxophone pegs installed. You have to take one out, then fold it up, then try to stick the peg back in.

I have the Belmonte baritone saxophone stand, too, and like it pretty well, though I suspect it will similarly suffer from wear and tear.

I’m currently playing a gig at the theater and using someone else’s Belmonte stand that holds a single saxophone and has two flute/clarinet pegs:


I like it because:

  • It has a nice small footprint if you only need one saxophone, and the tripod-style legs are handy when you’ve got music stands, microphone stands, chairs, and cables running everywhere.
  • Fairly stable.

I hate it because:

  • The instruments are too close together. This contributes to the compactness of the stand, but I really need another couple of inches so that I can make quick switches without having to maneuver instruments into and out of such tight spaces.
  • Usual flute/clarinet peg problem; it would be nice to have a real clarinet peg and a real flute peg rather than the either/or peg.

But of course there is more to life than flute-clarinet-saxophone doubling. I invested in a K&M folding base that accommodates four pegs, and several pegs to go with it: piccolo, flute, oboe, English horn, and clarinet.

I like it because:

  • It’s totally modular, so you just buy the pegs you need.
  • It’s a pretty inexpensive way to get a quasi-custom setup for smaller woodwinds.
  • They make two different piccolo pegs, a narrower one for conical (wood/plastic) instruments, and a wider one for cylindrical (metal) instruments.

I hate it because:

  • It arranges the instruments in a square, so you end with some instruments farther away and have to reach through a forest of woodwinds to grab what you need.
  • I bought the narrow piccolo peg and broke it almost immediately. The upright part is nothing more than a black-painted piece of very thin dowel.
  • I’ve had some quality problems with the the hardware; my oboe peg is permanently stuck to the base, and the English horn peg hardware has become detached from the wood.

I also have the K&M bassoon/bass clarinet stand, the one with the big rubber bowl at the bottom, rather than the hard metal ashtray thing.

I like it because:

  • It’s very sturdy and stable.
  • It’s quite adjustable, and really does work quite well for either bassoon or any of the large clarinets.

I hate it because:

  • It’s huge.
  • I can’t seem to set it up without pinching a finger somewhere in all the moving parts.
  • It’s expensive, over $100 last I checked.

At a recent gig, I used one of these Hercules flute-piccolo-clarinet stands that belongs to a friend. Hercules makes a variety of stands, but this is the only one I’ve used personally.

I like it because:

  • It seems quite stable and pretty sturdy. Their saxophone stands seem to be well-regarded in this department, too.
  • It folds up nicely.
  • The Hercules stands all seem to be very reasonably priced.

I hate it because:

  • It has yellow trim. Not on the pegs, which might be useful in the dark, but on the base, where its only function is to call attention to itself (and perhaps provide a little free advertising).
  • It arranges the instruments in a triangle, so the best you can do is have two instruments toward you, and one farther away that you have to reach around or between to get to.
  • My flute feels really unstable on the skinny little peg.

Some other items I use: a Manhasset music stand shelf (works great on Manhasset music stands, won’t work at all on Wenger stands) for piccolo, mouthpiece caps, or reed paraphernalia; a drumstick caddy (basically a cup that clips onto a stand) for recorders, whistles, or piccolo; and several of those little plastic BG folding stands, which obviously are neither sturdy nor reliable, but which have the advantage of folding completely flat so they’re easy to carry in a clarinet or oboe case.

Haven’t tried them myself yet, but I’ve heard good things about these SaxRax stands, such as that they are ultra-stable and ultra-tough. They are also highly customizable depending on what parts you buy. And highly expensive! Maybe someday. Another downside: no double reed or piccolo pegs.

The Blayman stands seem to be the gold standard for heavy, solid stands for small woodwinds, but of course they are expensive, and their multi-peg bases tend to arrange the instruments in triangles or squares.

My wish list for a line of woodwind stands:

  • Solid, heavy construction. Lots of instrument stands seem to advertised as “lightweight,” but I think this is a case of selling a bug as a feature. I suppose it would be nice to carry feather-light stands between the car and the venue, but then again I’m probably already making two or more trips schlepping instruments anyway.
  • Modular design, so I can buy just the pegs that I want, and bring just the ones I need to the gig. This has the added advantage of making well-designed, instrument-specific pegs possible, even pegs designed for specific models of instruments.
  • Instruments arranged in a line (or curve, perhaps), rather than a polygon, and with a good balance of keeping the instruments far enough apart and keeping the stand’s footprint small.
  • Legs (perhaps removable?) that lift the stand off the floor by an inch or two, to allow for cables and other pit-floor clutter.
  • I like instrument pegs padded with something soft, for protection and for silence. Felt is my favorite where practical, but it seems too slippery to hold a saxophone by the bell.
  • How about pegs I can see in the dark? I think a white or even glow-in-the-dark dot at the tip of each peg would be subtle enough to honor the traditional all-black pit look, but aid tremendously in getting an instrument onto the stand quickly in low light.
  • Perhaps peg extensions, so that I can decide how high my instruments are? Some piccolo stands are built this way, with a piccolo peg atop a taller riser, so you don’t have to reach down to the floor.
  • Relatively inexpensive would be nice, too, as long as I’m dreaming.

Is that too much to ask?

Similar Posts

  • Review: Rico Reserve clarinet mouthpieces, part II

    I mentioned in my recent review of the new Rico Reserve clarinet mouthpieces that Robert Polan, Rico Product Manager, was shipping me a few additional samples for comparison. I received three X5 mouthpieces this week, and I have been inspecting and playing them side-by-side with each other and with the one X5 from the original shipment.

    As far as visual inspection, I think the best thing I can do is show you a photo of the tables. You can click for the high-resolution version (warning: it is large and may download slowly). Check out the tips and rails especially.

    I’m certain that I have never seen a mouthpiece in this price class with this level of consistency. With the mouthpieces I’m accustomed to using, I would expect at least two out of four to have immediately-obvious asymmetry in the tips, and at least two to have rails of obviously different widths. The Reserves are visually much, much more symmetrical and even. If you look very closely at the high-resolution image of the Reserves, you can probably pick out a few imperfections—but it does require looking very closely. My sense is that Rico’s claims about precision and consistency are justified, at least so far as is relevant for relatively inexpensive mass-produced mouthpieces.

    Do they play identically to each other? Not 100%, but probably at least 95%. Of the four, there are two that I find to be virtually interchangeable in terms of tone, and a third that feels just barely purer in tone (or less rich, if you prefer). The fourth feels like it has a slight brightness (or presence or “sparkle,” if you like) that sets it slightly apart from the others, but only slightly. I say that these mouthpieces “feel” purer or whatever because I wasn’t able to capture the differences convincingly on a recording, and I suspect that beyond the clarinetist’s personal space even another clarinetist would be hard-pressed to tell one mouthpiece from another. (I do think the differences might cause the clarinetist to play a little differently, and that might be audible.) And the differences between the mouthpieces are, to me, less noticeable than, say, the difference between my two best performance reeds.

    Response (more important than tone in mouthpiece selection) is all but indistinguishable between all four mouthpieces. I could easily keep all four in my case, pull one out blindfolded, and perform on it without any worries about response or control. Any one of these four (six, really, counting the X0 and X10 from the original review) is at least as good as, and perhaps better than, the best cherry-picked examples of other mouthpieces in the same price class.

    I can also use reeds interchangeably between all four mouthpieces without any issues. I usually recommend using different reeds for different mouthpieces (even of the same model), as the reeds tend to take on a slight imprint of the mouthpiece’s window, which can cause leakiness if the reed is used on a mouthpiece with a window of even slightly different dimensions. No significant concerns about that here.

    My conclusion about these mouthpieces is that some clarinetists may find (as I did) that the Reserve is a better mouthpiece than others in its class; allowing for differences in taste, some may legitimately prefer to stick with what they’ve got. But the killer feature of the Reserve mouthpiece is its replaceability. With the Reserve series, I can get a fine mouthpiece without having to sift through a pile of them to find “the one.” If I break it, I can essentially grab the next one to roll off the production line and expect it to be very, very similar. I can recommend it to my students knowing that theirs will play like mine does. Those factors, to me, are what make these mouthpieces a really exciting development.

  • Required recordings, spring 2012

    It’s a new semester, so it’s time again for required recordings. I think I’ve got an exceptional group of recordings picked out for my students (and myself) this semester: lots of beautiful, virtuosic playing, and  great repertoire.

    Enjoy:

    Joseph Robinson: Principal Oboe, New York Philharmonic

    Find it on: Amazon | iTunes

    Repertoire: Saint-Saëns Sonata, Piston Suite, Poulenc TrioNielsen Two Fantasy Pieces, Dring Trio, Shickele Gardens, Still Incantation and Dance, Martin Petite Complainte Read More “Required recordings, spring 2012”

  • Review: Akai EWI4000s wind controller

    I recently got my hands on one of these:
    Akai EWI 4000s wind controller

    Believe me when I tell you that this is a seriously cool instrument.

    Even after hearing and reading a number of rave reviews of the Akai EWI 4000S, I was pleasantly surprised by its playability, responsiveness, and capacity for expression. In my opinion, this is a real instrument, and a viable option for serious music-making.

    A few highlights:
    Read More “Review: Akai EWI4000s wind controller”

  • Review: ReedGeek “Universal” reed tool

    reedgeek-1_mini

    I’m a little late to the party on this, as the ReedGeek has been around for a number of years now and has been widely reviewed, but I finally picked one up (at ClarinetFest) after a long conversation/demonstration with inventor Mauro Di Gioia.  I have been using mine for a few months now and wanted to add a few points to the conversation. Here is my take.

    The ReedGeek isn’t completely replacing my traditional reed tools, but, I am using it for some of the tasks that I used to do with those tools:

    • Flattening the backs of single reeds. This seems to be what the ReedGeek does best, and it is now my go-to tool for this procedure (by far the most frequent adjustment I make to my clarinet and saxophone reeds). I used to do this with wet-dry sandpaper on a piece of glass, and with flat files prior to that. Using the ReedGeek is faster and neater, doesn’t remove as much cane unnecessarily, and leaves a nice smooth non-shredded finish even on wet cane. I had also experimented in previous years with using knives for flattening, which is fast and leaves a nice finish but is risky because it’s so easy to gouge out chunks of cane by accident. The ReedGeek is much safer.reedgeek-2_mini
    • Smoothing out oboe reed windows. I still like my double-hollow-ground knives for carving out oboe reed windows, but I do have a tendency to leave the windows a bit rough and craggy (like from knife chatter). That’s fussy and time-consuming to fix with a knife, and if not handled delicately a knife can actually exacerbate the problem. But the ReedGeek cleans up my windows pretty quickly and easily, with much less risk of making the gouges worse. I mostly use the squared-off end for this.reedgeek-5_mini
    • Scraping bassoon reed channels. The concave parts of a bassoon reed blade are all but impossible to get at with a straight knife, and I find round files or sandpaper to be only a little less clumsy. The ReedGeek’s slightly curved tip works very well for this. Mr. Di Gioia describes this as being similar to using a pencil eraser—you just “erase” the cane you don’t want.reedgeek-4_mini

    I’m not currently using the ReedGeek for:

    • Balancing the corners of the tips of single reeds, though it certainly can be used for this. I’m still used to sandpaper and glass, which at this point feels more controlled to me. If I have both tools available I still grab the sandpaper but if I’m away from my reed desk and traveling light, the ReedGeek will do the job. The ReedGeek can, I think, be used effectively to target specific spots on a reed’s profile (using either the square or the curved end), but I personally do very little of that.
    • Double reed making. (It’s fair to point out that the ReedGeek isn’t exactly being marketed as a tool for this anyway, though the company does publish a document on its website that provides some instruction for double reed players.) For one thing, the ReedGeek is quite small, and for reedmaking I like big, chunky, comfortable knife handles. A handle would also get my hand out of the way, which was a problem for me when I tried to use the ReedGeek for some fine tip work on oboe reeds—it was hard to get everything angled so I had control and could see what I was doing. I spoke to Mr. Di Gioia on the phone while preparing this review, and he hinted at a soon-to-be-revealed, more double-reed-oriented version of the ReedGeek, with some kind of extension for increased leverage (though he shied away from calling it a “handle”), and with scraping surfaces tailored more for double-reed applications. Because of the ReedGeek’s extremely hard alloy, it may be tougher on reed plaques than a traditional knife, but if you’re planning to use the ReedGeek in that way, the price difference between the ReedGeek and a good knife will buy you dozens of plaques.

    The ReedGeek is very portable, won’t be confiscated at an airport security checkpoint, and doesn’t need sharpening like a knife or replacing like sandpaper. (When I spoke with Mr. Di Gioia he joked that he has to hope that people lose them so they will have to buy more.)

    The ReedGeek has a hole drilled though one end (visible in the oboe reed picture), which I thought might be a way to attach some kind of handle, or perhaps to put it on a lanyard or keyring. In my follow-up call with Mr. Di Gioia, he explained that the hole has to do with the ReedGeek manufacturing process, and that keeping the ReedGeek on your keyring would likely damage your keys as it is much harder than the metals keys are made from. Also, the ReedGeek’s edges feel sharp to me, but not really in such a way that I would cut myself on them; Mr. Di Gioia recommends handling it with care but isn’t aware of people injuring themselves with it. He has an idea for a sleeve or sheath that may become available at some future date, and that could make carrying the ReedGeek in your pocket more feasible.

    The verdict: for me, it’s useful and I will easily get my money’s worth out of it as long as I don’t lose it. For a single-reed player, I think it can realistically replace most or all of your tools. For a double-reed player, it’s currently a supplementary tool at best, but stay tuned for a possible new product.

    At the time of this writing the ReedGeek goes for right about $50 from the ReedGeek store; some retailers also carry it.

  • Required recordings, fall 2010

    A new semester is starting, and my university students have new required recordings.

    There are a number of criteria that go into these selections, but I mentioned one in particular back in the spring:

    So far my two-semester tally, selecting recordings for four different instruments, is six white men and two white women. I’d like to improve on that in the future, though I do think that, ultimately, what comes through the earphones is more central to this project than the colors or genders represented on the CD covers.

    I think I did manage to pick out two this semester that add a little diversity, and certainly without compromising one bit on quality: my oboe students are getting a fine recording by Brazilian oboist Alex Klein, and the saxophonists will be enjoying a new release by African-American saxophonist (and one of my teachers) Otis Murphy. On the other hand, I did end up with all men this time around.

    One other victory this semester is that all these recordings are available for download on iTunes. I still like having the CD myself, but iTunes is a convenient and, more importantly, economical option for my students.

    Here are the selections:

    Oboe: Alex Klein, Oboe Concertos of the Classical Era

    Find it on: iTunes | Amazon

    Repertoire: Krommer Concertos, Hummel Introduction, Theme, and Variations Read More “Required recordings, fall 2010”

  • A few thoughts on the new Roland Aerophone AE-10

    To be fair, I haven’t tried out the new electronic wind instrument from Roland, and probably won’t bother. (Unless you’re out there, Roland, and want to send me a review unit to change my mind?)

    Don’t get me wrong: it’s great to see another company get into this space, and I hope they will seek to innovate further in wind controllers and push other companies (Akai, Yamaha) to do the same. But Roland’s new Aerophone AE-10 seems like a misstep.

    n06_0352

    Much of the promotional material gushes about how “innovative” the instrument is, but there doesn’t seem to be much to support this claim—it is essentially a very similar instrument to the Akai EWI series or Yamaha WX series, both of which have been around for decades. In implementation and marketing, it really reminds me more of the Casio DH—a novelty for casual playing, not a serious instrument in its own right.

    Roland brags about the familiarity of the AE-10’s fingering system: “most digital horns make you master a new fingering system, which can be a major setback…” This positions the instrument as a toy: something saxophonists can pick up and play immediately without having to pay any additional dues. This unfortunately seems to be embedded in the philosophy of the AE-10’s fingering system: fully embracing the limitations of a real saxophone, while missing an opportunity to solidify wind controllers as viable instruments in their own right.

    The AE-10’s faithfulness to “real” saxophone fingerings extends to, for example, palm keys. Why do saxophones have palm keys? Certainly not for agility or comfort—palm keys are a significant technical issue for saxophonists. They are Sax’s 1840s solution to the problem of needing to locate tone holes at certain places on the instrument’s body. An electronic instrument has no such constraints: the keys can be literally anywhere on the instrument. (The Akai EWI series does a better job of balancing familiarity with innovation.)

    Additionally, the keys appear to move, and to do so in a rather noisy, clicky way. I don’t expect the noise is enough to really be a problem in an amplified situation, but it seems cheap and sloppy—not up to the standards a professional woodwind player demands. (And it strikes me as a very fixable problem on Roland’s end.) Beyond that, I’m not sure that moving keys really make much sense on this kind of instrument. I find the Akai EWI’s motionless keys to be very comfortable and intuitive, similar in touch to playing a recorder or simple-system flute. It’s a very free, agile feeling compared to the relatively clunky mechanisms of a keyed instrument. Why unnecessarily introduce moving parts?

    Also from Roland’s website: “There’s nothing worse than a studio session grinding to a halt because you need an instrument that you haven’t brought along. That won’t happen with the Roland Aerophone AE-10, which gives you a variety of additional acoustic instrument sounds like clarinet, flute, oboe, trumpet, violin, and more…” I suppose the AE-10 is being marketed here toward unprofessional studio musicians, who happen to be working on low-quality projects that will tolerate substitution of a synthesized sound when the musician fails to bring the needed instruments?

    Speaking of which, most of Roland’s promotional materials surrounding the AE-10 seem to focus on its sounds that imitate “real” instruments (“Choose from alto, tenor, soprano, and baritone sax types that all respond just like their acoustic counterparts…”). But the videos are unconvincing. The saxophone sounds, as usual for an electronic instrument, seem especially unsatisfying—a poor choice for a product that seems to be aimed at the saxophonist market. (My preference is to use wind controllers for “synthy” sounds rather than imitative ones, and the AE-10 does seem to include some.)

    The AE-10 does boast some nice but ultimately minor features that I wouldn’t mind having on my Akai:

    • Fingerings are, to some extent, user-programmable (though still not as flexible as the Akai’s EWI fingering mode).
    • An onboard speaker, which seems convenient for practicing. (Roland doesn’t pretend it is usable in a performance situation.)
    • A line-in jack, again probably useful mostly for practicing.
    • A number of handy user-customization settings.
    • It comes with a case.
    • The “Brass section” setting makes it easy to layer sounds.
    • The “Full range” setting automatically switches to different saxophone sounds depending on tessitura. I was unable to determine whether this setting is specific to the saxophone sounds, or whether it is programmable. Could be handy to have several sounds on tap depending on the octave.

    The AE-10 seems to be priced in roughly the same ballpark as the Akai 4000S/5000 and Yamaha WX5. (Bear in mind that the Yamaha requires an external sound module at extra cost, while the Akai and Roland have some sounds on board.) My take: spend your money elsewhere.

7 Comments

  1. I’ve always been a fan of the K&M individual instrument stands. I used to have a difficult time locating them in the dark during a show until I put a small ring of neon electrical tape on each of them.

    I like the fact that they’re each small and portable, and that I can position them wherever I want, in any number of possible configurations. I also like that I can use their clarinet stand for oboe or english horn.

    I agree with your comment on the K&M bass clarinet stand. It’s HUGE, and I really wish it was black.

    Still looking for that perfect bassoon stand…

  2. I see almost 3 years have passed since this item was submitted. I am now trying to find a combi stand for 2 clarinets and a flute and came across this very useful item. Thanks. There is still no decent stand out there as far as I can find.

    1. Hi Marilyn—thanks for stopping by. Something like the K&M base or one of the Blayman bases should work well, since you buy the pegs separately and can choose whatever you need.

  3. I recently played in an extremely dark pit, where the pegs were all but impossible to find for quick switches after looking at my more brightly lit stand. I used glow in the dark spray paint on the tips of the pegs, and it made them much more visible, both due to the slight glow as well as the fact that the translucent paint has a slight white tinge. And, the paint did NOT come off inside my instruments at all, as I had feared it might. It seemed to work equally well on wood and plastic, as well as on one peg I have that is some sort of rubberized material.

  4. I honestly prefer separate stands for all my instruments rather than combi-stands!
    I own two hercules tenor/alto stands, a hercules bari stand, a K&M picc stand (which screws to a music stand), K&M compact flute stand, unbranded clarinet stand (which packs into the bell), hercules soprano sax stand and my next purchase will be a bass clarinet stand (probably the hercules) once I’ve picked up my instrument.
    This means I have total control of where I put my instruments, with multiple options depending on the doubling gig. I can also adapt to different sizes of pits – it’s easier to fit myself around other stands/chairs/instrument stands etc.

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.