Naming the low E-flat (contrabass? contra-alto?) clarinet

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

Every so often I hear from people about what I call the E-flat contrabass clarinet (or “contrabass clarinet in E-flat”), such as in my woodwind doubling in musicals list or in my woodwind methods book. Some prefer the term “contra-alto” or even “contralto,” but I find “contrabass” to be the most accurate and useful description of the instrument.

(One disadvantage of this terminology is always having to specify the key to differentiate it from the larger contrabass in B-flat.)

First, let’s dispense with “contralto,” which describes a low female voice, typically in an opera setting. That misses the mark by a wide margin for an instrument whose range dips considerably lower than the lowest male voices.

The use of “contra-alto” (with or without hyphen) seems to be based on the questionable idea that the prefix “contra-” means “an octave below.” My best guess is that this is a back-formation from the names of some other instruments, such as the contrabassoon (which happens to be pitched an octave lower than the bassoon). In any case, following this logic leads to the term “contra-alto” clarinet because it is pitched an octave below the alto clarinet (an instrument whose waning popularity makes it a questionable choice for a frame of reference). This logic then produces “contrabass” for the B-flat instrument, as it is pitched an octave below the bass clarinet.

Various music dictionaries that I have at hand agree that the prefix “contra-” means “lower than,” but do not specify an octave lower, and most use contralto voice as an example. (If you have a counterexample from a published, music-oriented reference, I am interested to hear about it.) Based on this, “contra-alto” seems inapt—a contra-alto/contralto instrument should be just lower than the alto, and higher than tenor or bass.

Problematically, of the three major current manufacturers, Buffet-Crampon and Leblanc list “contra alto” clarinets on their websites, and Selmer uses “contralto.”

Here are some published usages of various names, listed from oldest to newest. Send me others if you know of any. It does seem to me that “contra-alto” becomes more common in the last quarter of the twentieth century, a trend that I consider undesirable (cf. “flautist”).

Reference Nomenclature used Notes
Waln, George E. “The Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. 2: 43. Article originally published 1955. E♭ contrabass
Ayres, Thomas A. “Arranging for the Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1957. E♭ contrabass
Cailliet, Lucien. “Cailliet Discusses the Contras.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1961. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
Hullfish, William R., and Jack Allen. “Examining a Versatile Instrument.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1963. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Weerts, Richard K. “The Clarinet Choir of Yesterday and Today.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1963. E♭ contra-alto clarinet Weerts uses “contra-alto” in this letter, but “contrabass” in subsequent articles listed here.
Abramson, Armand R. “A Better Use of the Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1964. Contrabass clarinet The author does not specifically name the E-flat instrument, but refers to the “contrabass members of the clarinet family” (in the plural).
Weerts, Richard K. “Clarinet Choir Music.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1964. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Weerts, Richard K. “The Contrabass Clarinet in the Modern Symphonic Band.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1964. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Rohner, Traugott. “The Bass and Contra-bass Clairnets are Misnamed.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1957. “So-called contrabass in E♭” The author makes a case that the instrument would be better called an E♭ bass clarinet (and the bass clarinet would be better called a baritone clarinet).
Lawrence, Morris Jr. “The E♭ Contrabass Clarinet.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Letter originally published 1966. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Small, Terrence. “The Contra-Clarinets.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1968. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Weerts, Richard K. “The Clarinet Choir as a Functional Ensemble.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1969. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Rendall, F. Geoffrey. The Clarinet: Some Notes Upon Its History and Construction. 3d ed. Edited by Philip Bate. Instruments of the Orchestra. London: E. Benn, 1971. Contrabasset-horn in E flat The author clarifies that this does refer to the instrument in question here.
Harmon, John M. “The Contra Clarinets: New Possibilities.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1978. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
Heim, Norman. “The Clarinet Choir Phenomenon.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1979. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
Donald E. McCathren. “Teaching and Playing the ‘Other Clarinets.'” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1983. E♭ contrabass clarinet
Heim, Norman. “The Clarinet Choir.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1985. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
Baines, Anthony. Woodwind Instruments and Their History. New York: Dover, 1991. Contrabass in E♭
Baines, Anthony. “Contrabass clarinet.” In The Oxford Companion to Musical Instruments. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. E♭ contrabass
Jones, Brian D. “The E♭ Contra-alto Clarinet: Misunderstood and Overlooked.” Woodwind Anthology: A Compendium of Woodwind Articles from The Instrumentalist. Northfield, Illinois: Instrumentalist, 1999. Article originally published 1998. E♭ contra-alto clarinet
Pino, David. The Clarinet and Clarinet Playing. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 1998. E♭ contrabass The author allows that it is “sometimes called the ‘contra-alto’ clarinet.”
Page, Janet K., K. A. Gourlay, Roger Blench, and Nicholas Shackleton. “Clarinet.” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Edited by Stanley Sadie and J. Tyrrell. London: Macmillan, 2001. Contrabass clarinet, E♭
Sadie, Stanley, and J. Tyrrell, eds. “Contrabass clarinet.” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: Macmillan, 2001. Contrabass clarinet in E♭
Randel, Don Michael, ed. “Clarinet.” The Harvard Dictionary of Music. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press: An Imprint of Harvard University Press, 2003. Contra alto clarinet in E♭
Payne, Tim. “The Contrabass Clarinets.” In The Versatile Clarinet, edited by Roger Heaton. New York: Routledge, 2006. E♭ contrabass

Similar Posts

  • Shaping a phrase

    When a woodwind player plays a phrase like this:

    …it could have a variety of shapes, depending. But often a rising line gets a subtle crescendo, and a long note at the end gets a little decrescendo:

    To play create this shape, you blow air that makes the shape. You can imagine playing a single note, like this:

    …and then let your fingers and tongue play the notes over the shape.

    But sometimes less-experienced players blow like this:

    That makes the phrase sound weird, like the notes each have their own shapes. For the notes to unite into a phrase, they need to combine into one shape.

    To practice this, first decide what shape your phrase should have, and mark it into your music. Then, without your instrument, blow air that makes the shape of the phrase. Then pick up your instrument and do the fingerings, blowing the air shape outside the instrument. If some notes should be tongued, add that next. Once you are comfortable with all those steps, combine them to play a smooth, connected, well-shaped phrase.

  • Trevor Wye’s “Flexibility I” flute exercise

    One of my favorite flute warmups is “Flexibility–I (after Sousseman)” from Trevor Wye’s Tone book. (Just buy the whole omnibus edition and thank me later.) This exercise is value-packed and meticulously thought out, and leads inevitably to some fundamental truths about flute playing.

    The exercise is slurred arpeggiated figures, like this:

    wye-1

    As you might expect, the figure gradually expands to larger intervals and notes in the third octave. It’s challenging to make the intervals smooth and accurate, but especially so if your approach to flute tone production is based on unclear or faulty pedagogical concepts. Wye provides some very crucial advice that is key to getting the most out of the etude, and to developing a solid approach to tone production.

    Wye suggests first playing the etude omitting the highest notes, and dynamically shaping the figures as follows:

    wye-2

    The forte dynamic on the lowest notes demands a low, open voicing and strong breath support, feeding into an aperture that is “focused” (small). The dynamic shape, stretched mostly across a single note (B-flat here), also requires the aperture to be agile and flexible, opening slightly for the loudest notes and closing slightly as the volume decreases.

    The next step is to “work up” to the high note, “so that it sounds softly, but not flat:”

    wye-3

    There is a lot going on here. The aperture has to continue to move flexibly in order to produce the dynamic effect. Voicing has to be low and open to make the low notes full and responsive. Breath support has to remain powerful and steady to keep the pitch buoyed up. And something has to happen to produce the register change.

    Many flute teachers suggest making the aperture smaller to achieve the higher registers, but this ties register to dynamics—the larger aperture makes the low notes loud, and the small aperture makes the high notes soft. Others suggest something like increasing air pressure or using “faster” air. This can be accomplished by increasing breath support and/or by using a higher voicing; changing these has a destabilizing and register-bound effect on pitch and tone. It also creates the opposite dynamic problem from aperture-based register changes: the higher notes are always loud, and the low notes are always soft.

    The most effective approach is to allow the embouchure to push forward for notes in the upper registers, and to relax back for lower registers. This allows breath support, voicing, and aperture to function separately, and intonation, tone, and dynamics to be manipulated independently. The Wye exercise demands all of this from the flutist.

    This is a great exercise to incorporate into a daily warmup. I especially like it for its coverage of several flute tone production concepts, since doubling on several instruments means I don’t have as much time to devote to the flute as I would like. Work on it slowly and deliberately—as Mr. Wye points out, “this may take time.”

  • 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!

  • Play reeds that fit

    Photo, °Florian

    During a rare visit to a music store this week, I overheard a very young clarinetist asking a salesperson to help him locate some unusually stiff reeds. The salesperson was as surprised as was I that the young man was interested in such an extreme equipment choice—but apparently for different reasons.

    “You must be very talented to have moved up to such stiff reeds already,” the salesperson told the beaming prodigy. “How impressive!”

    To me, this is a little like congratulating someone on moving up to a larger hat size. “Oh, it’s nothing, really. I started out in a 7¼, but I worked really hard and now I’m ready for the 7½. But the real greats all wear at least an 8, so that’s where I want to end up.” Bigger isn’t better—you should wear whatever fits your head.

    A clarinet or saxophone reed should be an appropriate fit to the mouthpiece. There are a number of factors that determine what strength of reed is right for a mouthpiece, but, in general terms, most mouthpieces with wider tip openings require softer reeds to get good response, and most mouthpieces with narrower openings need a stiffer reed for stability and dynamic range.

    While each player is of course different, I think sometimes the factor of the individual embouchure is actually over-emphasized. The embouchure doesn’t and shouldn’t need unusual muscular strength to do its job—it requires delicacy and control. If you’re biting and straining against a too-stiff reed, you’re sacrificing both, and both you and your audience are suffering for it. For most mouthpieces, there is a narrow range of reed strengths that is about right, no matter how “strong” you are (or think you are).

    There’s no such thing as “moving up” to a stiffer reed, just “moving” to a different strength to suit a new mouthpiece or to correct an error in your previous reed choice.

  • |

    Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 4: employment

    I hope you all are finding this as fascinating as I am. Here’s the latest batch of results from the Great Woodwind Doubler Census of 2011.

    Employment

    Q. Which of these do you play?


    Read More “Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 4: employment”

  • Using electronic harmonization with woodwinds

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

    In a recent recital I performed my own arrangement of Ravel’s Boléro for multiple woodwinds soloist using electronics, with piano and snare drum. I used electronics to try to approximate some of Ravel’s harmonies (and timbres), and used what in my mind are three different techniques, which I’ll try to outline here.

    In performance, I used the BOSS GT-1000CORE guitar multi-effects unit to do most of the heavy lifting. I did find that it had difficulty tracking my flute playing (though, surprisingly, it did better with piccolo), so I used an Electro-Harmonix Pitch Fork + to assist with that instrument in particular. I also used a BOSS SY-200 to try to create some non-woodwind tone colors. There are plenty of other equipment options that can achieve similar effects, but you’re on your own to read the manuals.

    All of this was done with a microphone rather than pickups, which was less complicated for quick instrument switches, but did make it difficult to get relatively isolated woodwind sounds into the electronics, which ultimately caused problems with the audibility of some of the electronic sounds.

    The warts-and-all live performance is available on my YouTube channel, but I’ll provide some clearer, isolated examples here. For rehearsal numbers in the orchestral score, I’m referring to the Durand Edition on IMSLP.

    Technique 1: parallel intervals

    At rehearsal mark 8 in the score, horn and celeste play the A theme in octaves, with two piccolos playing in parallel a perfect fifth and a major tenth above the celeste’s highest octave, perhaps in imitation of a pipe organ’s mixture stop.

    To achieve this harmony with electronics, I played the upper piccolo part “live,” and routed the piccolo’s sound into the GT-1000CORE where I split it into two separate signal paths. One got transposed down using a digital pitch shifter to create the second piccolo part. The other got transposed down to the melody pitch and split into octaves, then routed through the SY-200 to turn the sound into something vaguely celeste-like.

    Since the intervals are strictly parallel, this is a pretty straightforward use of pitch shifting: whatever note I play on the piccolo gets transposed to the specified intervals.

    Technique 2: smart harmonization

    At rehearsal mark 16, a thickly-orchestrated ensemble of woodwinds, brass, and strings plays the A theme in harmony. I opted to play this portion on soprano saxophone, thickened and harmonized with a synthesized string section.

    Since the harmony in this section is largely diatonic, I used the GT-1000CORE’s smart harmonizer. I added voices a diatonic fourth and diatonic sixth below in the key of G (like a first-inversion triad), which tracks with the notes in the first part of the theme. But there’s a moment in the first part that uses F-natural instead of F-sharp, and the second part of the melody uses F-naturals exclusively, so I used the unit’s footswitches to change to the key of C major as needed. I routed all of this through the SY-200 to change the three soprano saxophones into a string section sound, with the “live” soprano remaining audible in the room.

    For the key switching, I set one footswitch as a “momentary” switch, so it changes the key just while I’m pressing it, and another as a “toggle” switch, so I can press and release it and the key remains changed. This gives me some helpful options for live performance.

    Technique 3: smart harmonization with custom scales

    The smart harmonizer works well out of the box as long as you want to use notes of a major scale (or mode thereof), but at rehearsal mark 15 Ravel’s harmonization is more complicated than that. Luckily, the GT-1000CORE supports smart harmonization with custom “scales.” What this really means is that I can tell the unit that any time I play a certain pitch, it should add one or more pitches that I can specify arbitrarily. I can add whatever pitches I like to each note of the chromatic scale.

    I chose to play this section on clarinet, using the electronics to turn it into a 3-part clarinet section. During the first phrase, the melody pitches are harmonized in a consistent way: every time there’s a melody concert B-flat it’s harmonized with a G and an E, every time there’s a melody C it’s harmonized with an A and an F, every time there’s a melody E it’s harmonized with a C and a G, and so forth. I can just tell the effects unit which harmony notes to add to each melody note.

    But things change in the first half of the second phrase: melody B-flat is now harmonized with G and D, and C is now harmonized with A and E. To accommodate this I have to create a second custom “scale,” and use a footswitch to activate it at the right time. To finish the second phrase requires a third scale, engaged with another footswitch.

    Because of the flexibility of the custom scale system, I can recreate harmonies that use a variety of intervals. With a little analysis I can figure out where the scale changes need to be (basically anywhere a given melody pitch is harmonized in a new way).

    Additional thoughts

    There are some limitations to using pitch shifters and harmonizers, depending on your equipment. Each virtual pitch shifter and harmonizer in the GT-1000CORE can only add two voices, though by (virtually) splitting the audio signal into multiple paths and passing each through its own shifter/harmonizer I can build thicker chords.

    When trying to reproduce specific harmonies written by a composer, there may be some decisions to make to balance accuracy with practicality. Serendipitously, most of Ravel’s harmony translated fairly easily to the effects unit’s capabilities. But there were a few spots where I decided that certain chord voicings were close enough, and that I didn’t need to complicate things with one more custom scale plus the corresponding onstage footwork.

    As I’ve mentioned previously, I’m more interested in electronic effects that give my woodwinds new capabilities, like polyphony, than in just adding some distortion or echo (though those are also fun). Enjoy!

8 Comments

  1. I wonder if it could instead follow the naming patterns of the bassoon?
    We have the bassoon and the contrabassoon – both in C, an octave apart. We have the bass clarinet and bass clarinet, in Bb an octave apart.
    An historical instrument between the bassoon and contrabassoon is the semi-contrabassoon. So why not a semi-contrabass clarinet?

    1. The word you’re looking for there is “Greatbass” – if you look at the families of any renaissance instruments (e.g. recorders, dulcians, shawms), that’s the most common word used to describe an instrument halfway between the bass and the contrabass. Sometimes Quartbass and Quintbass pop up (respectively a 4th and a 5th beneath the Bass), but Greatbass is the blanket term that encompasses both of those

      1. In saying that, I don’t object to using the term Eb Contrabass at all. Considering how few people today recognise the name Greatbass today, it seems like a very reasonable compromise, especially considering how that’s the role it normally plays in the ensemble

        (Sorry if the original comment sounded rude – I should not be using the internet after midnight)

  2. Selmer used the term E♭ contrabass from when they first made their instrument (1931) until the mid-90s when they changed to contra-alto, and then at some point later changed again to contralto. Contra-alto was always the term used and popularized by Leblanc since they first made their instrument in 1959. I thought that perhaps Leblanc even invented the word, however Koechlin writes “clarinette-contralto (à l’octave de la Clarinette Alto)” in 1948, and Altenburg uses Kontra-Altklarinette in 1912. In that same article he also throws shade at Adolphe Sax for calling his instrument an E♭ contrabass, and praises Streitwolf for calling his a contrabassethorn in F.

  3. Interestingly, Philip Rehfeldt (New Directions for Clarinet, 2nd ed. 1994) writes in his section about multiphonics “Many of the bass clarinet fingerings are also suitable for the E-flat contralto and the E-flat and B-flat contrabass” (p.48). This caught my curiosity, so checking elsewhere in the book, in a discussion of Range (p.3), “For the E-flat sopranino, and B-flat and A sopranos, as well as the E-flat contralto, the usual lower limit is still E’… For bass and contrabass clarinets the normal lower limit is E-flat’.” I think it’s clear he’s using the term ‘contralto’ in the Italian sense, meaning, alto.

  4. Should be “Bass clarinet”, because what we now know as bass clarinet should really be called “Tenor clarinet.”

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.