What are the best instruments, mouthpieces, reeds, headjoints, method books, and other products for woodwind doublers?
I often see this question asked on online message boards (“I’m a saxophone player, so which clarinet mouthpiece should I buy?”) or answered in advertising copy (“The perfect flute headjoint for the woodwind doubler”).
When aspiring doublers ask this question, I think often what they are really asking is, “What product can I purchase that will save me having to really learn a new instrument?” If you’re serious about playing the flute, you’ll want to use the kind of flute that a good flutist would use. If you’re serious about the clarinet, you’ll seek out the kinds of reeds, mouthpieces, and instruments favored by fine clarinetists. In other words, the best clarinet for a woodwind doubler is… the best clarinet.
To double successfully, you have to abandon the idea that you can double on flute and clarinet (and so forth) without having to commit to being a flutist and a clarinetist. There are no shortcuts!
I want to follow up on something I touched on in my last post. I described in that post how I had my woodwind methods class evaluate some online pedagogical resources, and mentioned that I had them compare the information found online to the information presented in class. My idea was to prepare them to deal with conflicting information, which will be part of their reality as public school band directors.
Woodwind pedagogy, unfortunately, is a mishmash of contradictory ideas. This is supported by a culture of hero worship of certain teachers and performers, a permissive editorial process for publishing pedagogical materials (increasingly so with the rise of the internet), and an attitude that music is not subject to scientific method.
When conflicts exist between one school of thought and another, in some cases that is because one or both sides is incorrect. In other cases the problem is a communication failure: both sides are applying the same techniques in the same way, but describing them poorly (or at least differently). But I think there are other cases where the difference can be attributed to what I think of as different “recipes.”
There are many ways to make a chocolate cake. Some cake recipes might be objectively better than others by some measure or another. Some might produce results that are generally satisfactory but especially suited to certain tastes. And in some cases, two different recipes might produce results that are very similar. In those cases, the way the ingredients and techniques balance is significant: one recipe might call for two eggs instead of three, but has more of another ingredient that makes up the difference, or a difference in baking time and temperature.
I think a similar thing can happen with “recipes” for woodwind playing. Equipment preferences are a fairly clear example: one clarinet teacher might favor very stiff reeds, while another prefers softer ones. Both might produce excellent results, so long as they are balanced properly—the first teacher probably balances stiffer reeds against mouthpieces with a more closed tip, and the other might use softer reeds with more open mouthpieces. One oboe teacher might clip his reeds to 70mm while another clips hers to 69.5mm, but they probably balance this with narrower or wider shaper tips, or tweaks to any of a dozen other variables.
Playing techniques are a little more abstract and complicated to separate out, but I think the same concept applies. One bassoon teacher might encourage some jaw movement when articulating lower notes, while another teaches a more stable embouchure, but it’s always more complicated than that: the technique’s usefulness and effectiveness has to be evaluated in the context of each teacher’s approach to breath support, voicing, embouchure, equipment, and more.
The idea that I wanted to bring across to my class is that, for band directors or other musicians and music educators who might not be specialists in each of the woodwind instruments, it is important to beware little pedagogical proverbs taken out of context. Something like “firm up your embouchure” or “use a stiffer reed” or “use the alternate F-sharp” can seem like a quick and digestible solution, but can’t be applied casually and without understanding of the larger picture.
I am slowly building a good collection of high-quality instruments. It’s not easy to do that on a graduate student’s budget; I accomplish it by living frugally, saving carefully, shopping around, and generally putting a great deal of thought and planning into each purchase. I don’t buy instruments on credit. I protect my investments with conscientious care and maintenance, as well as an excellent insurance policy by a company that specializes in musical instrument coverage. (Incidentally, this policy quickly paid for itself, several times over, when there was an “incident” with my flute a couple of years ago. Seriously consider getting one if you don’t have one already!)
Every now and then someone asks to borrow an instrument from me. Often it will be a saxophonist who needs a flute or clarinet for a gig they have already agreed to play. My policy, which I have upheld almost perfectly for several years now, is simple: I don’t loan instruments to anybody, for anything, period. Read More “Why I don’t loan out instruments”
I got an email from a college student taking an Occupational Health and Wellness course. He asked me some questions about health and wellness issues in woodwind doubling, and I tried to answer the best I could.
How do you prepare for the many instrument switches in a musical which require changes of embouchure and hand position/key action adjustments? How do you deal with the physical demands of switches between many instruments?
The best preparation is to develop good, relaxed technique on each instrument independently. I try to practice each instrument carefully and produce the best possible sound on each one.
If I have the luxury of reviewing the part ahead of time, I will often practice the “choreography” for quick instrument switches, and make plenty of pencil marks so that I know ahead of time what switches are coming up. I try to keep a consistent layout of my instrument stands for each show, so that I get used to where each instrument is.
As I am making each switch (even very quick ones) I will try to take a moment to totally relax my facial muscles, hands, etc., and, maybe most importantly, flip a mental switch to oboe mode or clarinet mode or whatever.
Good reliable stands and neckstraps are vital.
Would you say that having to adjust to the action and key pressure of multiple instruments makes you more susceptible to hand/forearm injury than a musician who plays a single instrument?
I’m not an expert, but I would think that playing a single instrument is more dangerous in terms of repetitive motion injuries, etc. If I spend five hours a day practicing (I wish!) then I think I’m better off with more varied physical activities.
Does playing any one instrument create body tension that affects another instrument? (ex. flute might create shoulder tension which affects playing the sax) Read More “Health, wellness, and woodwind doubling”
The Akai EWI series’ “EWI” fingering mode is powerful and flexible. It bears a resemblance to basic saxophone fingerings (while wisely eschewing saxophoney compromises like rollers and palm keys). But with a little imagination EWI players can “borrow” a number of useful fingerings from other woodwinds, too.
For clarity, I’m considering any fingering that appears in the EWI 4000s’s Reference Manual under “EWI Fingerings” as a basic, non-borrowed fingering. Some of the fingerings I’m listing do appear in the manual for other fingering modes (saxophone, flute, and oboe). Some of the fingerings aren’t great-sounding fingerings on the “real” (non-electric) woodwind instruments, but work beautifully on the EWI, which of course isn’t subject to the acoustical problems of air-filled tubes.
And of course these fingerings work in any octave, which is not always the case with “real” woodwinds. I have arranged them octave-wise here in ways that will mostly look familiar to woodwind players.
Right C-sharp Borrowed from: oboe, clarinet Provides a useful alternative in left-hand-pinky-heavy passages.
Left E-flat Borrowed from: oboe, some clarinets In the example, prevents having to “jump” the right pinky from one key, over another, to another.
Side F-sharp Borrowed from: saxophone, clarinet Similar to using the saxophone’s side F-sharp key or clarinet’s side F-sharp(/B-natural) key (shown here in the wrong octave for clarinet), except using the right pinky rather than the ring finger. Useful for avoiding the right index-middle flip-flop.
Right G-sharp Borrowed from: oboe Provides a useful alternative in left-hand-pinky-heavy passages.
1+1 B-flat Borrowed from: flute, saxophone, clarinet Similar to a standard flute fingering, or to a problematic saxophone or clarinet alternate fingering (shown here in the wrong octave for clarinet). Of course on the EWI there are no pitch, timbre, or response issues with this (or any) fingering.
1+2 B-flat Borrowed from: saxophone A slightly lesser-known alternate fingering for saxophone (which, on saxophones, often sounds better than 1+1). Useful for transitions such as F-sharp to B-flat.
Right B Borrowed from: clarinet Similar to the sensation of using the clarinet’s right B(/E) key, but in this case you must use the right pinky to press two keys at once. In the example, this allows you to keep the movement in one hand, rather than having to coordinate both pinkies.
Side C Borrowed from: saxophone Useful in chromatic passages and trills for avoiding the left index-middle flip-flop.
These fingerings of course only scratch the surface of what’s possible with the EWI-mode fingering system. But because of their familiarity and time-tested usefulness to players of “real” woodwinds, they can be adapted easily and fruitfully to EWI playing.
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.
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!
The issues here are complex, and I hope that the DMA and the CSO will be able to come to a solution that is fair to all involved and that keeps the music alive. But this point in the authors’ list of complaints caught my eye:
Musicians performing on more than one instrument receive “doubling pay.”
I don’t have the full details of the doubling pay currently available to CSO members (though the amount doesn’t appear to be the issue here—it’s the fact that any doubling pay is offered that seems to offend). But a slightly-outdated agreement between the DMA and the Boulder Philharmonic, summarized below, shows a typical doubling pay structure, and it’s a reasonable guess that the CSO’s is identical or very similar:
25% bonus for first double
10% for each additional double
B-flat and A clarinets count as one instrument
Alto and tenor saxophones count as one instrument
Alto and bass clarinets count as one instrument
Piccolo, larger flutes, English horn, E-flat clarinet, contrabassoon, soprano saxophone, and saxophones larger than tenor each count as a double, even when used in common combinations (like flute plus piccolo)
Though I am not currently a union member (due to a dearth of union gigs in my area), I frequently ask for doubling fees when negotiating my pay for gigs. Here’s why doubling fees make sense to me as a woodwind player: Read More “Doubling fees under fire in Denver”
Same is true for the quality of the instrument. Just because it is a second or third instrument, don’t consider getting a cheap instrument. I have tried to get many vintage and used instruments to work such as with the bass clarinet.
This didn’t work. Got a new top of the line bass clarinet and suddenly I could play from top to bottom of the range.
I really appreciate this topic. I am not serious doubler, by that I mean I still have one very strong instrument and then weaker instruments, but I do want to sound like I know what I am doing. With some of the equipment I’m playing on it makes it difficult, and this article made me realize, yes if I’m going to play clarinet it’s time to break down and buy one that is worthwhile.
Bret, I agree with the assertion that there’s really no substitute for time spent practicing your second or third (or fourth or fifth…) instrument but there are some ways to make the your life easier. For myself, as a flutist, I have a real issue with the pressure needed to get a good tone on the clarinet. I recently got a Walt Grabner K14 (his ‘Klezmer/jazz’ style mouthpiece) which has made a world of difference for me. Not as robust as the Backun, but it has made tone production, articulation and just plain embouchure comfort much better for me. I would also agree with Gandalfe that a high quality instrument makes a world of difference. While I don’t feel it’s completely necesary to get an absolute top line instrument, I would highly recomend finding a good repairman (or woman!), nothing can make your life worse than an instrument that’s out of adjustment.
So basically my advice would be to get the best instrument you can afford, get a good quality (and easy blowing) moutpiece or headjoint, and make sure the darn thing works. Then practice!
I’m glad you found a mouthpiece that makes things easier for you. But why should “easier” equipment be reserved for doublers? If a mouthpiece makes the instrument easier to play, wouldn’t clarinetists-only also benefit from it? Or have you selected this mouthpiece because it lets you recycle elements of your flute technique, rather than learning proper clarinet technique (“pressure”)?
I agree 100% with your advice—buy the best you can afford, then practice—for doublers and non-doublers alike.
I’d like to add that equipment works differently for everyone, headjoints, reed/mouthpiece combinations, instruments, are all subject to everyone’s individual standards. Because we all have different bodies, each piece of material will react different for us. I play on a setup that both my teachers probably wouldn’t play on, but they both say that it works for me.
A lot of this will be trial and error, and working with someone else on how it sounds, whether it’s a teacher, or a colleague.
Bret, I really love what you’re saying about equipment here. I think mindset should be added also. To double on flute, you should think and approach it like a flutist, not like a clarinetist who plays flute. I strive, in all my doubles, to get the characteristic sound of that instrument, rather than an oboist playing clarinet. I think we should all strive for that same characteristic in sound.
Same is true for the quality of the instrument. Just because it is a second or third instrument, don’t consider getting a cheap instrument. I have tried to get many vintage and used instruments to work such as with the bass clarinet.
This didn’t work. Got a new top of the line bass clarinet and suddenly I could play from top to bottom of the range.
I really appreciate this topic. I am not serious doubler, by that I mean I still have one very strong instrument and then weaker instruments, but I do want to sound like I know what I am doing. With some of the equipment I’m playing on it makes it difficult, and this article made me realize, yes if I’m going to play clarinet it’s time to break down and buy one that is worthwhile.
Bret, I agree with the assertion that there’s really no substitute for time spent practicing your second or third (or fourth or fifth…) instrument but there are some ways to make the your life easier. For myself, as a flutist, I have a real issue with the pressure needed to get a good tone on the clarinet. I recently got a Walt Grabner K14 (his ‘Klezmer/jazz’ style mouthpiece) which has made a world of difference for me. Not as robust as the Backun, but it has made tone production, articulation and just plain embouchure comfort much better for me. I would also agree with Gandalfe that a high quality instrument makes a world of difference. While I don’t feel it’s completely necesary to get an absolute top line instrument, I would highly recomend finding a good repairman (or woman!), nothing can make your life worse than an instrument that’s out of adjustment.
So basically my advice would be to get the best instrument you can afford, get a good quality (and easy blowing) moutpiece or headjoint, and make sure the darn thing works. Then practice!
I’m glad you found a mouthpiece that makes things easier for you. But why should “easier” equipment be reserved for doublers? If a mouthpiece makes the instrument easier to play, wouldn’t clarinetists-only also benefit from it? Or have you selected this mouthpiece because it lets you recycle elements of your flute technique, rather than learning proper clarinet technique (“pressure”)?
I agree 100% with your advice—buy the best you can afford, then practice—for doublers and non-doublers alike.
I’d like to add that equipment works differently for everyone, headjoints, reed/mouthpiece combinations, instruments, are all subject to everyone’s individual standards. Because we all have different bodies, each piece of material will react different for us. I play on a setup that both my teachers probably wouldn’t play on, but they both say that it works for me.
A lot of this will be trial and error, and working with someone else on how it sounds, whether it’s a teacher, or a colleague.
Bret, I really love what you’re saying about equipment here. I think mindset should be added also. To double on flute, you should think and approach it like a flutist, not like a clarinetist who plays flute. I strive, in all my doubles, to get the characteristic sound of that instrument, rather than an oboist playing clarinet. I think we should all strive for that same characteristic in sound.