Things you don’t need to cover in woodwind methods class

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

orchestral flutist
Photo, KSMF Webmaster

I’ve taught college-level woodwind methods courses for a few years now. This is a course primarily for instrumental music majors, who will go on to become school band or orchestra directors, and who need a crash course in the playing and pedagogy of each instrument that will be in their future ensembles. At the places I’ve taught, it means taking students from zero to playing a little bit of flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon, and saxophone, all in one semester. It’s a semester-long sprint.

There are a handful of textbooks available for these types of courses, most of which I own, and none of which I use in class. I’m continually surprised by the material that is and isn’t covered in these books.

I try hard to keep my courses focused on core concepts, like position/posture, breath support, basic embouchure, voicing, and finger technique, and I try to keep those concepts as simple and clear as possible. I have students observe each other’s playing of these instruments, identify things that don’t look and/or sound right, and put their observations into terms of those basic concepts. (“So-and-so’s pitch sounds unstable, and his embouchure appears to be moving a lot. Perhaps keeping the embouchure still and increasing breath support will help to stabilize his intonation.”)

I find discouragingly little discussion (or even understanding) of these concepts in many of the published texts. Instead, I find what appears to be a lot of filler—not bad information, necessarily, but information that’s far from mission-critical. The students in these classes will mostly end up teaching beginning or intermediate students in large-group settings. They need to understand the fundamentals in ways that will help them problem-solve efficiently.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m certainly not opposed to knowledge for knowledge’s sake. I’m just saying that for an already too-short woodwind methods class, that 300-page book could perhaps be trimmed down to 100 or even 50 clear, concise pages, for significant savings of money, trees, class time, shelf space, and brain cells. Here are some examples of things that I’ve seen in actual classroom-intended woodwind methods textbooks, that just plain don’t need to be there:

  • An exhaustive history of the bassoon, going all the way back to its Renaissance-era progenitors. I personally didn’t read that much bassoon history until I was studying for my doctoral comprehensive exams; I think a future school band director can safely refocus his or her efforts on something of more immediate usefulness.
  • A thorough explanation and endorsement of the clarinet double-lip embouchure. While this technique can be useful, it’s non-standard, and should probably be introduced at the discretion of a private teacher, not a school band director, and in a private lesson, not in a band hall.
  • Multiple-tonguing techniques for reed instruments.
  • Surveys of various and obscure vibrato techniques.
  • Circular breathing.
  • Details of how woodwind instruments are manufactured.
  • Flute harmonics used as an extended technique, and their notation.
  • Photo essays of clarinet and saxophone reeds in various stages of manufacture, from cane field to finished product.
  • Saxophone altissimo fingering charts.
  • The use of not only bass and tenor clefs for bassoon, but also alto clef.
  • Photos of obsolete tools for making oboe reeds. For that matter, I don’t think we need photos of modern reedmaking tools in this situation.
  • A chapter on the history and repertoire of the wind quintet.
  • Lists of college-level repertoire.
  • Charts comparing single-reed mouthpiece tip openings and facing lengths.
  • Discussion of the playing technique of not only the alto and bass flute, but also the E-flat flute. In the same book: bass saxophone.
  • “Special problems” of the clarinet range above altissimo G.

If you are teaching a woodwind methods course, I suggest that you keep your lectures and class activities very focused, and even a little repetitive. You don’t need to cover “new” information in each lecture. You need to reinforce fundamental concepts, just like your students will hopefully be doing someday with their beginning bands. It’s tempting to gloss over concepts that are crucial but difficult (to you or to your students) and to spend time on less-critical but more easily-prepared activities (“Let’s compare the phrasing in some recordings of the Mozart clarinet concerto! Or look at photos of ancient flutes made from animal bones!”). Do your homework, consult with your colleagues (or invite them to guest-lecture?), and relentlessly edit your syllabi and lecture notes down to the basic concepts that your students will use daily in their own classrooms.

Similar Posts

  • Review: “So You Want to Play in Shows…?” by Paul Saunders

    I got a review copy of So You Want to Play in Shows…?, a new woodwind doubling etude book. The author, Paul Saunders, is a woodwind player in London’s West End.

    The book includes seven studies for doubler playing flute, clarinet, and alto saxophone. It also includes a piano accompaniment book, with piano part recordings included. This is an elegant solution to one of the problems of woodwind doubling etudes: how do you enforce quick instrument switches? Chris Vadala’s book provides rests and trusts you to observe them. Gene Kaplan’s duo book pairs you with another woodwind doubler. Saunders’s book, used with the recordings, provides a simple way to work out quick switches alone in a practice room. (For aĀ real-world challenge, cue up the recordings in a playlist, and sight-read the book beginning to end with no breaks between etudes.)

    Saunders’s tunes are fun and musically satisfying—to my tastes, the best among the doubling etude books so far. Styles are what you might find in contemporary rock/pop-based musical theater. Here is a quick-and-dirty demo of etude #3, “How Cool Can You Be:”

    Mr. Saunders emphasized toĀ me that the etudes are intended for aspiringĀ woodwind doublers, and therefore are of moderate difficulty.Ā I would sayĀ So You Want to PlayĀ is not as challengingĀ as the Vadala book, comparable overall to the Kaplan book. The most technically-demanding material nearly always falls to the clarinet. The flute parts tend to stay in a comfortable register, rarely breaking into the third octave, and maxing out at a high G. There is a note or two of saxophone altissimo. There are frequent instrument switches, a few of them very quick.

    Mr. Saunders was also kind enough to send me early drafts of some a couple of etudesĀ that will appear in a forthcoming second volume. TheyĀ appear to be more difficult, with some swing feel and doubles on soprano and tenor saxophone.

    As I’ve mentioned in reviews of previous materials, I wish there were more resources available for doublersĀ that included the double reed instruments and/or auxiliary instruments. But, as you may know, double-reed doubling is less common in the West End than it is on Broadway, so this book is probably a good fit for most British woodwind players (like Mr. Saunders), and quite a few American ones.Ā So You Want to PlayĀ is a solid addition to the flute/clarinet/alto materials available, challenging but fun for an up-and-coming doubler.

  • A woodwind player’s introduction to: recorders

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

    For a “modern” woodwind player, recorders might show up in “period” classical music performance or in commercial situations like musical theater or studio gigs. They might be used in commercial settings to evoke Renaissance or Baroque periods, to function generically as “world” or folk flutes with robust chromatic capabilities, or (maybe due to their association with elementary school classroom music) to suggest themes of childhood or naivete.

    The use of recorders in classroom settings is an odd one, as something like a pennywhistle has a similar just-blow “fipple” (duct) mouthpiece and a much simpler fingering scheme. The effort required to play recorders fluently and convincingly shouldn’t be underestimated.

    Here are some important things to know:

    • While the finest recorders are usually made of wood, there are high-quality and relatively inexpensive ones made of plastic that are quite playable. The top-of-the-line plastic ones made by Yamaha and Aulos are well worth considering, at least as a starting point.
    • The alto (“treble”) recorder is the primary instrument of Baroque repertoire, with a solo range similar to the Baroque flute. The soprano (“descant”) is the one used in elementary classrooms.
    • Recorders are available in “modern” pitch (A=440 or similar) and in various historical pitches, which may be required for playing with period ensembles.
    • Recorders are often misunderstood as being in the “keys” of C or F. This isn’t quite the same thing as, say, clarinets in B-flat and E-flat, since properly-written recorder parts are always written in concert pitch (sometimes with octave displacements). Rather than learning one set of fingerings and reading from transposed parts, recorder players learn two different sets of fingerings, and may read in multiple clefs. (I’ve written more about this in a previous post.) However, some composers and orchestrators get this wrong, and transpose parts for “F” recorders as they would for F horns.
    • Recorders require much less breath than “modern” woodwinds. Like most fipple flutes, they don’t have much dynamic range, since blowing harder tends to cause sharpness or unwanted leaps into the upper registers.
    • The recorder’s left-hand thumbhole functions as an octave vent (this feature distinguishes the recorders from pennywhistles and other fipple flutes). The thumb octave vent helps balance the volume of the upper and lower registers, and gives the player some agility for moving between them.
    • Recorders respond best to a low, open voicing.
    • Vibrato may be produced on recorders using the breath-pulse technique used on modern flutes and double reeds. It can also be done with flattement, a microtonal trill technique common in the Baroque period.
    • There are many historical and modern method books available for recorders; I like Walter Van Hauwe’s The Modern Recorder Player (in three volumes) as a good introduction that assumes a strong musical background.

  • |

    Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 6: benefits

    In this installment, we look at why woodwind doublers do what they do.

    Q. What is the greatest benefit of being a woodwind doubler?

    Here’s my own breakdown of the most common types of answers. Many answers fit into more than one category.

    • More gigs: Unsurprisingly, this was a factor for over half of the respondents. However, many if not most indicated some non-monetary motivation:
    • Variety
    • Fun/satisfaction
    • Artistic expression: A number of respondents mentioned the ability to access a variety of tone colors as a motivating factor.
    • Cross-training: Several respondents indicated that playing one instrument improves their skills at another.
    • Challenge

    Here is the complete list of responses, with only very minor editing, in random order.
    Read More “Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 6: benefits”

  • Breath support, register breaks, and resistance

    A few months ago I wrote this about the clarinet:

    IfĀ breath support, embouchure, andĀ voicingĀ are correctly established, then Crossing the Dreaded Break ceases to be a Thing. It’s just another note: a moment ago you were playing B-flat, and now you are playing B-natural. As long as your fingers get where they are supposed to go, then that’s all there is to it.Ā Personally, I don’t even use the word ā€œbreakā€ with a beginning student—there’s no need to get them all uptight about what really is a non-event.

    My point was that crossing a register break is merely a fingering issue, and shouldn’t be turned into a big to-do about embouchures and equipment purchases and so forth. And I stand by that, but there is something I glossed over a bit that perhaps ought to be revisited in more detail, and that applies to register break crossings on all woodwind instruments.

    The point that I want to return to is that of breath support. If it, and some other basic tone-production matters, are “correctly established,” then break-crossing is indeed nothing more than a new fingering or two. But assuming that breath support is 100% correct with a student just reaching the break-crossing stage is often a mistake.

    Each note on the clarinet (and on any woodwind) has a certain level of resistance—that is to say, it requires a certain amount of air pressure to get the air column vibrating. Some notes are more resistant, and some are less resistant. As a sort of general oversimplification, we might assume that a long-tube note (with more toneholes closed) is more resistant than a short-tube note (with more toneholes open). Other factors do apply, of course: the size of the toneholes, whether the fingering is a “forked” fingering, and more, but let’s isolate tube length for the moment. So for the clarinet, having a break between A-sharp and B, we would expect to see this kind of resistance change while crossing the break:

    Taller grey bar = higher resistance
    Taller grey bar = higher resistance

    (Note that the bar graphs here are strictly illustrative and not based on any real measurements.)

    A beginner who is accustomed to the lower resistance of a few chalumeau-register notes might have intuitively developed just enough breath support to make those notes respond. When he or she attempts to cross the break, the breath support isn’t enough to overcome the increased resistance: Read More “Breath support, register breaks, and resistance”

  • |

    Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 8: final comments

    I decided to leave a space in the survey for general comments, and many of you took the time to remark on a variety of subjects. Many of them were directed to me personally or seemed otherwise non-public in nature, so I’m not going to list them all, but I’ll share a few and summarize the rest.

    Some of you politely made suggestions on how the survey could be better:

    • There’s a big gap between “casual dabbler” and “semi-pro”. I suggest an additional category: “serious amateur” or something like that.
    • It would be good to have a skill level between casual dabbler and music major (something along the lines of “good amateur”). As the poll currently is, it suggests that I play recorder to the same standard as sax. I would consider my recorder and flute playing better than “not at all” but my sax and clarinet playing not to be at the level of “music major”, hence they all closest to “casual dabbler”. I guess it’s too late to change the poll now, but I thought I’d offer my opinion anyway :).
    • maybe ask music arranging abilities. Small ensemble writing for different woodwinds is necessary in my working fields.
    • Not sure what your intent is with this data, but I do think that there are some fields that would be nice to have/know of (of course maybe for the next time you do this)… Ā For example,
      -“what do you consider your strongest/primary instrument”,
      -consider having three columns in the instruments section like: Ā own/play/don’t own
    • Didn’t know how to answer some of the questions because I’m still a high school student

    I think these are all good suggestions, and ones that I would probably take if I could do the survey over. (At this point I have no specific plan for future surveys, but haven’t ruled the idea out, either.) Read More “Woodwind Doubler Census results, part 8: final comments”

  • Woodwind Doubler Census 2021 results, part 3: training/education

    Thanks to all who participated in my 2021 woodwind doubling survey, and to those who helped spread the word. I’m releasing the results in installments, so be sure to use my social media links, RSS feeds, etc. to keep up.

    I got 284 responses, an improvement over 2011’s 187. The numbers for each of these questions don’t necessarily add up to exactly that number, since not everybody responded to every question.

    Which was your first instrument, among the major woodwinds?

    2021 Data
    flute 37 13%
    oboe 13 5%
    clarinet 106 38%
    bassoon 6 2%
    saxophone 119 42%
    none of these apply 1 ~0%

    2011 Data
    flute 22 12%
    oboe 10 5%
    clarinet 77 41%
    bassoon 5 3%
    saxophone 73 39%

    Which of these have been part of your education on woodwind instruments?

    2021 Data
    school band/orchestra program (high school or younger) 262 93%
    private lessons outside of school 248 88%
    summer camps 188 67%
    university band/orchestra program 241 85%
    university/conservatory bachelors degree with formal concentration(s) in multiple woodwinds 27 10%
    university/conservatory bachelors degree with single-instrument or other music concentration 182 65%
    bachelors-level study on secondary instrument(s), but not as part of a formal multiple-woodwinds program 111 39%
    university/conservatory masters degree with formal concentration(s) in multiple woodwinds 35 12%
    university/conservatory masters degree with single-instrument or other music concentration 75 27%
    masters-level study on secondary instrument(s), but not as part of a formal multiple-woodwinds program 31 11%
    university/conservatory doctoral degree with formal concentration(s) in multiple woodwinds 10 4%
    university/conservatory doctoral degree with single-instrument or other music concentration 24 9%
    doctoral-level study on secondary instrument(s), but not as part of a formal multiple-woodwinds program 6 2%
    other university/conservatory music degree or certification 14 5%
    self-taught on one or more instruments 167 59%

    2011 Data
    school band/orchestra program (high school or younger) 175 94%
    private lessons outside of school 170 91%
    summer camps 131 70%
    university band/orchestra program 143 76%
    university/conservatory bachelors degree with formal concentration(s) in multiple woodwinds 27 14%
    university/conservatory bachelors degree with single-instrument or other music concentration 97 52%
    university/conservatory masters degree with formal concentration(s) in multiple woodwinds 13 7%
    university/conservatory masters degree with single-instrument or other music concentration 37 20%
    university/conservatory doctoral degree with formal concentration(s) in multiple woodwinds 4 2%
    university/conservatory doctoral degree with single-instrument or other music concentration 5 3%
    other university/conservatory music degree or certification 12 6%
    self-taught on one or more instruments 118 63%

    What factors influenced you first to get involved in woodwind doubling?

    Besides the provided answers, several of you included personal anecdotes of influences including boredom, norms of the early music scene, orthodontia and injuries, career aspirations like instrument repair and studio work, and the Lawrence Welk Show.

    2021 data
    just interested in more than one instrument 202 72%
    required/helpful for a jazz (or other improvisatory music) group you played in or wanted to play in 139 49%
    had or wanted opportunities to play for musical theater 196 70%
    influenced by a teacher or role model 136 48%
    wanted to improve employability 138 49%
    an ensemble you were in (or wanted to be in) needed someone to play a specific instrument, and you were willing to learn it 118 42%
    an ensemble you were in (or wanted to be in) didn’t include the instrument you already played and you needed to learn another 46 16%
    your training/experience as a teacher required you to branch out 56 20%

    2011 Data
    just interested in more than one instrument 40
    required/helpful for a jazz (or other improvisatory music) group you played in or wanted to play in 37
    had or wanted opportunities to play for musical theater 35
    influenced by a teacher or role model 23
    wanted to improve employability 19
    an ensemble you were in (or wanted to be in) needed someone to play a specific instrument, and you were willing to learn it 19
    your training/experience as a teacher required you to branch out 9

    What sources have you used to learn about or otherwise engage with woodwind doubling?

    Besides the provided answers, nine of you wrote in something to the effect of “lessons” or “teachers,” which I didn’t include as an option because I covered formal training in other questions. A few of you also wrote in “YouTube,” which I have lumped in with “social media sites.”

    Thanks again for your participation and stay tuned for more survey results.

11 Comments

  1. I’m about to start teaching my first woodwind methods class this coming Fall at Willamette University. I am trying to figure out which textbook to use, if any, and construct a decent syllabus. I’m kind of in the dark here. I play saxophone, clarinet, and flute well, but not any double reeds.

    Do you have any suggestions for me? Do you mind helping me get started a little? I found this article funny and informative, so I thought I’d reach out.

    1. The Dietz and Westphal books seem to be among the most commonly used; both have problems like the ones indicated. I don’t currently use a published text; I am in the process of preparing some resources that I hope at some point to make available. Please feel free to contact me with additional questions.

  2. Great post! I totally agree. I’ve taught methods courses at Northwestern for several years (brass, not woodwinds, but the problems are the same).

    Wanted to let you know about a new method that is more about TEACHING the instrument (flute, clarinet, and sax), and does just what you suggest: short, succinct chapters that cover the basics for the first five days.

    The web site (http://www.TeachingWoodwinds.com) is still under construction, and the book will be out this September, 2013. Should be a good resource.

    thanks again for the excellent post.

  3. Thanks for this information. I’ve felt guilty for NOT using a formal textbook for this course (2o years and still going…). I feel better now.

    After teaching beginning and junior high band simultaneously with a college level woodwind methods course, I’ve found that basics are essential. All the extra fluff you mention can always be found as a teacher needs it. My main point has always been having the ability to immediately recognize a playing issue and then fix it before it develops into a bad habit.

  4. Wow! Great post! I just stumbled upon this blog. I just graduated from college as a music education major and I felt like I learned more about actually teaching each instrument during my student teaching and only because my mentor teacher is VERY VERY good at teaching beginners.

    Another thing I think is not focused on enough is articulation.

  5. Hi Bret, This was a great post to read. I have been assembling a syllabus for my first semester teaching a woodwind methods class and have been brainstorming for each class meeting and have been struggling on just how I want to divide the time and what I want the students to be doing during the classes and between meetings. I would love to see your syllabus (if you’re willing) to understand how you chose to divide the semester and the different things you had the students doing besides learning to play the instrument.

    Happy New Year!

    Kristin

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.