The practice grew out of the need for players to cover parts on more than one instrument in the big bands of the 1920’s and 30s, and spread to the pits of Broadway shows and the TV staff orchestras at NBC and CBS. Saxophonists were initially expected to double on the clarinet until it was largely replaced by the flute in the 50’s, as it saw more acceptance in jazz. The 60’s brought new colors, adding oboe and bassoon parts for doublers—or triplers—to deal with, until players such as the legendary Romeo Penque appeared on the New York studio scene prepared to play every woodwind instrument known to man, often in quick succession, a situation further complicated by the re-emergence of the clarinet on the 1980’s. I counted over 20 instruments stacked up in front of the five-piece reed section of the Maria Schneider Orchestra at a recent concert.
Mr. Westbrook evaluates the Vadala book as “an indispensable part of every woodwind player’s training,” which I would consider to be somewhat of an exaggeration, though I do think the etudes are interesting and worth a look for an advanced doubler.
I was also intrigued by the mention of “legendary” doubler Romeo Penque, with whom I was not familiar, but whose credentials certainly seem to be in order.
A few years back I commissioned a piece, Divertissement by Sy Brandon for multiple woodwinds soloist with piano, with the help of a Co-op Press Commission Assistance Grant. Brian Levels, who was until recently a doctoral student at the University of North Texas, has written a dissertation on the piece, which is now available through the UNT Digital Library. Be sure to check out the dissertation, and, of course, the piece.
A few years ago I reviewed Gene Kaplan’s Duos for Doublers, a set of duets for woodwind doublers playing flute, clarinet, and saxophone. I was pleased to hear from Gene again recently about his new Duets for the ‘Double-Reed Doubler.’ It contains seven duets in a variety of styles, with one doubler playing oboe, clarinet, and alto saxophone, and the other playing clarinet, bassoon, and tenor saxophone. (No flute in either part.)
The books (a set of two, one for each player) are neat and easy to read, with well-placed page turns and spiral binding. Like the Duos for Doublers, this set currently costs $30.
I’m pleased to see more materials making their way into the world that address the growing pressure on woodwind doublers to be skilled double reed players. The idea of “doubling” meaning just flute, clarinet, and saxophone is increasingly a thing of the past. Working on doubling in a chamber music setting, like these duets, is a useful way to improve your skills as a soloist-level player of multiple instruments.
Here’s a demo of one of the duets, called “Machinations:”
I wouldn’t call these duets easy, exactly, but they aren’t overwhelming for doublers with a little background in each instrument. All the instruments stay mostly in their lower and middle registers. The oboe rarely ventures outside the staff, and the bassoon stays squarely in bass-clef range. There are some fast switches (catch me trying to play bassoon with the tenor in my lap in the demo video), some tricky navigation of the clarinet’s throat-to-clarion break, some articulated low notes in the saxophones, and other real but not unusual challenges.
These duets are a fun an interesting challenge if you have a doubler friend to practice with. Head over to Gene’s website to get your copy.
The PiezoBarrel pickup is a way to electrify wind instruments, for amplification and for the application of electronic effects, such as guitar effects pedals. There are a few models of PiezoBarrel with different tonal characteristics, and the “Wood” model seems to be optimized for clarinets.
I have experimented with electronics previously using the Little Jake pickup, on bassoon, bass clarinet, and English horn. In those cases installation involved drilling a small hole into a metal bocal or neck, and soldering on a small adapter to accept the Little Jake. I considered pursuing the same approach with the clarinet, but had some apprehensions about drilling into a wooden barrel.
While trying to work up the nerve to proceed, I discovered that the PiezoBarrel is available pre-installed on a clarinet barrel. (It can also be purchased separately if you want to take on the do-it-yourself task or have your repair tech handle it.) I found this to be a surprisingly affordable option, so I placed my order through PiezoBarrel’s eBay store, figuring this would at least be a way to test-drive the pickup before installing on one of my own barrels.
On arrival, I found the provided plastic barrel to work quite well with my instruments, so my wooden barrels get a reprieve for now. If I choose, I can later use the same pickup with many other instruments, if I install adapters (available from PiezoBarrel) for mounting on wood or metal.
The package I purchased included the plastic 65mm barrel, with a screw that can be used to close the hole (so the barrel can be used as a “normal” barrel). It also included the PiezoBarrel pickup unit, which is a cylinder just over 2cm in length and about the same in diameter (or just under 1 inch). It screws into the threaded hole in the barrel. It also includes an audio cable, with a 1/8″ end that plugs into the PiezoBarrel and a 1/4″ end that plugs into your effects or amplification. There were also a few extra adapters, such as for installing into my own wooden barrels, and a small screwdriver for adjusting the PiezoBarrel’s output volume. (This is something you would adjust once if needed, and then adjust volume for performance using your amplification system’s volume controls.)
Installation was as simple as putting the barrel on my clarinet, screwing in the pickup, and plugging in the cable.
The PiezoBarrel doesn’t require an external preamp. It can be plugged directly into a PA system or something like a guitar or keyboard amplifier (using the included cable), or can be routed through effects units of your choice.
Most pickups will impose some amount of “character” on the sound of a wind instrument. (For a more purely “natural” sound, use a high-quality external microphone instead, though this raises potential problems when working with live effects or on noisy stages.) However, I find the PiezoBarrel’s sound to be surprisingly close to natural on my clarinets.
For baseline comparison, here’s me playing, recorded with a conventional microphone:
And here’s what it sounds like through the PiezoBarrel:
Here are some examples using effects, from the Boss GT-1000CORE guitar multieffects unit. All have a little added reverb. For simplicity, they do not have any noise reduction or added EQ/compression, which I might do to sweeten them for a real performance or recording situation.
Overdrive plus chorus:
Delay:
Distortion:
Pitch shifter:
In my opinion, this is an excellent system for electrified clarinet—easy, affordable, and of suitable quality for performance.
My university saxophone students are anxious to tackle the altissimo register, and it’s not at all uncommon for them to show up to their first lessons clutching the Sigurd Raschèr Top-Tones for the Saxophone book and wearing a hopeful expression. I also see the Raschèr book frequently and glibly recommended on online forums. With the greatest respect for Raschèr, I think this is a mistake.
Don’t get me wrong: the Raschèr book is a classic and contains a great deal of wisdom. It is a must-have for the well-read saxophonist. But I think most saxophonists would do better to start with Eugene Rousseau’s Saxophone High Tones, and have the Raschèr on hand for supplementary exercises and instruction.
Get this one firstUse this one as a supplement
I’m going to make the following point first, not because I think it’s necessarily the most important, but because it’s the one that will click with those of you who are hoping to “learn altissimo” in an afternoon by looking at a fingering chart: Rousseau’s fingering charts are much better. They are better suited to “modern” (Mark VI and beyond) instruments and more complete (in the sense of providing many more options for each note, though Raschèr’s chart does go a little higher). Rousseau also provides separate fingering charts for soprano, alto, tenor, and baritone, while Raschèr provides only one chart, which he indicates in the first-edition foreword is intended for “E-flat saxophones”—altos, that is. (I do have a few issues with the visual layout of Rousseau’s charts, and Raschèr’s too, but that’s another rant.) Read More “Saxophone altissimo books: Raschèr vs. Rousseau”
I’ve been reading The Woodwind Player’s Cookbook, published last year by Meredith Music and edited by Charles West. It’s a collection of 57 pedagogical essays by a pretty impressive roster of woodwind folks. You can download the table of contents here to see the authors and titles.
Most of the articles deal with technique fundamentals on specific instruments, which should make this book valuable to school band directors, but it also works quite well as a handbook for woodwind doublers; in fact, there are several articles that deal specifically with doubling, by Mike Duva, James Nesbit, Elsie Parker, and Albert Regni. Read More “Review: The Woodwind Player’s Cookbook”
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, at no cost to you.
If you have read my reviews of the D’Addario clarinet and jazz alto and tenor saxophone mouthpieces, you won’t be surprised to learn that I’m a big fan of their new classical alto saxophone mouthpiece, too. (As with the last several reviews, D’Addario sent me some mouthpieces at no cost, with the possibility but not the promise of a review.)
I’ve been hammering on one point with all the D’Addario mouthpieces, but it’s worth bringing up again because it’s an important innovation in how mouthpieces are made and bought. D’Addario’s manufacturing process (precisely milling mouthpieces from solid rod rubber) produces mouthpieces that are extremely consistent, much more so than other mass-produced professional mouthpieces, which are generally finished a little by hand. The old system is that you try out a bunch of mouthpieces that are the same make and model (by going into a store or putting a big deposit on your credit card), and pick out the one that plays best. The new system is that you order a D’Addario mouthpiece from your favorite retailer, and know that it plays just like all the others. This is a game-changing development in the sub-$200 mouthpiece market.
And, of course, like the other mouthpieces in D’Addario’s lineup, the new Reserve alto mouthpiece plays great.
I’ve been playing on a Vandoren Optimum AL3 for the last 8 or 9 years (and used an AL4 for a few years before that). What I like about the Optimum is that it’s very easy to play, with good response in all registers, good dynamic range, a lot of stability (so pitch and tone are very consistent, without much effort from the player), and tone that tends toward a warm, almost muted quality (in a good way). It’s a mouthpiece for a 21st-century classical saxophone player.
The D’Addario mouthpiece has these same qualities, with some subtle but important improvements. When I started playing on the AL4 I liked its richness of tone, but ultimately decided I needed to sacrifice that a little to embrace the AL3’s superior high register. The D’Addario Reserve does an impressive job of blending those qualities, and even improving upon both.
In particular, I have been impressed with scalar movement in the altissimo register, which on my Vandoren mouthpieces could be just a little lumpy as I crossed from one partial to another. The D’Addario mouthpieces make this feel really smooth, effortless, and secure.
I have been using mostly D’Addario Reserve reeds for classical saxophone playing, and with my Vandoren mouthpieces I sometimes wished I could get a reed strength between 2.5 and 3.0. I did hope that switching to the D’Addario mouthpiece would eliminate that need, but after trying them I still feel like a 2.5+ would be a useful option. (D’Addario does make some “plus” reeds, such as the Reserve alto saxophone 3.0+.) If I have one complaint about the Reserve mouthpiece, it’s that I don’t get quite the ease of low-register response I would like with the 3.0 reed. A 2.5 helps that but plays a little brighter than I want.
The Reserve mouthpiece comes in three flavors at the moment: D145 (1.45mm tip/medium facing), D150 (1.50mm tip/medium-long facing), and D155 (1.50mm tip/medium facing—yes, it is the same tip opening as the D150). The mouthpiece has what D’Addario touts as a “unique oval inner chamber.”
I’m really quite impressed with all three of the Reserve options, and not 100% settled yet on which will be my go-to. But I recently used the D150 (with a Reserve 3.0 reed) for a concerto performance with band that involved some double tonguing and plenty of altissimo. The D150/3.0 setup worked well for that situation—just the right amount of resistance to make the double-tonguing comfortable and easy, good security in the altissimo, and enough guts to be heard over the band without getting spread or edgy.
Here’s a quick comparison between the D’Addario Reserve D150 and the Vandoren Optimum AL3. I’m using the same ligature and reed in both clips.
D’Addario Reserve D150:
Vandoren Optimum AL3:
To my ear, the D’Addario has a richer, fuller, and more even sound, and also responds better to dynamic changes.
So far D’Addario is scoring 100% with me on their mouthpieces: each new mouthpiece they have released has replaced my former setups (clarinet, jazz alto, jazz tenor, and now classical alto). I look forward to whatever is next.
I realize this is over 7 years old but, for posterity sake, Romeo Penque was used extensively in many 60s New York recordings, especially Oliver Nelson’s larger band recordings playng tenor, oboe, EH, flute and clarinet among other things.
I realize this is over 7 years old but, for posterity sake, Romeo Penque was used extensively in many 60s New York recordings, especially Oliver Nelson’s larger band recordings playng tenor, oboe, EH, flute and clarinet among other things.