How the heck did Mr. Sax think of the saxophone???

[haonhien]

I'm new to the world of woodwinds, so I'm amazed that anyone would think of creating the saxophone. What I wonder about is the sax's tune.

My experience is limited to strings and a number of other popular instruments. These instruments all have the empty note (note with no fingers anywhere) "in tune" with the notes of the "natural"/"simple" (for lack of a better word) fingers. But the sax has C# as the empty note and B-A-G-F-E-D as the "natural"/"simple" fingering. How did Alphonese Sax ever think of designing an instrument like that?

Allow me to elaborate some more with an example.

All instruments (that I know of - I understand the bagpipe maybe different) can play the whole chromatic scale, so that's one thing. But within all the fingerings, there are some that are simpler, more straightforward, more likely to be taught within the first few lessons. That's what I meant by "natural"/"simple" or maybe more accurately "first lessons" type of fingering.

The violin, for example, has G, D, A, E strings. The "natural" fingering would be index (finger 1) on the A - E - B - F#, middle (finger 2) on either: (1) Bb - F - C - G, or: (2) B - F# - C# - G#, ring (finger 3) on C - G - D - A, pinky (finger 4) on D - A - E - B.

Now, if you take only the empty strings plus index and the ring fingers (the easiest for beginners), they're all in G Major.

Empty + index + middle (1) + ring + pinky: either F Major w/ one note off or C Major w/ one note off.

Etc.

The idea is that the "simple" fingerings are mostly in tune with the empty notes. The same is true of the other string instruments, with the guitar, the mandolin. In the world of things you blow into, the same is true of the recorder - that instrument almost all kids started with.

But the sax isn't like that. The simplest fingerings are not in tune with the instrument when blown without any fingerings. So, a beginner would play maybe half a book before encountering the "empty" note.

That, to me, seems so counter-intuitive, that it bugs me that someone (that's you, Mr. Sax) would come up with such an instrument. Seems to me, he could have lengthened or shortened the instrument so that, without changing the fingering mechanism, the empty note would be in tune with the "natural"/"simple" fingered notes. So why didn't he design the instrument like that?

Now I'm not dissing the saxophone - the design worked out fine, as a century-plus of sax music proved.

But how on earth would someone even think of designing an instrument where the natural fingerings create notes that are not in tune with the empty note? What ever inspired Mr. Sax to do such a thing? (You know what I mean?)

Are other woodwinds the same way? Is that where Alphonse Sax got the idea?

(For that matter, if other woodwinds work that way, then whoever created the first woodwind - how did that person come up with such an instrument?)

[makemyday]

The violin, for example, has G, D, A, E strings. The "natural" fingering would be index (finger 1) on the A - E - B - F#, middle (finger 2) on either: (1) Bb - F - C - G, or: (2) B - F# - C# - G#, ring (finger 3) on C - G - D - A, pinky (finger 4) on D - A - E - B.

Now, if you take only the empty strings plus index and the ring fingers (the easiest for beginners), they're all in G Major.

Empty + index + middle (1) + ring + pinky: either F Major w/ one note off or C Major w/ one note off.

Etc.
Talking about something simple :? !?



But the sax isn't like that.

How right you are. It is essentially like the recorder you mentioned, as are more or less all woodwinds.

You start with all you fingers down to get the lowest note, C. "All fingers" is (from top to bottom): left index, middle, and ring fingers, and right index, middle and ring fingers and pinky. The left pinky is being left out as it is a bit out of line with the other fingers; this is clearly noticeable on a recorder.
Now if you blow, each time you lift your finger, a higher note in the scale of C will come out: C with all fingers down, D with all but the pinky, E with all but pinky and ring finger etc. A child can figure it out and mostly they will.
For technical reasons it appears if you just continue drilling holes, the closer to the opening of the head of the tube you get, the more difference in pitch they will make. That's why the higher holes are smaller. What happens is that the last hole doesn't make a difference of a semi tone, but of a whole tone, resulting in C# instead of C. But - how handy - this can be corrected by closing the tube a bit and closing the hole of the middle finger. Problem solved. Works, if I remember well, on all recorders.Later, in its development of the saxophone, the low B and low Bb were added (a lot of very old saxes only go down to B). Later still, attempts were made by adding a low A, but this only worked on baritones; on altos the sound and intonation detoriated too much to continue this.

So if you think in terms of blowing a pipe (the longer the pipe, the lower the tone) it is all as logical as a piano.

All the other keys (to get all the chromatic tones) were and are still added in a proces of trial and error - that's why there are such differences in quality among all woodwinds.

Now you explain in a simple way how to play a C scale on any stringed instrument: I really don't think that the way you have to move your fingers is what you call "intuitive". To me it is also no coincidence that most amateur guitarists don't know ***** about scales and that almost none of the violinists can use chords to improvise!

[Swingtone]

Reading the "Devil's Horn" (2005) by Michael Segall should answer that question and more. It's the best biography of Sax (and the sax) I've ever read--

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374159386/sr=8-1/qid=1145744666/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-2186947-2310546?%5Fencoding=UTF8

[stefank]

and you can blame Theobald Boehm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theobald_Boehm whose fingering system Sax adapted for his new instrument.

Stefan

[haonhien]

Makemyday's right. What I called "simple" fingering ain't that simple on paper for someone who doesn't play the violin. :)

But I guess my question is not really on the saxophone's fingering system, which seems reasonably logical. My question is the relationship between that fingering system, and the empty note (blowing with no fingers down).

How come Mr. Sax didn't make some adjustments so that the empty note is in the same scale as the "simple" fingerings? The "simple" fingerings are basically in C Major but the empty note is not.

I'm not a technician, but it seems to me he could have changed some proportions of the instrument, or made the same changes as makemyday mentioned about the recorder. Or something. I am sure if he wanted to, he could.

But, for some reason, he found it unnecessary. And I wonder why.

And not just him, other musicians too. I imagine Mr. Sax showing off his instruments, and musicians of his time would be trying out this brand new invention, and apparently nobody asked, "Say, Alphonse, why did you make the empty note offscale?"

That's my question. Whatever would possess a person to invent an instrument with an empty note that's offscale?

Like I said, it worked out fine. But that's our 20/20 hindsight a century later....

[haonhien]

I just thought of a real good analogy.

Suppose someone had created a new kind of horn - let's call it the Saxonthewebophone :) - where the simplest fingerings: Putting all the fingers down and letting go one at a time would result in a set of notes that's offscale. Say, C - D - E - F - G - A# - B - C (last C being the empty note).

I bet people would jump down the guy's throat about that A#.

So, when Alphonse Sax showed off his invention that's C - D - E - F - G - A - B - C#, how come nobody questioned the C#?

(Maybe they did. If the answer is in that book, I'll buy it. :))

[makemyday]

you can blame Theobald Boehm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theobald_Boehm whose fingering system Sax adapted for his new instrument

RTFT

History, madam, history. That's the same as wanting to know why your violin starts with G and not with, say C; or has only four strings and not five or six etc. And why guitars are tuned the way the are.

Surprised me that you didn't ask why saxes, and other horns, are transposing instruments. Or why we don't blow at the other end of the horn. Or why bananas are bend. Did you ask as many questions when you were studying the violin?

[danyo]

he designed the sax around the flute(/clarinet?).. which is pretty much the same fingering, and the c# is open(flute). and i dont know how the fingering on a saxophone could be any easier.. i mean, on flute u hold down the Eb key for f and up and on d u lift the b key. clarinet... :o i dont think i need to get into that.

oh and didnt he think of it as a way to blend the brass and woodwind sound?

[haonhien]

Oh, that's because I already know the answer to all those questions (even the one about bananas) -- all except the one about 4 strings on the violin, but I wouldn't ask it on this board. :D And, see, there isn't one single "Mr. Viol" that can be blamed for things the violin turns out.

There is one known Mr. Sax who holds an actual patent. So I try to visualize this Belgian with a patent and a brand new instrument, shopping it around other musicians/manufacturers, and no one stopped to ask, "Say, what's with this one note that's not in tune with the others?"

[haonhien]

[QUOTE=danyo]he designed the sax around the flute(/clarinet?).. which is pretty much the same fingering, and the c# is open(flute).[QUOTE]

Maybe that's the answer.

So I was trying to look up the flute fingering and didn't understand it at all. :) So, on the flute, if I put all my fingers down and the lift them up one at a time, what do I get?

[cmelodysax]

Ah, but if you apply the onscale/offscale argument to tenor sax (which, for the uninitiated, is pitched in Bb), the open note is a not really an off-scale C#, it's an on-scale concert B-natural. Similarly for alto (in Eb), the open C# is an on-scale E......

Now, I know Sax created the original saxophones not in those keys, but in C and F, so my logic may have just been shot in the foot. Maybe that also explains why I mostly play C-Tenor and C-Soprano, I'm a musical Luddite ? To me the concept of guitar fingering (not a million miles from violin) is totally alien.

I think I'll go back to the C Forum now........Nobody said life was simple :?

[makemyday]

no one stopped to ask, "Say, what's with this one note that's not in tune with the others?"

Because they were all used to it by years and years of playing clarinets, hobos, flutes etc. No use confronting them with yet another system. History, madam, history. And actually, the note is not not in tune (well, not much, anyway ;)), but only off scale :D .

[cmelodysax]

Didn't realise you could get a tune out of a hobo ? What key are they in then ? ;)

[stefank]

I'm really not sure what the problem is. Boehm's fingering system (and it is Boehm's system we are discussing, not Sax's) improved both the intonation of flutes and clarinets and greatly facilitated playing in "difficult" keys. The fact that two of the C#s in the range happen to be "open" (not quite true of the flute) in terms of fingers down (which isn't the same thing as tone holes shut) is just a by product of this system - which was so good Sax adopted it with only minor modifications for his new instrument. The only thing that worries me about the "no fingers" C# is that it's the most difficult to play in tune on the instrument - but the note that uses the shortest tube length is always going to be the most unstable pitch wise. But, as cmelodysax pointed out, these C#s aren't C# anyway, unless you have a c melody sax or a flute. In fact, when you get into the fields of note nomenclature, differences through history in pitch and then different scale temperaments you begin to realise just how artificial and arbitary a lot of our conventions about pitch are. Who says the note we (currently) call C# is less "natural" than any other note? Start discriminating against the black notes on the keyboard and see how much trouble you get into!

[princeganon]

i think it's not really a concern unless you plan on playing in C major all the time. having notes that aren't in the C major scale, but still fall naturally under the fingers (or in this case, no fingers) just makes it easier when you need to play in more difficult keys. besides it's not like it makes the c major scale difficult to play. it's still one of the easiest keys to play in.

[KenK]

haonhien - I think one thing that might be confusing you is thinking that "no fingers" on a woodwind is like "no fingers" on a violin. It's actually the opposite.

With a stringed instrument, the open string is the lowest note (and longest length), and putting fingers down makes the string shorter, hence the note higher.

With a woodwind, the full length of the tube is the lowest note, which is achieved by closing all the holes (putting all fingers down). Opening holes (lifting fingers) makes the tube shorter, and the notes higher.

[ste1390]

I think this thread is a bit too smart for me, but as I understand it the Saxophone was created as a compromise. The octave tone hole for the upper range is too high for the low tones and vice versa. I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that that is the reason for bad intonation commonly associated with the middle c#.

As to the answer to your question about how on earth could Sax "invent" the saxophone from thin air. It is my personal opinion that God just got sick of hearing that sorry excuse for a instrument the ophicleide so he blessed Adolphe with the idea!!!!!

[saxpiece]

This is basically how it all happens

Compare a Soprano Sax to a Clarinet. The major difference is that the Soprano Sax is shaped like a Cone and the Clarinet is shaped like a Cylinder. The Cone and Cylinder produce different overtones when an air column is vibrating inside the body. Each note that we hear (due to a vibrating air column) is made up of a series of frequencies that are all mixed together and the higher frequencies are overtones and the main frequency is the fundamental. The vibrating air column inside the body can be made shorter (higher pitch) or longer (lower pitch) by opening or closing toneholes. Basically the vibrating air column extends mostly to the first open tonehole or a bit longer so a open fingering C# has a much shorter vibrating air column than a E fingering so the C# sounds higher in pitch than the E. So the toneholes on the sax are placed in positions to alter the length of the vibrating air column and the fingerings change the length of the vibrating air column to produce the notes we all use.

The octave key disturbs the first or main frequency of the vibrating air column and the main frequency and pitch then jumps up an octave to the first overtone frequency.
The Front F key does a similar thing as the octave key for the Altissimo range. There is no real octave key for the Altissimo range but the Front F is really an octave key for some Altissimo notes. Like the octave key, the Front F key disturbs some of the lower frequencies of a note so the main frequency pitch jumps up to one of the higher overtone frequencies and into the Altissimo range. Players can also alter the lower frequencies of a note so the main frequency pitch jumps up to one of the higher overtone frequencies by using oral and airstream and embouchure changes to produce Altissimo notes.

So the basic design of the sax and sax fingering has to do with conical overtones.

Modes of vibration:

F1 = Fundamental (usually perceived Pitch) = 1st harmonic = 1st partial
F2 = 2F1 = Octave above = 2nd harmonic = 1st overtone
F3 = 3F1 = Oct + 5th above = 3rd harmonic = 2nd overtone
Etc.
A harmonic is an integer multiple of the fundamental (= the 1st harmonic), and the frequency of a harmonic is expresses as nF1, where n is a natural number.
A partial is not necessarily an integer multiple of the fundamental.

[martysax]

He thought that his name was more appealing than Mr. Sarrus.

[Wisco99]

He probably got frustrated with the damn break on a clarinet and playing a straight bore instrument that jumped a 12th. Mr. Sax must have been a very logical man.

An octave key to make it jump an octave, conical bore so it is more fun to play and doesn't back up on you, NO BREAK like a clarinet, a neck strap, and most important, a tenor sax just looks sexy.

He must have had a love for attorneys, because he sure paid them a lot to try and protect the rights to his invention. They got rich, he didn't.

Wisco8-)

[saxpiece]

Yep. The clarinet is a great instrument but it's overtones are weird. The sax is much more logical with an octave overtone for the register key. Just shows what a cone can do.

[Jeff Foster]

Think of it this way. If the open note was "in tune" as you say, the open note would be D2. Hence the fingerings for the 2nd octave of the C maj scale would be different than for the lower octave (like the clarinet, for example). The sax was designed so that the fingerings are repeatable in the first two octaves. BTW: you do know, of course that you can play C2 by fingering low C with the octave key. It sounds kind of funky but it works. In other words, it would be possible to play a 2 octave C scale by using the same fingerings twice and adding the octave key. It seems really sensible when you look at it like that.

[SOTSDO]

You should keep in mind that the original (as in the first one upon which sheet metal and rod was expended) saxophone was a bass sax pitched in the key of C. So, a C on a C bass comes out as a C concert.

Back to the rest of the "reasoning"...

[Souportwenty]

Sax was the son of an instrument maker and was hired by the French military to create a musical instrument for marching band with the projection of brass and the speed of a woodwind. I suppose he never considered trying to improve upon the fingering system the client wanted. If it's not Baroque, don't fix it!

[RedBaron]

BTW, the man's name was Adolphe, not Alphonse...

Anyway, the original question presupposes that Mr. Sax had an arbitrary choice to make, and chose to make the open note not in the same key as the "easy" fingerings...But his choice was forced by physics, and wasn't even entirely made by him (as others have pointed out). So we have a system which gives us easy, intuitive fingerings for the majority of the "normal" notes. If we have to pay for that by remembering the slightly special fingering for middle C, that's fine...and besides: It makes it easier to hold on to the instrument, especially on a soprano with no neck strap. :-)

Red

[hakukani]

BTW, the man's name was Adolphe, not Alphonse...

Anyway, the original question presupposes that Mr. Sax had an arbitrary choice to make, and chose to make the open note not in the same key as the "easy" fingerings...But his choice was forced by physics, and wasn't even entirely made by him (as others have pointed out). So we have a system which gives us easy, intuitive fingerings for the majority of the "normal" notes. If we have to pay for that by remembering the slightly special fingering for middle C, that's fine...and besides: It makes it easier to hold on to the instrument, especially on a soprano with no neck strap. :-)

Red

His name was really Antoine-Joseph Sax.

Belgians, go figger.

[RedBaron]

His name was really Antoine-Joseph Sax.

Belgians, go figger.

Ahh, right! Thanks...

Yeah, go figger...

Red

[HSkid]

i believe that he got the idea from this strange brass horn

[And7barton]

Didn't realise you could get a tune out of a hobo ? What key are they in then ? ;)

If you tried to play a HOBO - Surely you'd get a BUM note ?

[Kubalivre]

I thought it was because of its conical construction? From what I reckon out of this thread, I'm not too off.

[NissanMarkVII]

i believe that he got the idea from this strange brass horn



That's a Saxhorn isn't it? I get the Saxhorns and Sarousaphones mixed up. Both are predessesors to the Saxophone.

[Yamahaaltoplayer]

Saxhorns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxhorn) look like euphs and tubas. Sarrusophones sorta look like that with more keys and a double reed. That's definitely a ophicleide. Ophicleides are actually pretty cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUS-NJ8nSnI

[NissanMarkVII]

Saxhorns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxhorn) look like euphs and tubas. Sarrusophones sorta look like that with more keys and a double reed. That's definitely a ophicleide. Ophicleides are actually pretty cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUS-NJ8nSnI

I knew they were similar. I just get them all mixed up! They are precede the Saxophone, and the sax takes bits and pieces of all of them and the Clarinet. Interlochen Arts Academy has a full set of Adolph Saxes, as well as the instruments that precede it. Just haven't seen them since 1995 :) .