An Analysis of Concert Saxophone Vibrato Through the Examination of Recordings by Eight Prominent Soloists

Thomas Zinninger

August 2013

B.M.E., University of Louisville, 2006 M.M., University of Cincinnati, 2009

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTS

University of Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music

Dr. James Bunte, Committee Chair

ABSTRACT

This study examines concert saxophone vibrato through the analysis of several

recordings of standard repertoire by prominent soloists. The vibrato of Vincent Abato,

Arno Bornkamp, Claude Delangle, Jean-Marie Londeix, Marcel Mule, Otis Murphy,

Sigurd Rascher, and Eugene Rousseau is analyzed with regards to rate, extent, shape, and

discretionary use. Examination of these parameters was conducted through both general

observation and precise measurements with the aid of a spectrogram. Statistical analyses

of the results provide tendencies for overall vibrato use, as well as the effects of certain

musical attributes (note length, tempo, dynamic, range) on vibrato. The results of this

analysis are also compared among each soloist and against pre-existing theories or

findings in vibrato research.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables vi List of Figures vii

PART 1: BACKGROUND Introduction 1 Need for Study 2 Similar Studies 3

The Nature of Vibrato 6 A Vocal Phenomenon 6 Parameters 8 Perception 12

Vibrato in Music 15 Continuous or Ornamental? 15 Emotion, Stress, and Musical Structure 19

Saxophone Vibrato 22 Origins 23 Modern Vibrato 27 Pedagogy 29

PART 2: THE STUDY Methodology 33 Choice of Soloists 33 Choice of Repertoire/Recordings 38 Observational Techniques 40 Measurement Techniques 42

General Analysis 44 Vibrato Use and Non-Use 44 Vibrato Rate and Extent 54 Note Length 58 Tempo 69 Dynamic 81 Range 93 Vibrato Shape 106 Variance Above and Below Pitch 109

Repertoire Analysis 113 Bozza 113 Creston 115 Desenclos 116 Glazunov 119

Hindemith 120 Ibert 122 Maurice 125

Conclusions 128 Overall Significant Findings 128 Tendencies by Each Soloist 129 Generational and Geographical Trends 131 Significance of Findings 133

Bibliography 135

Appendix: Raw Data for Each Soloist 140 Abato 140 Bornkamp 141 Delangle 143 Londeix 144 Mule 146 Murphy 147 Rascher 148 Rousseau 150

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Sections for the Analysis of Vibrato Use/Non-use 45

Table 2 Standard Deviation and Deviation Percentages for Rates 57 and Extents

Table 3 Correlation between Vibrato Rate and Four Musical 105 Attributes

Table 4 Correlation between Vibrato Extent and Four Musical 105 Attributes

Table 5 Mean Change in Rate and Extent in Long Tones 107

Table 6 Mean Change in Rate and Extent for Each Soloists 109

Table 7 Mean Vibrato Extent Above and Below the Intended Pitch 111

Mean Rates and Extents for: Table 8 Bozza 113 Table 9 Creston 115 Table 10 Desenclos 116 Table 11 Glazunov 119 Table 12 Hindemith 120 Table 13 Ibert 122 Table 14 Vibrato Use for Notes from Rehearsal 6 to 123 8 in the Ibert Table 15 Maurice 125

Table 16 Mean Rate and Extent for all Soloists, Grouped by 132 Generation

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Vibrato Use Percentages on Notes Shorter Than One Second 47 Figure 2 Abato 48 Figure 3 Bornkamp 48 Figure 4 Delangle 49 Figure 5 Londeix 49 Figure 6 Mule 50 Figure 7 Murphy 50 Figure 8 Rascher 51 Figure 9 Rousseau 51

Figure 10 Vibrato Use Percentages for Tempos Less Than 100 bpm 53

Figure 11 Vibrato Use Percentages for Tempos Greater Than 100 bpm 53

Figure 12 Mean Vibrato Rate for Each Soloist 56

Figure 13 Mean Vibrato Extent for Each Soloist 56

Figure 14 Vibrato Rate in Comparison to Note Length 59 Figure 15 Abato 60 Figure 16 Bornkamp 60 Figure 17 Delangle 61 Figure 18 Londeix 61 Figure 19 Mule 62 Figure 20 Murphy 62 Figure 21 Rascher 63 Figure 22 Rousseau 63

Figure 23 Vibrato Extent in Comparison to Note Length 64 Figure 24 Abato 65 Figure 25 Bornkamp 65 Figure 26 Delangle 66 Figure 27 Londeix 66 Figure 28 Mule 67 Figure 29 Murphy 67 Figure 30 Rascher 68 Figure 31 Rousseau 68

vii

Figure 32 Vibrato Rate in Comparison to Tempo 70 Figure 33 Abato 71 Figure 34 Bornkamp 71 Figure 35 Delangle 72 Figure 36 Londeix 72 Figure 37 Mule 73 Figure 38 Murphy 73 Figure 39 Rascher 74 Figure 40 Rousseau 74

Figure 41 Vibrato Extent in Comparison to Tempo 76 Figure 42 Abato 77 Figure 43 Bornkamp 77 Figure 44 Delangle 78 Figure 45 Londeix 78 Figure 46 Mule 79 Figure 47 Murphy 79 Figure 48 Rascher 80 Figure 49 Rousseau 80

Figure 50 Vibrato Rate in Comparison to Dynamic Level 82 Figure 51 Abato 83 Figure 52 Bornkamp 84 Figure 53 Delangle 84 Figure 54 Londeix 85 Figure 55 Mule 85 Figure 56 Murphy 86 Figure 57 Rascher 86 Figure 58 Rousseau 87

Figure 59 Vibrato Extent in Comparison to Dynamic Level 88 Figure 60 Abato 89 Figure 61 Bornkamp 89 Figure 62 Delangle 90 Figure 63 Londeix 90 Figure 64 Mule 91 Figure 65 Murphy 91 Figure 66 Rascher 92 Figure 67 Rousseau 92

viii

Figure 68 Vibrato Rate in Comparison to Range 94 Figure 69 Abato 95 Figure 70 Bornkamp 95 Figure 71 Delangle 96 Figure 72 Londeix 96 Figure 73 Mule 97 Figure 74 Murphy 97 Figure 75 Rascher 98 Figure 76 Rousseau 98

Figure 77 Vibrato Extent in Comparison to Range 99 Figure 78 Abato 100 Figure 79 Bornkamp 101 Figure 80 Delangle 101 Figure 81 Londeix 102 Figure 82 Mule 102 Figure 83 Murphy 103 Figure 84 Rascher 103 Figure 85 Rousseau 104

Figure 86 Mean Vibrato Extent Above and Below the Intended Pitch 111 for Each Soloist

PART 1: BACKGROUND

Introduction

The etymology of the word “saxophone” is simple. There is “sax,” from its

Belgian inventor Adolphe Sax, and “phone,” which is often defined as: “a sound, esp.

from the voice.”1 It is appropriate that Sax used this word when he named his invention

as many believe it to be the closest of all wind instruments to the human voice. The

Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone even begins with Thomas Liley describing the saxophone as a “singing instrument.”2 This sentiment can also be confirmed with

acoustical evidence. The sounds of both the saxophone and the average human voice

have a concentration of harmonics around 2000 Hz giving them similar timbres.3

However, the similarity may best be illustrated by the “vocal” manner in which the

instrument is often played.

Marcel Mule once claimed that it was the vocal-like eloquence of the saxophone

that led to its popularity.4 One of the most important factors in this vocal quality is the

extensive use of vibrato by saxophonists of the past 80-90 years. It is rare to hear a live

performance or a recording of a saxophonist—in either the jazz or classical idioms—that

lacks the use of vibrato. There are certainly individual jazz performers who play with

little to no vibrato, and several contemporary classical works call for a “straight” tone

1 Thomas Liley, “Invention and Development,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone, ed. Richard Ingham (Cambridge University Press, 1998), 1.

2 Ibid.

3 Claude Delangle and Jean-Denis Michat, “The Contemporary Saxophone,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone, ed. Richard Ingham (Cambridge University Press, 1998), 163.

4 Claude Delangle, “Interview with the Legendary Marcel Mule on the History of Saxophone Vibrato,” Australian Clarinet and Saxophone (March 1998), trans. Huguette Brassine, 7.

quality, but these are undoubtedly considered the exceptions rather than the rule. In

concert music, which will be the focus of this study, all of the notable recorded

saxophonists have used vibrato on their performances of standard repertoire.

Need for Study

Vibrato has not only been used extensively by concert saxophonists since the

1930s, its existence has been crucial to the musicality and individuality of many notable

performers. Musically, vibrato has been used to manipulate the emotion or tension of

certain notes or passages within a piece. It is also one of the defining characteristics of an

individual’s playing style. The performances of saxophone greats such as Marcel Mule or

Claude Delangle are often instantly recognizable for their distinctive vibrato use. Because

of the immense importance of vibrato to the concert saxophone, a study is needed to

explore and quantify its use. Through analysis, we can gain a better understanding of how

saxophonists have used vibrato in a variety of musical situations.

This study analyzes the use of vibrato by eight prominent concert saxophonists

across 28 recordings of standard saxophone repertoire. There were two main objectives

for the analysis. The first was to look for general trends in vibrato use by the performers.

This was best achieved by examining how certain musical attributes such as beat

placement, note length, or dynamic level affected vibrato use. The second objective was

to explore the differences in vibrato use between each performer. The musical attributes’

effects were also considered here as well as the comparison of general trends in each

soloists vibrato.

The decision to analyzing historical recordings instead of controlled

experimentation had both advantages and disadvantages. Measuring the parameters and

shapes of vibrato would have been easier and possibly more accurate if a group of

saxophonists were recorded for the specific purpose of vibrato study. Yet the analysis in

some ways can be of higher quality with “real” commercially available recordings. Each

recording chosen represents a true “performance” for an audience (whether or not it was

in front of a live audience is inconsequential; it was intended for an audience). Therefore

the vibrato use should be of the utmost authenticity. Utilizing historical recordings also

allows one to analyze the performances of influential saxophonists across different

generations and geographical backgrounds, something entirely impossible with controlled

studio recordings.

Similar Studies

There have been numerous scientific vibrato studies over the past 80 years. These have ranged from Carl Seashore’s general study of the phenomenon of vibrato in the

1930s5 to Yoshiyuki Horii’s specific study of vocal vibrato on long tone /a/s in 1989.6

While most vibrato studies have been of a different nature than the one presented here, there have been a few with similar objectives. One such study, where musical attributes’ effects on vibrato were measured, was conducted by Timmers and Desain in 2000.7 A cello, oboe, tenor, theremin, and violin were each recorded performing the first phrase of

5 many publications, including: Carl Seashore, The Vibrato (Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1931).

6 Yoshiyuki Horii, “Frequency Modulation Characteristics of Sustained /a/ Sung in Vocal Vibrato,” Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 32 (December 1989).

7 Renee Timmers and Peter Desain, “Vibrato: Questions and Answers from Musicians and Science,” Proceedings of the Sixth ICMPC (Keele: 2000).

“Le Cygne” by Saint-Saëns. Only professional musicians were utilized. Each recording

was examined through spectral analysis to measure the parameters of the vibrato. The

objective was to find correlation between these parameters and certain musical structures

such as metrical stress (the hierarchy of beat placement within a meter), phrase position,

and melodic charge (a note’s diatonic distance from the tonic). The results were varied

with some musical structures having more effect on vibrato than others and some

instruments being affected more or less than others. The most consistent results were that

increased metric stress had a negative correlation with vibrato rate and positive

correlation with vibrato extent.

In 2006 a similar study was conducted by Rebecca MacLeod8 which examined

how dynamic levels and range affected the vibrato rates and extents of violin and viola

players. Forty-eight university and high school musicians were recorded performing both

scales and musical excerpts. Vibrato rate and extent were measured for each note. She

concluded that dynamic level had a slightly positive influence on vibrato extent but

effected rate only on the scales. Range (pitch height) had a more significant positive

effect on vibrato for both rate and extent.

There have been few vibrato studies conducted that actually use commercially

available recordings for analysis. One such study was conducted by Eric Prame in 1993 and used ten professional recordings of Schubert’s Ave Maria.9 Several general

conclusions regarding the vibrato were drawn including that the mean rate was 6.1 Hz

8 Rebecca MacLeod, “Influences of Dynamic Level and Pitch Height on the Vibrato Rates and idths of Violin and Viola Players,” PhD diss., Florida State University, 2006.

9 Eric Prame, “Measurements of the Vibrato Rate of Ten Singers,” KTH Computer Science and Communication. Department for Speech, Music and Hearing Quarterly Progress and Status Report 33, no. 4 (1992).

and that the vibrato typically increased at the end of long tones. Another study using

commercially available recordings was conducted by Bretos and Sundberg in 2000.10

Notes were selected from ten recordings of an aria from Verdi’s Aida by notable

sopranos. Two sustained pitches with crescendos were analyzed with regards to fundamental frequency, vibrato rate, vibrato extent, intonation, and sound level. The objective was to observe how the crescendo affected these parameters and the

relationships between the parameters. As with Prame’s study, it was found that vibrato

rates tended to increase at the end of the long tones.

The only known significant scientific vibrato study exclusively focused on the

saxophone was conducted by Gilbert, Simon, and Terroir in 2005.11 The primary

objective of this study was to create a mathematical model that could differentiate

between two different types of vibrato (jaw and air pressure) used by saxophonists. While

it possibly had some interest to musicians, the study mostly focused on creating the

mathematical model and made no mention of how each type of vibrato has been used in a

musical context.

10 Jose Bretos and Johan Sundberg, ”Measurements of Vibrato Parameters in Long Sustained Crescendo Notes as Sung by Ten Sopranos,” Journal of Voice 17, no.3 (September 2003): 343-352.

11 J. Gilbert, L. Simon, and J. Terroir, “Vibrato of Saxophones,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118, No. 4 (October 2005), 2649-2655.

The Nature of Vibrato

According to Frederick Neumann, a good definition for vibrato is “a means of

enriching musical tone by rapid, regular oscillations of pitch, loudness, or timbre, or by a

combination of these.”12 As these parameters change, the harmonic series constantly

shifts leading to the enrichment in tone.13 We know that these oscillations are the direct

cause of vibrato, but how did musicians begin to use them in the first place? Some

believe this did not happen by chance. They believe that vibrato is very much a part of

nature. This sentiment also gives credence to the notion that vibrato is first and foremost

a vocal phenomenon.

A Vocal Phenomenon

The theory that vibrato is a naturally occurring phenomenon in the human singing

voice has sparked much debate among musicologists. While many believe vibrato to be a

strictly stylistic entity learned by developing musicians in imitation of those who came

before them, there is considerable evidence that vibrato—at least in the voice—is a part

of nature. In Carl Seashore’s studies on vibrato in the 1930s, the first significant study of

its kind, he provided several observations that suggested vibrato is inherent in the singing

voice. He wrote about the pervasive nature of vibrato claiming that all great singers used

it 95% of the time. He asserted that it is a universal phenomenon as he observed its use in

the music of African and Indian primitive cultures. He also pointed out that vibrato in the

12 Frederick Neumann, “The Vibrato Controvery,” Performance Practice Review 4, no.1 (Spring 1991), 14.

13 Ingo R. Titze, “Getting the Most from the Vocal Instruments in a Choral Setting,” Choral Journal 49, no. 5 (November 2008), 40.

human voice even exists outside the realm of music as it can often be heard in emotional speech.14

Several modern studies of vocal vibrato have provided physiological evidence

that vibrato may be an innate phenomenon. Most fully developed singers will agree that it

is difficult to sing with a perfectly straight sound. Generally this can only be achieved by singing with a pressed or breathy tone, techniques which have been deemed improper or even unhealthy for trained vocalists because they require a high level of muscular tension.15 Studies have shown that when a voice holds a sustained pitch, a series of irregular nerve impulses cause muscular tremors to occur in the larynx at the rate of five to eight times per second. If the vocal folds are making the correct amount of contact, these muscular tremors will develop into a natural quivering of the tone; hence vibrato is actually an indication of proper vocal technique.16 Some have taken a more moderate

stance on this subject stating that the muscular tremors do not develop into vibrato on their own. Instead it has been suggested that vibrato is a learned behavior which allows vocalists to regulate the involuntary muscular tremors in a systematic fashion.17 It has

also been observed that in most cases vocalists cannot significantly alter their normal

14 Carl E. Seashore, “The Natural History of Vibrato,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 17, no. 12 (December 1931), 623.

15 Julia Davids and Stephen LaTour, Vocal Technique (Lon Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc., 2012), 128.

16 Ibid, 127.

17 Titze, 40.

vibrato rate. This is further evidence that involuntary muscular tremors are the origin of the oscillations.18

Vibrato in the voice has also been deemed natural by some because it helps

eliminate vocal fatigue, especially at louder volume levels. Like other muscles in the

human body, the larynx works best when there are alternating periods of contraction and

relaxation.19 It is also believed that a sustained tone with vibrato allows around 10% more

airflow as opposed to a straight tone with this rate going up as register and loudness

increase. Airflow is reduced when a vocalist sings with a straight tone because glottal

resistance is increased as the muscles are constantly working to inhibit the natural

tremors.20

Parameters

Rate, extent, and shape are the fundamental parameters of vibrato. Rate refers to the number of oscillations which occur over a period of time and is usually measured in cycles per second (Hz). Extent refers to the width of vibrato and has a more ambiguous definition. Since vibrato can consist of oscillations of pitch, loudness, or timbre, extent can refer to the amount of variance of any, all, or a combination of these. Pitch extent is the easiest of the three to measure and also has the greatest effect on the overall

18 Jose Antonio Diaz, “A Mathematical Model of Singer’s Vibrato Based on Waveform Analysis,” PhD diss., University of Florida, 1998, 4.

19 Davids and LaTour, 128.

20 John Large and Shigenobu Iwata, “The Significance of Air Flow Modulations in Vocal Vibrato,” The NATS Bulletin 32, no. 3 (February/March 1976), 46.

perception of oscillation for the listener.21 For these reasons, many studies only attempt to

quantify pitch extent and for the most part ignore the other two. When measuring pitch

variance, the distance from the highest to the lowest pitch within the cycle should be

considered the full extent. This is often measured in semi-tones, but to be more precise

should be measured in cents (100th of a semi-tone). Loudness variance, or as it is often

called “amplitude vibrato,” is usually measured as the change in decibels over one cycle

of vibrato. A variance in timbre, called “timbral vibrato,” refers to an oscillation in the

harmonic series for the specific frequency. This is often impossible to quantify in all but

the most controlled environments. There is no standard unit of measurement for timbral

extent. Vibrato shape is the most open ended parameter of vibrato. It can refer to the

change in both rate and extent over the course of any sustained tone. It can also refer to

the actual shape of the curve for each oscillation.

Over the years, many have attempted to quantify these parameters, or even create

a mathematical model of “proper” vibrato. These vibrato studies have not always yielded

consistent results. In Seashore’s studies, he concluded that the best singers oscillate in

pitch by about a semi-tone (100 cents), and that string players oscillate a quarter-tone (50

cents). Both use a vibrato rate of six to seven cycles per second.22 Other recent studies

using empirical data collection include those by Prame and Horii. Prame recorded a mean

vibrato rate of 6.1 Hz on his studies of Shubert’s Ave Maria. He found that the average rate variation for all notes measured for a single vocalist was around 10% while the average variation across all of the ten vocalists he studied was also 10%. Prame’s

21 Peter Desain, Hankjan Honing, Rinus Aarts, and Renee Timmers, “Rhythmic Aspects of Vibrato,” in Rhytm Perception and Production, ed. by Peter Desain and Luke Windsor, 203-216, (Lisse: Swerts & Zeitlinger, 2000), 203.

22 Seashore, “The Natural History…,” 623.

findings for extent varied between 57 and 87 cents, with a mean of 71, slightly smaller

than the typical extent described by Seashore.23 Horii studied vocalists simply sustaining long tones and found that rates could range from three to ten Hz, but most fell between five and six. He also found a pitch extent of 50 to 200 cents.24 In another study, Horii

discussed the inconsistencies when measuring amplitude vibrato. He found that a 2-3 dB

fluctuation is most typical, but as much an 8-10 dB fluctuation has been reported by

others.25

We can also look to various pedagogical studies to find suggestions of the proper

parameters for vibrato. Ingo Titze states that acceptable vibrato rates fall between 4.5 and

6.5 Hz for vocalists in a choral setting. Congruent with Seashore’s findings, he gives 100

cents as a rough guide for extent.26 In the book Vocal Technique by Davids and LaTour,

the authors suggest a wider range for rate, contending that the rate of vibrato should fall

in the same range as the involuntary muscular pulses. These happen five to eight times

per second. They recommend a pitch extent of 100 to 200 cents.27 While trying to create a

mathematical model of proper vocal vibrato, Diaz determined that vibrato rates should

typically fall between 5.5 and 7.5 Hz with pitch extents between 50 and 200 cents.28

Seashore also included some discussion regarding the relationship between amplitude and pitch vibrato. He described “parallel” vibrato where the variation in pitch

23 Prame, “Measurements of the Vibrato Rate…,” 73.

24 Horii, “Frequency Modulation…,” 829.

25 Yoshiyuki Horii, “Acoustical Analysis of Vocal Vibrato: A Theoretical Interpretation of Data,” Journal of Voice 3, no. 1 (1989), 36.

26 Titze, 40.

27 Davids and LaTour, 128.

28 Diaz, 4-5.

and loudness positively correlate, and “opposite” vibrato where the correlation is

negative. He observed that 40% of vocalists generally use parallel, and 30% use opposite

vibrato. The other 30%, he claimed, did not have a significant enough variation in loudness to be considered parallel or opposite.29

Some studies have also attempted to look for trends in vibrato shape. In Horii’s

studies, he concluded that vocal vibrato is usually sinusoidal, but at times can be

trapezoidal. He also observed that the increase in frequency during the vibrato cycle is

generally faster than the decrease.30 He did not discuss whether or not these trends carried

over into instrumental vibrato however. Another study on vibrato shape by Desain,

Honing, Aarts, and Timmers31 found that transitions between notes with vibrato typically

occur in phase for trained musicians. This means that if the note transition is ascending,

the final pitch fluctuation of the first note’s vibrato will end during the ascending portion

of the cycle. They also found that this causes musicians to adjust their rate of vibrato as

not all note lengths will be divisible by a constant rate. This explains why musicians often

increase their vibrato rates toward the end of a note. This technique gives them a better

chance of being in the desired phase for the transition.32 Vibrato rate increasing at the end

of notes, especially in long tones, was also observed by Prame,33 and Bretos and

Sundberg.34 Bretos and Sundberg further qualified their observation, reporting that the

29 Seashore, “The Natural History…,” 625.

30 Horii, “Frequency Modulation…,” 829.

31Desain, Honing, Aarts, and Timmers, 204.

32 Ibid, 213.

33 Prame, “Measurements of the Vibrato Rate…,” 73.

34 Bretos and Sundberg, 343.

vibrato rate increased by an average of 20% from the beginning to the end of a long

tone.35

Perception

Being able to measure the parameters of vibrato is certainly important to

understanding its nature. However, it is also essential to understand that mathematical measurements do not always correlate with how the listener actually perceives vibrato.

Seashore discussed this at length in the introduction to his findings in 1931. He called

vibrato an “illusion” because we hear the fluctuations as being much less than they really are, both in pitch and loudness.36 He was also one of the first to describe the concept of

sonance. Sonance is a phenomenon of vibrato where the listener no longer perceives a

fluctuation of pitch, loudness, or timbre, but instead hears a warmer or richer single

tone.37 Most agree that the parameters of vibrato must be within certain limitations for

true sonance to occur, but the extent of these limitations have often been debated. Some

have even suggested that the entire concept is flawed, and that a listener can always

perceive pitch and loudness fluctuations.38

For those that believe listeners do perceive fluctuations in the parameters of

vibrato, it is important to understand how these parameters interact. As stated previously,

of the three parameters which make up extent, pitch variance is perceived by the listener

35 Ibid, 347.

36 Carl Seashore, Introduction to The Vibrato (Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1931), 10.

37 Neumann, 15.

38 Frederick K. Gable, “Some Observations Concerning Baroque and Modern Vibrato,” Performance Practice Review 5, no. 1 (Spring 1992), 100.

the most.39 Horii’s research however, has suggested that the listener often perceives a

measurable pitch variation as an amplitude variation.40 Prame provides a reason for this.

According to his findings, frequency modulation (pitch variance) causes amplitude

modulations of the individual spectrum partials for a tone. This is what causes the

perceptible modulation in overall amplitude even if the fundamental vibrato frequency remains at a constant loudness.41

Another interesting phenomenon regarding the perception of vibrato was studied

by Robert Donington. He claimed that one of the primary reasons vibrato enriches

musical tone is actually the result of a physical reaction in the listener’s ear. A sustained

static frequency rapidly fatigues the band of fibers in the basilar membrane of the ear

corresponding to the specific sounding pitch. The listener in turn will perceive a decline

in both loudness and colorfulness of the sound. This is why truly static pitches, such as

those produced electronically, sound completely “dead” to us. Vibrato allows the ear to

perceive the tone at its full intensity.42

Of all the known studies on the subject of vibrato, the most common types are

those trying to determine a listener’s perception of pitch within a vibrato tone. One of the

more in depth studies on this topic was conducted by Brown and Vaughn and published

in 1996. In this study a virtuoso violinist was recorded playing several different pitches

with both vibrato and straight tone. The straight tones were then resampled to a variety of

frequencies within 21 cents of the mean vibrato tones. A group of musically experienced

39 Diaz, 6.

40 Horii, “Acoustical Analysis…,” 37.

41 Eric Prame, “Vibrato Extent and Intonation in Professional Western Lyric Singing,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 102, no. 1 (July 1997), 616.

42 Robert Donington, Baroque Music: Style and Performance (London: Faber Music, 1982), 35.

listeners were asked to match the vibrato tones to the straight tones with the closest pitch.

The conclusion was that the listeners (with few exceptions) could match the tones

correctly, meaning that the perceived pitch of a note with vibrato is its mean frequency.43

Similar studies utilizing either vocal or artificially produced sounds were conducted by

Sundberg (1978), Iwamiya (1983), and Shonle and Horan (1980) with comparable

results.44

43 Judith C. Brown and Kathryn V. Vaughn, “Pitch Center of Stringed Instrument Vibrato Tones,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100, no. 3 (September 1996), 1728.

44 Brown and Vaughn, 1729.

Vibrato in Music

It is not clear how or when musicians began using vibrato to enhance their music.

While it is widely believed that it first developed in the singing voice, there is evidence

pointing toward its use by instrumentalists as early as ancient Greece.45 What is clear is

that musicians have used vibrato in a variety of ways and for a variety of reasons across

several centuries of music. In a modern classical music recital it would not be out of the

ordinary to hear several different types of vibrato, even from the same vocalist or

instrumentalist. In fact, it is generally expected that one will alter his or her vibrato use to

match the style of music. To improve our analysis, it may be helpful to explore some of

the different ways musicians have used vibrato within the context of musical

performance.

Continuous or Ornamental?

When looking at vibrato through an historical context, two radically different

approaches to its use emerge. If you are of the school of thought that vibrato is innate to the human voice, then it is logical that some vibrato should always be present in a singing voice. If an instrumentalist is attempting to imitate the lyrical nature of the voice, then he or she should use vibrato in a similar “continuous” manner. Many believe however, that vibrato is simply an ornament only used to enhance music. It does not have to be present for the performance to be considered musically satisfactory. This approach has been most commonly championed by music historians attempting to construct the most authentic model for “historically informed” performances.

45 There is evidence vibrato was used on an instrument called the kithara… see Neumann, 14.

There is considerable evidence that vibrato in most forms of pre-modern music

was considered an ornament, thought of much in the same way as the trill or tremolo are

today. In fact the term “close shake” in relation to string players was synonymous with

vibrato through the seventeenth century.46 In Robert Donington’s The Interpretation of

Early Music, he categorizes vibrato as an ornament in the “shake” family along with

tremolo, the trill, and the mordent.47 Evidence for this claim can be found in several historical documents. In Silvestro Ganassi’s 1542 viol treatise, he stated: “At times one trembles with the bow arm and with the fingers of the hand around the neck in order to achieve an expression appropriate for sad aggrieved music.”48 This shows Ganassi

thought of vibrato as a means of expression for a specific type of music, not to be used

continuously on the viol. In his 1757 vocal treatise, Johann Friedrich Agricola calls

intentional vocal vibrato bebung, the same term used to describe the ornamental vibrato

capable of being produced by the clavichord.49 For wind instruments, the important baroque flute treatises of Hotteterre (1707) and Quantz (1752) mention only finger vibrato, a technique which cannot be used continuously.50

It is also believed that while vibrato use by both vocalists and instrumentalists

increased in the nineteenth century, much of it was still considered ornamentation. Many

romantic era composers such as Gaetano Donizetti, Fromental Halévy, and Giacomo

46 Joseph Berljawsky, “The Evolution of Vibrato,” The Strad 78 (November 1967), 255.

47 Robert Donington, The Interpretation of Early Music (London: Faber and Faber, 1963), 195.

48 Silvestro Ganassi, quoted in Neumann, 19.

49 Beverly Jerold, “Distinguishing Between Artificial and Natural Vibrato in Premodern Music,” Journal of Singing 63, no. 2 (Novemeber/December 2006), 162.

50 Dwight Manning, “Woodwind Vibrato from the Eighteenth Century to the Present,” Performance Practice Review 8, no. 1 (Spring 1995), 67.

Meyerbeer wrote specific places for vocalists to use vibrato in their scores, evidence that

its continuous use was not expected.51 Even as late as the early part of the twentieth century, virtuoso violinist Joseph Joachim made recordings using vibrato only for emphasis or on certain long tones.52

There is additional evidence that would suggest not all pre-modern musicians viewed vibrato as strictly ornamental. Several historical references point to vibrato being a natural phenomenon, especially in the voice. In 1619 when writing about exceptional choir boys, Michael Praetorius said they were “endowed by God and Nature with an especially beautiful vibrant, and flowing or quivering voice.”53 In a 1778 letter by W.A.

Mozart to his father, he stated: “The human voice trembles naturally—but in its own

way—and only to such a degree that the effect is beautiful. Such is the nature of the

voice; and people imitate it not only on wind instruments, but also on string instruments

and even the clavichord.”54

The concept of instrumentalists imitating the human voice is common among

other early writings. In 1751 Francesco Geminiani wrote, “The art of playing the violin

consists in giving that instrument a tone that shall in a manner rival the most perfect

human voice.”55 Geminiani actually advocated a more extensive use of vibrato than his

51 Jerold, 165.

52 Clive Brown, “Notation and Interpretation,” in A Performer’s Guide to Music of the Romantic Period, ed. Anthony Burton (London: The Associated Board of the Royall Schools of Music, 2002), 24.

53 Michael Praetorius, quoted in Christopher Jackson, “An Examination of Vibrato Use Options for Late Renaissance Vocal Music,” Choral Journal 48, no. 1 (July 2007), 28.

54 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, letter of June 12, 1778 to his father, adapted from The Letters of Mozart and his Family, trans. Emily Anderson (New York: Norton, 1985).

55 Francesco Geminiani, quoted in Merrill T. Hollinshead, “Historical Survey of the String Instrument Vibrato,” in Studies in the Psychology of Music, vol. 1, The Vibrato, ed. Carl Seashore (Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1931), 290.

contemporaries, suggesting that it should be used even on short notes because it made

them sound more “agreeable.”56 Marin Mersenne also advocated its liberal use in his

1636 violin treatise stating that “The tone of the violin is the most ravishing when players sweeten it by certain tremblings which delight the mind.57

When music historians debate continuous natural vibrato versus “intentional” ornamental vibrato, they often are arguing about two different things. Many believe that much of the continuous vibrato heard by modern musicians is in fact not the natural

“quivering” that Mozart and others described.58 Some have suggested that the use of

vibrato went through a radical transformation during the late nineteenth century because

concert halls and orchestras became larger. Audiences probably began to desire vocalists

who could stand out from the orchestra and a more exaggerated vibrato allowed them to

do so.59 Over time, extensive training at high dynamic levels led to a habitual continuous

vibrato that became intensified on into the twentieth century.60 As expected, many

instrumentalists began incorporating an omnipresent, constant vibrato in imitation of their

vocal counterparts.61

In modern times, the lines between ornamental, continuous, natural, and

intentional vibrato are quite blurred. As Seashore and others have observed, its use is

quite pervasive in most forms of music, but variations in vibrato use can usually be

56 Neumann, 22.

57 Marin Mersenne, often considered the “father of acoustics,” quoted in Donington, 232.

58 Gable, 91.

59 Jerold, 165.

60 Gable, 93.

61 Neumann, 15.

found. This suggests a possible blend of the above vibrato styles. Donington states that

even in forms of early music, continuous vibrato is always musically justifiable if treated

correctly.62 It is the music itself that informs the musician of the “correct” use.

Emotion, Stress, and Musical Structure

According to Joseph Berljawsky, the purpose of vibrato has always been to enhance emotion.63 This is one of the innate effects of vibrato as it has been observed

even in emotional speech.64 But in music, since a wide range of emotions are often

portrayed, subtle variations of vibrato can be used to distinguish every detail. This is

especially important to instrumentalists where no inherent meaning is associated with

every note as it is with a texted vocal piece. The wide range of vibrato use can go from

evoking strong feelings of happiness, sadness, or anger, to simply adding stress to a note

within the musical structure. In fact, more vibrato does not always equal more stress. The

tone with a different kind of vibrato will always stand out from the rest.65

MacLeod’s experiments with vibrato clearly illustrate how emotion and musical

structure can affect vibrato use by trained musicians. She recorded several high school and university violin and viola students performing scales and musical excerpts. The vibrato rates and extents of each subject were measured and compared against musical attributes such as dynamic level and pitch height. She concluded that higher dynamic levels generally caused the vibrato to be faster (but only on the scales) and wider (on both

62 Donington, 235.

63 Berljawsky, 255.

64 Seashore 623.

65 Jacquelyn Lamar, “The History and Development of Vibrato Among Classical Saxophonists,” lecture, North Texas University, 1986, 26.

scales and excerpts). Notes in the upper range tended to also be faster and wider. Since

louder and higher notes generally have more stress or emotion associated with them, it is

only natural that their vibrato be intensified. Another interesting conclusion in this study

was that the university students used a significantly wider vibrato on the musical excerpts

than on the scales, but the high school musicians did not. Since real musical excerpts

have inherently higher emotional content than exercises, the subjects with more musical

training used vibrato to enhance this emotion.66

One study by Michel and Myers examined how dynamics affected vibrato use

among vocalists. They concluded that while vocalists generally use the same vibrato rates

on loud and soft singing, the rates increase on crescendos. Here the subjects altered their

vibrato most during the actual transition, not simply between two contrasting dynamics.

Interestingly, no rate increase or decrease was found on decrescendos.67

The study by Timmers and Desain focused almost exclusively on vibrato and

musical structure. They used a method to quantify certain aspects of the musical structure

to see how it affected the vibrato of a cello, oboe, tenor, theremin, and a violin. Values

for metric stress, phrase position, and melodic charge were assigned to each note of the

given musical material, the first phrase of Saint-Saëns’s “Le Cygne.”68 As the metric

stress increased, the cello, oboe, theremin, and violin all were found to have a decreased

vibrato rate. Extent was generally increased as metric stress increased, but notes with the

highest metric stress often had only medium or even small extents. This was most notable

66 MacLeod, viii.

67 John F. Michel and R. Denise Myers, “The Effects of Crescendo on Vocal Vibrato,” Journal of Voice 5, no. 4 (1991), 292.

68 originally for solo cello

with the cello. For phrase position, only the theremin had its rate affected (slower at the

end of the phrase). The cello and oboe had lower extents at the beginning and end of the

phrase but for violin it was lower just at the end. Melodic charge positively correlated

with the violin’s rate, and both the violin and oboe’s extent.69

The results of the Timmers and Desain study show that musical structures often affect the parameters of vibrato in unexpected ways. For instance, most of the

instruments actually used a slower vibrato on notes with more metric stress. It is also

interesting to note that the tenor was generally affected the least by contrasting structures

possibly illustrating that vibrato is more innate to the voice. The tenor’s vibrato

parameters remained rather constant as they are a product of his own physiology while

the instrumentalists were able to manipulate their vibrato to a greater extent.70

In addition to measuring and analyzing the musicians’ vibrato, interviews were

conducted with each subject as part of this study. For the most part, the musicians’ ideas

about how musical structures would affect their own vibrato matched the empirical data

collected. There was some contradiction though in the way the musicians thought they

stressed certain notes with vibrato. In their interviews, most claimed that the notes with

the highest stress would have both faster and wider vibrato. But generally only the extent

was higher with the rate often being lower for these notes.71 Even for professional

musicians there is often a difference between perception and reality in regards to vibrato.

69 Timmers and Desain.

70 Ibid.

71 Ibid.

Saxophone Vibrato

At the time of the saxophone’s invention in the mid-nineteenth century, it was

uncommon for wind instrumentalists to use vibrato in their playing. Even as vibrato

became more accepted in vocal art music, many still considered it inappropriate and in

poor taste for winds.72 The earliest saxophone studies and method books, including

publications by Kastner (1844), Cokken (1846), Hartmann (1846), L. Mayeur (1867),

Klosé (1877), and A. Mayeur (1896) made no mention of vibrato. Carl Weber, in his

1897 method described the ideal saxophone sound as “unwavering.”73 Even in the early

part of the twentieth century vibrato was still not associated with the saxophone. In 1917

Ben Vereecken published his Foundation to Saxophone Playing, one of the most

important pedagogical studies of its time. In the section titled “What to Practice,” he

stated: “Avoid the ‘tremolo’ or ‘vibrato’ style of playing. See that your tone is absolutely

clear and pure.”74 Later he wrote, “Avoid letting the tone tremble by the loosening of the lips.”75 As late as 1920, George Koehler’s book instructed to “avoid any semblance to

tremolo or vibrato.”76

72 Lamar, 1.

73 Gail Beth Levinsky, “An Analysis and Comparison of Early Saxophone Methods Published Between 1846-1946,” (DMA doc, Northwestern University, 1997), 153.

74 Ben Vereeken, Foundation to Saxophone Playing: An Elementary Method (New York: Carl Fischer, 1917), 4.

75 Vereeken, 8.

76 Levinsky, 154.

Origins

There are several theories regarding the manner in which saxophonists began

using vibrato. A general assumption has been made that as vibrato became more popular

with vocalists, string players, and finally wind players, saxophonists likely followed this

trend by experimenting with the new technique. A more specific theory relates the

saxophone’s incorporation into dance orchestras of the early twentieth century. At the

turn of the century, dance orchestras generally used no saxophones as the instrument was

still relatively unknown. As the saxophone gained popularity among the general public,

many orchestras began to incorporate its use to remain fashionable. Because of its greater

stylistic flexibility and dynamic range, saxophones most commonly replaced violins in

the orchestras. Since there was a lack of quality players available many violinists learned

to double on the saxophone, an instrument relatively easy to pick up in a short period of

time.77 It is probable that these string players brought many of their playing techniques

over to the new instrument. In many cases this would have included vibrato.

While vibrato and other similar effects (harmonic trills, shakes, tremolo, etc.)

were likely being used by Vaudeville and early jazz saxophonists by the first decades of

the twentieth century, the technique had not yet gained popularity among classical

players. Several notable concert soloists of the era, including Jean Moeremans (the Sousa

band soloist), Eugene Coffin (who performed at McKinley’s inauguration), and François

Combelle (Marcel Mule’s predecessor in the Garde Républicane de Paris) played with

no vibrato.78 It may have been Rudy Wiedoeft that first helped to popularize vibrato

77 Wally Horwood, Adolphe Sax 1814-1894: His Life and Legacy (Herts: Egon Publishers Ltd., 1980), 173-174.

78 Lamar, 13.

among the “legit” performers. Though Wiedoeft’s musical style was a mixture of

classical and popular, he attempted to play with some of the same characteristics of his

violinist contemporaries, Fritz Kreisler and Jasha Heifetz.79 Cecil Leeson, widely

considered the first great American concert saxophonist, pointed toward Wiedoeft as his initial primary model for his playing.80

In Europe there is one person who undoubtedly influenced the development of

concert saxophone vibrato more than any other. This of course was Marcel Mule. Mule

began playing saxophone at age seven, but also seriously studied violin in his early

years.81 He later claimed that his studies on the violin taught him a great deal about tonal

homogeneity, virtuosity, and articulation, concepts he helped bring to the concert

saxophone world.82 One may assume that Mule developed his saxophone vibrato style

from the violin, an instrument that was already developing a reputation for extensive

vibrato use during the time of his childhood. But according to Mule himself, this was not

the case. Mule claimed that his vibrato all started with jazz.83

Even though Mule had studied the saxophone since c.1908, he did not hear jazz played on the instrument until the early 1920s. When he first heard saxophonists play this new type of music he found the tone remarkably strange, even calling the rapid vibrato many early jazz players utilized “dreadful.” Anyone familiar with the vibrato style of

French-Creole saxophonist Sidney Bechet, widely regarded as the most influential jazz

79 Lamar, 16.

80 Lamar, 18.

81 Eugene Rousseau, Marcel Mule: His Life and the Saxophone (Shell Lake, WI: Étoile Music, Inc., 1982), 5.

82 Delangle and Michat, 166.

83 Delangle, 5.

saxophonist of the 1920s, can probably understand Mule’s bewilderment. Nevertheless,

Mule was inspired to develop his own vibrato.84

In 1923 Mule began performing with jazz groups around Paris for extra income.

He described himself as a decent jazz player, but not a great one because he did not

“favor the choruses.”85 Later on he admitted that jazz taught him about the saxophone’s

power and versatility.86 Eventually Mule was able to succeed in finding the undulating

vibrato characteristic of the local jazz musicians. Though Mule had learned this new

technique, he still played classical music without vibrato, treating the instrument much

like a clarinet. It was in 1928 that everything changed. Mule had been performing with

the Opéra Comique in Paris for a short time when they were scheduled to play a ballet

titled Evolution, by Edouard L’Enfant. L’Enfant was a pianist-composer who dabbled in

jazz and liked to include pieces such as foxtrots and blues87 in his compositions. There

happened to be a saxophone solo in the ballet with the composer’s instruction “very

vibrant.” After being unsatisfied with Mule’s interpretation of the solo on the first play-

through during rehearsal, L’Enfant asked Mule to play the solo like he had heard him

play jazz. Mule feared using his jazz vibrato would lead to a “scandal,” but obliged the

composer anyway. Much to his surprise, the performance received exceptionally high

84 Rousseau, 6.

85 He is alluding to improvised soloing, see Delangle, “Interview with the Legendary Marcel Mule…,” 5.

86 Rousseau, 10.

87 musical styles which were in vogue at the time

praise from his peers, some who even suggested he always play concert music in that

manner.88

From that point forward, Mule used vibrato in all of his playing. It is apparent that he considered the day he initially used vibrato with the Opéra Comique as somewhat of a turning point in his career. He has even claimed that this event commenced a 15 year period of growth for the concert saxophone, eventually culminating in the reestablishment of saxophone classes at the Paris Conservatory in 1942.89 While there

may be some amount of hyperbole in this statement, it is worth noting that during this

time period (1928-1942), a great majority of the most important concert saxophone

repertoire was composed. Mule claimed composers were now attracted to the instrument

because its new sonority (a result of the vibrato) helped set it apart from the clarinet.90

Mule often related the concepts of sonority and vibrato. In an interview with Eugene

Rousseau, he stated, “This basic desire for a good sonority on the part of both performers

and listeners is at the heart of my teaching philosophy. Thus I spent years developing and

refining my sonority and the use of vibrato trying to impart the principles to my

students.”91

It is ironic that Mule credits the origins of his classical vibrato to jazz because the

early jazz vibrato he was first so off put by is one of the things many found “crude” about

88 Delangle, 6.

89 In 1942 Mule became the second ever professor of saxophone at the Paris Conservatory. The first was Adolphe Sax himself, who held the position from 1857-1870.

90 Rousseau, 77.

91 Ibid, 83.

the instrument. After Sigurd Rascher’s debut performance with the New York

Philharmonic in 1939,92 this review appeared in the New York Times:

In his hands, the saxophone sheds its nightclub abandon and becomes, in fact, continent and almost reserved. His tone is pure, smooth, and varied. It has not a trace of Broadway wobble or honeyed slides. When its natural vibrato is suppressed it takes on the color of the French Horn; and it invades the realms of the ‘cello and clarinet with no protest from the ear.93

In all likelihood, Rascher was using vibrato on this performance, just not in the same

manner that the writer was accustomed to hearing on the saxophone. It does illustrate the

point however, that the saxophone was still quite new to the concert music scene without

a firmly established standard of performance techniques.

Modern Vibrato

By the middle to late part of the twentieth century, vibrato had become nearly

universally accepted by all concert saxophonists. In 1973 Cecil Gold conducted a survey

of 75 Canadian and American university saxophone teachers in which he asked how

often they used vibrato in their performance: always, usually, occasionally, or never. All

of the respondents answered “always” or “usually.”94

Even though vibrato use by saxophonists had become widespread, many observed

regional differences to its approach. There was the “French school,” led by Marcel Mule,

the “American school,” modeled after Cecil Leeson and Larry Teal, and the “Rascher

92 Performance included works by Debussy and Ibert (likely, the Concertino da Camera).

93 Unknown author, “Philharmonic has a Saxophone Soloist for First Time in its 3,543 Concerts,” New York Times 12 (November 1939), 45, quoted in Timothy Verville, “Instrumantal Vibrato: An Annotated Bibliography of Historical Writings Before 1940,” DMA Doc., Arizona State University, May 2012.

94 Cecil Gold, Saxophone Performance Practices and Teaching in the United States and Canada (Moscow, ID: School of Music Publications, University of Idaho, 1973), 29.

school,” for the smaller group who followed Sigurd Rascher. These schools had slight differences in tonal concept, playing styles, and standard repertoire, yet vibrato was possibly the thing that separated them the most. The Gold survey asked respondents to comment on the differences between the American and French schools of playing. The majority of answers focused on vibrato, stating that the French school used faster, wider, and more constant vibrato. The American school’s vibrato tended to be slower, more varied in rate and extent, and used less often.95

When asked about this subject, Marcel Mule completely rejected the idea of

differing saxophone “schools.” He claimed it was only brought up by players who have

not studied the saxophone seriously and that the correct approach to playing the

instrument should be similar everywhere.96 But according to Stephen Cottrell, when one

person (Mule in this case) has had such an overwhelming influence on his students, a

somewhat homogenized style is likely to emerge.97 He compares Mule’s influence on the

French school of saxophone playing with Paul Taffanel’s creation of the French flute

school nearly 50 years earlier.98 Larry Teal had a similar influence on his students as the

first professor of saxophone in the United States.99

95 Gold, 32-35.

96 Rousseau, 97.

97 For much of Mule’s tenure at the Paris Conservatory, he was the only classical saxophone model for his students.

98 Stephen Cottrell, The Saxophone (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012), 248.

99 Teal taught at the University of Michigan 1953-1974.

Pedagogy

The first saxophone method to explicitly mention vibrato is Paul De Ville’s

Universal Method for the Saxophone, published in 1908. It was the most complete

method for saxophone at the time of its publication, and defined vibrato as: “A wavering

tone-effect, which should be sparingly used.”100 Rudy Wiedoeft was the first to write

about vibrato in a more positive way. In 1922 he wrote that vibrato enhanced musical

quality of tone and pointed out how it should emulate the human voice.101 Since that

time, nearly all saxophone pedagogical studies and methods have included discussion on

vibrato. Many focus on ways to achieve and refine vibrato but it is rare to find a

recommendation of specific parameters (rate and extent).102 A few pertinent examples

will be discussed below.

Perhaps the most in depth pedagogical discussion on saxophone vibrato comes in

Larry Teal’s 1963 book, The Art of Saxophone Playing. Teal devotes an entire seven

pages to the subject. Included in the discussion are several methods to create vibrato

(through motions of the jaw, lip, throat, or diaphragm) and specific musical examples for

practicing their implementation. He includes a scientific discussion about the nature of

vibrato, with explanations of pitch, intensity, and timbre modulations. There is even a

philosophical discussion about the justification for vibrato on the saxophone. Teal states,

“The saxophone is essentially a lyric instrument, whose tone and use is associated with

100 Paul De Ville, Universal Method for the Saxophone (New York: Carl Fischer, 1908), 9.

101 Levinsky, 154.

102 Levinsky, 166.

the human voice. Inasmuch as vibrato is universally accepted as a natural embellishment

for the voice, it is logical that the saxophone should be treated likewise.”103

Though Teal does not suggest specific ranges for the parameters of vibrato, he

does discuss both rate and extent. He recommends using an even rate and an extent that is

not so wide it becomes monotonous. He also says these parameters should be determined

by the type of music, and the “emotional quality of the phrase.” Later, he states that “a

variation in rate and extent is desirable.”104 Regarding the overall shape of vibrato, Teal states, “In a lyrical phrase, pass from one tone to the next without disturbing the flow of

pulsation.”105

One pedagogical publication that does give specific parameters for vibrato is the

Teacher’s Guide to the Saxophone, by Fred Hemke. Hemke was the first American

student of Marcel Mule and became one of the world’s most prominent performers,

teachers, and pedagogs in the area of concert saxophone. In his book he suggests a rate

between 5 and 5.5 Hz, and an extent of 5 to 15 cents.106

While Mule himself never authored a complete pedagogical method, he has provided us with some specific ways he helped his students master vibrato. Mule initially

instructed students to learn vibrato with a metronome. His standard speed was 288

undulations per minute (4.8 Hz). His students not only practiced exercises in this manner,

but learned musical studies while keeping a constant vibrato rate. This is precisely why

103 Larry Teal, The Art of Saxophone Playing (Princeton: Summy-Birchard Inc., 1963), 54.

104 Teal, 54.

105 Teal, 60.

106 Fred Hemke, Teacher’s Guide to the Saxophone (Elkhart, IN: H & A Selmer, Inc., 1966), 8-9.

on Mule’s edition of W. Ferling’s 48 Famous Studies,107 he marked all the slow

movements at 72 beats per minute. This would allow the player to have four undulations

per beat at his suggested vibrato rate. Mule later said he should have suggested a rate of

300 undulations per minute (5 Hz) as he thought that was closer to what he used in actual

performance. Mule believed it was important for his students to be able to play vibrato

with the utmost consistency before he allowed them to vary the speed and depth to suit the music. He believed practicing with the metronome would teach the control needed to master vibrato.108

One of the most recently published saxophone pedagogical books is Tracy

Heavner’s Saxophone Secrets: 60 Performance Strategies for the Advanced Saxophonist.

In his section on vibrato, he states that the performer should have complete control over

both the width and speed of vibrato, echoing the sentiments of many of the earlier

studies. He also makes an interesting observation concerning pitch range and vibrato

width on the saxophone. He states that as one descends in range, much more jaw

movement is required to produce the same amount of vibrato as on higher notes. Heavner

never suggests what the ideal parameters of vibrato should be because he also believes

this must vary by piece. He recommends listening to accomplished artists (both

instrumental and vocal) to gain the ability to know what is appropriate.109

One specific aspect of saxophone vibrato discussed in several pedagogical studies

and methods is the amount of pitch variance there should be above versus below the

107 This book of studies originally for oboe has become one of the most standard etude books for saxophone.

108 Rousseau, 85.

109 Tracy Lee Heavner, Saxophone Secrets: 60 Performance Strategies for the Advanced Saxo[phoniest (Plymoth, UK: Scarecrow Press, 2013), 71.

given note. In the Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone, Kyle Horch states that

vibrato can go above and below the center of the note evenly, or just above, or just below.

He says that the preferred method is to use vibrato which only goes below as to not constrict the sound.110 Heavner echoes this sentiment, saying that during one undulation

of vibrato, the jaw should be lowered, and then returned to “normal” position. This

causes the pitch to fluctuate from being in tune, to flat, to back in tune. He even warns against going sharp when the jaw is returned to normal position.111 In Hemke’s method, he makes similar statements about vibrato only occurring below the note.112

According to Cecil Leeson, the saxophone embouchure holds the pitch near the

upper limit of variation, and that it is physically possible to only use vibrato which goes

under the pitch.113 It is clear that the overwhelming majority of methods suggest using

vibrato that is mostly or entirely beneath the given pitch. Yet, as was previously

discussed, the perception of pitch throughout a tone with vibrato is usually the mean of

the highest and lowest extents of frequency. So in theory, if a saxophonist was precisely

observing the instructions of these pedagogical methods, the listener would always hear

his or her vibrato as being flat. More research is needed on this topic as it relates to

saxophone performance.

110 Kyle Horch, “Saxophone Technique,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone, ed. Richard Ingham (Cambridge University Press, 1998), 80.

111 Heavner, 70.

112 Hemke, 8.

113 Cecil Leeson, ”The Basis of Saxophone Tone Production: A Critical and Analytical Study,” DFA diss., Chicago Musical College, 1955, 76.

PART 2: THE STUDY

Methodology

To examine the use of vibrato by prominent concert saxophonists it was important

to utilize a clear method for data collection and analysis. The choice of soloists and

recordings was the initial concern when beginning the study. It was impractical to

examine the vibrato use by every significant saxophone soloist as detailed analysis would

be impossible with such a large sample. However, only analyzing one or two prominent

soloists may not illustrate the wide range of vibrato used by saxophonists. In an attempt

to balance these considerations, eight soloists were chosen performing seven pieces of

standard saxophone repertoire. The soloists chosen were Vincent Abato, Arno Bornkamp,

Claude Delangle, Jean-Marie Londeix, Marcel Mule, Otis Murphy, Sigurd Rascher, and

Eugene Rousseau. The repertoire included Aria by Eugene Bozza, Sonata by Paul

Creston, Prelude, Cadence et Finale by Alfred Desenclos, Concerto in Eb by Alexander

Glazunov, Concertino da Camera by Jacques Ibert, Sonate by Paul Hindemith, and

Tableaux de Provence by Paule Maurice.

Choice of Soloists

Several aspects were considered when choosing the soloists for this study. It was

most crucial to select individuals with a high degree of influence on the field of concert

saxophone. It was also important to select individuals from different time periods and

contrasting backgrounds. This allowed observations to be made regarding regional and

generational trends in vibrato use. In order to make comparisons of the highest quality

between the soloists, it was also important to select saxophonists that had recorded the

same repertoire. A brief justification for the inclusion of each soloist, by order of birth

date, is provided below.

Marcel Mule (1901-2001) is widely considered the father of the French saxophone school and possibly the most influential of all concert saxophonists. He almost singlehandedly created the modern pedagogical foundation for saxophone playing and was also the leading pioneer of the saxophone quartet. Over 60 compositions were dedicated to him, including the works by Bozza, Desenclos, and Maurice in this study.114

It has been said that when Mule retired from his position at the CNSM (Paris

Conservatory) in 1968, every single classical saxophone teacher or performer in the world had been influenced by him in some way.115 Mule’s inclusion in this study was

essential. His influence on saxophone vibrato has been previously discussed in detail.116

Sigurd Rascher (1907-2001) is often considered the counterpart to Mule. While he

did not gain Mule’s level of influence with his teaching, Rascher may have had a more

successful performance career. He toured much of Europe in the 1930s performing with

several significant professional orchestras, and his 1939 American premier with the New

York Philharmonic helped to legitimize the saxophone as a concert instrument in the

United States.117 Rascher also had many significant relationships with composers who would write much of the standard saxophone repertoire. The Glazunov Concerto and

Ibert Concertino, perhaps the two most important pieces of saxophone literature (both

114 Harry R. Gee, Saxophone Soloists and Their Music 1844-1985: An Annotated Bibliography (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), 223.

115 Rousseau, 3.

116 see pages 24-26

117 Michael Segell, The Devil’s Horn: The Story of the Saxophone, from Noisy Novelty to King of Cool (New York: Picador, 2005), 246.

included in this study) were written for him. In all, nearly 100 compositions were

dedicated to Rascher.118 Born in western Germany, but of Danish descent, Rascher

actually spent the majority of his life living in upstate New York. His performance style was significantly different from the French school, and he preferred to play on equipment more similar to Adolphe Sax’s original designs.119 Because of these differences, Rascher

has always had a following of purists who separate themselves from both the French and

American schools of playing.120

Vincent Abato (1919-2008) was an early American concert saxophonist. He has

been included in this study because the more influential early American saxophonists

Cecil Leeson and Larry Teal were rarely recorded. Abato was a formally trained

clarinetist who studied at the prestigious institutions of Peabody and Julliard.121 In 1944

he won a job with the New York Philharmonic playing both clarinet and bass clarinet.

That year the orchestra was scheduled to premier Paul Creston’s saxophone concerto with

Marcel Mule performing the solo. Due to complications with the war in Europe, Mule

could not make the trip and Abato was asked to perform instead. Up until this time he had

only played saxophone on the side in after-hours jazz clubs. Abato’s performance was a

resounding success and from then on he was more famous for playing saxophone than

clarinet. Because he always had a full-time clarinet job with various orchestras

throughout his career, he was able to further expose these groups to the saxophone. Since

these orchestras did not have to hire an outside musician (one who may have had a lower

118 Gee, 140.

119 The larger, barrel shaped mouthpiece indicated by Sax’s diagrams is said to give a darker tone quality and more even distribution of overtones across the entire dynamic range.

120 Segell, 245-246.

121 Gee, 68.

performance standard than the orchestra members) they were more inclined to program

works which included the saxophone. This could have influenced composers to write

more for the orchestral saxophone. In this way, Abato likely had a significant influence

on concert and orchestral saxophone repertoire.122

Eugene Rousseau (b.1932) is one of the most influential saxophone teachers and

pedagogs in the United States having taught at Indiana University (1964-2000) and the

University of Minnesota (2000-present). While completing his PhD at the University of

Iowa, he received a Fullbright Grant to study with Marcel Mule in 1960-1961. Rousseau

also was a co-founder of the World Saxophone Congress, a triennial celebration of the

saxophone held at various locations around the globe. After his debut as a soloist at

Carnegie Hall in 1965, Rousseau has enjoyed an extensive performance career, playing

for audiences across five different continents.123 Though American, his playing style

contains many elements of the French school, possibly because of his time with Mule.

Jean-Marie Londeix (b.1932) was a member of Mule’s CNSM saxophone studio in 1951-1952. Performing professionally throughout Europe over the next several

decades, he became known as one of the most vocal champions of new music for the

saxophone. As a teacher he has held the position of professor of saxophone at the

Conservatory of Dijon and the CNRM in Bordeaux.124 One of Londeix’s greatest

contributions to the saxophone field is his Comprehensive Guide to Saxophone

122 Segell, 254-256.

123 Gee, 148.

124 Ibid, 214.

Repertoire,125 an index (updated annually) of every known composition for the

instrument. In addition to the guide, he has authored 29 pedagogical methods and studies.

Claude Delangle (b.1957) is the current professor of saxophone at the CNSM in

Paris. He began his tenure in 1982 as the fourth to hold the position after Sax, Mule, and

Daniel Deffayet. Delangle was actually a member of the saxophone studio under

Deffayet, beginning his studies in 1975.126 He is currently one of the most respected

soloists and clinicians in the concert saxophone field. His extensive discography includes recordings of nearly all the standard repertoire, many of which are considered the exemplary model of modern concert saxophone performance. Delangle is also

responsible for working with several contemporary composers to create new works for

the saxophone.127

Arno Bornkamp (b.1959) is another one of the most important concert saxophone

soloists in Europe today. A native of the Netherlands, Bornkamp’s musical education included studies with Deffayet, Londeix, and Ryo Noda. In 1982 he made his solo debut in Rome performing Ibert’s Concertino da Camera to much critical acclaim. Since then

he has presented more than 250 concerts with orchestras around the world. Bornkamp is

currently the saxophone professor at the Conservatory of Amsterdam.128

Otis Murphy (b.1972) is the youngest individual included in this study. He is one

of the leading concert saxophone soloists in the United States and has presented clinics

125 Jean-Marie Londeix, Comprehensive Guide to Saxophone Repertoire 1844-2012, ed. Bruce Ronkin (Glenmore, PA: Roncorp, 2012).

126 Gee, 193.

127 Segell, 250.

128 from Arno Bornkamp’s promotional website last accessed Aug. 5, 2013.

and recitals in much of Europe and Japan. Among others, he has studied with Rousseau

and Jean-Yves Fourmeau, a former member of the CNSM studio under Deffayet. In 2001

(at the age of 28), Murphy became one of the youngest faculty members in the history of

the prestigious Jacobs School of Music at the Indiana University.129

Choice of Repertoire/Recordings

Each recording chosen for this study consists of a work of standard concert

saxophone literature. These compositions can be found on nearly every saxophone

studio’s repertoire list at the university level. It was important to use standard repertoire

for analysis in order to get the best representation of “normal” saxophone vibrato. Where

possible, compositions were chosen that were recorded by several of our selected soloists

in order to achieve the highest quality comparative analysis.

Alexander Glazunov’s (1865-1936) Concerto in E-flat for saxophone and string

orchestra is the oldest work used in this study. Completed near the end of Glazunov’s life in 1934, it has become possibly the most played concert saxophone work to date. Like most of his music, this concerto has many aspects of Russian late romantic music, a more traditional style than most other significant saxophone repertoire. Included in this study are recordings of the Glazunov by Rascher (1953), Mule (1958), Abato (c.1964),

Rousseau (1971), and Bornkamp (1994).

The only piece of saxophone repertoire that may be as significant as Glazunov’s

concerto is the Concertino da Camera, by Jacques Ibert (1890-1962). Composed a year later in 1935, this work is scored for saxophone and an eleven piece chamber orchestra.

129 from Otis Murphy’s promotional website, last accessed Aug. 5, 2013.

Ibert knew the saxophone quite well, and had personal relationships with both Mule and

Rascher. The work was written for Rascher and was one of the first pieces to take advantage of his skills playing in the altissimo register.130 Included in this study are

recordings of the Ibert by Mule (1958), Rascher (1958), Abato (c.1964), Rousseau

(1971), Bornkamp (1994), and Delangle (2007).

Aria for alto saxophone and piano was composed by Eugène Bozza (1905-1991)

in 1936. This brief single movement work is often one of the first pieces of literature

learned by developing saxophonists. The slow tempo and lyrical nature also make it

perfect for vibrato study. Recordings of the Bozza by Rascher (c.1960), Bornkamp

(1995), and Murphy (2006) were included in this study

Another one of the most significant compositions for concert saxophone is the

Sonata by Paul Creston (1906-1985). This work was composed in 1939 and dedicated to

the American saxophonist Cecil Leeson.131 Although all three movements were examined, the second movement, “with tranquility” was focused on the most for detailed vibrato analysis. Included in this study are recordings of the Creston by Mule (c.1960),

Rascher (c.1960), Bornkamp (1989), and Murphy (1999).

Paul Hindemith’s (1895-1963) Sonate is the only work in this study not originally composed for the saxophone. The piece was written in 1943 and initially intended for the alto horn. Hindemith adapted it for the alto saxophone after finding it was a more popular instrument. For this reason, the writing is significantly less technical than the majority of saxophone compositions. In fact, many saxophonists often opt to play an arranged version of the fourth movement, which includes material adapted from the highly

130 Rousseau, 59.

131 Gee, 122.

technical piano part. For this study only the first three movements were considered.

Included here are recordings by Londeix (date unknown), Rousseau (1968), and

Bornkamp (1989).

Tableaux de Provence is a programmatic work by Paule Maurice (1910-1967).

The five movement work depicts life in the rural Mediterranean region of France known

as Provence. This was an area where Marcel Mule would often spend his vacations.

Maurice composed the work between 1948 and 1955 and dedicated it to Mule, who also

had a close relationship with her composer husband, Pierre Lantier.132 The first three

movements were considered for this study. Included here are recordings by Mule

(c.1960), Londeix (date unknown), and Delangle (1999).

The newest work utilized for this study is Prelude, Cadence et Finale by Alfred

Desenclos (1912-1971). This piece was composed in 1956 specifically for the solo de

concours, an annual competition for the saxophone studio at the CNSM in Paris.

Desenclos, a faculty member at the conservatory dedicated the work to his friend and

colleague Marcel Mule.133 Recordings of the Desenclos by Londeix (date unknown),

Bornkamp (1989), and Delangle (1999) were considered.

Observational Techniques

For this study, vibrato was examined using a variety of methods. Some of these

were observational, such as recording the use or non-use of vibrato on a given note or

passage. Some were more mathematical, such as measuring the precise rate and extent of

132 Anthony Jon Moore, last accessed Aug. 10, 2013.

133 Gee, 223.

the vibrato on a certain note. To aid in both observational and mathematical data

collection, the software program Sonic Visualiser134 was used.

Before any detailed data collection took place, a general observational analysis

with respect to the vibrato used on each recording was made. Large scale trends, such as

when and where the soloists used vibrato, and how the soloists’ vibrato styles compared

were considered. These observations will be discussed in detail in both the “Repertoire

Analysis” and “Conclusions” sections below.

Certain “important” sections within the music, such as the exposition of a

movement or a complete statement of a theme were also analyzed in greater detail.

Within these sections, the vibrato use or non-use on every note was considered. This data

could then be compared against musical attributes such as note length or metric stress to

determine their influence on vibrato use. These results will be presented in both the

“General Analysis” and “Repertoire Analysis” sections.

To determine whether or not a given note had vibrato, certain criteria needed to be established. For most notes, an observable oscillation of pitch, loudness, or timbre of at

least one full cycle was required. However, for notes with a length shorter than one cycle

of vibrato, a full cycle of oscillation was not required. As long as oscillation similar to the

soloist’s vibrato on longer notes was present and detectable, the note was determined to

have vibrato. To aid in these observations, Sonic Visualiser was often used to digitally

reduce the speed of the recordings.

134 Sonic Visualiser 2.0, by Chris Cannam, Christian Landone, and Mark Sandler, Sonic Visualiser: An Open Source Application for Viewing, Analysing, and Annotating Music Audio Files, Proceedings of the ACM Multimedia 2010 International Conference.

Measurement Techniques

In addition to observational analysis, several notes were chosen for the precise measurement of vibrato rate and extent. For a variety of reasons, it was impossible to consider every note for measurement. When studying “real” recordings where the soloist is not isolated, many notes are often obscured by other instruments, or by anomalies in

the audio itself. Only notes that clearly could be isolated with the software were

considered. To accurately compare the vibrato use between each soloist, it was also

important to measure the same notes in every recording of the same repertoire. Where

possible, notes were chosen that contained vibrato by each soloist. Lastly, it was

important to choose notes for measurement with a variety of musical attributes since the

results were to be compared against note length, tempo, dynamics, and range. The notes were selected from all parts of the spectrum with regards to these attributes. A list of the notes chosen for measurement, including the raw data collected, can be found in the

Appendix.

In order to record precise measurements of the rate and extent of the vibrato, a peak frequency spectrogram was applied to the audio. Sonic Visualiser displays this

spectrogram as a graph of all frequencies from approximately 40 to 1500 Hz. The

frequency scale is displayed vertically and is logarithmic, therefore linear in perceived

musical pitch. The horizontal axis of the graph is time in seconds. The spectrogram

displays the dominant frequencies within certain ranges, providing an accurate

representation of the prevailing musical pitches at any given moment. It was possible to

adjust both the frequency and time scale to focus on specific notes.

The measurement of vibrato rate was a fairly straightforward procedure. After

finding a note with vibrato, a measuring tool within the software could be used to determine the length of each vibrato oscillation. To determine the mean vibrato rate over a certain amount of time, the total number of full oscillations was divided by the time it took these oscillations to occur. When measuring the vibrato on a specific note, it was important to consider as many oscillations as possible to obtain the most accurate average. It was also crucial to begin and end the time measurement at precisely the same place on the vibrato cycle. For this reason, parts of the first or last vibrato oscillations within a single note often had to be disregarded.

Measuring the vibrato extent was a more complex process. It must be noted that within the methodologies presented in this study, it was only possible to measure the frequency (pitch) extent of the vibrato.135 The measuring tool could determine the

distance in Hz between the frequencies of the highest and lowest extents within a vibrato

cycle. Sonic Visualiser could then convert this value, with respect to the perceived pitch,

to musical cents. This provided the pitch extent for one cycle of vibrato, but determining

the extent for an entire note required a more elaborate method. Many notes did not have a

consistent vibrato extent for their entire duration. On notes with three or less vibrato cycles, the distance between the highest and lowest peaks was considered.136 For notes

with four or more vibrato cycles, the average of the highest three and lowest three peaks

was considered. If a single vibrato peak was exceedingly higher or lower than the rest on

certain notes of considerable length, this peak was not considered.

135 As was discussed previously, pitch extent is the most important parameter of vibrato in determining the overall effect to the listener.

136 When only hearing a few vibrato cycles, the listener perceives the widest one as the vibrato extent.

General Analysis

In this section, results will be presented from the analysis of vibrato use across all

recordings studied. Specific sections or instances will not be considered. Through

statistical analysis, trends in vibrato use in comparison to the selected musical attributes

will be examined. These trends will also be compared among each soloist. Data with

regards to use and non-use of vibrato, rate and extent of vibrato, vibrato shape, and

variance above and below pitch was considered for this analysis.

Vibrato Use and Non-Use

The use or non-use of vibrato was considered on each note in several key sections

of music within the given repertoire. A list of these sections can be found in Table 1.

Sections were chosen based on their importance to the overall composition, and their variety in style, character, and tempo.

Table 1 ‐ Sections for the Analysis of Vibrato Use/Non‐use

Piece Measure Numbers Description Bozza all, except m.40-41 and all notes within original tempo 58-60 Creston, mvt. 2 8-30 exposition Creston, mvt. 3 94-159 second A and C sections (rondo) Desenclos 1-15 opening prelude melody Desenclos 100-110 restatement of secondary theme Glazunov 11-22 initial statement of the melody Glazunov 104-118 con moto section Glazunov 201-211 allegro section Hindemith, mvt. 1 all entire movement Hindemith, mvt. 2 1-71 A, B, and A (rondo form) Hindemith, mvt. 3 all entire movement Ibert, mvt. 1 9-51 exposition Ibert, mvt. 1 65-94 lyrical secondary melody Ibert, mvt. 2 11-32 slow section, after orchestra enters Ibert, mvt. 2 67-111 exposition of animato molto theme Maurice, mvt. 1 all entire movement Maurice, mvt. 2 all entire movement

When comparing the use and non-use of vibrato against various musical

structures, certain trends became clear. For example, it was much more likely for soloists

to use vibrato on notes that fell on a beat than off a beat. Vibrato use was also more

common on strong beats than weak beats. Often the least likely place for vibrato use was

on a pick-up note to a strong beat. It was also observed that vibrato use tended to occur

more in places where the harmony of the music changed. While observations like these

were clear and consistent to a certain degree, it is nearly impossible to quantify them on a

large scale. They are better discussed when considering each of these sections separately,

which will occur in the subsequent “Repertoire Analysis” section.

There is however, one overriding factor that was found to influence vibrato use

and non-use that can be quantified on a large scale. This factor is note length. While Carl

Seashore’s studies found that vocalists use vibrato on all notes regardless of length, it is clear that note length had a positive correlation with the likelihood of vibrato use on the

recordings analyzed here. In fact, there are certain limitations on note length that produce

vibrato use or non-use nearly 100% of the time. In every section listed in Table 1, no note

with a duration of 0.17 seconds or shorter had perceivable vibrato. Conversely, every

note above one second in length, with rare exception, was found to have at least some

vibrato. Figure 1 displays a graph of the percentage of vibrato use on all notes less than a

second in length across all soloists. The thickest line shows the raw data while the other

is a polynomial trend line, which compensates for the extremes and shows a moving

average.

Figure 1 ‐ Vibrato Use Percentages on Notes Shorter Than One Second, Across All Soloists

Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

From this graph we can see that the likelihood of vibrato use increases dramatically on notes around a quarter second in length to three quarters of a second in

length. The trend levels out as we near a full second in duration. Figures 2 through 9 show the percentage of vibrato use on notes lasting less than a second for each soloist.

Figure 2

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 3

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use

40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 4

Claude Delangle's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 5

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use

40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 6

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 7

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use

40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 8

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use

40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 9

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Use

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

While the overall shape of the graphs for each soloist is similar, there are some

significant differences. The three oldest soloists, Mule, Rascher, and Abato use vibrato on

more notes of a shorter duration than the rest of the soloists. Their trend lines increase at

a much sharper angle, nearing the 100% mark at only a half second in duration.

Bornkamp, Londeix, and Rousseau all have similar trend lines to the overall trend shown

in Figure 1. Otis Murphy’s vibrato use is perhaps the most inconsistent with respect to

note length, but still shows an increase with duration, albeit with a less drastic curve.

Claude Delangle has the most gently sloping trend line of all soloists. His likelihood for

vibrato use does not cross the 50% mark until around three quarters of a second.

The correlation between note length and vibrato use can also be compared against

the tempo of the music. Figure 10 shows the same vibrato use percentile graph for note

lengths less than one second but only for tempos below 100 beats per minute. Figure 11

shows the same but for tempos above 100 beats per minute. There are two things we can

conclude from these graphs. Firstly, the raw data line illustrates that many more of the

shortest notes have vibrato on the slow tempos (Figure 10). The trend line curve however,

is steeper on Figure 11, meaning that for quicker tempos the likelihood of vibrato use

increases at a faster rate as note lengths increase.

Figure 10 ‐ Vibrato Use Percentages for Tempos Less Than 100 bpm

Vibrato Use ‐ Tempo < 100 bpm

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Figure 11 ‐ Vibrato Use Percentages for Tempos Greater Than 100 bpm

Vibrato Use ‐ Tempo > 100 bpm

100%

80%

60% Percentage

Use 40%

20% Vibrato

0% 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Note Duration (in seconds)

Vibrato Rate and Extent

A total of 873 notes were measured for their rates and extents across all

recordings and all soloists. The mean vibrato rate among all soloists was 5.96 Hz and the

average extent was 37.3 cents. Standard deviation was 0.74 (12.4%) for rate and 16.7

(44.8%) for extent. This indicates that the vibrato rates for each note were about 32%

more consistent than the extents.

It is interesting to compare these numbers to those suggested by saxophone

pedagogical methods and studies. For rate, Hemke recommended between 5 and 5.5 Hz

and Mule instructed 4.8, and later 5 Hz. The mean vibrato rate found in this study is

significantly higher than these suggestions especially in the case of Mule’s teachings. For

extent, Hemke was the only writer to suggest a specific range (from 5 to 15 cents) in total

pitch variance. This suggestion also falls significantly under our recorded mean extent of

37.3 cents.

It is also interesting to compare these results to those found by the many vocal

vibrato studies previously discussed. Prame was the only one to list a specific average

rate. He recorded a mean of 6.1 Hz, which is remarkably similar to the 5.96 found here.

He also concluded that the variation for all notes was 10%, also comparable to our 12.4%

deviation. The standards for rate found by Horri (between 5 and 6 Hz) and suggested in

the pedagogical studies of Titze (between 4.5 and 6.5 Hz), Davids and LaTour (between

5 and 8 Hz), and Diaz (between 5.5 and 7.5 Hz) also fall in line with the mean rate found

in this study. From this, we can conclude that saxophone vibrato has a similar rate to

vocal vibrato.

Vibrato extent however, was generally quite a bit higher in both the findings of vocal scientific studies and in pedagogical suggestions. Most listed the lower limit of extent at 50 cents, with averages often above 100. Prame’s specific mean was only 71 cents, but that is still nearly double our 37.3 cent mean extent. Unlike rate, the pitch extent of vibrato used in the singing voice is significantly larger than what is generally used on the saxophone. It must be noted however, that with a deviation of nearly 45%, many of the saxophone vibrato extents recorded here fall comfortably in the standard vocal range.

When comparing the data collected in this study with the above scientific and pedagogical research, we can conclude that these prominent saxophonists generally used more vibrato (higher rates and extents) than what is commonly thought to be acceptable for saxophonists. Their vibrato use in some cases (especially with rate) is actually closer to the normal parameters of vocal vibrato.

Figures 12 and 13 show the mean vibrato rates and extents for each soloist in this study. It is clear that the mean rate between each soloist is far more consistent than extent, just as the standard deviations for rate and extent among all of the measured notes

illustrate. It may come as no surprise to anyone familiar with concert saxophone history that Marcel Mule’s extent is significantly higher than the other soloists as he was well known for his wide vibrato. Equally predictable may be Mule’s modern counterpart,

Claude Delangle having a significantly lower extent than the rest. He has become known for often breaking from the French tradition and using vibrato in a more measured manner than his predecessors. While much can be gleaned from these graphs alone, they

will become even more useful as we begin to compare vibrato parameters under a variety of conditions to the overall averages.

Figure 12 ‐ Mean Vibrato Rate for Each Soloist

Mean Vibrato Rate (Hz)

6.37 6.21 6.23 6.32 6.00 5.85 5.50 5.19

ABATO BORNKAMP DELANGLE LONDEIX MULE MURPHY RASCHER ROUSSEAU

Figure 13 ‐ Mean Vibrato Extent for Each Soloist

Mean Vibrato Extent (Cents)

54.08

41.19 41.66 39.42 37.92 32.52 31.71

19.55

ABATO BORNKAMP DELANGLE LONDEIX MULE MURPHY RASCHER ROUSSEAU

Table 2 provides the standard deviation, and deviation percentage137 for each

soloist’s rate and extent.

Table 2 ‐ Standard Deviations and Deviation Percentages for Rates and Extents

Rate Extent

Soloist Standard Deviation Standard Deviation Deviation Percentage Deviation Percentage Vincent Abato 0.79 12.4% 15.3 38.9%

Arno Bornkamp 0.79 12.7% 18.8 49.7%

Claude Delangle 0.64 11.7% 11.5 59.0%

Jean-Marie Londeix 0.68 10.9% 20.2 49.1%

Marcel Mule 0.58 9.1% 19.0 35.0%

Otis Murphy 0.68 11.4% 16.5 50.8%

Sigurd Rascher 1.16 22.4% 17.9 43.0%

Eugene Rousseau 0.58 9.9% 14.4 45.4%

Other than Rascher, each soloist’s rate deviation was remarkably similar, all falling

between 9.1% and 12.4%. For extent the deviations are not quite as consistent. It is

interesting that the two soloists who had the lowest mean rate and extent (Rascher and

Delangle, respectively), had the highest deviation percentages for those parameters.

Rascher’s rate varied by 22.4% and Delangle’s extent varied by 59%, illustrating

remarkable inconsistency. It should also be noted that Mule had the most consistent (least

deviation percentage) vibrato rate and extent of all soloists. Perhaps this is a result of

many years spent practicing and teaching vibrato with a metronome.

137 The deviation percentage is the standard deviation divided by the overall average (Figures 12 and 13) and is a better unit for comparing consistency.

In the next several sections, the data collected for vibrato rate and extent will be

compared against each note’s length, tempo, dynamic, and range. Each section will have

a similar format with the mean across all soloists presented first followed by a

comparison of each soloist. Each section’s graphs will be presented in the format which

best displays its data.

Note Length

The length of each note measured was recorded in seconds. Since this data

consists of a set of single notes with several different rates, extents, and lengths, it is best

presented as a scatter chart of single data points. To aid in determining the overall effect

of length on the vibrato parameters, an exponential trend line was included. It should also

be noted that in order to present a clear graph of the data, it was important to designate a

limit on note length. Since nearly every note measured lasted less than four seconds, this

seemed the best possible upper limit for note length. Figure 14 shows the vibrato rate

among all soloists in comparison to note length.

Figure 14

Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate 4

2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

The trend line illustrates that vibrato rate has an overall negative correlation with note length. The difference between the spread of high vibrato rates and low vibrato rates across the note length spectrum is also remarkable. There are notes with a relatively slow rate of vibrato (less than 5 Hz) at all parts of the spectrum, but high rates have a strong negative correlation with note length. For notes less than one second in length, several have rates higher than 7 Hz. For note lengths above 1.5 seconds however, rates above 7

Hz are rare with the majority falling below 6.5 Hz. Figures 15 through 22 show the vibrato rate by note length for each soloist.

Figure 15

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate 4

2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 16

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10 9 8 7 (Hz) 6 5 Rate 4 3 2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 17

Claude Delangle's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10 9 8 7 (Hz) 6 5 Rate 4 3 2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 18

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate 4

2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 19

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate 4

2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 20

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate 4

2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 21

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate 4

2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Figure 22

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Rate by Note Length 10 9 8 7 (Hz) 6 5 Rate 4 3 2 00.511.522.533.54 Length in Seconds

Bornkamp, Londeix, Mule, Murphy, and Rousseau have trend lines similar to the

overall trend, with vibrato rate negatively correlating with note length. Rascher’s line also

has a similar shape, but with a more drastic descent. It ends significantly lower on the rate

spectrum. Abato and Delangle each have trend lines that are nearly flat. This means that

their vibrato rates were generally more consistent across several different note lengths

than the other soloists.

Figure 23 shows the vibrato extent across all soloists in relation to note length.

Figure 23

Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Even though there was a wide range of extent measurements, there does not seem to be a significant correlation with note length. The trend is just slightly negative. There are notes with widely varying vibrato extents at all parts of the note length spectrum.

Figures 24 through 31 show vibrato extent by note length for each soloist.

Figure 24

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 25

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 26

Claude DeLangle's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 27

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 28

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 29

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 30

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

Figure 31

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Extent by Note Length

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 00.511.522.533.54 Note Length in Seconds

The trend lines for Rascher and Rousseau are even flatter than the overall trend

with hardly any correlation between vibrato extent and note length. Bornkamp’s and

Londeix’s are similar with minimal negative correlation. Otis Murphy has the most severe negative correlation with mean extents of his longest notes roughly half of the mean extents of his shortest notes. Abato, Delangle, and Mule actually have strong positive correlations between their vibrato extent and note length.

Tempo

For each note measured for vibrato rate and extent, the prevailing tempo of the music was noted in beats per minute (bpm). Only notes in sections that had a steady pulse

rate were associated with a specific tempo. Rubato sections, cadenzas, and fermatas were

ignored for this section of the study. The graphs below illustrate any possible correlation

between vibrato rate and extent with the prevailing tempo of the music. As with note

length, this data is presented as a scatter chart with an exponential trend line. Figure 32

shows the relationship between rate and tempo across all of the soloists.

Figure 32

Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

Rate 5

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

While this correlation is slightly positive across all soloists, many high rates still exist at slow tempos, and many low rates exist at high tempos. The trend is clear but not strong. Figures 33 through 40 show vibrato rate by tempo for each soloist.

Figure 33

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 34

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 35

Claude DeLangle's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 36

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 37

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 38

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 39

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 40

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Rate by Tempo 10

7 (Hz) 6

5 Rate

2 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Every soloist except for Abato has a slight to moderate positive correlation

between vibrato rate and tempo. Abato’s is negative but only to a small degree. Rascher

clearly has the most dramatic positive correlation with his trending rate ranging from

around 4.5 Hz at the slow tempos, to nearly 6 Hz for the fastest ones (roughly a 30%

increase). In addition to the overall trend being positive, Rascher only used high rate

vibrato (over 7 Hz) on tempos above 120. For tempos below 120 bpm, only two notes

were recorded above 6 Hz. Mule’s data is similar in this regard, with every note above 7

Hz in rate occurring while the tempo was 120 bpm or faster.

It is interesting that a positive correlation between rate and tempo exists in nearly

every soloist’s vibrato. This contradicts the notion found in many pedagogical studies

that vibrato rate should not be tied to tempo in any way. Mule would even make his

students practice vibrato at different metronome settings, always striving to maintain his

suggested 5 Hz rate.138 It could be possible that speeding up ones vibrato is only natural when performing at higher tempos. The correlation found here however, is not strong enough to disprove the pedagogical belief that vibrato rate should be unassociated with tempo.

138 Delangle 6. This requires using a different number of undulations per beat with respect to the tempo.

Figure 41 shows the relationship between vibrato extent and tempo across all

soloists.

Figure 41

Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

As it was with rate, this correlation is also positive, but to a higher degree. Figures

42 through 49 show this relationship for each soloist.

Figure 42

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 43

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 44

Claude DeLangle's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 45

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 46

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 47

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 48

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

Figure 49

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Extent by Tempo

100

60 (cents)

40 Extent 20

0 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Tempo (bpm)

For extent, Bornkamp, Londeix, Mule, Murphy, and Rascher have a positive

correlation with tempo. Bornkamp has the most positive correlation with a nearly 100%

trend increase from the slowest to fastest tempos. Delangle’s trend line is completely flat,

indicating no general correlation. Abato and Rousseau have negative correlations

between extent and tempo. In fact, Abato has a negative correlation for both rate and

extent in relation to tempo. He is the only soloist that generally uses “less” vibrato as the

tempo increases.

Dynamic

Another important goal for this study was to determine what impact dynamics

have on the parameters of saxophone vibrato. Since this study deals with real

recordings—all with various gain levels and made in differing environments—it was

impossible to accurately measure the loudness of each note. Therefore, to determine each

note’s “dynamic,” the dynamic instruction (forte, piano, etc.) on the score was

considered. Since a performer often uses a wide range of literal dynamics within one

written dynamic, this method does not provide the most accurate measure of loudness. It

does however give a good representation of what dynamic the music informed the soloist

to use. This is better for our study since we are trying to determine how the pre-existing

musical structure (the written score) affects vibrato use.

Since not all notes measured had a clearly marked dynamic instruction, several

estimations had to be made. For instance, when a section was marked piano and a

crescendo occurred, the following notes could be estimated at mezzo piano, or mezzo

forte, depending on the musical context. Much of this determination was guided by the

recordings themselves, or how each soloist treated the unmarked notes. Several notes

with completely ambiguous dynamic markings, or notes that were played at an entirely different dynamic level than what was marked on the score were ignored for this section of analysis.

Each note considered was categorized into one of six dynamic levels (pp, p, mp, mf, f, ff). Since only six categories exist for one of the variables, a scatter chart showing all notes measured was impractical. Instead, all of the parameter values for each specific dynamic level were averaged and are presented as single data points in a line graph.

Figure 50 shows the overall mean vibrato rate for each dynamic level across all soloists.

Figure 50

Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

There is a moderately positive correlation between vibrato rate and dynamic level.

While minimal difference exists between pp and p, or f and ff, the difference between the most contrasting dynamics is significant. The rate for soft notes averaged around 5.8 Hz

with loud ones around 6.2 Hz. These results are similar to the ones found by MacLeod in her study of string players. She found that vibrato rates were faster with higher dynamic

levels, but only when her subjects performed technical exercises. It seems this positive

correlation exists even with real repertoire for these saxophonists. The results do not

concur with the vocal vibrato study by Michel and Myers where they determined that

different dynamic levels had no effect on vibrato rate. Figures 51 through 58 show the

mean vibrato rate by dynamic for each soloist.

Figure 51

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 52

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 53

Claude Delangle's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 54

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 55

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 56

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 57

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 58

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Rate by Dynamic 7.5

6.5 (Hz) 6

Rate 5.5

4.5 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Abato, Bornkamp, Delangle, Mule, and Rascher have vibrato rates that generally correlate positively with dynamic levels, similar to the overall trend. Of these, Rascher’s correlation is the most severe with his louder notes vibrating over 1 Hz faster than the soft ones. Londeix and Rousseau have slightly negative correlations between rate and dynamic. Murphy may have the strangest results in this set of data. His overall correlation is slightly positive, but the dynamics with the highest average rates are mezzo piano, and mezzo forte. Murphy actually uses a slower rate of vibrato on both the softest and loudest notes. It should also be noted that four of the eight soloists (Mule, Murphy, Rascher, and

Rousseau) averaged a higher vibrato rate on pianissimo notes than piano notes.

Figure 59 shows the mean vibrato extent for each dynamic level across all

soloists.

Figure 59

Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

As it was with rate, the correlation between extent and dynamic level is also positive, but only for the highest three dynamics. From mezzo piano to fortissimo the correlation is quite strong with an approximate 15 cent increase (about 47%) in mean vibrato extent. The findings for vibrato extent and dynamics closely match those from

MacLeod’s string study. Figures 60 through 67 show the mean vibrato extent by dynamic level for each soloist.

Figure 60

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 61

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 62

Claude Delangle's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 63

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

20 Extent

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 64

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 65

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 66

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

Extent 20

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Figure 67

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Extent by Dynamic 70

40 (cents)

20 Extent 10

0 pp p mp mf f ff Dynamic

Bornkamp, Londeix, Mule, Murphy, and Rascher have positive correlations

similar to the overall trend. Rascher’s positive correlation is the most pure with mean

vibrato rates significantly increasing for each higher dynamic level. The graphs for

Bornkamp and Mule also illustrate a dramatic rate increase for the loudest two dynamics.

Abato, Delangle, and Rousseau have minimal correlation between rate and dynamic.

Each of their graphs have a slightly positive trend, but to a much lesser degree than the

other five soloists.

Range

To determine the effect that pitch range had on vibrato rate and extent, all

parameters for each separate pitch were averaged. For example, the rates and extents for

every middle C were averaged to establish mean parameters for that note. The results are

displayed in line graphs below including an exponential trend line. The pitches on the

horizontal axis of each graph are displayed in the transposed key for alto saxophone. For

purposes of visual clarity, only every other pitch within the normal saxophone range is

shown, but all notes in the range were considered. Figure 68 shows the mean vibrato rate for each pitch across all soloists.

Figure 68

Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

The overall correlation is slightly to moderately positive with the highest rates occurring on the highest pitches. Even though the trend is clearly positive, the raw data shows that mean rates are inconsistent throughout the middle range of the saxophone.

Figures 69 through 76 show the correlation between rate and range for each soloist.

Figure 69

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 70

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 71

Claude Delangle's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 72

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 73

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 74

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 75

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 76

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Rate by Range 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 (Hz)

5.5

Rate 5 4.5 4 3.5 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

There is quite a bit of variance in the results presented by these graphs. The most

positive correlation is from Rascher, followed by Bornkamp, then Abato. Londeix’s

correlation is also positive, but to a lesser degree than the overall trend. Delangle, Mule,

Murphy, and Rousseau have negative correlations between rate and range, but only

Delangle’s is moderately significant.

Figure 77 shows the mean vibrato extent for each pitch across all soloists.

Figure 77

Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

This correlation is significantly positive with the means for the lowest and highest pitches over 30 cents apart (around twice as much). The overall trend roughly shows a

66% increase from the lowest to highest range of the saxophone. If Heavner’s assertion139

that low notes take much more jaw motion to produce the same amount of vibrato is true,

it should come as no surprise that they generally have less vibrato extent than high notes.

139 Heavner, 71.

It should be noted however, that the means for a few of the lowest pitches shown here are

quite high and that the raw data does not show a consistent increase until around G5 in

the range.

Figures 78 through 85 show the vibrato extent by range for each soloist.

Figure 78

Vincent Abato's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

100

Figure 79

Arno Bornkamp's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 80

Claude Delangle's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

101

Figure 81

Jean‐Marie Londeix's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 82

Marcel Mule's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

102

Figure 83

Otis Murphy's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

Figure 84

Sigurd Rascher's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

103

Figure 85

Eugene Rousseau's Vibrato Extent by Range 90 80 70 60 50 (cents)

40 30

Extent 20 10 0 A#3 C4 D4 E4 F#4 G#4 A#4 C5 D5 E5 F#5 G#5 A#5 C6 D6 E6 F#6 Pitch

All soloists show a positive correlation between vibrato extent and range to some degree. Bornkamp and Londeix have the most dramatic positive correlations with an increase greater than 100% over each soloist’s range. Delangle has the least positive correlation with range having almost no effect on his vibrato extent. It is also remarkable how inconsistent some soloists’ average extents are, even among notes very similar in range. This is most notable in the low range for Abato where both his highest and lowest extent averages can be found.

To conclude this section, Tables 3 and 4 show an overview of the correlations by each soloist between the parameters of vibrato, and the four musical attributes discussed.

For each attribute, “+” signs signify positive correlation and “-” signs signify negative.

The more signs there are, the stronger the correlation. A “0” represents negligible correlation.

104

Table 3 ‐ Correlations between Vibrato Rate and Four Musical Attributes

Note Length Tempo Dynamic Range

Overall - - + 0 0

Vincent Abato 0 0 + +

Arno Bornkamp - + + +

Claude Delangle 0 + + 0

Jean-Marie Londeix - - 0 0 0

Marcel Mule - + 0 0

Otis Murphy - 0 0 0

Sigurd Rascher - - - ++ ++ ++

Eugene Rousseau - 0 0 0

Table 4 ‐ Correlations between Vibrato Extent and Four Musical Attributes

Note Length Tempo Dynamic Range

Overall 0 + ++ ++

Vincent Abato ++ - 0 +

Arno Bornkamp - +++ +++ ++++

Claude Delangle ++ 0 0 0

Jean-Marie Londeix - + ++ ++++

Marcel Mule + + ++ +

Otis Murphy - - ++ ++ +++

Sigurd Rascher 0 + ++ +++

Eugene Rousseau 0 - + ++

105

A few things stand out when examining the correlations as a whole. Overall, the

four musical attributes affected vibrato extent far more than vibrato rate. This is

understandable considering the much higher overall standard deviation for extent than

rate. When looking at the individual soloists for rate, Rascher was significantly more

affected by each musical attribute than the others. Murphy and Rousseau were affected

the least. For extent, Bornkamp was affected the most, followed by Murphy. Delangle

was clearly the least affected with tempo, dynamic, and range all having negligible

effects on his extent.

Vibrato Shape

Many vibrato studies using controlled environments have examined vibrato shape

in a number of ways. These have included measuring the sinusoidal curve of each

undulation, or the vibrato behavior at the transition between two different notes. While

analysis of this kind would tell us a great deal about the vibrato used by saxophonists, it

was impossible to measure this level of detail using pre-existing recordings of varying

audio quality. Using the methodologies already discussed however, it was possible to

analyze one aspect of the saxophonists’ vibrato shapes, the change in rate and extent

throughout a given note.

To examine the change in rate and extent throughout a note, 77 long tones were

chosen from the 873 originally measured notes. It was important to choose notes with a

significant duration in order to accurately measure the change in parameters. Since other

vibrato studies have commented on the effects of crescendo and decrescendo on vibrato

shape, it was also important to choose notes with these properties. Twenty-two of the

106

notes had a crescendo, 19 had a decrescendo, and 36 had no change in dynamic to act as a

control group. Notes with a significant amount of straight tone were disregarded for this

section of analysis.

To determine the change in vibrato parameters, each note was split into thirds.

Rate and extent were measured within the first and last third of each note. Since overall

rate was measured as an average for the entire note, the rate values were converted to

percentages of the total. For extent it was more useful to determine the change from first

to last third of the note. This value is also presented as a percentage. Table 3 shows the

mean for these values across all notes considered, notes with a crescendo, and notes with

a decrescendo.

Table 5 ‐ Mean Change in Rate and Extent in Long Tones

All Notes Crescendos Decrescendos

% of Overall Rate (First Third) -3% -6% -1%

% of Overall Rate (Last Third) 3% 1% 3%

Extent Change % -5% -21% -9%

The table illustrates both expected and unexpected results. In general, vibrato

rates tended to increase throughout a note. This acceleration was fairly even across all

notes, from -3% to 3% of the overall rate. For crescendos, one might expect an increase

in rate at the end of the note, but it was actually more common for the soloist to begin the

vibrato slower (-6%), only ending up 1% above the overall mean. This indicates that the

increase in rate generally happened early in the note. The means for decrescendos

matched up closely to the overall trend. These results are similar to those found by

107

Prame, Bretos, and Sundberg in their vocal studies. They generally found increases of the

vibrato rate in long tones, but to a higher degree (20%) than this study found.

For extent, the results are much more surprising. For all notes measured, the

vibrato extent was 5% less at the end of notes than the beginning. While this may seem

perfectly understandable, the trend for notes with a crescendo is quite astonishing. One

might expect the vibrato to get wider as the dynamic increases, but according to these

findings, just the opposite happens. The last third of notes with a crescendo averaged

21% narrower vibrato than the first third. This is certainly surprising since dynamic and

extent have already been shown to have a significant positive correlation (Figure 59).

One possible explanation is that the embouchure tightens as air pressure increases,

inhibiting vibrato width. Further study is needed in this area. For decrescendos, the same

decrease in extent occurs, but to a lesser degree.

Not enough data was collected to make accurate conclusions regarding the effects

of crescendos and decrescendos on vibrato shape for each soloist separately, but we can

view the results for all notes considered. Table 4 shows the change in vibrato rate and

extent in long tones for each soloist.

108

Table 6 ‐ Mean Change in Rate and Extent for Each Soloist

% of Overall Rate % of Overall Rate Extent Change % (First Third) (Last Third) Abato -1% 7% 8%

Bornkamp -5% 2% 7%

Delangle -7% -3% -19%

Londeix -3% 0% -12%

Mule 0% 2% -15%

Murphy -1% 1% -8%

Rascher -3% 10% 8%

Rousseau -3% -2% -20%

For rate, Rascher averaged the most change from beginnings to endings of long

tones, and generally increased his rate late in the notes. Delangle and Rousseau had

negative values for the first and last thirds, indicating a generally faster rate through the middle of the notes. For extent, Abato, Bornkamp, and Rascher used wider vibrato at the ends of notes, while the other five used wider vibrato at the beginnings. The decrease in extent throughout the note was especially exaggerated by Delangle and Rousseau.

Variance Above and Below Pitch

One of the most discussed aspects of saxophone vibrato is the proper amount of pitch variance above versus below the intended note. As was previously discussed, most believe that saxophone vibrato should be mostly or entirely below the given pitch. To test this theory in a controlled environment, one could simply have a subject play long tones with and without vibrato, or give the subject a static pitch aurally and have him or her

109

match it with vibrato. Since neither of these methods was possible in this study, an

alternative process was developed. On pre-existing recordings, far too many variables

such as intonation of the soloist, intonation of the accompaniment, or playback speed of

the recording exist to simply measure a note against its “correct” pitch. Furthermore, the

“correct” pitch within the software will always be with respect to equal temperament

tuning, a system the saxophone is not constrained by. The only way to measure the

amount of vibrato extent above and below the intended pitch on pre-existing recordings

was to find notes that contained both straight tone and vibrato.

Thirty-four notes (an average of 4.25 per soloist) across all recordings were found that contained both straight tone and vibrato. The majority of these had straight tone at the beginning of the note with vibrato added later, but the opposite was found in a few.

The extent from the straight tone to the highest pitch and lowest pitch within the vibrato cycle was measured and then compared to the overall vibrato extent of the note. The mean extent across all soloists was 28.7% above the pitch, and 71.3% below the pitch.

This finding agrees with the pedagogical belief that saxophone vibrato exists mostly below the intended pitch, but conflicts with those who believe it is only below the pitch.

Of all notes measured, only two (one by Bornkamp, and one by Londeix) had zero extent above the static pitch.

Table 7 shows the mean variance above and below pitch for each soloist while

Figure 86 shows these values on a stacked column bar graph to visually illustrate the difference in variance.

110

Table 7 ‐ Mean Vibrato Extent Above and Below the Intended Pitch

Mean % Above Pitch Mean % Below Pitch

Abato 27.0% 73.0%

Bornkamp 26.2% 73.8%

Delangle 46.3% 53.7%

Londeix 24.1% 75.9%

Mule 28.6% 71.4%

Murphy 35.7% 64.3%

Rascher 5.7% 94.3%

Rousseau 36.3% 63.7%

overall mean 28.7% 71.3%

Figure 86

Vibrato Extent Above and Below Intended Pitch 100%

75%

50% % above % below 25%

111

Each soloist followed the general trend of playing vibrato with a greater extent

below than above pitch, although Delangle’s variance was close to even. Rascher was the

only soloist to use vibrato that neared 100% below the pitch. It is clear that the notion of

saxophone vibrato being “under” the pitch is quite universal. Of every note measured,

only three (one each by Bornkamp, Delangle, and Rousseau) had a greater variance

above the pitch than below.

112

Repertoire Analysis

In the following sections the use of vibrato within specific excerpts of the selected

repertoire will be discussed. Since the previous section focused exclusively on large scale

trends, this section will focus on aspects such as unique musical structures and their

effects on vibrato, and the direct comparison of single notes or groups of notes by

different soloists. Only pertinent sections from each composition will be discussed. For

each piece, mean rates and extents for all notes measured will be listed for all relevant

soloists. These charts contain the most precise comparisons of data between soloists

presented in this study because the same set of notes was measured for each.

Bozza - Aria

Table 8 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Bozza

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Bornkamp 5.9 34

Murphy 6.0 18

Rascher 4.8 45

When examining the vibrato use on Bozza’s Aria as a whole, one of the most

glaring differences between the soloists is the treatment of sixteenth notes. The majority

of time in the piece is spent playing lyrical connected sixteenth notes that are roughly 0.4 to 0.5 seconds in length, a duration range where vibrato use is highly discretionary.

Rascher used vibrato on 92% of the sixteenth notes, Bornkamp on 22%, and Murphy on just 2%. This illustrates three contrasting approaches.

113

Because Rascher used vibrato so continuously, he was likely treating the technique as a method of constant tone coloration. In addition to the 92% use on

sixteenths, he used it on 41% of the sixteenth note triplets, the next most common note length found in the piece. His overall rate and extent even seem fairly constant to the observer’s ear. He only changed his vibrato noticeably in two places. One is at the cédez un peu preceding rehearsal 6 (m.58-60), where he drastically slowed the rate as the music slows. The other is the final note, which he played with a straight tone.

Bornkamp used vibrato quite differently than Rascher. His use mostly involved the emphasis of certain notes, or parts of notes. Though he used vibrato on only 36 of the

162 sixteenth notes (22%), 30 of these were notes that fell on a beat. The majority of these (17) occur on the second beat of the measure, a beat that is often emphasized in triple meters. On long notes his vibrato often changed throughout the note, with many instances of straight tone developing into vibrato.

Murphy’s vibrato use was generally much more reserved than the other two soloists, but was similar to each in certain ways. On long tones his vibrato use was mostly for tone coloration similar to Rascher’s, with a more constant rate and extent than

Bornkamp’s. Unlike Rascher however, this tone coloration did not extend to the sixteenth

(or shorter) notes. On sixteenths he used vibrato to emphasize the second beat of certain measures, though many less times than Bornkamp. It should also be noted that Murphy’s mean vibrato extent for this piece (18 Hz) was far less than his overall mean (32.5 Hz).

114

Creston - Sonata

Table 9 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Creston

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Bornkamp 6.6 46

Mule 6.4 60

Murphy 6.0 38

Rascher 5.7 42

Of the three movements of Creston’s Sonata, the second is best suited for detailed

vibrato analysis because of its slow, lyrical nature. Since the majority of notes in this

movement are eighth notes or triplets (at quarter note = 66 bpm), these notes were

examined in detail. Each eighth note and triplet between measures 8 and 30 (the primary

exposition of the movement) was considered for their vibrato use and non-use. The

results show two contrasting vibrato styles among the four soloists.

Mule and Rascher used vibrato on nearly all of the eighth notes (90% and 85%,

respectively), illustrating their intent of constant tone coloration. For Mule, the most

likely place for non-use was the first note of each phrase, which always acts as a pick-up

or “afterbeat.”140 This also occurred in Rascher’s playing, but his non-use was generally more random. On triplets Mule had quite a bit more vibrato use (71%) than Rascher

(38%), though their styles were still similar. The most common place for use on triplets

was near the high points of phrases.

140 An “afterbeat” refers to a string of notes following a downbeat rest, usually at the beginning of a phrase.

115

The vibrato use of Bornkamp and Murphy was much more dependent on metric

stress. Overall they only used vibrato on 36% and 34% of the eighth notes, but if one

only considers notes that fall on a beat, these numbers climbed to 68% and 66%. In fact,

every single instance of vibrato use on an eighth note for both occurred on a beat. Even

though Bornkamp and Murphy only used vibrato on 11% of the triplets, each use was

also on a beat. This is most remarkable with the triplets since there are generally three in

every set and vibrato was never used on the second or third of these.

Vibrato use by the four soloists continued in their established manner throughout the rest of the movement until the final three measures. Here the composer’s instruction states “gradually fading away.” While Mule’s vibrato maintained his established trend of

constant tone coloration, Rascher’s became more similar to Bornkamp’s and Murphy’s.

At this point each of these three began to lessen their vibrato rates and extents in a

gradual manner, eventually using straight tone by the final note. The fact that these

instructions did not cause Mule to lessen his vibrato may point toward his philosophical

connection between vibrato and saxophone tone.

Desenclos - Prelude, Cadence et Finale

Table 10 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Desenclos

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Bornkamp 6.4 44

Delangle 5.5 19

Londeix 6.1 45

Murphy 6.0 38

116

One of the primary sections for vibrato analysis in this piece was the opening

statement of the prelude melody, measures 1-15. This section is comprised of mostly

eighth notes, with the dotted quarter notes acting as the pulse at roughly 60 bpm (0.33

seconds per eighth note). As expected with such short durations, vibrato use was fairly

sparse. Across all soloists, there was an average of 10% use for eighth notes. Londeix

used vibrato on 22%, Bornkamp on 10%, Murphy on 6%, and Delangle on less than 1%.

It was also observed that notes containing vibrato were commonly stretched, so their true

lengths were significantly longer than 0.33 seconds.

When examining the notes where vibrato was present among most or all soloists,

a few trends emerge. Of all eighth notes occurring on the beat, 23% had vibrato, as

opposed to only 5% for notes not on a beat. This means that the soloists were nearly five

times more likely to use vibrato on a beat than off. This trend can also be found in

measure six where all of the notes are actually sixteenths. The only place vibrato existed

in this measure was on notes falling on the beat, with Londeix using it on all four of

them.

Another place where vibrato use was common was on the notes with a tenuto

marking. Bornkamp, Londeix, and Murphy used vibrato on all of these notes within the

first three measures. These were the only notes which contained vibrato in that time span.

As many consider a tenuto to be a type of accent, this is an example of using vibrato to

add stress to a note. It was also common for vibrato to be present on notes that followed a

large ascending leap. In fact, Londeix used vibrato on several of the leaps in measure

four, even though some did not fall on a beat.

117

The only note in the section where vibrato use occurred for all soloists was the

high F# in measure seven. This is the highest point of the entire opening melody and its

emphasis is to be expected. It also occurs just after the measure of sixteenth notes so its

length was significantly stretched by every soloist to provide even more contrast with the

preceding notes. This is the only eighth note in this section where Delangle uses vibrato.

It is also interesting to examine the vibrato use on the Cadence. The first half of

this section is played by the saxophone alone with no strict adherence to tempo or meter.

The first note is marked with a fermata and is usually played at a very soft dynamic. All

four of the soloists began this note with a straight tone, then added vibrato as they let the dynamic grow. Delangle was quite a bit more subtle about this than the other soloists however.

Throughout the first four lines of the Cadence, Bornkamp and Londeix used vibrato in a similar manner. Most of their eighth notes and all of their longer notes had vibrato. Delangle and Murphy used quite a bit more straight tone with no vibrato use on the eighth notes. In the thirty-second note section (the next five and a half lines), the only notes containing vibrato for any soloist were ones marked tenuto. Here, Bornkamp and

Londeix were again quite similar with vibrato use on nearly all of the tenuto notes, though Londeix’s use was a bit more exaggerated. Murphy used no vibrato on these when the dynamic was soft, but added it more and more as he played louder. Delangle’s use was just the opposite. He used a subtle vibrato on the soft tenuto notes, but went to completely straight tone as the music neared forte.

118

Glazunov - Concerto

Table 11 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Glazunov

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Abato 6.6 36

Bornkamp 6.2 36

Mule 6.2 51

Rascher 4.7 34

Rousseau 5.7 33

One section of the Glazunov that is perfect for vibrato analysis is from measures

104 to 118. This section marked, “Con moto” almost exclusively contains slurred running

triplets, so vibrato use here is not affected by note length. Overall, only 13% of the

triplets contained vibrato across all soloists. When examining these notes against the

musical structure however, two trends emerge. Vibrato use was more likely on notes

falling on the beat, and on notes falling on a chord change.

When considering only notes that fall on a beat, the vibrato use percentage climbs from 13% to 39%. In fact, of all triplets containing vibrato in this section, 92% of them

fell on a beat. The correlation is even stronger for notes at the beginning of a change in

the harmony. Here the usage went up to 45%, with all soloists except Delangle using vibrato on more than half of the notes with a harmonic change. This is another example of vibrato being used for the purpose of emphasis.

Another section in the Glazunov with interesting vibrato use is the “Allegro”

beginning at rehearsal 24. This 12/8 metered section begins with a forte dynamic, has a

119

diminuendo in the second measure, then arrives at piano on the third. Beginning with this

third piano measure however, the music is also marked energico. Five of the six soloists

started the section with no vibrato but began to add it by the measure marked energico.

Only Rascher began the section with vibrato, but it was minimal, and also increased on

the third measure. It is likely that the energico marking actually caused the soloists to

suppress their vibrato in the preceding measures marked forte, a dynamic usually

associated with significant vibrato use. They saved their vibrato for the piano measures as

a way to add “energy” to the music, even at a soft volume level.

Hindemith - Sonate

Table 12 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Hindemith

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Bornkamp 6.0 31

Londeix 6.0 27

Rousseau 5.9 31

Paul Hindemith’s Sonate is an interesting piece for the examination of saxophone

vibrato because it was originally composed for the alto horn, an instrument traditionally

not associated with vibrato use. However, since the piece is mostly lyrical and flowing,141 vibrato use was fairly normal on the recordings analyzed. Of the parameters listed above, only Londeix’s extent was significantly different (lower) than his overall mean (27 cents, instead of 41).

141 Since the alto horn is an instrument less technically adept than the saxophone, this work is technically easier than most of the standard saxophone repertoire.

120

In the first movement, Londeix had the most extensive vibrato use, with its

existence on all notes longer than a quarter. Rousseau had the next most use, but played

many longer notes with a straight tone (seemingly at random). Bornkamp used more

straight tone than the others, especially on all quarters and dotted quarters. Overall, the

least likely place for any of the soloists to use vibrato was the soft sections that begin the

phrases at measures 16 and 33. The thing that stands out about these places is the

minimal piano accompaniment, which consists of mostly sustained chords. This is in

stark contrast to the “busy” piano score of the rest of the movement. This is a clear

example of vibrato being used to cut through a dense accompaniment texture, but

relaxing when this is not necessary.

In comparison to the first movement, the second had far less vibrato use overall.

This could be because of its march-like nature, or simply the fact that this movement is

more idiomatic to the alto horn. Perhaps the soloists’ were attempting to emulate the

horn’s playing style. Londeix still exhibited the most use, with vibrato on nearly all notes

one beat and longer. He used vibrato occasionally on quarter notes (half of a beat) at the

high points of the phrases, such as in measures five and 62. Rousseau used vibrato similarly to Londeix, just to a lesser degree. For Bornkamp, straight tone was common on the final notes of the phrase. Even though these notes are generally long enough in length to warrant vibrato, they often land on the tonic of the underlying harmony, a note that needs no further emphasis.

121

Ibert - Concertino da Camera

Table 13 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Ibert

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Abato 6.2 41

Bornkamp 6.1 37

Delangle 5.5 24

Mule 6.3 53

Rascher 5.2 44

Rousseau 5.9 31

More recordings of Ibert’s Concertino da Camera were analyzed than any other piece in this study. Through the first “Allegro con moto” section of the work, vibrato use was fairly limited as most of the opening melody consists of short notes. Mule had the

most extensive use, with vibrato on nearly all of the notes a half of a beat (eighth note)

and longer. Everyone else used vibrato to varying degrees on the syncopated quarters and

dotted eighths, and all used vibrato on the few notes longer than a beat. Some notable

exceptions were Delangle, who never used vibrato until the long tone at rehearsal 3, and

Bornkamp, who actually used vibrato on some of the eighth notes following ascending

leaps (measures 30 and 33).

Rehearsal 6 begins the first lyrical section of this work. There is much rhythmic

variety here, and it is interesting to see which kinds of notes were most likely to have

vibrato use. Table 14 shows the different kinds of notes in this section (rehearsal 6 to 8) and the mean number of soloists (out of six) to use vibrato on them.

122

Table 14 ‐ Vibrato Use for Notes from Rehearsal 6 to 8 in the Ibert

Type of Note Mean number of soloists using vibrato

notes two beats or longer 6

dotted quarter notes on strong beats 6

notes on weak beats tied to next bar 5.3

syncopated quarter notes 5

triplets on downbeats 4

quarter notes on downbeats 3.5

quarter notes on upbeats 2.9

eighth notes on the beat 2

triplets off the beat 1.25

eighth notes off the beat 0.6

This table illustrates the relationships between note length, metric stress, and

vibrato use. In general, length still had the most effect on vibrato use, but metric stress

also played a significant role. For example, with quarter notes vibrato use was more

likely on notes that fell on a downbeat (3.5 soloists) than an upbeat (2.9). For eighth

notes, metric stress was even more important. Eighth notes falling on downbeats (2

soloists) were more than three times as likely to contain vibrato as eighth notes off the

beat (0.6). In every case these off beat eighth notes also act as a pick-up note, a musical

structure that further weakens their metric stress. The same relationship can also be found

for triplets.

From this table we can also glean one piece of information that contradicts the

established positive correlation between vibrato use and metric stress. This comes from

123

looking at quarter notes that fall off of a beat. Though these notes have the least metric

stress of all quarter notes in the section—even less than quarter notes on up beats (2.9 soloists)—they were far more likely to have vibrato (5). The reason for this is that the

notes were syncopated, a rhythmic phenomenon that is often emphasized. Here vibrato

use for the sake of emphasis trumps vibrato use for the sake of metric stress.

One of the most distinctive moments in the Concertino da Camera occurs at the

beginning of the second movement. Here there are two sets of notes, each consisting of

an A descending to a G#, marked quasi recitativo. These notes are almost always played

very slowly and deliberately as if they have no underlying tempo. Vibrato is one of the

key elements to add musicality to this part, and a variety of use options was found on the

six recordings examined.

One common way to treat the four notes is to play the second set as an echo of the first. This technique was used to some degree by all of the soloists except for Mule. Mule actually played the second set a little louder and with a little more vibrato than the first, but both were otherwise the same. Rascher exaggerated the echo more than the others, beginning the first note at a surprisingly strong dynamic and with significant vibrato. On the second set, he played far softer and used almost imperceptible vibrato. Other than

Rascher, Delangle changed his vibrato the most from the first to the second set. While he did not play much softer on the second set—especially on the first note—his vibrato was much slower.

Bornkamp, Delangle, and Rousseau each began the notes in this set with straight tone, adding vibrato later. Bornkamp did this to a greater degree than the other two, waiting until nearly half way through a note’s duration before adding it. Also, when

124

Rousseau and Delangle added vibrato, the rate was fairly constant through the remainder

of the note. Bornkamp began his vibrato very slowly and increased the rate dramatically

over a short period of time.

Maurice - Tableaux de Provence

Table 15 ‐ Mean Rates and Extents for the Maurice

Rate (Hz) Extent (cents)

Delangle 5.5 14

Londeix 6.5 56

Mule 6.4 50

In the first movement of Tableaux de Provence the only note types where vibrato

was discretionary were quarter notes and dotted quarter notes. All notes shorter than these

had no vibrato use and all notes longer had vibrato use by all three soloists with rare

exception. Londeix used vibrato on 56% of the quarter notes, Mule on 40%, and Delangle

on 5%. This is one of the rare cases where another soloist had more frequent use than

Mule. The difference was their vibrato use on quarter notes at the beginnings of phrases.

Most phrases in this movement begin with a quarter note followed by several eighths, a

rhythmic figure that is repeated several times and forms a distinctive motif. Mule often

played these notes with a straight tone, though vibrato use became more likely as the

dynamic increased. In addition to using vibrato more on those notes, Londeix also tended

to use it on every quarter note in the more lyrical second theme of the melody (first

iteration begins at rehearsal 3). The only quarter notes Delangle ever used vibrato on

125

were ones followed by a rest and preceded by a significant crescendo, such as in measure

27. While he used vibrato on nearly all of the longer notes, it was generally subtle, often

nearly imperceptible.

In the second movement, Mule retained his usual position of most frequent

vibrato user. He used vibrato on 80% of the eighth notes and 100% of the notes longer than an eighth. The only eighth notes he did not use vibrato on were notes that function as

a pick-up. Londeix used vibrato on only 20% of the eighth notes, also rarely using it on

pick up notes. One strange trend observed for Londeix was his tendency to use vibrato on

just one of the three eighth notes within a single beat (meter is 6/8). The one he used

vibrato on was seemingly random, a trend that continued throughout the movement. The

only longer note with no vibrato use for Londeix was the final note. Delangle had just a

single instance of vibrato use on an eighth note (first note of measure 14) and only used it

on 56% of the quarter notes. He used it on every longer note except the last note in

measure 16 and the final note. Both of these notes were played with significant

decrescendos and Delangle’s choice of straight tone helped to further dissipate the

energy.

Vibrato use for the third movement of the Tableaux de Provence was often

unpredictable and difficult to compare between the soloists. Because there was such

variety in stylistic interpretation, each soloist played certain notes with varying degrees of

separation throughout the movement. Therefore, notes of the same type were often played

with widely varying lengths. Mule had a fairly consistent style with vibrato on all notes

one beat in duration and longer. Most of his eighth notes were too staccato to have

vibrato. Delangle and Londeix both had irregular vibrato use. Many of their notes with

126

enough length to typically warrant vibrato had none. Furthermore, the grounds generally associated with non-use on longer notes such as decrescendos or extremely soft dynamics were not responsible here. Delangle even played the seven beat long ‘A’ from measures

22 to 25 with no vibrato whatsoever. In this case, he was using the absence of vibrato as a

certain musical effect itself. This absence caused the note to sound remarkably dry and

static, an effect he was undoubtedly trying to achieve.

127

Conclusions

The final section of this document has been reserved to summarize the most

significant findings from both observational and statistical analysis. We will first re-

examine important conclusions in regards to overall vibrato use, then discuss any unique

tendencies for each soloists’ vibrato. Finally, any correlations between the soloists’

generational or geographical backgrounds and their vibrato will be examined.

Overall Significant Findings

The analysis of vibrato in this study was split into three major categories, the

presence or absence of vibrato, vibrato rate, and vibrato extent. The most important determining factor for whether or not a note was played with vibrato was its duration, regardless of tempo. After note length, metric stress played the largest role. In fact, notes which acted as a “pick-up” to a strong beat were some of the least likely to contain vibrato. Most of the other factors that increased the likelihood for vibrato use were related to the stress or emphasis of the given note. These included high points in the phrase, ascending melodic leaps, changes in harmony, and the need to cut through a dense musical texture.

The mean vibrato rate for all saxophonists studied was just under six undulations per second. This is faster than the rate suggested by the majority of saxophone pedagogical studies and is actually closer to the vibrato rate commonly used by vocalists.

This is unsurprising considering the saxophone’s association with the human voice. The only musical attributes found to have a significant effect on vibrato rate were note length and crescendos. The longer the note, the slower the vibrato tended to be. Crescendos

128

generally caused vibrato to be faster at the end of a note than the beginning, but only to a

small degree more than the normal increase in rate throughout a note.

Vibrato extent was found to be far more inconsistent than vibrato rate. This inconsistency refers to the range of extents measured across all notes, as well as the range of mean extents for each different soloist. In comparison to rate, extent was also affected to a greater degree by certain musical attributes. Dynamic level and range had the largest effects, each causing the soloists to use wider vibrato as they increased. Throughout the duration of long tones vibrato extent tended to decrease. This decrease was surprisingly more exaggerated on crescendos. Finally, the vibrato for each soloist was found to extend below the intended pitch more than above. On average, the vibrato roughly varied 29% above and 71% below the given note.

Tendencies by Each Soloist

The vibrato styles of Vincent Abato, Jean-Marie Londeix, and Eugene Rousseau did not display any strikingly distinctive or unique tendencies. While their rates, extents, and discretionary use all differed, nothing notable stood out.

Arno Bornkamp’s vibrato use was most distinctive for his tendency to begin long tones with straight sound, then add vibrato late in the note. While the others all used this technique to some degree, no one used it as extensively as Bornkamp. He also tended to change his vibrato rate throughout long tones, though no consistent pattern for this practice was observed. Bornkamp’s extent was also more affected by changes in the four musical attributes than the rest of the soloists.

129

There were several things about Claude Delangle’s vibrato use that were unique.

In general, he used vibrato much less of the time than the other soloists, mostly because

he rarely used it on short duration notes. He even used completely straight tone on several

long notes to achieve a certain musical effect. When Delangle did use vibrato, his use

was generally subdued. In fact his mean extent was far narrower than the rest of the

soloists and was least affected by changes in the various musical attributes. Delangle also

tended to vary his vibrato above and below the intended pitch more evenly than the other

saxophonists.

In several ways Marcel Mule’s vibrato was completely opposite from Delangle’s.

He used vibrato on more notes than any other, and had the widest mean extent by a

significant margin. Mule also had the most consistent rate and extent among all soloists

when considering all notes measured. Because of this consistency and its continuous use,

Mule’s vibrato can be considered the least “ornamental” of any of the soloists studied.

These findings are congruent with his notion that vibrato is directly associated with the

basic tone of the saxophone.

Just as Mule had the most consistent vibrato from note to note, Otis Murphy had

the most consistent vibrato through the duration of each note. He also displayed a

tendency at times to use vibrato as a method of constant tone coloration. Unlike Mule

however, his vibrato parameters were quite reserved.

Sigurd Rascher was another soloist with many unique tendencies for his vibrato.

He had the second highest mean extent, but the lowest rate. All of the others soloists had

fairly consistent rankings in these parameter averages. Rascher was the only one to be

high in one parameter and low in the other. Furthermore, his vibrato rate tended to be

130

more inconsistent and was affected by changes in the musical attributes more than the

other soloists. Rascher was also observed using vibrato for constant tone coloration,

though to a lesser degree than Mule.

Generational and Geographical Trends

One of the primary goals when beginning this study was to look for trends among

the soloists in respect to their generational of geographical backgrounds. A common

sentiment in the field of concert saxophone study is that playing styles have changed over

the years, and concepts such as the “French” or “American” schools are often discussed

by modern performers and educators. To make an accurate assessment of the differences

in vibrato styles among different generations or geographical locations, many more

soloists than the eight considered here should be studied. However, our analysis does

show some significant trends in regards to this topic.

When looking for overall trends in the vibrato in relation to the soloists’ ages,

three distinct groups emerged. The oldest soloists, including Mule, Rascher, and Abato,

were observed using vibrato more continuously than the younger soloists. The statistical

analysis of discretionary vibrato use on notes less than a second confirms this

observation. Each of these soloists used vibrato significantly more on notes of a short

duration than the others. Even though Abato’s age is actually closer to the ages of

Londeix and Rousseau, he is best grouped with the older generation because he was a

true pioneer of the concert saxophone. Like Mule and Rascher, Abato did not have a

saxophone instructor, whereas Londeix and Rousseau both studied with established

masters.

131

Londeix and Rousseau (born the same year) can be considered part of the second

generation of concert saxophonists. Their vibrato styles generally fell somewhere

between the oldest and youngest generations. When considering all facets of their styles

however, they probably had more similarities with the younger soloists.

Delangle, Bornkamp, and Murphy can be grouped as the youngest generation

(even though Murphy is significantly younger than the other two). They are all currently among the most sought after soloists and clinicians, and each direct prominent saxophone studios. Their vibrato on average tends to be used more for ornamental purposes in comparison to the older soloists, although Bornkamp often has more widespread use.

Table 16 shows the mean rate and extent for each group of soloists categorized by generation. From this data, we can conclude that over the years vibrato rate has remained the same while extent has decreased.

Table 16 ‐ Mean Rate and Extent for all Soloists, Grouped by Generation

Mean Rate (Hz) Mean Extent (cents)

Abato, Mule, Rascher 6.0 45

Londeix, Rousseau 6.0 36

Delangle, Bornkamp, Murphy 5.9 30

Drawing conclusions in regards to the soloists’ geographical upbringing or

saxophone “school,” was more difficult. If one considers Mule and Londeix (Mule’s

student) to represent the French school of playing, then it is easy to draw the conclusion

that French players generally had higher parameters for vibrato. Mule was second in rate

and first in extent, and Londeix was third in both categories. However, if one also

132

includes Delangle, the current director of the saxophone studio at the Paris Conservatory,

this conclusion cannot be made. Delangle ranked seventh in rate and eighth in extent and

also used vibrato less of the time than any other soloist.

It was also difficult to make any conclusions about the American school of

playing. Much of this was the result of the soloists chosen for the study.142 Both

Rousseau and Murphy studied with prominent French saxophonists (Mule and Fourmeau,

respectively) so their playing styles were likely influenced by the French school a great

deal. Even so, Abato—the only American saxophonist in this study not significantly influenced by the French style—actually had a vibrato style closer to Mule’s than

Rousseau’s and Murphy’s were. This is evidence of the generational trend outweighing the geographical one.

It should also be noted that Rascher has often been considered the leader of a third school, the “Rascher” school. This study’s findings do indicate many unique attributes to his vibrato, which were discussed in the previous section. However, more data needs to be compiled on the vibrato of other followers of the Rascher school to determine if there is any kind of trend.

Significance of Findings

This study has attempted to provide a better understanding of the ways in which prominent concert saxophonists have used vibrato in their music. Through statistical analysis certain trends for saxophone vibrato have been established. These trends include not just the values for mean rate and extent, but the effects of the music itself on vibrato

142 Cecil Leeson, Larry Teal, or Donald Sinta would have been better choices to define the American school, but analyzing recordings of common repertoire was deemed more crucial to the study.

133

use. Since the soloists studied are some of the most significant concert saxophonists of

the past and present, the trends found can also be considered exemplary characteristics of

saxophone vibrato. If nothing else, this study will hopefully influence others to examine

their own vibrato in a more comprehensive manner so that its use can serve the music in

the best way possible.

134

Bibliography

Berljawsky, Joseph. “The Evolution of Vibrato.” The Strad 78 (November 1967): 255- 267.

Bornkamp, Arno. Promotional Website. < http://www.arnobornkamp.nl > Last accessed August 5, 2013.

Bretos, Jose and Johan Sundberg. “Measurements of Vibrato Parameters in Long Sustained Crescendo Notes as Sung by Ten Sopranos.” Journal of Voice 17, No. 3 (September 2003): 343-352.

Brown, Clive. “Notation and Interpretation (Chapter 2).” In A Performer’s Guide to Music of the Romantic Period. Edited by Anthony Burton. London: The Associated Board of the Royall Schools of Music, 2002.

Brown, Judith C. and Kathryn V. Vaughn. “Pitch Center of Stringed Instrument Vibrato Tones.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100, no. 3 (September 1996): 1728-1735.

Cottrell, Stephen. The Saxophone. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012.

Davids, Julia and Stephen LaTour. Vocal Technique. Lon Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc., 2012.

De Ville, Paul. Universal Method for the Saxophone. New York: Carl Fischer, 1908.

Delangle, Claude. “Interview with the Legendary Marcel Mule on the History of Saxophone Vibrato.” Australian Clarinet and Saxophone (March 1998): 5-11. Translated by Huguette Brassine. Published online at Last accessed July 23, 2013.

Desain, Peter, Henkjan Honing, Rinus Aarts, and Renee Timmers. “Rhythmic Aspects of Vibrato.” In Rhythm Perception and Production, edited by Peter Desain and Luke Windsor, 203-216. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger, 2000.

Donington, Robert. Baroque Music: Style and Performance. London: Faber Music, 1982.

Donington, Robert. The Interpretation of Early Music. London: Faber and Faber, 1963.

Gable, Frederick K. “Some Observations Concerning Baroque and Modern Vibrato.” Performance Practice Review 5, no. 1 (Spring 1992): 90-102.

135

Gee, Harry R. Saxophone Soloists and Their Music 1844-1985: An Annotated Bibliography. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986.

Gold, Cecil. Saxophone Performance Practices and Teaching in the United States and Canada. Moscow, ID: School of Music Publications, University of Idaho, 1973.

Heavner, Tracy Lee. Saxophone Secrets: 60 Performance Strategies for the Advanced Saxophonist. Plymoth, UK: Scarecrow Press, 2013.

Hemke, Fred. Teacher’s Guide to the Saxophone. Elkhart, IN: H&A Selmer, Inc., 1966.

Hollinshead, Merrill T. “Historical Survey of the String Instrument Vibrato.” In Studies in the Psychology of Music, Vol. 1, The Vibrato. Edited by Carl Seashore, 282- 388. Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1932.

Horii, Yoshiyuki. “Acoustical Analysis of Vocal Vibrato: A Theoretical Interpretation of Data.” Journal of Voice 3, no. 1 (1989): 36-43.

Horii, Yoshiyuki. “Frequency Modulation Characteristics of Sustained /a/ Sung in Vocal Vibrato.” Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 32 (December 1989): 829- 836.

Horwood, Wally. Adolphe Sax 1814-1894: His Life and Legacy. Herts: Egon Publishers Ltd., 1980.

Ingham, Richard, editor. The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone. Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Jackson, Christopher. “An Examination of Vibrato-Use Options for Late Renaissance Vocal Music.” Choral Journal 48, no. 1 (July 2007): 24-35.

Jerold, Beverly. “Distinguishing Between Artificial and Natural Vibrato in Premodern Music.” Journal of Singing 63, no. 2 (November/December 2006): 161-167.

Lamar, Jacquelyn. “The History and Development of Vibrato Among Classical Saxophonists.” DMA Lecture, North Texas University, 1986.

Large, John and Shigenobu Iwata. "The Significance of Air Flow Modulations in Vocal Vibrato." The NATS Bulletin 32, no.3 (February/March 1976): 42-47.

Leeson, Cecil. “The Basis of Saxophone Tone Production: A Critical and Analytical Study.” DFA Dissertation, Chicago Musical College, 1955.

Levinsky, Gail Beth. “An Analysis and Comparison of Early Saxophone Methods Published Between 1846-1946.” DMA Document, Northwestern University, 1997.

136

Manning, Dwight. “Woodwind Vibrato from the Eighteenth Century to the Present.” Performance Practice Review 8, no. 1 (Spring 1995): 67-72.

Moore, Anthony Jon. Last accessed August 10, 2013.

Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. Letter of June 12, 1778 to his father. Translated by Emily Anderson. The Letters of Mozart and his Family. New York: Norton, 1985.

Murphy, Otis. Promotional Website. < http://otismurphy.com/> Last Accessed August 5, 2013.

Neumann, Frederick. “The Vibrato Controversy.” Performance Practice Review 4, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 14-27.

Prame, Eric. “Measurements of the Vibrato Rate of Ten Singers.” KTH Computer Science and Communication. Department for Speech, Music and Hearing Quarterly Progress and Status Report 33, no. 4 (1992): 73-86.

Prame, Eric. “Vibrato Extent and Intonation in Professional Western Lyric Singing.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 102, no. 1 (July 1997): 616-621.

Rousseau, Eugene. Marcel Mule: His Life and the Saxophone. Shell Lake, WI: Étoile Music, Inc., 1982.

Seashore, Carl E. "The Natural History of the Vibrato." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 17, no. 12 (December 1931): 623-626.

Segell, Michael. The Devil’s Horn: The Story of the Saxophone, from Noisy Novelty to King of Cool. New York: Picador, 2005.

Teal, Larry. The Art of Saxophone Playing. Princeton: Summy-Birchard Inc., 1963.

Timmers, Renee and Peter Desain. “Vibrato: Questions and Answers from Musicians and Science.” Proceedings of the Sixth ICMPC. Keele: 2000. Available online at Last accessed August 1, 2013.

Titze, Ingo R. "Getting the Most from the Vocal Instrument in a Choral Setting." Choral Journal 49, no. 5 (November 2008): 34-41.

Vereecken, Ben. Foundation to Saxophone Playing: An Elementary Method. New York: Carl Fischer, 1917.

Verville, Timothy. “Instrumental Vibrato: An Annotated Bibliography of Historical Writings Before 1940.” DMA Document, Arizona State University, May 2012.

137

Software

Sonic Visualiser 2.0. By Chris Cannam, Christian Landone, and Mark Sandler. Sonic Visualiser: An Open Source Application for Viewing, Analysing, and Annotating Music Audio Files. Proceedings of the ACM Multimedia 2010 International Conference. Available at .

Repertoire

Bozza, Eugène. Aria. Paris: Alphonse Leduc, 1936.

Creston, Paul. Sonata for Alto Saxophone and Piano (1939). Delaware Water Gap, PA: Templeton Publishing, 1945.

Desenclos, Alfred. Prélude, Cadence et Finale. Paris: Alphonse Leduc, 1956.

Glazunov, Alexander. Concerto in E flat. Boca Raton, FL: Edwin F. Kalmus & Co., Inc., 1934.

Hindemith, Paul. Sonate (1943). New York: Schott, 1956.

Ibert, Jacques. Concertino da Camera. Paris: Alphonse Leduc, 1935.

Maurice, Paule. Tableaux de Provence (1955). Paris: Editions Henry Lemoine, 1990.

Recordings

Abato, Vincent. Ibert/Glazunov/Villa-Lobos. New York: Nonesuch Records, 1964. Sylvian Shulman and Norman Pickering, conductors. Recorded c.1964 in New York.

Bornkamp, Arno. A Saxophone in Paris: Glazunov, Koechlin, Caplet, Ibert. Nieuwegein, The Netherlands: Vanguard Classics, 1994. Jeroen Weierink, conductor. Recorded January-May 1994.

Bornkamp, Arno. Devil’s Rag. Nieuwegei, The Netherlands: Vanguard Classics, 1995. Ivo Janssen, piano. Recorded February-March, 1995 in Eindhoven.

138

Bornkamp, Arno. Saxophone Sonatas. Castricum, The Netherlands: Globe, 1990. Ivo Janssen, piano. Recorded October 1989 in Amsterdam.

Delangle, Claude. A la Francaise. Åkersberga, Sweden: BIS 50547526, 2002. Odile Delangle, piano. Recorded July 1999 in Sweden.

Delangle, Claude. Ibert/Tomasi/Ravel/Maurice/Schmitt/Milhaud: Works for Saxophone and Orchestra. Hong Kong: Naxos Digital Services Ltd., 2007.

Londeix, Jean-Marie. Jean-Marie Londeix: Portrait. Detmold: MDG Archive, 2006. Recorded 1961-1983 in France, Quebec, and New York.

Mule, Marcel. Live Recital. Unpublished. Marion E. Hall, piano. Recorded February 9, 1958, Elkhart, IN.

Mule, Marcel. Marcel Mule. France: Selmer LPL-2012. Recorded c.1960.

Murphy, Otis. Fantasy. Tuscon, AZ: Arizona University Recordings, 2006. Haruko Murphy, piano.

Murphy, Otis. Memories of Dinant. Bloomington, IN: RiAX, 1999. Haruko Suzuki, piano.

Rascher, Sigurd. Sigurd Rascher Plays the Saxophone. Harrison, NJ: Grand Award AAS 703. Russell Sherman, piano. Recorded c.1960.

Rascher, Sigurd. The Classical Concertos Live! Laurel, MD: Bryan Kendall, 2007. Recorded in 1953 and 1958, Boston and Stockholm.

Rousseau, Eugene. Saxophone Concertos. Hamburg: Deutshe Grammophon 453 991-2, 1972. Paul Kuentz, conductor. Recorded April 1971 in Paris.

Rousseau, Eugene. The Virtuoso Saxophone, Volume 2. Columbus, OH: Coronet Records LPS 1601, 1968. Marion Hall, piano. Recorded c.1968.

139

Appendix: Raw Data for Each Soloist

For each soloist, the raw values for the rate and extent of each note measured are

presented below. The notes are grouped by composition. The name of the recording

examined is also listed. “Note” is the measure the note begins in, followed by its named

pitch (in the transposed key of the alto saxophone). “Time” refers to the time stamp of the

nearest second the note can be found on for its respective recording. “Rate” refers to the

vibrato rate in Hz and “Extent” refers to the vibrato extent in cents. It should also be

noted that the overall pitch of some of the recordings was significantly out of tune,

sometimes by as much as a quarter-step. This indicates that somewhere in the recording

or transferring process, the playback speed was incorrect. Since this affects vibrato rate,

the rates measured each had to be adjusted on the incorrect recordings (see footnotes).

Vincent Abato 154-F6 6:18 6.5 27 156-F4 6:25 6.5 26 Glazunov - Concerto, from 158-C#4 6:32 6.6 35 Ibert/Gazunov/Villa-Lobos 159-Ab4 6:34 6.2 39 207-C5 8:14 6.3 28 210-F5 8:19 7.0 23 Note Time Rate Extent 269-Bb5 10:09 6.4 37 11-D5 0:33 6.3 34 284-C6 10:36 6.7 36 12-F5 0:35 7.0 29 11-D5 0:33 6.3 34 14-D5 0:40 7.1 31 12-F5 0:35 7.0 29 19-A5 0:51 7.5 27 14-D5 0:40 7.1 31 23-D4 1:01 6.0 9 19-A5 0:51 7.5 27 32-A5 1:24 7.0 41 23-D4 1:01 6.0 9 34-D5 1:27 6.1 43 40-B4 1:45 6.4 20 41-B5 1:47 6.7 49 81-Eb6 3:24 6.5 25 Ibert - Concertino da Camera, from 84-Eb5 3:32 6.3 65 Ibert/Gazunov/Villa-Lobos 85-C5 3:36 6.5 47 91-Ab5 3:49 6.8 58 Note Time Rate Extent 97-Eb6 4:04 7.3 15 i 102-E4 4:17 6.1 54 9-A4 0:15 7.1 16 106-Db6 4:28 6.7 60 10-B4 0:16 6.5 36 123-C6 5:09 6.5 41 11-C#5 0:17 5.6 13 125-G#5 5:15 7.3 48 13-E5 0:18 6.9 31

140

21-Ab5 0:26 5.6 38 Arno Bornkamp 25-B#4 0:29 6.5 38 39-F6 0:42 7.7 16 Bozza Aria, from Devil’s Rag 45-B3 0:47 4.2 42 63-Eb5 1:07 6.4 50 Note Time Rate Extent 65-G5 1:10 6.1 56 5-G5 0:11 5.8 63 77-E5 1:22 6.3 44 7-F#5 0:16 5.8 29 81-D6 1:26 6.8 54 9-A5 0:22 6.1 24 83-G5 1:28 3.6 20 13-C6 0:33 5.9 36 95-E#5 1:39 6.3 64 16-A5 0:44 6.3 35 103-D6 1:47 6.8 44 21-C5 0:56 5.2 45 110-G5 1:53 5.3 54 24-B5 1:04 6.3 12 116-E6 1:59 6.7 39 26-E5 1:09 7.2 31 154-Ab5 2:33 4.5 28 32-G5 1:25 5.4 43 158-Eb6 2:38 6.7 61 36-C5 1:36 5.7 35 182-G4 3:00 6.6 29 40-Db5 1:49 5.3 16 183-F4 3:01 5.0 29 41-F5 1:50 7.5 34 188-B4 3:05 6.3 27 42-D#6 1:52 6.4 52 189-D5 3:07 4.2 44 46-B5 2:02 5.9 42 ii 49-A5 2:12 5.6 36 1-A5 0:06 7.0 47 53-A5 2:23 6.6 56 1-G#5 0:07 6.2 28 61-G5 2:50 5.3 10 2-A5 0:10 6.5 48 65-A5 3:01 5.7 35 2-G#5 0:12 6.0 35 76-F#4 3:35 5.6 49 3-A5 0:15 6.7 63 77-B4 3:38 5.9 21 4-C#5 0:19 6.4 30 79-E4 3:46 4.5 17 7-A#3 0:31 6.3 12 11-G#5 0:52 6.3 50 18-G#4 1:19 5.8 52 23-E6 1:40 5.4 39 Creston - Sonata, from Saxophone 24-F#5 1:48 6.3 67 Sonatas 26-E6 1:55 6.1 43 49-C#5 3:28 6.1 70 Note Time Rate Extent 54-C#5 3:50 5.9 31 i 67-Db5 4:04 6.9 56 1-C5 0:03 7.5 52 80-Eb5 4:15 7.8 39 3-Bb5 0:07 7.1 50 85-Bb5 4:19 7.7 15 5-E#6 0:11 7.7 52 126-A5 4:54 6.8 46 7-F6 0:14 7.1 53 135-G#5 5:03 6.3 59 10-Gb5 0:19 7.5 85 162-E6 5:27 7.3 28 10-F5 0:21 6.7 21 202-C4 6:02 6.5 75 13-F6 0:26 6.4 48 202-Eb6 6:15 7.5 38 29-C#6 1:03 7.1 93 202-A5 6:25 6.6 56 55-G4 1:53 5.6 43 202-B3 6:30 6.2 65 65-F5 2:19 6.7 95 202-D5 6:39 6.0 33 72-E5 2:37 6.3 22 202-C5 6:41 4.5 25 92-C5 3:22 10.0 39 267-F#5 7:41 7.1 26 103-G6 3:43 7.0 33 112-C4 3:58 8.0 71 122-F6 4:16 6.2 69 ii 9-Eb5 0:53 5.9 19

141

10-C5 1:00 5.8 19 Glazunov - Concerto, from A Saxophone 11-Bb5 1:08 6.2 38 in Paris 12-G5 1:15 5.1 7 14-Eb5 1:28 5.4 16 Note Time Rate Extent 21-Gb5 2:08 6.3 20 11-D5 0:35 6.6 22 23-D#6 2:15 6.3 44 12-F5 0:37 6.7 17 27-F6 2:37 6.4 54 14-D5 0:44 6.8 23 31-C#6 3:01 6.6 37 19-A5 0:59 6.3 20 36-F#4 3:34 5.7 23 23-D4 1:11 5.5 20 45-F#4 4:29 5.5 11 32-A5 1:39 6.7 46 iii 34-D5 1:43 6.2 30 20-F#5 0:15 6.7 42 40-B4 2:05 6.2 48 45-A# 0:35 6.5 60 41-B5 2:08 6.6 50 103-F4 1:21 6.3 24 81-Eb6 3:55 6.5 47 110-C6 1:27 6.5 76 84-Eb5 4:06 5.8 16 207-C#5 2:46 6.9 104 85-C5 4:11 4.7 17 235-F#5 3:09 6.7 72 91-Ab5 4:35 6.8 60 241-F#4 3:14 5.9 47 97-Eb6 4:54 6.9 54 284-B5 3:48 6.4 41 102-E4 5:10 5.2 15 106-Db6 5:23 6.5 75 123-C6 6:04 7.1 49 Desenclos - Prelude, Cadence et Finale, 125-G#5 6:11 5.4 53 from Saxophone Sonatas 154-F6 7:15 6.9 64 156-F4 7:20 6.1 16 Note Time Rate Extent 158-C#4 7:27 5.5 16 7-F#6 0:25 7.4 55 159-Ab4 7:30 4.7 44 11-F6 0:42 6.2 31 172-B4 8:10 5.0 31 15-F#5 0:58 6.2 8 207-C5 9:41 6.3 17 19-A#4 1:17 5.8 48 210-F5 9:46 6.3 25 22-F5 1:26 6.2 36 269-Bb5 11:46 7.0 40 24-E4 1:34 5.9 21 284-C6 12:16 6.7 49 27-C6 1:46 6.5 61 40-G#4 2:43 5.6 21 70-D#5 5:27 6.7 35 Hindemith - Sonate, from Saxophone 73-C5 5:33 6.1 38 Sonatas 84-Bb4 6:01 5.8 13 100-Bb4 6:59 6.3 38 Note Time Rate Extent 101-C5 7:04 6.1 49 i 103-G5 7:10 6.3 54 1-D5 0:00 4.4 13 104-G5 7:15 6.6 44 2-D5 0:04 6.1 44 106-A5 7:21 7.4 33 3-Eb5 0:06 6.0 16 106-A5 7:22 6.4 55 8-C5 0:16 7.6 34 109-D6 7:33 7.1 41 9-F#4 0:18 5.9 29 114-Bb5 7:47 5.8 72 10-F#5 0:21 5.9 14 118-D6 7:55 7.3 83 11-G#5 0:22 6.2 59 119-D5 7:57 6.6 67 24-C5 0:51 8.3 28 121-C#6 8:01 6.9 60 25-F5 0:52 6.3 12 30-F5 1:02 6.2 46 ii 1-D#5 0:00 6.6 24

142

2-F#5 0:01 6.7 45 1-A5 0:01 6.2 22 16-A#4 0:14 6.2 32 1-G#5 0:03 4.9 55 41-B4 0:37 6.3 38 2-A5 0:08 5.6 36 58-D#5 0:55 6.4 23 2-G#5 0:11 5.2 45 59-F#5 0:56 7.2 55 4-C#5 0:20 5.6 26 83-Bb4 1:19 6.1 37 7-A#3 0:36 5.3 12 86-Bb4 1:22 4.9 29 11-G#5 0:59 5.2 28 112-C5 1:50 7.0 68 18-G#4 1:28 5.3 19 113-C6 1:51 6.3 57 23-E6 1:49 6.3 57 136-D#5 2:15 6.0 38 24-F#5 1:56 5.3 12 137-F#5 2:16 6.9 49 26-E6 2:04 6.1 42 189-Ab5 3:06 5.6 13 54-C#5 3:58 4.1 15 iii 67-Db5 4:13 6.0 23 1-D5 0:00 5.3 33 80-Eb5 4:24 6.8 37 1-C#5 0:05 4.3 8 85-Bb5 4:28 6.7 57 1-Eb5 0:07 5.7 30 126-A5 5:03 7.1 55 3-A4 0:20 5.7 20 135-G#5 5:12 5.9 41 5-F5 0:45 6.1 8 162-E6 5:37 6.9 41 8-B4 1:13 5.8 30 202-C4 6:11 5.5 42 9-Bb5 1:26 6.1 24 202-Eb6 6:26 6.6 25 13-A4 1:59 6.0 17 202-A5 6:35 6.1 23 13-G#4 2:03 5.1 12 202-B3 6:41 6.3 34 14-G4 2:07 4.7 25 202-D5 6:51 4.9 26 202-C5 6:54 4.3 16 267-F#5 7:53 6.3 26 Ibert - Concertino da Camera, from A Saxophone in Paris Claude Delangle Note Time Rate Extent i Desenclos - Prelude, Cadence et Finale, 9-A4 0:12 7.7 21 from A la Francaise 10-B4 0:13 7.4 18 11-C#5 0:14 6.3 53 Note Time Rate Extent 13-E5 0:16 6.3 36 7-F#6 0:28 5.1 29 25-B#4 0:27 6.0 55 11-F6 0:43 5.4 14 39-F6 0:40 5.7 36 15-F#5 0:57 4.8 7 45-B3 0:45 6.7 36 19-A#4 1:15 6.2 25 63-Eb5 1:04 6.1 36 22-F5 1:24 5.6 15 65-G5 1:09 6.3 48 24-E4 1:31 5.4 12 77-E5 1:19 6.7 51 27-C6 1:42 5.6 15 81-D6 1:23 6.3 47 40-G#4 0:01 6.0 6 83-G5 1:25 6.7 23 70-D#5 0:08 5.3 19 95-E#5 1:36 6.4 41 73-C5 0:14 4.9 67 103-D6 1:44 6.8 66 84-Bb4 0:42 5.4 18 116-E6 1:57 6.9 54 100-Bb4 1:34 6.2 13 154-Ab5 2:32 6.1 38 101-C5 1:38 5.6 20 158-Eb6 2:36 7.0 70 103-G5 1:43 6.2 4 182-G4 2:59 6.6 39 104-G5 1:48 5.8 27 189-D5 3:05 6.1 43 106-A5 1:54 4.1 23 ii 106-A5 1:56 5.1 17

143

109-D6 2:07 6.3 15 Maurice - Tableaux de Provence, from A 114-Bb5 2:21 5.7 25 la Francaise 118-D6 2:30 6.0 20 119-D5 2:32 5.2 15 Note Time Rate Extent 121-C#6 2:36 5.4 21 i 20-C#5 0:16 5.8 18 74-C#5 0:59 5.0 11 Ibert - Concertino da Camera, from 90-B5 1:12 5.4 16 Ibert/Tomasi/Ravel/Maurice/Schmitt/ 98-C#6 1:18 5.7 14 Milhaud 106-Eb5 1:25 5.3 14 123-F6 1:39 6.1 18 Note Time Rate Extent 125-F5 1:40 4.8 9 i 135-Eb5 1:47 5.7 5 25-B#4 0:27 5.5 7 169-E6 2:14 5.3 7 39-F6 0:40 5.6 26 ii 63-Eb5 1:05 5.4 7 5-F#5 0:19 5.0 4 65-G5 1:09 5.5 16 8-G#4 0:26 7.1 14 77-E5 1:20 5.8 13 11-B5 0:35 4.1 14 81-D6 1:24 5.6 25 12-C#6 0:38 4.8 14 95-E#5 1:38 5.9 19 14-G#4 0:46 4.9 12 103-D6 1:46 6.1 36 15-A5 0:51 4.7 32 110-G5 1:52 6.6 39 26-C#6 1:28 4.7 19 158-Eb6 2:39 5.7 49 iii 182-G4 3:01 6.1 22 19-G5 0:18 5.0 11 ii 20-B5 0:19 7.0 21 1-A5 0:02 5.0 16 51-G5 0:48 7.3 7 1-G#5 0:06 5.5 18 58-B4 0:53 5.9 18 2-A5 0:11 4.5 11 2-G#5 0:14 4.2 18 11-G#5 1:06 5.2 53 Jean-Marie Londeix 23-E6 1:51 5.3 9 24-F#6 1:57 5.7 22 Desenclos - Prelude, Cadence et Finale, 26-E7 2:02 5.1 18 from Jean-Marie Londeix: Portrait 67-Db5 3:56 5.9 21 126-A5 4:48 5.7 23 Note Time Rate Extent 135-G#5 4:58 5.8 14 7-F#6 0:24 6.6 50 162-E6 5:23 6.1 41 11-F6 0:40 6.2 40 202-C4 5:59 5.7 19 15-F#5 0:54 6.0 33 202-Eb6 6:10 5.7 28 19-A#4 1:13 6.1 55 202-A5 6:19 4.1 31 22-F5 1:22 5.9 48 202-B3 6:24 5.9 35 24-E4 1:30 6.0 32 202-D5 6:34 5.1 10 27-C6 1:43 6.1 56 267-F#5 7:39 5.3 37 40-G#4 2:37 5.7 31 70-D#5 5:41 5.9 46 73-C5 5:48 6.1 39 84-Bb4 6:18 5.6 48 100-Bb4 7:19 6.1 42 101-C5 7:24 6.0 42 103-G5 7:31 6.3 32 104-G5 7:37 6.0 39

144

106-A5 7:44 6.5 43 14-G4 1:43 5.2 13 106-A5 7:46 6.0 65 109-D6 7:58 6.2 53 114-Bb5 8:14 6.3 57 Maurice - Tableaux de Provence, from 118-D6 8:22 6.6 49 Jean-Marie Londeix: Portrait 119-D5 8:24 6.2 36 121-C#6 8:29 6.2 47 Note Time Rate Extent

i 17-E5 0:13 10.0 9 Hindemith - Sonate, from Jean-Marie 20-C#5 0:15 6.3 32 Londeix: Portrait 24-A4 0:18 7.1 61 27-A#5 0:21 7.7 54 Note Time Rate Extent 33-A5 0:25 6.7 77 i 45-G5 0:35 5.8 78 1-D5 0:03 6.1 14 71-E5 0:55 6.7 27 2-D5 0:06 6.9 17 74-C#5 0:58 6.5 86 3-Eb5 0:08 5.9 16 90-B5 1:10 6.1 61 8-C5 0:17 7.4 17 98-C#6 1:17 7.1 21 9-F#4 0:19 6.7 16 106-Eb5 1:24 6.6 35 10-F#5 0:22 6.0 23 123-F6 1:37 6.1 67 11-G#5 0:23 5.9 44 125-F5 1:38 6.2 49 13-D5 0:27 6.3 16 135-Eb5 1:46 6.2 55 24-C5 0:51 5.9 24 169-E6 2:12 4.8 73 25-F5 0:52 6.0 26 170-E5 2:13 7.7 63 30-F5 1:02 6.0 25 ii ii 5-C#6 0:14 7.7 16 1-D#5 0:03 6.0 37 5-B5 0:15 7.1 48 2-F#5 0:04 6.7 39 5-F#5 0:16 6.6 50 14-G#4 0:15 5.5 17 8-G#4 0:24 6.1 63 16-A#4 0:17 6.0 31 9-E5 0:28 6.5 39 41-B4 0:40 5.2 65 11-B5 0:32 5.8 86 58-D#5 0:58 5.6 41 12-C#6 0:35 6.3 49 59-F#5 0:59 6.4 39 14-G#4 0:42 5.9 83 83-Bb4 1:23 5.7 15 15-A5 0:45 5.8 72 86-Bb4 1:25 5.9 19 26-C#6 1:19 6.4 40 112-C5 1:52 5.6 39 iii 113-C6 1:53 5.5 61 22-A4 0:19 5.7 71 136-D#5 2:18 7.4 33 51-G5 0:46 5.7 68 137-F#5 2:19 6.5 23 58-B4 0:52 6.3 85 189-Ab5 3:12 6.4 18 iii 1-D5 0:06 6.0 20 1-C#5 0:09 6.3 16 1-Eb5 0:11 5.9 9 3-A4 0:21 6.0 35 5-F5 0:40 6.2 25

8-B4 1:03 5.3 29 9-Bb5 1:12 5.9 46 13-A4 1:36 6.2 21 13-G#4 1:40 5.5 12

145

Marcel Mule 241-F#4 2:57 6.0 110 284-B5 3:29 6.3 75 Creston - Sonata, from Marcel Mule

Note Time Rate143 Extent Glazunov - Concerto, from Live Recital i 1-C5 0:00 7.1 61 Note Time Rate144 Extent 3-Bb5 0:04 6.7 44 11-D5 0:27 6.1 40 5-E#6 0:08 7.1 74 12-F5 0:29 6.1 51 7-F6 0:10 7.1 88 14-D5 0:35 5.9 40 10-Gb5 0:15 6.3 42 19-A5 0:47 6.2 51 10-F5 0:17 6.5 32 23-D4 0:58 6.2 58 13-F6 0:21 6.1 48 32-A5 1:22 6.0 58 22-Eb5 0:41 6.5 37 34-D5 1:25 6.1 37 29-C#6 0:55 6.3 88 40-B4 1:42 6.0 32 55-G4 1:41 6.1 55 41-B5 1:44 5.9 59 56-D4 1:44 6.7 25 81-Eb6 2:47 5.9 62 65-F5 2:03 6.0 48 84-Eb5 2:58 5.9 23 72-E5 2:19 5.9 50 85-C5 3:02 5.7 49 92-C5 3:01 6.7 84 91-Ab5 3:24 6.0 57 103-G6 3:21 6.7 85 97-Eb6 3:43 6.4 103 112-C4 3:36 8.3 40 102-E4 3:58 6.1 71 122-F6 3:54 6.2 73 106-Db6 4:12 6.2 68 ii 123-C6 4:44 5.7 54 9-Eb5 0:43 5.8 40 125-G#5 4:50 6.2 45 10-C5 0:50 6.0 63 154-F6 5:43 6.1 73 11-Bb5 0:57 5.9 62 156-F4 5:48 6.3 56 12-G5 1:02 6.0 74 158-C#4 5:56 6.4 31 14-Eb5 1:14 5.7 25 159-Ab4 5:59 5.9 46 21-Gb5 1:51 5.9 48 172-B4 6:35 5.9 44 23-D#6 1:56 5.6 100 207-C5 8:03 7.8 17 27-F6 2:16 6.1 71 210-F5 8:07 6.7 40 31-C#6 2:36 6.7 66 269-Bb5 8:40 6.4 53 36-F#4 3:03 6.6 98 284-C6 9:07 6.0 66 45-F#4 3:50 5.7 62 iii 5-F#4 0:03 6.7 56 Ibert - Concertino da Camera, from Live 20-F#5 0:14 6.4 42 Recital 24-D#5 0:17 6.2 52 45-A# 0:32 6.1 68 Note Time Rate Extent 103-F4 1:13 6.1 77 110-C6 1:19 6.5 52 i 111-G5 1:20 5.9 36 9-A4 0:10 5.8 69 168-Bb4 2:03 6.7 49 10-B4 0:11 7.2 95 170-Eb6 2:05 9.1 37 11-C#5 0:12 6.9 59 207-C#5 2:31 6.3 77 13-E5 0:13 7.2 72 235-F#5 2:53 6.1 54 21-Ab5 0:20 6.9 57 25-B#4 0:23 6.8 68

143 This recording was found to be 40 cents 144 This recording was found to be 40 cents sharp, so the rates were each lowered by 2.3%. sharp, so the rates were each lowered by 2.3%.

146

39-F6 0:34 6.8 97 Maurice - Tableaux de Provence, from 45-B3 0:39 6.2 67 Marcel Mule 63-Eb5 0:55 6.0 52 65-G5 1:00 5.9 45 Note Time Rate Extent 67-B4 1:03 5.8 28 i 77-E5 1:11 6.2 49 20-C#5 0:14 6.5 68 81-D6 1:15 6.2 65 24-A4 0:17 6.9 53 83-G5 1:18 5.6 27 27-A#5 0:20 7.4 34 95-E#5 1:29 6.3 41 45-G5 0:33 6.9 45 103-D6 1:37 6.2 36 74-C#5 0:55 6.5 74 110-G5 1:43 6.5 74 90-B5 1:07 6.0 83 154-Ab5 2:23 6.7 50 98-C#6 1:13 6.3 69 158-Eb6 2:27 6.2 73 106-Eb5 1:20 6.5 31 182-G4 2:47 6.4 32 123-F6 1:33 6.9 70 183-F4 2:48 6.5 29 125-F5 1:34 6.5 58 188-B4 2:52 6.5 40 135-Eb5 1:42 6.0 32 189-D5 2:53 4.9 31 169-E6 2:08 8.0 63 ii ii 1-A5 0:01 5.9 40 5-C#6 0:10 6.7 41 1-G#5 0:03 5.6 46 5-B5 0:11 6.3 17 2-A5 0:07 5.8 40 5-F#5 0:12 6.1 38 2-G#5 0:09 5.4 35 8-G#4 0:19 6.0 33 3-A5 0:13 6.1 35 8-G#4 0:22 5.3 21 3-B4 0:15 6.2 38 9-E5 0:23 6.2 26 4-C#5 0:17 6.1 64 11-B5 0:27 5.7 60 7-A#3 0:29 6.2 43 12-C#6 0:30 5.8 73 11-G#5 0:53 5.7 37 14-G#4 0:38 5.8 24 18-G#4 1:20 6.3 44 15-A5 0:41 6.0 51 23-E6 1:39 6.1 71 26-C#6 1:14 5.7 70 24-F#5 1:46 5.6 49 iii 26-E6 1:53 6.3 74 7-E5 0:05 6.3 31 49-C#5 2:26 6.0 34 8-G5 0:06 6.3 47 54-C#5 2:48 5.7 58 19-G5 0:17 6.3 56 67-Db5 3:05 7.5 40 20-B5 0:18 6.5 52 80-Eb5 3:15 6.9 48 22-A4 0:19 6.0 68 85-Bb5 3:19 7.5 71 27-B4 0:24 8.3 41 126-A5 3:50 6.4 83 51-G5 0:46 6.3 44 135-G#5 3:59 6.0 48 58-B4 0:52 7.0 64 162-E6 4:20 7.2 85 202-C4 4:40 6.4 49 202-Eb6 4:57 6.2 83 202-A5 5:05 6.2 53 Otis Murphy 202-B3 5:10 6.4 61 202-D5 5:25 6.0 62 Bozza - Aria, from Fantasy 202-C5 5:29 5.9 36 267-F#5 6:23 6.7 40 Note Time Rate Extent 5-G5 0:11 5.2 11 7-F#5 0:17 5.5 11 9-A5 0:23 5.5 14 13-C6 0:35 5.5 14 16-A5 0:46 5.6 20

147

24-B5 1:05 6.6 27 103-F4 1:18 6.3 46 26-E5 1:10 6.8 13 110-C6 1:24 5.6 23 32-G5 1:25 5.6 11 170-Eb6 2:10 7.7 44 36-C5 1:36 5.9 17 207-C#5 2:38 6.2 32 38-Bb4 1:41 7.1 26 235-F#5 3:01 5.9 29 40-Db5 1:48 6.6 27 241-F#4 3:06 5.4 41 41-F5 1:50 7.8 29 284-B5 3:40 5.9 53 42-D#6 1:51 6.0 31 46-B5 2:02 6.0 34 49-A5 2:10 5.7 14 Desenclos - Prelude, Cadence et Finale, 53-A5 2:21 5.6 13 from Memories of Dinant 65-A5 2:54 5.4 13 76-F#4 3:27 5.5 8 Note Time Rate Extent 77-B4 3:29 6.3 12 7-F#6 0:24 7.0 46 11-F6 0:39 6.0 36 15-F#5 0:53 5.8 23 Creston - Sonata, from Memories of 19-A#4 1:11 5.7 35 Dinant 22-F5 1:19 6.1 36 24-E4 1:27 7.1 26 Note Time Rate Extent 27-C6 1:39 6.0 32 i 40-G#4 2:34 5.1 14 1-C5 0:01 7.1 72 70-D#5 5:51 6.1 19 3-Bb5 0:04 6.5 41 84-Bb4 6:27 5.2 18 5-E#6 0:09 6.5 60 101-C5 7:23 5.7 36 7-F6 0:12 5.7 46 103-G5 7:29 6.0 45 10-Gb5 0:17 6.5 71 104-G5 7:34 6.0 48 13-F6 0:24 6.1 55 106-A5 7:40 6.6 46 22-Eb5 0:45 5.8 34 106-A5 7:42 6.0 38 29-C#6 1:03 6.3 46 109-D6 7:53 5.2 50 65-F5 2:21 5.6 13 114-Bb5 8:08 6.0 56 72-E5 2:39 5.9 18 118-D6 8:16 6.5 49 92-C5 3:29 6.0 48 119-D5 8:18 6.3 47 103-G6 3:51 5.4 59 121-C#6 8:23 6.2 50 122-F6 4:27 5.7 40 ii 9-Eb5 0:46 5.1 9 Sigurd Rascher 10-C5 0:54 5.6 11 11-Bb5 1:02 5.7 30 Bozza - Aria, from Sigurd Rascher Plays 12-G5 1:08 4.5 22 the Saxophone 21-Gb5 2:01 6.3 20

23-D#6 2:08 5.6 64 145 27-F6 2:29 5.7 39 Note Time Rate Extent 31-C#6 2:53 6.3 47 5-G5 0:12 4.5 27 45-F#4 4:15 5.0 8 7-F#5 0:18 4.0 37 iii 9-A5 0:24 4.6 43 7-B5 0:06 8.3 27 13-C6 0:36 4.5 45 20-F#5 0:15 6.7 27 16-A5 0:46 4.7 42 24-D#5 0:19 6.3 18 45-A# 0:34 5.9 56 145 84-G5 1:04 4.3 30 This recording was found to be 73 cents sharp, so the rates were each lowered by 4.2%.

148

21-C5 0:58 4.5 52 31-C#6 2:49 5.8 51 24-B5 1:07 5.4 40 36-F#4 3:20 4.4 27 26-E5 1:12 6.4 43 45-F#4 4:14 4.0 27 32-G5 1:28 4.8 50 iii 36-C5 1:39 5.0 59 5-F#4 0:05 6.5 24 38-Bb4 1:44 5.1 46 20-F#5 0:16 5.0 37 40-Db5 1:52 6.0 26 24-D#5 0:19 5.0 38 42-D#6 1:55 5.6 86 45-A# 0:35 4.8 53 46-B5 2:05 4.8 68 84-G5 1:04 6.9 43 49-A5 2:15 4.3 51 110-C6 1:23 5.0 66 53-A5 2:26 5.0 49 168-Bb4 2:07 8.0 37 59-E5 2:44 4.2 30 170-Eb6 2:08 7.5 40 61-G5 2:50 3.9 26 207-C#5 2:35 5.6 53 65-A5 3:02 4.9 54 235-F#5 2:56 5.2 49 76-F#4 3:35 5.3 39 241-F#4 3:01 5.8 36 77-B4 3:38 5.1 41 284-B5 3:33 6.3 48 79-E4 3:46 3.5 25

Glazunov - Concerto, from The Creston - Sonata, from Sigurd Rascher Classical Concertos Live! Plays the Saxophone Note Time Rate Extent Note Time Rate146 Extent 11-D5 0:35 3.8 24 i 12-F5 0:37 4.8 28 1-C5 0:03 6.7 66 14-D5 0:44 4.4 50 3-Bb5 0:07 12.2 28 19-A5 0:57 5.4 62 5-E#6 0:12 6.9 42 23-D4 1:08 3.8 20 7-F6 0:14 8.1 58 34-D5 1:39 4.1 38 10-Gb5 0:20 5.1 77 40-B4 2:01 4.5 45 10-F5 0:21 5.5 29 41-B5 2:03 4.1 38 13-F6 0:26 5.1 69 81-Eb6 3:39 4.9 34 22-Eb5 0:46 4.9 18 84-Eb5 3:51 4.7 55 29-C#6 1:03 5.5 73 85-C5 3:54 4.2 21 65-F5 2:17 5.2 30 91-Ab5 4:12 4.9 29 72-E5 2:36 5.4 20 97-Eb6 4:28 5.3 66 92-C5 3:19 5.6 59 102-E4 4:42 3.8 31 103-G6 3:40 7.7 58 123-C6 5:33 5.8 38 112-C4 3:56 4.9 28 125-G#5 5:40 5.3 35 122-F6 4:15 5.2 37 154-F6 6:38 5.8 42 ii 156-F4 6:46 4.3 30 9-Eb5 0:47 4.4 24 158-C#4 6:55 5.1 22 10-C5 0:54 4.6 24 159-Ab4 6:58 4.0 23 11-Bb5 1:03 4.2 60 207-C5 8:33 5.3 11 14-Eb5 1:22 3.4 14 210-F5 8:39 4.8 20 21-Gb5 2:01 4.7 31 269-Bb5 10:35 5.3 31 23-D#6 2:08 5.0 36 284-C6 11:05 5.3 33 27-F6 2:27 5.5 53

146 This recording was found to be 45 cents sharp, so the rates were each lowered by 2.6%.

149

Ibert - Concertino da Camera, from The 202-A5 13:42 4.8 24 Classical Concertos Live! 202-B3 13:47 5.4 72 202-D5 14:03 3.6 30 Note Time Rate Extent 202-C5 14:06 3.0 24 i 9-A4 2:38 7.4 47 10-B4 2:40 6.3 49 Eugene Rousseau 11-C#5 2:41 5.6 49 13-E5 2:42 4.9 41 Glazunov - Concerto, from Saxophone 21-Ab5 2:50 7.7 47 Concertos 25-B#4 2:54 5.1 70 39-F6 3:09 5.9 21 Note Time Rate Extent 45-B3 3:14 5.0 52 11-D5 0:30 6.0 13 63-Eb5 3:36 4.2 32 12-F5 0:32 6.4 27 65-G5 3:39 4.5 25 14-D5 0:38 6.1 12 77-E5 3:51 4.2 34 19-A5 0:50 6.0 48 81-D6 3:55 5.0 61 23-D4 1:00 5.3 42 95-E#5 4:09 4.7 49 32-A5 1:25 5.7 43 103-D6 4:18 5.7 109 34-D5 1:28 5.6 21 110-G5 4:25 6.4 68 40-B4 1:48 5.5 15 116-E6 4:31 8.6 54 41-B5 1:51 5.0 51 154-Ab5 5:09 5.4 54 81-Eb6 3:32 5.4 56 158-Eb6 5:14 4.7 53 84-Eb5 3:43 5.7 58 182-G4 5:38 4.7 55 85-C5 3:46 5.5 17 183-F4 5:39 5.6 50 91-Ab5 4:02 6.1 17 188-B4 5:44 5.4 24 97-Eb6 4:19 5.4 53 189-D5 5:45 4.6 42 102-E4 4:36 5.7 32 ii 106-Db6 4:50 5.8 62 1-A5 6:54 4.7 55 123-C6 5:34 5.7 49 1-G#5 6:56 4.1 36 125-G#5 5:41 5.7 42 2-A5 7:01 4.4 10 154-F6 6:46 5.7 30 3-A5 7:07 4.8 28 156-F4 6:53 5.4 17 3-B4 7:09 4.5 23 158-C#4 7:03 5.6 33 4-C#5 7:11 5.5 14 159-Ab4 7:06 5.1 14 7-A#3 7:25 5.1 25 172-B4 7:45 5.9 21 11-G#5 7:45 3.9 33 210-F5 9:23 6.1 19 18-G#4 8:15 3.9 14 269-Bb5 11:27 6.5 27 23-E6 8:37 5.0 80 284-C6 11:58 6.2 32 24-F#6 8:45 5.4 45 26-E7 8:52 6.8 76

49-C#5 10:26 4.9 30 54-C#5 10:49 6.4 14 Hindemith - Sonate, from The Virtuoso 67-Db5 11:06 5.1 26 Saxophone 80-Eb5 11:20 4.5 24 85-Bb5 11:25 6.3 61 Note Time Rate Extent 126-A5 12:07 4.7 61 i 135-G#5 12:18 4.7 27 1-D5 0:03 5.2 45 162-E6 12:47 5.9 89 2-D5 0:06 6.1 39 202-C4 13:26 4.7 27 3-Eb5 0:08 5.7 33 202-Eb6 13:37 5.0 55 8-C5 0:19 6.7 54

150

9-F#4 0:22 5.6 29 65-G5 1:15 5.5 36 10-F#5 0:26 5.8 38 77-E5 1:27 6.1 28 11-G#5 0:27 5.8 44 81-D6 1:31 5.8 49 13-D5 0:31 5.5 31 95-E#5 1:45 5.6 35 24-C5 0:59 6.3 86 103-D6 1:53 6.0 54 25-F5 1:00 5.4 30 110-G5 2:00 5.9 35 30-F5 1:13 5.7 27 116-E6 2:07 6.1 39 ii 154-Ab5 2:44 6.1 44 1-D#5 0:02 5.0 23 158-Eb6 2:49 5.4 49 2-F#5 0:03 5.5 19 182-G4 3:14 5.3 18 14-G#4 0:14 5.4 20 189-D5 3:21 5.6 30 16-A#4 0:16 6.0 24 ii 41-B4 0:39 6.8 37 1-A5 0:01 5.3 29 58-D#5 0:55 7.1 23 1-G#5 0:03 5.9 29 59-F#5 0:56 6.0 46 2-A5 0:05 5.3 30 83-Bb4 1:20 7.7 12 2-G#5 0:07 5.6 21 86-Bb4 1:23 5.6 12 3-A5 0:10 8.3 28 112-C5 1:51 5.8 19 4-C#5 0:14 5.6 40 113-C6 1:52 6.0 43 7-A#3 0:25 7.1 39 136-D#5 2:22 7.8 23 11-G#5 0:45 5.3 20 137-F#5 2:23 5.5 42 23-E6 1:29 5.7 48 149-G4 2:34 7.2 52 24-F#5 1:35 5.6 18 189-Ab5 3:14 6.3 29 26-E6 1:42 5.6 58 iii 49-C#5 3:07 5.8 16 1-D5 0:02 5.4 14 80-Eb5 3:54 6.3 42 1-C#5 0:06 5.9 20 85-Bb5 3:59 6.3 30 1-Eb5 0:08 5.4 31 126-A5 4:39 5.5 27 3-A4 0:19 5.1 25 135-G#5 4:49 5.7 16 5-F5 0:38 5.6 21 162-E6 5:17 5.8 46 8-B4 1:02 5.3 23 202-C4 5:57 5.7 46 9-Bb5 1:13 5.7 51 202-Eb6 6:15 5.8 53 13-A4 1:41 5.8 12 202-A5 6:27 5.4 41 13-G#4 1:46 6.4 27 202-B3 6:35 5.6 18 14-G4 1:49 5.0 21 202-D5 6:49 6.1 5

Ibert - Concertino da Camera, from Saxophone Concertos

Note Time Rate Extent i 9-A4 0:14 5.3 13 10-B4 0:16 6.8 20 11-C#5 0:17 6.1 32 13-E5 0:18 6.5 22 21-Ab5 0:26 6.3 23 25-B#4 0:30 6.6 20 39-F6 0:44 5.1 45 45-B3 0:50 5.9 16 63-Eb5 1:11 5.2 14

151

152