DU Undergraduate Research Journal Archive Volume 1 Issue 2 Article 10 4-20-2020 Establishment of the Classical Saxophone: The Evolution of Instrumental Design and Performance into the 20th Century Emily Nicol University of Denver Art Bouton University of Denver - Advisor Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/duurj Part of the Music Performance Commons, Other History Commons, and the Other Music Commons Recommended Citation Nicol, Emily and Bouton, Art (2020) "Establishment of the Classical Saxophone: The Evolution of Instrumental Design and Performance into the 20th Century," DU Undergraduate Research Journal Archive: Vol. 1 : Iss. 2 , Article 10. Available at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/duurj/vol1/iss2/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in DU Undergraduate Research Journal Archive by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. Establishment of the Classical Saxophone: The Evolution of Instrumental Design and Performance into the 20th Century Abstract The instrumental design of the saxophone has evolved dramatically from its original patent in 1846. Referencing instruments from the St. Cecilia’s Hall Music Museum at the University of Edinburgh, this article explores the historical origins of the saxophone and traces the evolution of its design into the 20th century. Original research was completed through analysis of unique antique saxophones at St. Cecilia’s Hall and historical source materials in order to determine how, despite its intention to be used as a classical instrument, many factors such as politics, instrument structure, finances, and musician attitude at the time of the saxophone’s invention resulted in limited classical saxophone performance in the modern day. This article addresses the importance of exploring the early history of instruments as an aspect of contemporary musical study. Keywords Saxophone, Adolphe Sax, Performance practice, Instrument design, Music history Publication Statement Copyright held by the author. User is responsible for all copyright compliance. This article is available in DU Undergraduate Research Journal Archive: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/duurj/vol1/ iss2/10 University of Denver Undergraduate Research Journal Establishment of the Classical Saxophone: The evolution of instrumental design and performance into the 20th century Emily Nicol1 and Art Bouton2 1Student Contributor, University of Denver, Denver, CO 2Advisor, Lamont School of Music, University of Denver, Denver, CO Abstract The instrumental design of the saxophone has evolved dramatically from its original patent in 1846. Referencing instruments from the St. Cecilia’s Hall Music Museum at the University of Edinburgh, this article explores the historical origins of the saxophone and traces the evolution of its design into the 20th century. Original research was completed through analysis of unique antique saxophones at St. Cecilia’s Hall and historical source materials in order to determine how, despite its intention to be used as a classical instrument, many factors such as politics, instrument structure, finances, and musician attitude at the time of the saxophone’s invention resulted in limited classical saxophone performance in the modern day. This article addresses the importance of exploring the early history of instruments as an aspect of contemporary musical study. Keywords: saxophone – Adolphe Sax – performance practice – instrument design – music history 1 INTRODUCTION instrumental design with historical factors. First officially patented in 1846, the saxophone is the most recently invented Western instrument that is writ- 2 THE ORIGINAL SAX PATENTS ten with frequency into modern orchestral and wind ensemble compositions. Due to its relative novelty, as it Adolphe Sax initially invented the saxophone as a was not invented until the Romantic period of music, melodic low woodwind that could imitate the timbre the amount of repertoire existing for solo and ensem- of orchestral strings but had the volume of brass instru- ble classical saxophone compared to most traditional ments. In the original patent, Sax states that “the char- instruments is limited. In addition, the popularity of acter of [the saxophone’s] voice can be reconciled with saxophone in jazz and rock overshadows its origin and the stringed instruments, but which possesses more 1 usage as a classical instrument. Despite its lack of exten- force and intensity than the strings” . The bassoon and sive recognition, the repertoire and schools of classical the bass clarinet (which Sax himself had invented in saxophone study are still vital to historical understand- 1838) were both too quiet for large concert settings, es- ing of the instrument and remain a versatile area of pecially outdoors, and low brass instruments lacked musical performance. This article contains original re- the consistency of tone and technology to play quick 2 search on the complexity of the evolution of saxophone melodic passages . One popular theory behind Sax’s design since Adolphe Sax’s initial patent and will focus inspiration for the saxophone was that he combined on the progression of alterations to the alto saxophone his work optimizing the bass clarinet with the work of that allow for the virtuosity of performance that classi- his father. Charles-Joseph Sax had the title as the “Mu- cal saxophone repertoire requires today. The progres- sical Instrument Maker of the King of Brussels” and 2 sion of saxophone design will be traced through unique spent the majority of his efforts designing ophicleides . historical instruments from St. Cecilia’s hall. In addi- Until the invention of the saxophone, the ophicleide tion, this article will explore the causes of diminished attempted to fill the gap, but was not ideal as it lacked popularity of the saxophone as a classical instrument a functional lower range, stood out from the rest of the from a historical perspective. This analysis of causes orchestral sound, and maintained poor intonation. for the low prevalence of classical saxophone will in- There has been some confusion when observing the clude original research forming connections between original Sax patents about which instruments had ac- Emily Nicol tually been finalized and physically realized as part of Sax’s saxophone family. The 1846 patent, seen in Fig- ure1, shows eight total saxophone models, but only no.1 and no.2 in the diagram have any detail in design. This would imply that the very first saxophones that Adolphe Sax actually created were the E[ baritone sax- ophone (no.1) and the C/B[ bass saxophone (no.2) 3. Figure 2. Adolphe Sax’s 1950 saxophone family patent 3 which can be observed in the carefully constructed bore of the saxophone. Both the bassoon and oboe also have conical bores, but Sax’s design was unique as the chang- ing diameter of the saxophone is not consistent but rather parabolic in order to maximize the reflection Figure 1. Adolphe Sax’s original 1846 saxophone family patent 3 of soundwaves within the instrument. By including three other smaller parabolic curves within the body of These initial patented models gained massive popu- the instrument, Sax was able to most efficiently project larity in the French military band, which required the the volume of the saxophone while creating its unique 1 volume and dexterity that Sax provided, but the man bright and sonorous timbre . He also claimed that this was shortly to fall on hard times. Sax’s rivals claimed parabolic shape allowed the saxophone to be “able to that there was too much similarity between the sax- change the volume of its sounds better than any other 1 ophone and the ophicleide, especially since the origi- instrument” . The original key system, although not nal bass saxophone still retained the ophicleide shape. as layered as modern saxophone key systems, was in- Along with being drawn into lawsuits against competi- spired by the latest in instrumental technology: the tors designing their own types of “saxophones”, Sax Boehm flute. Theobald Boehm created a key system lost his foothold in the French military band as King in 1832 that placed large-bore tone holes in their most Louis Philippe, who’s favor he had gained, was de- acoustically accurate locations on the instrument, us- 2,5 posed in 1848, and saxophones were removed from the ing pivoting rods to mechanize keys together . This standard instrumentation 2,4 . Although fiscally devas- made more ergonomic sense for performers as they tating, this period of misfortune allowed Sax the time were able to press a key that was within easy reach to to develop his designs. He attempted to move the saxo- open or close the actual tone hole from a distance. By phone even further from the ophicleide by adjusting the utilizing Boehm’s key system, Sax was able to create position in which saxophones were held and spent time his saxophone with more accurate intonation through- expanding upon and finalizing the different members out its length and allow for more dexterity of playing of his saxophone family. In Figure2, his 1850 Belgium compared to the ophicleide, for example, which had a 2 patent shows a four-part saxophone family that is rec- separate lever for each key . The acoustics of Sax’s orig- ognizable today: no.1 –B[ soprano saxophone, no.2 – inal design may have favored the lower register of the E[ alto saxophone, no.3 –B[ tenor saxophone, and no.4 saxophone,