Download The Saxophone`s Music / Jacob Shapiro

The Saxophone's Music / Jacob Shapiro
------------------------------------The saxophone, invented by Belgian instrument maker Adolphe Sax
(1814-1894) in 1846, was intended to combine the clarinet's
agility and the brass' power. Originally there were two "sets"
of instruments: orchestral ones in C and F and military-band
ones in E-flat and B-flat. Today only the military band versions
survive, even in classical music usage, although the orchestral
versions are said to be much softer and blend in better with
other symphonic instruments. The influential German military
band instrument maker / composer / arranger Wilhelm Friedrich
Wieprecht (1802-1872) had a bitter rivalry with Adolphe Sax {1},
which may have contributed to the saxophone's initial adoption
mainly only in France and Belgium as well as its rather total
failure to find a permanent position in a symphony orchestra.
From the military bands, to French opera, to jazz, the saxophone
quickly gained popularity, but never very much in serious
classical music {2}.
Some noteworthy composers such as Ravel or Berlioz recognized
its unique qualities {3}, but as a whole, most of the pieces
we have today for saxophone from serious composers came mainly
due to the efforts of two saxophone players who worked very hard
to commission pieces for it {2}. One is the German-born, later
to be American, saxophonist-virtuoso Sigurd Raschèr
(1907-2001), who, in the 20th century, commissioned many
important pieces for the instrument (Glazunov, Ibert, Martin,
Hindemith, Larsson, Dahl and so on). The second, Elise Hall,
of Boston, was an amateur saxophone player who took up the
instrument to improve her deteriorating hearing and had a lot
of money to commission works from some great composers (Debussy,
d'Indy, Schmitt, Caplet, etc). There is no doubt that though
we are lucky to have as many pieces as we do, there was a certain
unluckiness as well. Famous saxophone player Jean-Marie Londeix
(1932 *) was just on his way to meet Francis Poulenc in order
to discuss the possibility of a saxophone sonata as the composer
suddenly passed away. Prokofiev asked for 10,000 Francs in order
to write a saxophone sonata {4}. Johannes Brahms composed his
two clarinet sonatas and quintet around the end of the 19th
century (around six (!) decades after the saxophone was
breathing air) because he had met an especially inspiring
clarinet player--Richard Mühlfeld in 1891--but one could only
imagine what he would have done had he met an especially
inspiring saxophone player, such as Adolphe Sax himself, who
was a professor for saxophone in the Paris conservatory and had
lived until 1894.
At any rate, while the beginning was "humble", it was also
short-lived, and not because of the actual instrument itself,
but rather, music in general was changing its direction. The
tonal type of music had reached its full blossom by the beginning
of the 20th century. Perhaps this shift was inevitable, because,
the
two
The
was
number of possibilities to combine seven scale degrees, with
scales, or 48 scales, or even 12 tones, is ultimately finite.
emphasis went, thus, to different directions. One of which
jazz, in which the saxophone played a major role.
Hence, for a saxophonist, there is the possibility to play jazz,
transcriptions, original classical literature, or contemporary
classical music. Of course in the real world most musicians do
a little of everything. Jean-Marie Londeix, mentioned earlier,
claims that playing transcriptions bears no value for the
listener, because it necessarily will not add anything—-he
compares this to trying to build the palace of versailles from
concrete blocks {5}. The implicit statement is that the
composer's original intention will always provide a more
pleasant experience for the listener than a transcription. Be
that as it may, he goes further to claim that all classical
literature of the saxophone is basically worthless(!), because
it does not have its own, saxophonistic, idiomatic language,
but rather, it borrows from the idioms of other instruments.
He starts this argument by establishing the concept of an
idiomatic language for an instrument: Chopin's piano music,
Paganini's violin music, and so on. He then goes on to show how
the very small original classical literature for saxophone does
not establish an idiom for the saxophone itself, but rather,
uses idioms of other instruments: Glazunouv's concerto is
actually string language (in fact there are claims that it was
sketched out first as a viola concerto), Ibert's Concertino da
Camera is flute music, Singelee quartet is really a string
quartet, and so on. In fact, according to him, the saxophone
was not “given” its true idiomatic language until the
composition of Edison Denisov's (1929-1996) sonata in the 1970s
(which, coincidentally or not to his claims, was dedicated to
Londeix). Ever since, many new music pieces have been written
specifically for the saxophone, and, although in general the
saxophone is not very prominent in classical music, within the
“niche” of new contemporary music, it has gained a primary
position of honor. There is the so-called Bordeaux composers'
school, in which due to Londeix' influence as a professor (in
Bordeaux itself), many new music pieces have been written,
including ones by Christian Lauba, Francoise Rosse, and so on.
It is my aim in this present text to offer alternatives to
Londeix's claims. This shall be done on three fronts: One would
be to show that the new music that is supposedly so special and
idiomatic for the saxophone is in fact not quite so unique and
that it is part of the general new direction that music took
after its "tonal epoch". The second, to show that the original
non-new-music literature of the saxophone does bear its own
merit, and offers new (and perhaps better, or fresher) ways of
expression of the same musical language or idiomaticism (for
instance, is it valid to play the Hammerklavier sonata on a
modern piano?) The third direction would be the discussion about
transcriptions in general, in which it shall be attempted to
show that the long tradition of transcriptions in music history
is worthy and valuable.
But just how unique is this new idiom for the saxophone that
Londeix is talking about, and how much of it could be explained
by the death of tonal music in general?
True, the saxophone is particularly adept at new music
techniques {6}. It can execute glissandi, quartet tones,
non-standard temperament, multi-phonics, extended playing
range (up to 4.5 octaves with some players), a wide plethora
of types of attacks (including slaps), the clicks of its keys
make a distinct sound of itself, and that is just the beginning.
However, most of these techniques are also executable on any
other wind instrument. True, if one plays a prepared piano or
plays the bow below the bridge, one produces sounds that are
specific to the instrument and cannot be reproduced on any other
instrument. However, as has been mentioned, that is the general
direction of music in general, into painting with sound {7},
rather than music composition that is analogues to verbal
composition. But if one considers the musical material itself,
one discovers that really there is not such a big difference
besides the actual color.
Denisov's clarinet sonata, composed in 1993, bears a striking
similarity to the saxophone sonata. Either Denisov was using
saxophone idioms to write that sonata, or he was just using the
Denisov-idioms. If it is valid to use that musical material in
that way for both instruments, then it cannot be considered
saxophone-idiomatic or clarinet-idiomatic. Luciano Berio's
Sequenca for clarinet has been published by the composer itself
for alto saxophone, while the one for oboe he also published
as a soprano saxophone piece (Sequenca's VIIIb and IXb
respectively). Did Berio have a very specific saxophone idiom
in mind? Another example is Philippe Hurel's piece Opcit, which
was composed in 1983 for saxophone whereas in 1993 a clarinet
version was composed. There are many other examples that show
either that the material of a "typically" saxophone piece is
also used in another instrument's piece, or that a transcription
has been done all together, many times by the composers
themselves if not by an authorized third-party.
The second point is about the merit of the saxophone's original
literature, specifically that which is not new-music.
Specifically, the question arises if it has any added new value
compared to having the same piece played by another instrument.
As in the example of the Ibert concertino da Camera which was
presented before to bear a strong similarity to the flute
concerto, it is also obvious that Ibert didn't just copy exactly
the same phrases, but also took advantage of the saxophone's
special qualities in the right moments: the usage of the low
register which is usually too loud and almost aggressive in a
climatic place in the piece, the usage of the smooth lyrical
tone in the slow section, imitating Charlie Parker bebop section
to accompany the orchestra, and so on. All of these special
things are not to be found in the flute concerto (of course,
other flute-special features exist). Another example is Alfred
Desenclos' "Prelude, Cadence et Finale" for alto saxophone and
piano, composed in 1943. The Cadence in this pieces shows the
the virtuosity and the screaming heights that can be reached.
This quality, that is usually aggressive and thus not
appreciated, is utilized with great mastery in this piece. It
is in fact a new combination of abilities, that Sax had
originally envisioned--the virtuosity of the clarinet with the
power of the brass--that offers a new vista in music, indeed
also tonal music.
Lastly, if one was not convinced thus far, there is the
discussion about transcriptions. As a thought experiment, one
could imagine what one of the items from Bach's Art of the Fugue
would sound like as synthesized on a MIDI controller. Sure, this
would be horrible, but it would also show that there is a some
quality in the music that is not lost even if a robot plays
it--and thus--let alone a saxophone. Bach himself was an avid
transcriber, who sometimes went from very opposite places. The
g-minor gamba sonata BWV 1029 was a two flute trio sonata {10}.
The famous d-minor toccata BWV 565 was a transcription from a
5-string cello and the Chaconne from BWV 1004 was perhaps a lute
piece before {11}, which at any rates incorporates many of his
chorales into one. He transcribed Vivaldi's four-violin
concerto into a four-keyboard concerto. It is obvious, however,
that Bach took care of the instrumentation as composed (he was
using the help of a gamba player friend when composing the cello
suites, and it is known he was a pretty good violin player, with
the sonatas and partitas {12}). The tradition of transcriptions
can find another example in Mozart's oboe concerto K 314 (1777)
and flute concerto (1778). The flute concerto was supposed to
be a new composition, commissioned by a Dutch flutist. However,
Mozart was too lazy to write a new piece, and so he took the
oboe concerto from C-major to D-major and called it a flute
concerto. Consequently, he did not receive any money for that
commission. But Mozart was not so stupid--he did not merely
transpose, but in fact changed the flute part quite a bit to
take advantage of what Mozart believed to be the special
qualities of the flute. Where the oboe leaps one octave, the
flute leaps two, for example. Perhaps the most avid transcribed
in music history was Franz Liszt, and while many would argue
that he mainly transcribed for practical reasons (in order to
play orchestral music when an orchestra was not available),
there are numerous examples that his transcriptions are so
successful that indeed if one didn't know previously one could
imagine his transcriptions were original. Indeed with the
invention of the recording devices, Liszt's transcriptions were
recorded in studio, which would be absolutely unnecessary if
they were done merely for lack of possibility to play orchestral
music (since one could just record an orchestra and then play
_that_). So I would suggest that while it is true the music has
a certain theoretical quality that transcends instrumentation,
all from the early music and until the 20th century with
impressionism, there are certainly very different
considerations that have to be taken with every transcription
and instrumentation. Certainly some transcriptions would be
successful for the saxophones whereas others are just criminal.
But it is obvious to me that transcriptions offer an exciting
new way to experience our music.
References
1: Berliner musikalische Zeitung, issue 42-43 1846
2: Jean-Marie Londeix, 125 Years of Music for Saxophone
3: Berlioz's orchestration treatise 1855
4: Jean-Marie Londeix Master of the Modern Saxophone by James
Umble
5: Jean-Marie Londeix, Lecture: "Music OF the saxophone or music
FOR saxophone?"
6: Marcus Weiss and Giorgio Netti - "The Techniques of Saxophone
Playing" 2010, Jean-Marie Londeix - "Hello Mr. Sax!"
7: The Sound of Painting: Music in Modern Art, Karin von Maur,
1999
8: Jacques Ibert - Concertino da Camera for alto saxophone and
11 Instruments
9: Alfred Desenclos - Prelude, Cadence et Finale for alto
saxophone and piano
10: Henle Edition of Bach's BWV 1029, Preface section.
11: The Musical Times Vol 146 No 1893 Winter 2005, Eric Lewin
Altschuler - Were Bach's BWV 565 and the Chaconne from BWV 1004
lute pieces?
12: Henle Edition of the Bach Cello Suites, Violin Soantas and
Partitas, Prefaces
13: The Life of Elise Boyer Hall, William H. Street