Contrabass Digest
To subscribe or unsubscribe, email gdgreen@contrabass.com

 
 

1998-06-change

 
list                           Mon, 1 Jun 1998            Volume 1 : Number 88

In this issue:
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 19:20:24 EDT
From: <PaulC135@aol.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re:  list V1 #87

In a message dated 5/31/98 11:51:20 PM, you wrote:

<<I was just reading the saxophone pattent and came across a question.  If
Sax thought that the lower saxes would prove the most useful, by lower I
mean bari downwards, then why do we never see these instruments.  Also if
the subcontrabass sax was actually in the original pattent why has none
ever appeared, other than the Conns which are still elusive.  (I won't
mention the "fake")
>>

But we do see these instruments!  Baritones are everywhere, and bass saxes are
in relative abundance and making a comeback of sorts.  Besides the thousands
of basses made before 1920, there are at least three manufacturers today who
still make them.
Sax conceived of the saxophone as a bass reed orchestral instrument to fill a
need in 19th century orchestras. The bass did fit that need, but the
contrabassoon and improved bass clarinet also filled it and became more
standard.  For this reason the lower saxes never developed the foot-hold
envisioned by Sax. But the smaller sizes allowed for an expression and
technical facility that provided yet another unique dimension for the
instrument!  This partially accounts for the rampant popularity of the
remaining family.
        As to the subcontra.  No such animal.  The Conn prop from the 1930s should
not even be mentioned in the same breath as a true subcontra, which never was
made, despite the patent.  Sax often postulated enormous horns and inventions
which were never produced.  Sometimes we are just lucky!
Paul Cohen

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 20:22:43 -0400
From: "RJ Carpenter" <emerald1@megsinet.net>
To: <list@contrabass.com>
Subject: Re: lower saxes

On May 31st Bret Newton wrote:
>
>I was just reading the saxophone pattent and came across a question.  If
>Sax thought that the lower saxes would prove the most useful, by lower I
>mean bari downwards, then why do we never see these instruments.  Also if
>the subcontrabass sax was actually in the original pattent why has none
>ever appeared, other than the Conns which are still elusive.  (I won't
>mention the "fake")
>
>Just wondering,
>Bret Newton
>
    Bret,
    I don't believe that he Subcontrabass was in the original patent.  The
lowest sax in Sax's patent drawing was the Sarrusophone shaped Contrabass.
IMHO, I don't believe sax ever intended this instrument to be made; as he
realized the implications of developing and playing an instrument of that
size.  With the bore of a saxophone; even tripled up like a Sarrusophone;
the instrument would weigh @ 75 pounds and be about 8-feet tall(I'm guessing
on the height, I've tried to work out a few scaled sketches for it, and
that's close to what I end up with.
    As for the rest of the lower saxes:  Baritone is a mainstay of concert
and jazz bands; it's low, reedy tone is often considered indispensible.
Bass is making a huge come back; it seems like every day anymore, a great
saxophonist professes his new-found love for the bass; and sax company after
company is tooling out thier basses.  I believe it will soon begin to make
it's way back into the media light and public eye.  The contrabass has been
limited in use, and still is today, mainly for one reason: size.  The
instrument stands between 6'4'' and 6'8'' tall, depending on model.  It is
also quite heavy.  Plus, at least I've been told, very difficult to play
"fluidly".  Tounging is often "jumpy" (think of beginning french horn
players for that adjective.) and the sound can be muffled.  Even Don Stevens
of the Nuclear Whales exhibits a little of both these traits.
    But I'm sorry, I'm writing a novel.  As far as I know, that is the
truth.
Tristan Carpenter

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 21:54:34 -0400
From: "Ryan Kaus" <rkaus@baynet.net>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Re: Lower Saxes

I'm new to this list, so if I make a mistake, please forgive me.

After reading the post on lower saxes, I thought I would put my 2 cents
worth in about it.  IMHO, there are probably many people who own the
lower saxes, but that its is too expensive and cumbersome to transport
and carry these monsters.  As a bari player, I know that it is very
akward to transport my instrument places, especially when it won't fit
in my trunk and takes up the entire back seat.  As a person who also
plays clarinet and violin, I know that the smaller saxes such as the
soprano, alto, and tenor are much easier to carry and transport and
therefore are more promenient no matter how useful Sax thought the lower
ones would be.  There is my 2.5 cents worth.

Ryan Kaus

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 02:53:04 -0500
From: bonedaddy@Connections.ultranet.com
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: list V1 #86

LI>Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 14:10:12 -0600
LI>From: "Michael B. McDonald" <mmcdonal@silver.sdsmt.edu>
LI>To: "list@contrabass.com" <list@contrabass.com>
LI>Subject: anyone here?
LI>Message-ID: <3571B924.E8B1833D@silver.sdsmt.edu>

LI>Is this list still functioning?

LI>Michael McDonald

Did everyone get as scared as I did by that weird loop?
I thought I'd even unsubscribed, but apparently I muffed it.
Anybody hurt?

Cheers!
Bonedaddy@connections.ultranet.com

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 11:39:12 +0300
From: auctyo@mail.freelines.ru
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: list
 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 13:41:46 -0700
From: Grant Green <gdgreen@contrabass.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Back On Line

Hi,

It appears that our list software problems have been solved once again
(Thanks Scott!), and we're back to normal.  At least, as normal as we get
around here ;-)

During the Glitch, I didn't receive any email addressed to contrabass.com.
I *think* I have it now, but I seem to be missing at least digest #85 (I do
have #86 and #87).  Would someone please forward me a copy?  Also, is
anyone now having any problems with the list, either posting or receiving?

Thanks,

Grant
 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Grant D. Green                  gdgreen@contrabass.com
www.contrabass.com     Just filling in on sarrusophone
Contrabass email list:             list@contrabass.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 13:48:26 -0700
From: Grant Green <gdgreen@contrabass.com>
To: list@contrabass.com
Subject: Bass Oboe FS

Just ran across a bass oboe for sale.  Here's the listing:

Oboe, Cabart Bass Oboe c.1958
$3,800/OBO, Refurbished
Instrument is in excellent condition. Grenadilla
with silver plated keys. Even scale, easy
blowing. Beautifully restored; valuable as a
collectible or performing instrument.

Seller Info
(313) 285-4445
timholmes
Southgate, Michigan 48195

*********************************
Enjoy!

Grant
 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Grant D. Green                  gdgreen@contrabass.com
www.contrabass.com     Just filling in on sarrusophone
Contrabass email list:             list@contrabass.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

------------------------------

End of list V1 #88
******************

 
Next Digest ->
Previous Digest <-
Index
Top